The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Forum
Murdered DNC Staffer Seth Rich Shared 44,053 Democrat Emails with WikiLeaks: Report
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

For the past several months, Democrats have based their “Resist 45″ movement on unsubstantiated assertions that the Trump campaign coordinated with Russian intelligence officials to undermine the 2016 Presidential Election thereby ‘stealing’ the White House from Hillary Clinton. Day after day we’ve all suffered through one anonymously sourced, “shock” story after another from the New York Times and/or The Washington Post with new allegations of the ‘wrongdoing’.

But, new evidence surfacing in the Seth Rich murder investigation may just quash the “Russian hacking” conspiracy theory. According to a new report from Fox News, it was former DNC staffer Seth Rich who supplied 44,000 DNC emails to WikiLeaks and not some random Russian cyber terrorist, as we’ve all been led to believe.

According to Fox News, though admittedly via yet another anonymous FBI source, Rich made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, an American investigative reporter and director of WikiLeaks who was living in London at the time. According to Fox News sources, federal law enforcement investigators found 44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments sent between DNC leaders from January 2015 to May 2016 that Rich shared with WikiLeaks before he was gunned down on July 10, 2016.

The Democratic National Committee staffer who was gunned down on July 10 on a Washington, D.C., street just steps from his home had leaked thousands of internal emails to WikiLeaks, law enforcement sources told Fox News.

A federal investigator who reviewed an FBI forensic report detailing the contents of DNC staffer Seth Rich’s computer generated within 96 hours after his murder, said Rich made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter, documentary filmmaker, and director of WikiLeaks who was living in London at the time.

“I have seen and read the emails between Seth Rich and Wikileaks,” the federal investigator told Fox News, confirming the MacFadyen connection. He said the emails are in possession of the FBI, while the stalled case is in the hands of the Washington Police Department.

Then, on July 22, just 12 days after Rich was killed, WikiLeaks published internal DNC emails that appeared to show top party officials conspiring to stop Bernie Sanders from becoming the party’s presidential nominee. As we’ve noted before, the DNC’s efforts to block Sanders resulted in Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigning as DNC chairperson.

 
Hide 134 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Ivy says:

    Expect the Comey-Russia hysteria to escalate as the Seth Rich matter ripens. The DNC is eyeing the 2018 midterm elections and hoping that they can keep the focus off their problems (Hillary, Podesta, ad nauseam). How will they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory yet again? CNN and MSNBC are preparing to levitate over the issues.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tomster
    If only the Frito would shut up or have his twittering thumbs cut off so that competent people could do their jobs. Oh right, that would mean Mr Taxpayer Money Pence.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /forum/murdered-dnc-staffer-seth-rich-shared-44053-democrat-emails-with-wikileaks-report/#comment-1874362
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. El Dato says:

    made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter

    What did HE die from?

    I thought it was ex-ambassador Craig Murray who did the deed? He even confirmed it:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

    The above-reference tabloid is derided by goodthinking Brits but seems to deliver the dirty underwear.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...

    "What did HE die from?"
     
    A well-documented recurrence of lung cancer. He died in his bed surrounded by his family after a long period of bed-ridden treatment. This is easily confirmed with a search of different news sources.

    Please don't muddy the waters with off-the-wall and easily dis-proven rubbish that can then be used by progs to discredit an important story.
    , @Sam McGowan
    Craig Murray's contact was for a later batch of info.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. The exposure of this story takes the mask off the exponents of the Russian conspiracy theory. Their sanity is now in question, as is their loyalty.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Tomster says:
    @Ivy
    Expect the Comey-Russia hysteria to escalate as the Seth Rich matter ripens. The DNC is eyeing the 2018 midterm elections and hoping that they can keep the focus off their problems (Hillary, Podesta, ad nauseam). How will they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory yet again? CNN and MSNBC are preparing to levitate over the issues.

    If only the Frito would shut up or have his twittering thumbs cut off so that competent people could do their jobs. Oh right, that would mean Mr Taxpayer Money Pence.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Excellent point from Anonymous Conservative: Metro DC is probably wired for surveillance to a degree that would astonish most people, and yet the official line is that “ain’t nobody seen nuthin”.

    http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/reward-for-seth-richs-murder-up-to-150000/

    Even the police who handled the scene wore body cameras, and Rich was conscious when they arrived. Where are the audio/video records?

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/developing-seth-rich-alive-police-found-police-camera-video-went-missing/

    Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?

    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/792875315920048128/photo/1

    Read More
    • Agree: Druid
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Metro DC is probably wired for surveillance to a degree that would astonish most people...
     
    London is no doubt worse, and more comprehensive, yet the man in the street fears there is not enough.
    , @Anonymous
    I feel the same way about the plane crashing into the Pentagon on 9/11

    That must be literally the most surveillance heavy facility on the planet -- yet there is no footage of the crash/aftermath?

    The whole system is crooked. Anything that incriminates the power structure simply disappears. And there doesn't seem to be any mechanism to even look into it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. jim jones says:

    Credit to The Donald on Reddit for keeping this issue alive, praise Kek.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    DNC Staffer ASSASSINATED for ties to Wikileaks?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. You heard it here first, nearly a year ago … just sayin’!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    I think I was one of the first, maybe the first on here. August 6 2016. And I got the lowdown from the_donald.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/2016-election-is-driven-by-large-scale-events-happening-or-not-happening/?highlight=seth+rich#comment-1519430
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Ram says:

    Three days after the Seth Rich murder Comey had the information (IF he didn’t already know) gleaned from Rich’s laptop that he had been in correspondence with Wikileaks, yet went along with the canard that the DNC was hacked by the Russians till the very end. Assange’s confirmation that Russians had no connection to the LEAK was also ignored, because they wanted Assange painted as a criminal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    But, But, But don't you know that Seth Rich got the Emails from Putin, on Trumps instructions?
    , @Logan
    I think it's pretty clear that Assange, or at minimum his organization, with him claiming plausible deniability, conspired to violate a host of US laws against espionage.

