Well, if there is collusion between Wikileaks and Russia, it’s right here and it’s not what people would expect:
“It might materialize at some point”
What might materialize at some point? Evidence the Russians hacked the DNC, according to Wikileaks chief editor Kristinn Hrafnsson. Now, let’s pound that square peg into the round hole of Craig Murray stating…
“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things”
…and Seymour Hersh stating the DNC mails were discovered in (the assassinated) Seth Rich’s computer and he (Rich) had passed the mails to Wikileaks for money…
…and Kim Dotcom states he was a part of it…
Let me assure you, the DNC hack wasn’t even a hack. It was an insider with a memory stick. I know this because I know who did it and why. Special Counsel Mueller is not interested in my evidence. My lawyers wrote to him twice. He never replied. 360 pounds!https://t.co/AGRO0sFx7shttps://t.co/epXtv0t1uN
— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) February 18, 2018
If Congress includes #SethRich case into their Russia probe I’ll give written testimony with evidence that Seth Rich was @Wikileaks source.
— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) May 19, 2017
I knew Seth Rich. I know he was the @Wikileaks source. I was involved. https://t.co/MbGQteHhZM
— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) May 20, 2017
…and Assange himself indicating it had been “Wikileaks source” Seth Rich was the “insider” who LEAKED the DNC mails and he’s certainly not Russian:
Now, what I’d like to know is, with Assange presently under what amounts to ‘lock-down’ in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, why does Russian state media appear to be colluding in the ‘Russian hack’ mythology that should have been laid to rest long ago? Why does Wikileaks associate Craig Murray, who flatly stated he had met the source, continue to refuse to name Seth Rich (a dead man) and contribute to laying the caper to rest?
RT has promoted Assange and Wikileaks via its reporting for years, at one point providing Assange his own show , raising questions; was any grilling (that didn’t happen) of the Wikileaks chief editor concerning this glaring inconsistency of Wikileaks suddenly allowing for the (non-existent) ‘hack’ somehow too compromising for the Russians? Clearly Wikileaks should be able to blow the entire ‘evil Russians’ DNC hack lie out of existence and instead there is pulling in opposite direction by Kristinn Hrafnsson with Russian state media playing along by handling the Wikileaks editor with kid gloves.
Why does Russian state media and Wikileaks appear to be colluding in perpetrating and/or providing cover for the DNC hack lie promoted by Mueller’s special investigation findings?
Is there some consensus between the Russians and Wikileaks that laying the DNC hack propaganda BS to rest would be too destabilizing? Criminals do not voluntarily surrender their business models and Crowdstrike (the CIA & Ukrainian intelligence associated author of the Guccifer lie) is not going to put tail between legs and voluntarily march itself to jail together with Robert Muller and the ‘formerly’ CIA employed Attorney General William Barr.
It follows, if it can be a reasonable interpretation of events to suggest (reasonable insofar as the far stretches of reality created by intelligence agencies for their adversaries to hopefully consume) the Steele Dossier had been fed to Western institutions by Russian intelligence via Sergei Skripal to ultimately make Western intelligence look like idiots, and just such a scenario has been not only suggested but endorsed by a former NATO intelligence officer with a pretty good record on calling BS on the whole ‘evil Russians’ propaganda line by the NATO states; it is also a reasonable speculation the ‘Guccifer 2.0 hack’ in the DNC mails storyline might be a very similar Russian intelligence ploy but had unforeseen consequence of not only swallowed by American intelligence but the entire USA Congress, House and Senate, rather than exposed (as William Binney of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity attempted to do.) In this case, the so-called ‘hack’ caper never resolved as intended, to simply make American intelligence look stupid and reduce the American political establishment’s confidence in their intelligence services. In short ‘the hack’ became a runaway gambit much bigger than its intended goal of (falsely) exposing Ukrainian intelligence (connected to Crowdstrike) feeding the Americans a baited hook, a hook baited in actuality by Russian intelligence who likely have every aspect of the Ukrainian intelligence apparatus compromised. , , , , 
Maybe, just maybe, the DNC ‘hack’ story is the spy versus spy operation that ran away to unintended/unknown destiny and Russian intelligence just doesn’t know what, exactly, to do about it, that is, it became too big and destabilizing, and Wikileaks is going along because indeed they could be exposed as a Russian stooge (if in a most asymmetrical and unanticipated way!)
 see comments Pat Armstrong/Michael Antony exchange: https://michaelantonyblog.wordpress.com/2019/02/22/the-alternative-skripal-narrative/
 The proposed conclusion reached in the above essay, especially re Ukrainian intelligence connections to Crowdstrike, differs from the conclusion reached at this linked piece but the evidence presented at this link could easily support either conclusion: https://washingtonsblog.com/2017/01/crowdstrikes-russian-hacking-story-fell-apart-2-dni-report-faked-sources.html