Is CIA Trying to Cover Its Own Hack or Accommodating Obama?

Obama’s parting shot across the bow is his order of a full review into hacking aimed at influencing US elections going back to 2008. Instead of targeting the CIA or the NSA, WikiLeaks has gone after an organization Democrats actually care about — the Democratic National Committee and exposed its internal corruption. If Obama could, he would declare Wikileaks a Terrorist Organization and anyone who published its stuff should be thrown in prison.
Nevertheless, this latest act by Obama is clearly a politicized action that seems more about widening the divide in the country and to continue to smear doubt over the election. The CIA claim that Russia hacked the DNC and gave the data to Wikileaks to help Trump against Hillary, is really questionable since there is no evidence of a hack. The FBI said that Hillary’s emails had been hacked by five foreign governments. They could not be 100% sure who, or what they got since the really classified stuff was omitted, but the CIA is now claiming it was Russia who hacked the DNC and got this collection of 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments from the DNC. There is absolutely NO WAY that a professional hacker who leaves no concrete trace with Hillary’s emails, would be sloppy enough to leave such a trace at the DNC.
Furthermore, Julian Assange  came out and stated publicly it was a leak and not a hack but declined to say who was the leak. Backing up Assange, the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, confirmed he has met the person who gave the DNC emails to Wikileaks and said publicly it was not the Russians. That was reported by BizPac Review, which is a contributor to Google News. Additionally, there is just no hard evidence whatsoever. This is clearly a false flag report by the Obama Administration supported by the highly partisan Washington Post, which has lost all credibility during this election. Yes, Trump was correct, 77% of all press reporting during the election was negative against him according to a Harvard study.
There is absolutely no evidence that the votes were hacked in any state by Russia, China, Bangladesh or Canada just so Justin Pierre James Trudeau who have someone to talk to if Hillary won. So exactly how is this sinister hack supposed to have influenced the election? Oh, that’s right, it revealed that the Democrats conspired with the press to make sure Trump would be the pick because they thought they could demonize him and beat him easily. Then they conspired to stop Bernie take California and cheated to give that to Hillary to the point the head of the DNC had to resign. But hey! What Obama is really saying is if they DNC hack had not taken place, then the Democrats would have gotten away with it fair and square?
There is something else behind the curtain. That is, there were plenty within the FBI and the Intelligence Community who wanted Hillary indicted. There was talk that the hack of the DNC was home grown from within the CIA and handed to Wikileaks. So is the CIA now trying to cover its own trail? Or is Obama trying to set the stage for the next election saying Trump was really not the president? There cannot be any hard-core proof Russia was behind that hack. This seems to be a false-flag to clean the deck before leaving office and to try to shift the proof that the DNC was rotten to the core.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/is-cia-trying-to-cover-its-own-hack-or-accommodating-obama/