    Now you can believe that he was justified in doing so, or that he served a higher purpose, or that the laws in question are overly broad, or some other rationale why he shouldn't be punished for breaking those laws.

    But I really don't think it's possible to claim he didn't violate laws and is therefore by definition a criminal.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Anonym says:
    @The Alarmist
    You heard it here first, nearly a year ago ... just sayin'!

    I think I was one of the first, maybe the first on here. August 6 2016. And I got the lowdown from the_donald.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/2016-election-is-driven-by-large-scale-events-happening-or-not-happening/?highlight=seth+rich#comment-1519430

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    http://www.unz.com/plee/trumputin-and-the-leaks/#comment-1507217

    Got you by a few days
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    His murder is very troubling. Nothing was taken so it seems he was targeted. Assassinations taking place in the US should be of great concern to everyone. This shouldn’t be allowed to go down the memory hole. Does the trail lead to Clinton or other domestic spook groups?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. JackOH says:

    Only scanned the article quickly, but I’m very confident an untold number of political decisions in America are made by political violence and threats of violence, blackmail, bribery, and so on. There are good people in politics, even in my preternaturally corrupt area, but they have to be tough as nails, and that can wear you out. We may be closer to Tinpot-istan in our political culture than Norman Rockwell, but–Chrissake–where are the mainstream media in this Seth Rich case? I’m just a casual reader of the story, but I’d like to know if this was a political assassination.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. Didn’t Podesta say he wanted “an example made” of leakers, even if only suspected?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. @Anonym
    I think I was one of the first, maybe the first on here. August 6 2016. And I got the lowdown from the_donald.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/2016-election-is-driven-by-large-scale-events-happening-or-not-happening/?highlight=seth+rich#comment-1519430
    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    Nice work. I very rarely read Peter Lee. It is possible I was first on Sailer's blog. I generally only read Sailer, Buchanan, Derb or others if they appear particularly interesting.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @El Dato

    made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter
     
    What did HE die from?

    I thought it was ex-ambassador Craig Murray who did the deed? He even confirmed it:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

    The above-reference tabloid is derided by goodthinking Brits but seems to deliver the dirty underwear.

    “What did HE die from?”

    A well-documented recurrence of lung cancer. He died in his bed surrounded by his family after a long period of bed-ridden treatment. This is easily confirmed with a search of different news sources.

    Please don’t muddy the waters with off-the-wall and easily dis-proven rubbish that can then be used by progs to discredit an important story.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. OutWest says:

    I suspect there’s as much evidence in the Seth Rich matter as there is in The-Russians-Did-It theory. So let’s have congress drop all other business and “investigate” this Rich matter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Wheeler is a Negro.. and Negroes are pathological liars.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Is there a specific combination on DNA of Negroes that carries the "pathological liar" trait?
    What is that DNA pattern?
    Does it appear only on NEGRO DNA or has its presence been noted on non-Negro DNA?

    A majority of Black callers to C Span declare, with gospel certainty, that "Trump is a liar, has been all his life."
    Does that mean that Trump carries Negro DNA?
    Or that Trump is a Negro?
    Or that the code for lying can be present in non-Negroes?
    Or that Negroes, being "pathological liars," lie about Trump being a liar?

    Is that last statement disproved if it happens that Trump does, indeed, lie?

    My but it does get complicated when blanket, prejudiced generalizations are slung about.

    , @Corvinus
    "Wheeler is a Negro.. and Negroes are pathological liars."

    Anon, how do you manage to keep straight your all of your sock puppets?
    , @Seamus Padraig

    Wheeler is a Negro.. and Negroes are pathological liars.
     
    Concern troll.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Anonym says:
    @The Alarmist
    http://www.unz.com/plee/trumputin-and-the-leaks/#comment-1507217

    Got you by a few days

    Nice work. I very rarely read Peter Lee. It is possible I was first on Sailer’s blog. I generally only read Sailer, Buchanan, Derb or others if they appear particularly interesting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anon
    Wheeler is a Negro.. and Negroes are pathological liars.

    Is there a specific combination on DNA of Negroes that carries the “pathological liar” trait?
    What is that DNA pattern?
    Does it appear only on NEGRO DNA or has its presence been noted on non-Negro DNA?

    A majority of Black callers to C Span declare, with gospel certainty, that “Trump is a liar, has been all his life.”
    Does that mean that Trump carries Negro DNA?
    Or that Trump is a Negro?
    Or that the code for lying can be present in non-Negroes?
    Or that Negroes, being “pathological liars,” lie about Trump being a liar?

    Is that last statement disproved if it happens that Trump does, indeed, lie?

    My but it does get complicated when blanket, prejudiced generalizations are slung about.

    Read More
    • Disagree: Sowhat
    • Replies: @jim jones
    I believe the MAOA gene is assumed to be the problem:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2933872/
    , @Anonym
    Is there a specific combination on DNA of Negroes that carries the “pathological liar” trait?

    Yes, it is the D1NDU gene on the locus NUFF1NWR0NG.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Corvinus says:

    “According to a new report from Fox News, it was former DNC staffer Seth Rich who supplied 44,000 DNC emails to WikiLeaks and not some random Russian cyber terrorist, as we’ve all been led to believe.”

    Does it occur to Durden that there may be SEPARATE WikiLeaks, one allegedly from Rich and one from another source?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alfa158
    The Wikileaks site shows two batches of leaked e-mails. One is the 44,053 from the DNC and the other 30,000 plus from Hilary's e-mail server. Wikileaks doesn't say on their site specifically what the sources were. They did offer a reward for information on the murder of Seth Rich, which implies, but does not state, that the DNC leaks came from Rich.
    The Hillary e-mails could have been hacked by the Russians, any number of other intelligence sources, or even a skilled amateur.
    Then on top of all that fog, other conflicting information is that the DNC lost control of the e-mails due to Podesta falling for a phishing probe, even after his IT people warned him not to respond to it.
    Yet another journalist claims he was the guy who forwarded the e-mails to Wikileaks and got them from a DNC staffer, but not Rich!
    I think I'll go take a nap for about 5 years and you can wake me up after it is all sorted out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Corvinus says:
    @Anon
    Wheeler is a Negro.. and Negroes are pathological liars.

