The Hill's ( more accurately "The Pile" ) bar for contention is set predictably low: "PROBABLY"
While neither the DNC, nor any of the 16+ Intelligence Agencies have produced ANY EVIDENCE to back up a 4 year RussiaGate claim despite 2+ year Mueller investigation, non-stop MockingbirdMedia - The Hill goes through the trouble of constructing a hypothetical scenario where files were copied here, sent there, dumped here - before being sent to WikiLeaks. All of this is charming, but how about digging up a counter-argument that can be verified before going to such lengths to explain away the verifiable explanation already out there
And why do they fail to explain why Seth Rich was murdered right after?
Why the latest theory about the DNC not being hacked is probably wrong
“This theory assumes that the hacker downloaded the files to a computer and then leaked it from that computer,” said Rich Barger, director of security research at Splunk.
But, said Barger and other experts, that overlooks the possibility the files were copied multiple times before being released, something that may be more probable than not in a bureaucracy like Russian intelligence.
“A hacker might have downloaded it to one computer, then shared it by USB to an air gapped [off the internet] network for translation, then copied by a different person for analysis, then brought a new USB to an entirely different air gapped computer to determine a strategy all before it was packaged for Guccifer 2.0 to leak,” said Barger.