    “Wheeler is a Negro.. and Negroes are pathological liars.”

    Anon, how do you manage to keep straight your all of your sock puppets?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Alfa158 says:
    @Corvinus
    "According to a new report from Fox News, it was former DNC staffer Seth Rich who supplied 44,000 DNC emails to WikiLeaks and not some random Russian cyber terrorist, as we’ve all been led to believe."

    Does it occur to Durden that there may be SEPARATE WikiLeaks, one allegedly from Rich and one from another source?

    The Wikileaks site shows two batches of leaked e-mails. One is the 44,053 from the DNC and the other 30,000 plus from Hilary’s e-mail server. Wikileaks doesn’t say on their site specifically what the sources were. They did offer a reward for information on the murder of Seth Rich, which implies, but does not state, that the DNC leaks came from Rich.
    The Hillary e-mails could have been hacked by the Russians, any number of other intelligence sources, or even a skilled amateur.
    Then on top of all that fog, other conflicting information is that the DNC lost control of the e-mails due to Podesta falling for a phishing probe, even after his IT people warned him not to respond to it.
    Yet another journalist claims he was the guy who forwarded the e-mails to Wikileaks and got them from a DNC staffer, but not Rich!
    I think I’ll go take a nap for about 5 years and you can wake me up after it is all sorted out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "The Wikileaks site shows two batches of leaked e-mails. One is the 44,053 from the DNC and the other 30,000 plus from Hilary’s e-mail server. Wikileaks doesn’t say on their site specifically what the sources were. The Hillary e-mails could have been hacked by the Russians, any number of other intelligence sources, or even a skilled amateur."

    Exactly. So Zerohedge is being a White Knight here for Trump. It is possible that Rich could have supplied those documents, but it is also possible that the Russians was involved. We don't know for sure.
    , @Eagle Eye
    Seth Rich was quite young and perhaps not 100% wise to the ways of the world.

    Is it conceivable that he passed the DNC emails to Comey's FBI FIRST as evidence of criminal wrongdoing, and THEN handed another copy to Wikileaks as backup?

    Perhaps Rich went to Wikileaks only after Comeys' FBI gave him the brush-off?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Trump has been thrown a life line with this.

    This may well be his last chance to pull back the curtain and show us how the deep state handles leaks/dissent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. @SteveRogers42
    Excellent point from Anonymous Conservative: Metro DC is probably wired for surveillance to a degree that would astonish most people, and yet the official line is that "ain't nobody seen nuthin".

    http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/reward-for-seth-richs-murder-up-to-150000/

    Even the police who handled the scene wore body cameras, and Rich was conscious when they arrived. Where are the audio/video records?

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/developing-seth-rich-alive-police-found-police-camera-video-went-missing/

    Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?

    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/792875315920048128/photo/1

    Metro DC is probably wired for surveillance to a degree that would astonish most people…

    London is no doubt worse, and more comprehensive, yet the man in the street fears there is not enough.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. […] The Unz Review: Murdered DNC Staffer Seth Rich Shared 44,053 Democrat Emails with WikiLeaks: Report… […]

    Read More
  26. Corvinus says:
    @Alfa158
    The Wikileaks site shows two batches of leaked e-mails. One is the 44,053 from the DNC and the other 30,000 plus from Hilary's e-mail server. Wikileaks doesn't say on their site specifically what the sources were. They did offer a reward for information on the murder of Seth Rich, which implies, but does not state, that the DNC leaks came from Rich.
    The Hillary e-mails could have been hacked by the Russians, any number of other intelligence sources, or even a skilled amateur.
    Then on top of all that fog, other conflicting information is that the DNC lost control of the e-mails due to Podesta falling for a phishing probe, even after his IT people warned him not to respond to it.
    Yet another journalist claims he was the guy who forwarded the e-mails to Wikileaks and got them from a DNC staffer, but not Rich!
    I think I'll go take a nap for about 5 years and you can wake me up after it is all sorted out.

    “The Wikileaks site shows two batches of leaked e-mails. One is the 44,053 from the DNC and the other 30,000 plus from Hilary’s e-mail server. Wikileaks doesn’t say on their site specifically what the sources were. The Hillary e-mails could have been hacked by the Russians, any number of other intelligence sources, or even a skilled amateur.”

    Exactly. So Zerohedge is being a White Knight here for Trump. It is possible that Rich could have supplied those documents, but it is also possible that the Russians was involved. We don’t know for sure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Don Bass
    ......We don't know for sure.....
    Sure, we do. Wikileaks has stated emphatically and categorically the leaks - and they were leaks, not " hacks", were not sourced from the Russians.
    What also know - for sure - is that the "Russians hacked our elections" psy-op/misdirect was constructed (workshopped) by the Podesta + David Brookes media matters "team" immediately after the HRC election failure.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @SteveRogers42
    Excellent point from Anonymous Conservative: Metro DC is probably wired for surveillance to a degree that would astonish most people, and yet the official line is that "ain't nobody seen nuthin".

    http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/reward-for-seth-richs-murder-up-to-150000/

    Even the police who handled the scene wore body cameras, and Rich was conscious when they arrived. Where are the audio/video records?

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/developing-seth-rich-alive-police-found-police-camera-video-went-missing/

    Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?

    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/792875315920048128/photo/1

    I feel the same way about the plane crashing into the Pentagon on 9/11

    That must be literally the most surveillance heavy facility on the planet — yet there is no footage of the crash/aftermath?

    The whole system is crooked. Anything that incriminates the power structure simply disappears. And there doesn’t seem to be any mechanism to even look into it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    That was in 2001.

    Different age. Watch the "X Files" for the tech quality,

    Didn't even have mobile phones with cameras.
    , @SteveRogers42
    Agreed.
    , @Intelligent Dasein
    The Pentagon had CCTV cameras taking very grainy, very compressed images of entryways, parking lots, and guard huts. They did not have cameras watching the walls of the structure just in case a plane happened to fly into it. In any case, the plane only would have been within the camera's field of view for the merest fraction of second.
    , @Bill Jones
    There was ample evidence of the Pentagon crash. Many local businesses had videos.
    It was all stolen by the FBI within a couple of hours and has never seen the light of day.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Sam McGowan says: • Website
    @El Dato

    made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter
     
    What did HE die from?

    I thought it was ex-ambassador Craig Murray who did the deed? He even confirmed it:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

    The above-reference tabloid is derided by goodthinking Brits but seems to deliver the dirty underwear.

    Craig Murray’s contact was for a later batch of info.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. anon says: • Disclaimer

    Why doesn’t Assange release at least some of the e-mails from Seth Rich to Wikileaks?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig

    Why doesn’t Assange release at least some of the e-mails from Seth Rich to Wikileaks?
     
    According to the standard version of the story, Rich did not email the pilfered DNC data to Wikileaks. Rather, he met in DC with Craig Murray--a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and a personal friend of Julian Assange--and gave him the information on a flashdrive of some type. Murray then flew back to Britain and gave the drive to Assange in person.
    , @Joe Franklin

    Why doesn’t Assange release at least some of the e-mails from Seth Rich to Wikileaks?

     

    You can read all the Wikileaks Podesta emails here:

    https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/

    Comment: Wikileaks emails are not indexed by whomever leaked them. Obviously they do this to protect their sources from establishment punishments.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. jim jones says:
    @anon
    Is there a specific combination on DNA of Negroes that carries the "pathological liar" trait?
    What is that DNA pattern?
    Does it appear only on NEGRO DNA or has its presence been noted on non-Negro DNA?

    A majority of Black callers to C Span declare, with gospel certainty, that "Trump is a liar, has been all his life."
    Does that mean that Trump carries Negro DNA?
    Or that Trump is a Negro?
    Or that the code for lying can be present in non-Negroes?
    Or that Negroes, being "pathological liars," lie about Trump being a liar?

    Is that last statement disproved if it happens that Trump does, indeed, lie?

    My but it does get complicated when blanket, prejudiced generalizations are slung about.

    I believe the MAOA gene is assumed to be the problem:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2933872/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    The results of any study regarding the 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene should be interpreted with caution in light of a number of limitations that need to be addressed in replication studies. First, the measures of psychopathic personality traits, ever arrested, and ever incarcerated were based on self reports, not official data. Although self-reports have been shown to be reliable and valid instruments for assessing antisocial phenotypes (Krueger et al., 1994; Sutton, 2010), it is possible that official crime data would have produced differing results.

    Second, the measures of criminal justice outcomes did not delineate between different types of offenders, such as violent predatory offenders versus non-violent property offenders. Perhaps the 2-repeat allele would have varying effects on different subcategories of offenders.

    Third, the sample analyzed in the current study is the same as the one analyzed in Guo et al.’s (2008) study. While some studies examined different outcome measures and focused only on African-American males, it is important that future studies estimate the association between the 2-repeat allele and antisocial phenotypes in other samples.

    Last, although the frequency of the 2-repeat allele is similar to prior research, only about 5% of the final analytical sample carried the 2-repeat allele. Future research needs to examine much larger samples in order to include more 2-repeat allele carriers. Until these limitations are addressed, it would be premature to hypothesize how the 2-repeat allele may impact criminal activity patterns in society.
    , @Logan
    IF such complex behaviors are genetic in nature, which they almost certainly are to at least some extent, the chance of their being simple single-gene switches is extremely unlikely.

    It is probable that tendencies towards differences in behavior are caused by complex interactions of a host of genes, interactions we aren't even close to understanding.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. I’m not impressed. For quite some time there has been a credible witness to the fact of an insider leaked the DNC mails that doesn’t require going through anonymous FBI sources or climbing over a Rich family in denial:

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/12/cias-absence-conviction/

    “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” -wikileaks associate and former British foreign service officer Craig Murray

    So why would ‘tyler durden’ toss all of this doubt inducing crap from the faux news channel into the stew of it? It’s been black & white, case closed for quite some time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    One can have reasonable doubt that Craig Murray "knows" who leaked them since he has self-interest and self-preservation in mind.

    Mr. Murray made this statement--"A little simple logic demolishes the CIA’s claims. The CIA claim they “know the individuals” involved. Yet under Obama the USA has been absolutely ruthless in its persecution of whistleblowers, and its pursuit of foreign hackers through extradition. We are supposed to believe that in the most vital instance imaginable, an attempt by a foreign power to destabilise a US election, even though the CIA knows who the individuals are, nobody is going to be arrested or extradited, or (if in Russia) made subject to yet more banking and other restrictions against Russian individuals? Plainly it stinks."

    Except if the "Deep State" is playing for keeps and is hell-bent on removing Trump, then they are going to play it close to the vest in certain matters and wait until they have the absolute goods to nail him to the cross. So it's not as "simple" as Mr. Murray makes it out to be. Arrests and/or extraditions are most likely made when there is hard-core evidence, which is required in this case given Trump status and popularity among his base. They have ONE bullet in their chamber and have to get the KILL SHOT. The CIA has their attack dogs out en masses to smoke out the culprits. If it is revealed that in the two grand juries that Trump's crew are joined at the hip with the Russians and/or engaged in shenanigans, then Republicans will have to think about cutting their ties to Trump given the importance of the mid-term elections.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @Anon
    Wheeler is a Negro.. and Negroes are pathological liars.

    Wheeler is a Negro.. and Negroes are pathological liars.

    Concern troll.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @anon
    Why doesn't Assange release at least some of the e-mails from Seth Rich to Wikileaks?

    Why doesn’t Assange release at least some of the e-mails from Seth Rich to Wikileaks?

    According to the standard version of the story, Rich did not email the pilfered DNC data to Wikileaks. Rather, he met in DC with Craig Murray–a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and a personal friend of Julian Assange–and gave him the information on a flashdrive of some type. Murray then flew back to Britain and gave the drive to Assange in person.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Don Bass
    @Seamus. You are correct.


    It is edifying that Seth Rich murder is *finally* gaining the exposures it deserves.
    But so many of us *knew* the implications and most of the conspiracy around how and why he died a year ago.
    It's tedious that people here are so ill informed about *what* Wikileaks leaked and the importance of those leaks.
    Despite the hysteria of the CIA-NN-lead media there are *no* Russian hackers.
    It is all a misdirect.
    Americans are about to have another President politically assassinated. It behooves the citizenry to pay attention to how and *why*.
    It's not 1963 anymore. Wake up. Use a search engine and get acquainted with what's happening to the country _ and for whose benefit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. @anon
    Why doesn't Assange release at least some of the e-mails from Seth Rich to Wikileaks?

    Why doesn’t Assange release at least some of the e-mails from Seth Rich to Wikileaks?

    You can read all the Wikileaks Podesta emails here:

    https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/

    Comment: Wikileaks emails are not indexed by whomever leaked them. Obviously they do this to protect their sources from establishment punishments.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Corvinus says:
    @jim jones
    I believe the MAOA gene is assumed to be the problem:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2933872/

    The results of any study regarding the 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene should be interpreted with caution in light of a number of limitations that need to be addressed in replication studies. First, the measures of psychopathic personality traits, ever arrested, and ever incarcerated were based on self reports, not official data. Although self-reports have been shown to be reliable and valid instruments for assessing antisocial phenotypes (Krueger et al., 1994; Sutton, 2010), it is possible that official crime data would have produced differing results.

    Second, the measures of criminal justice outcomes did not delineate between different types of offenders, such as violent predatory offenders versus non-violent property offenders. Perhaps the 2-repeat allele would have varying effects on different subcategories of offenders.

    Third, the sample analyzed in the current study is the same as the one analyzed in Guo et al.’s (2008) study. While some studies examined different outcome measures and focused only on African-American males, it is important that future studies estimate the association between the 2-repeat allele and antisocial phenotypes in other samples.

    Last, although the frequency of the 2-repeat allele is similar to prior research, only about 5% of the final analytical sample carried the 2-repeat allele. Future research needs to examine much larger samples in order to include more 2-repeat allele carriers. Until these limitations are addressed, it would be premature to hypothesize how the 2-repeat allele may impact criminal activity patterns in society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Corvinus says:
    @Ronald Thomas West
    I'm not impressed. For quite some time there has been a credible witness to the fact of an insider leaked the DNC mails that doesn't require going through anonymous FBI sources or climbing over a Rich family in denial:

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/12/cias-absence-conviction/

    “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” -wikileaks associate and former British foreign service officer Craig Murray

    So why would 'tyler durden' toss all of this doubt inducing crap from the faux news channel into the stew of it? It's been black & white, case closed for quite some time.

    One can have reasonable doubt that Craig Murray “knows” who leaked them since he has self-interest and self-preservation in mind.

    Mr. Murray made this statement–”A little simple logic demolishes the CIA’s claims. The CIA claim they “know the individuals” involved. Yet under Obama the USA has been absolutely ruthless in its persecution of whistleblowers, and its pursuit of foreign hackers through extradition. We are supposed to believe that in the most vital instance imaginable, an attempt by a foreign power to destabilise a US election, even though the CIA knows who the individuals are, nobody is going to be arrested or extradited, or (if in Russia) made subject to yet more banking and other restrictions against Russian individuals? Plainly it stinks.”

    Except if the “Deep State” is playing for keeps and is hell-bent on removing Trump, then they are going to play it close to the vest in certain matters and wait until they have the absolute goods to nail him to the cross. So it’s not as “simple” as Mr. Murray makes it out to be. Arrests and/or extraditions are most likely made when there is hard-core evidence, which is required in this case given Trump status and popularity among his base. They have ONE bullet in their chamber and have to get the KILL SHOT. The CIA has their attack dogs out en masses to smoke out the culprits. If it is revealed that in the two grand juries that Trump’s crew are joined at the hip with the Russians and/or engaged in shenanigans, then Republicans will have to think about cutting their ties to Trump given the importance of the mid-term elections.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
    Clearly you're just way too smart for ordinary folk with common sense; kind of like the IQ 180 that believes Jesus will return and straighten everything out. Meanwhile, I'll take Murray at his word.
    , @Sowhat
    And, if all is but a witch hunt, the DNC and crew will finally shut the .... up? I wonder. Never witnessed such a sad sack of sour grapes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Corvinus
    One can have reasonable doubt that Craig Murray "knows" who leaked them since he has self-interest and self-preservation in mind.

    Mr. Murray made this statement--"A little simple logic demolishes the CIA’s claims. The CIA claim they “know the individuals” involved. Yet under Obama the USA has been absolutely ruthless in its persecution of whistleblowers, and its pursuit of foreign hackers through extradition. We are supposed to believe that in the most vital instance imaginable, an attempt by a foreign power to destabilise a US election, even though the CIA knows who the individuals are, nobody is going to be arrested or extradited, or (if in Russia) made subject to yet more banking and other restrictions against Russian individuals? Plainly it stinks."

    Except if the "Deep State" is playing for keeps and is hell-bent on removing Trump, then they are going to play it close to the vest in certain matters and wait until they have the absolute goods to nail him to the cross. So it's not as "simple" as Mr. Murray makes it out to be. Arrests and/or extraditions are most likely made when there is hard-core evidence, which is required in this case given Trump status and popularity among his base. They have ONE bullet in their chamber and have to get the KILL SHOT. The CIA has their attack dogs out en masses to smoke out the culprits. If it is revealed that in the two grand juries that Trump's crew are joined at the hip with the Russians and/or engaged in shenanigans, then Republicans will have to think about cutting their ties to Trump given the importance of the mid-term elections.

    Clearly you’re just way too smart for ordinary folk with common sense; kind of like the IQ 180 that believes Jesus will return and straighten everything out. Meanwhile, I’ll take Murray at his word.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Clearly you’re just way too smart for ordinary folk with common sense...:

    I'm merely offering my analysis from multiple sources.

    "kind of like the IQ 180 that believes Jesus will return and straighten everything out."

    Exactly. It is faith. One can question that belief, but you nor I actually know.

    "Meanwhile, I’ll take Murray at his word."

    In order to maintain his narrative, absolutely. But you may be missing key things along the way. We'll see how it all plays out. The two grand juries being convened on the Trump Administration will be telling.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Corvinus says:
    @Ronald Thomas West
    Clearly you're just way too smart for ordinary folk with common sense; kind of like the IQ 180 that believes Jesus will return and straighten everything out. Meanwhile, I'll take Murray at his word.

    “Clearly you’re just way too smart for ordinary folk with common sense…:

    I’m merely offering my analysis from multiple sources.

    “kind of like the IQ 180 that believes Jesus will return and straighten everything out.”

    Exactly. It is faith. One can question that belief, but you nor I actually know.

    “Meanwhile, I’ll take Murray at his word.”

    In order to maintain his narrative, absolutely. But you may be missing key things along the way. We’ll see how it all plays out. The two grand juries being convened on the Trump Administration will be telling.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
    huh. I'd supposed you'd sorted 'faith' with alleles [belly laugh]
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. JHC .. we do it/have been doing it (eg) meddling in foreign elections, wars, whacking the occasional candidate since the Spanish-American War and say “its okay, it’s in the national interest.”

    What’s the point with the supposed Russia-US election bashing? Ie, it’s okay and national interest legal for the US to meddle and others not?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. Agent76 says:

    May 17, 2017 The Seth Rich Story Changes Once Again

    Less than 24 hours after Private Investigator Rod Wheeler claimed that “investigation up to this point shows there was some degree of email exchange between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks,” the story has changed. Wheeler is now claiming that he had no additional evidence to suggest that Seth Rich contacted WikiLeaks prior to his murder.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Yeah, I had doubts from the start.

    Never trust a Negro.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Agent76 says:

    14.05.2017 International Cyber Attack: Roots Traced to US National Security Agency

    Over 45,000 ransomware attacks have been tracked in large-scale attacks across Europe and Asia — particularly Russia and China — as well as attacks in the US and South America. There are reports of infections in 99 countries. A string of ransomware attacks appears to have started in the United Kingdom, Spain and the rest of Europe, before striking Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines on May 12. According to Kaspersky Laboratory, Russia, Ukraine, India and Taiwan were hit hardest. Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer at the Helsinki-based cybersecurity company F-Secure, called the attack «the biggest ransomware outbreak in history». It is not known who exactly was behind it.

    http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/05/14/international-cyber-attack-roots-traced-us-national-security-agency.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. @Corvinus
    "Clearly you’re just way too smart for ordinary folk with common sense...:

    I'm merely offering my analysis from multiple sources.

    "kind of like the IQ 180 that believes Jesus will return and straighten everything out."

    Exactly. It is faith. One can question that belief, but you nor I actually know.

    "Meanwhile, I’ll take Murray at his word."

    In order to maintain his narrative, absolutely. But you may be missing key things along the way. We'll see how it all plays out. The two grand juries being convened on the Trump Administration will be telling.

    huh. I’d supposed you’d sorted ‘faith’ with alleles [belly laugh]

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "huh. I’d supposed you’d sorted ‘faith’ with alleles"

    Jim Jones has faith that an article he linked to "proves" that blacks are genetically prone to psychopathic behavior, and you have faith that God will not come down from the Heavens to save humankind from their psychopathic behavior. Two separate ideas, but one common link. You can figure what is that connection, with your high IQ and all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Agent76
    May 17, 2017 The Seth Rich Story Changes Once Again

    Less than 24 hours after Private Investigator Rod Wheeler claimed that “investigation up to this point shows there was some degree of email exchange between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks,” the story has changed. Wheeler is now claiming that he had no additional evidence to suggest that Seth Rich contacted WikiLeaks prior to his murder.

    https://youtu.be/wQRDkppCqNM

    Yeah, I had doubts from the start.

    Never trust a Negro.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Agent76
    How old are you having to use derogatory terms in your communications? You should learn a vocabulary selection a step above redneck.

    May 01, 2017 How long before Nancy Pelosi is officially diagnosed with Alzheimer’s or dementia?

    Some of the Democratic Party’s Marxist stalwarts are getting up there in age and it’s finally beginning to show: In public appearances they are having an increasingly difficult time enunciating their words, remembering key facts and clearly conveying their hatred for President Donald J. Trump.

    http://newstarget.com/2017-05-01-how-long-before-nanci-pelosi-is-officially-diagnosed-with-alzheimers-or-dementia.html
    , @Father O'Hara
    Agreed. But why hire a Negro??
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @Ram
    Three days after the Seth Rich murder Comey had the information (IF he didn't already know) gleaned from Rich's laptop that he had been in correspondence with Wikileaks, yet went along with the canard that the DNC was hacked by the Russians till the very end. Assange's confirmation that Russians had no connection to the LEAK was also ignored, because they wanted Assange painted as a criminal.

    But, But, But don’t you know that Seth Rich got the Emails from Putin, on Trumps instructions?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. El Dato says:
    @Anonymous
    I feel the same way about the plane crashing into the Pentagon on 9/11

    That must be literally the most surveillance heavy facility on the planet -- yet there is no footage of the crash/aftermath?

    The whole system is crooked. Anything that incriminates the power structure simply disappears. And there doesn't seem to be any mechanism to even look into it.

    That was in 2001.

    Different age. Watch the “X Files” for the tech quality,

    Didn’t even have mobile phones with cameras.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    I mentioned to my wife about five years ago that the phrase
    "My son just bought a waterproof Bluetooth speaker so he could listen to songs from his phone in the shower"

    Would have been absolutely meaningless fifteen years previously.

    But he did.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Sowhat says:
    @Corvinus
    One can have reasonable doubt that Craig Murray "knows" who leaked them since he has self-interest and self-preservation in mind.

    Mr. Murray made this statement--"A little simple logic demolishes the CIA’s claims. The CIA claim they “know the individuals” involved. Yet under Obama the USA has been absolutely ruthless in its persecution of whistleblowers, and its pursuit of foreign hackers through extradition. We are supposed to believe that in the most vital instance imaginable, an attempt by a foreign power to destabilise a US election, even though the CIA knows who the individuals are, nobody is going to be arrested or extradited, or (if in Russia) made subject to yet more banking and other restrictions against Russian individuals? Plainly it stinks."

    Except if the "Deep State" is playing for keeps and is hell-bent on removing Trump, then they are going to play it close to the vest in certain matters and wait until they have the absolute goods to nail him to the cross. So it's not as "simple" as Mr. Murray makes it out to be. Arrests and/or extraditions are most likely made when there is hard-core evidence, which is required in this case given Trump status and popularity among his base. They have ONE bullet in their chamber and have to get the KILL SHOT. The CIA has their attack dogs out en masses to smoke out the culprits. If it is revealed that in the two grand juries that Trump's crew are joined at the hip with the Russians and/or engaged in shenanigans, then Republicans will have to think about cutting their ties to Trump given the importance of the mid-term elections.

    And, if all is but a witch hunt, the DNC and crew will finally shut the …. up? I wonder. Never witnessed such a sad sack of sour grapes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Corvinus says:
    @Ronald Thomas West
    huh. I'd supposed you'd sorted 'faith' with alleles [belly laugh]

    “huh. I’d supposed you’d sorted ‘faith’ with alleles”

    Jim Jones has faith that an article he linked to “proves” that blacks are genetically prone to psychopathic behavior, and you have faith that God will not come down from the Heavens to save humankind from their psychopathic behavior. Two separate ideas, but one common link. You can figure what is that connection, with your high IQ and all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Anonym says:
    @anon
    Is there a specific combination on DNA of Negroes that carries the "pathological liar" trait?
    What is that DNA pattern?
    Does it appear only on NEGRO DNA or has its presence been noted on non-Negro DNA?

    A majority of Black callers to C Span declare, with gospel certainty, that "Trump is a liar, has been all his life."
    Does that mean that Trump carries Negro DNA?
    Or that Trump is a Negro?
    Or that the code for lying can be present in non-Negroes?
    Or that Negroes, being "pathological liars," lie about Trump being a liar?

    Is that last statement disproved if it happens that Trump does, indeed, lie?

    My but it does get complicated when blanket, prejudiced generalizations are slung about.

    Is there a specific combination on DNA of Negroes that carries the “pathological liar” trait?

    Yes, it is the D1NDU gene on the locus NUFF1NWR0NG.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @El Dato
    That was in 2001.

    Different age. Watch the "X Files" for the tech quality,

    Didn't even have mobile phones with cameras.

    I mentioned to my wife about five years ago that the phrase
    “My son just bought a waterproof Bluetooth speaker so he could listen to songs from his phone in the shower”

    Would have been absolutely meaningless fifteen years previously.

    But he did.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. anon says: • Disclaimer

    one of the key elements of this story is the media completely ignoring the Seth Rich angle

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    ... the media completely ignoring the Seth Rich angle
     
    Whatever happened must be REALLY bad. And too many people kneww about this early on for the whole matter to be swept under the rug.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @Anonymous
    I feel the same way about the plane crashing into the Pentagon on 9/11

    That must be literally the most surveillance heavy facility on the planet -- yet there is no footage of the crash/aftermath?

    The whole system is crooked. Anything that incriminates the power structure simply disappears. And there doesn't seem to be any mechanism to even look into it.

    Agreed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Eagle Eye says:
    @Alfa158
    The Wikileaks site shows two batches of leaked e-mails. One is the 44,053 from the DNC and the other 30,000 plus from Hilary's e-mail server. Wikileaks doesn't say on their site specifically what the sources were. They did offer a reward for information on the murder of Seth Rich, which implies, but does not state, that the DNC leaks came from Rich.
    The Hillary e-mails could have been hacked by the Russians, any number of other intelligence sources, or even a skilled amateur.
    Then on top of all that fog, other conflicting information is that the DNC lost control of the e-mails due to Podesta falling for a phishing probe, even after his IT people warned him not to respond to it.
    Yet another journalist claims he was the guy who forwarded the e-mails to Wikileaks and got them from a DNC staffer, but not Rich!
    I think I'll go take a nap for about 5 years and you can wake me up after it is all sorted out.

    Seth Rich was quite young and perhaps not 100% wise to the ways of the world.

    Is it conceivable that he passed the DNC emails to Comey’s FBI FIRST as evidence of criminal wrongdoing, and THEN handed another copy to Wikileaks as backup?

    Perhaps Rich went to Wikileaks only after Comeys’ FBI gave him the brush-off?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    Seth Rich was quite young and perhaps not 100% wise to the ways of the world....snip...Perhaps Rich went to Wikileaks only after Comeys’ FBI gave him the brush-off?
     
    /pol/ found his twitter handle etc yesterday and people on the The_Donald subreddit were going through his various social media posts looking for evidence

    (before reddit shut it down)

    and yes from looking at his posts, very much the doe-eyed idealist type the modern Left uses for its nefarious purposes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Eagle Eye says:
    @anon
    one of the key elements of this story is the media completely ignoring the Seth Rich angle

    … the media completely ignoring the Seth Rich angle

    Whatever happened must be REALLY bad. And too many people kneww about this early on for the whole matter to be swept under the rug.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Don Bass says:
    @Corvinus
    "The Wikileaks site shows two batches of leaked e-mails. One is the 44,053 from the DNC and the other 30,000 plus from Hilary’s e-mail server. Wikileaks doesn’t say on their site specifically what the sources were. The Hillary e-mails could have been hacked by the Russians, any number of other intelligence sources, or even a skilled amateur."

    Exactly. So Zerohedge is being a White Knight here for Trump. It is possible that Rich could have supplied those documents, but it is also possible that the Russians was involved. We don't know for sure.

    ……We don’t know for sure…..
    Sure, we do. Wikileaks has stated emphatically and categorically the leaks – and they were leaks, not ” hacks”, were not sourced from the Russians.
    What also know – for sure – is that the “Russians hacked our elections” psy-op/misdirect was constructed (workshopped) by the Podesta + David Brookes media matters “team” immediately after the HRC election failure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig

    What also know – for sure – is that the “Russians hacked our elections” psy-op/misdirect was constructed (workshopped) by the Podesta + David Brookes media matters “team” immediately after the HRC election failure.
     
    I think you mean David Brock, not David Brookes (the NYT columnist). Also: don't forget about Robbie Mook!
    , @Corvinus
    "Sure, we do. Wikileaks has stated emphatically and categorically the leaks – and they were leaks, not ” hacks”, were not sourced from the Russians."

    There are two separate things here. One, is Wikileaks. Two, is Russian hacking of the DNC. There is so much misdirection and misinformation by BOTH SIDES that it is challenging for reasonable people to know what is actually accurate or what is a crafted narrative.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Don Bass says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    Why doesn’t Assange release at least some of the e-mails from Seth Rich to Wikileaks?
     
    According to the standard version of the story, Rich did not email the pilfered DNC data to Wikileaks. Rather, he met in DC with Craig Murray--a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and a personal friend of Julian Assange--and gave him the information on a flashdrive of some type. Murray then flew back to Britain and gave the drive to Assange in person.

    @Seamus. You are correct.

    It is edifying that Seth Rich murder is *finally* gaining the exposures it deserves.
    But so many of us *knew* the implications and most of the conspiracy around how and why he died a year ago.
    It’s tedious that people here are so ill informed about *what* Wikileaks leaked and the importance of those leaks.
    Despite the hysteria of the CIA-NN-lead media there are *no* Russian hackers.
    It is all a misdirect.
    Americans are about to have another President politically assassinated. It behooves the citizenry to pay attention to how and *why*.
    It’s not 1963 anymore. Wake up. Use a search engine and get acquainted with what’s happening to the country _ and for whose benefit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @Don Bass
    ......We don't know for sure.....
    Sure, we do. Wikileaks has stated emphatically and categorically the leaks - and they were leaks, not " hacks", were not sourced from the Russians.
    What also know - for sure - is that the "Russians hacked our elections" psy-op/misdirect was constructed (workshopped) by the Podesta + David Brookes media matters "team" immediately after the HRC election failure.

    What also know – for sure – is that the “Russians hacked our elections” psy-op/misdirect was constructed (workshopped) by the Podesta + David Brookes media matters “team” immediately after the HRC election failure.

    I think you mean David Brock, not David Brookes (the NYT columnist). Also: don’t forget about Robbie Mook!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Corvinus says:
    @Don Bass
    ......We don't know for sure.....
    Sure, we do. Wikileaks has stated emphatically and categorically the leaks - and they were leaks, not " hacks", were not sourced from the Russians.
    What also know - for sure - is that the "Russians hacked our elections" psy-op/misdirect was constructed (workshopped) by the Podesta + David Brookes media matters "team" immediately after the HRC election failure.

    “Sure, we do. Wikileaks has stated emphatically and categorically the leaks – and they were leaks, not ” hacks”, were not sourced from the Russians.”

    There are two separate things here. One, is Wikileaks. Two, is Russian hacking of the DNC. There is so much misdirection and misinformation by BOTH SIDES that it is challenging for reasonable people to know what is actually accurate or what is a crafted narrative.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. OutWest says:

    Well, it must have been the Russians that hacked into the NY Times and published that damning article about Hil and Libya. It was a rather complete exposé of incompetence and savagery. Note; the New York Times! And where did Trump live? Pretty conclusive; Trump and the Russians victimizing poor Hil and the voice of liberals in one dastardly hack.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  59. @Anonymous
    I feel the same way about the plane crashing into the Pentagon on 9/11

    That must be literally the most surveillance heavy facility on the planet -- yet there is no footage of the crash/aftermath?

    The whole system is crooked. Anything that incriminates the power structure simply disappears. And there doesn't seem to be any mechanism to even look into it.

    The Pentagon had CCTV cameras taking very grainy, very compressed images of entryways, parking lots, and guard huts. They did not have cameras watching the walls of the structure just in case a plane happened to fly into it. In any case, the plane only would have been within the camera’s field of view for the merest fraction of second.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Dahlia says:

    There’s been so much smoke and mirrors on this, that it makes one want to throw his hands up…

    Before I even start, if anyone reporting on this does not mention Craig Murray, a well-known and respected associate of Julian Assange involved with Wikileaks, and his claim back in December that he personally received the hand-off of the DNC emails from insiders in DC, that person IS A HACK.

    I followed it closely when he came out and was shocked and dismayed that barely anybody (nobody?) in the United States followed up with him. They just ignored him. I guess because he couldn’t be dismissed as a hack and what he said torpedoed the “Russians did it” narrative, so just hope nobody heard him.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

    Craig Murray did not mention Seth Rich. What the American MSM’s ignoring of him shows, though, is that *anything* that casts doubt on the “Russians did it” narrative will be obfuscated, ignored, etc. Expect to be gaslit.
    Anyway…

    One issue muddying the waters is that the two major “breakthroughs” come from “FOX”: a local affiliate and Fox News.

    I understand that there are problems with the local affiliate, but I gather, NOT the Fox News story… Am I wrong?

    If the Fox News reporting is correct, it’s huge, and their’s was the more substantive to begin with: law enforcement sources said Seth Rich had been in contact with Gavin MacFadyen.
    (if the local guy was bluffing in order to have fresh attention and get people to come forward, it was worth it)

    Gavin MacFadyen seems to have had a relationship with Craig Murray, and both had/have a relationship with Julian Assange. Seth Rich being in contact with Gavin MacFadyen greatly lends credibility to Craig Murray’s account.
    (Here, both are mentioned together in the book “Ghost Plane: The True Story Story of the CIA Torture Program”

    https://books.google.com/books?id=NLzB7YXDHNUC&pg=PA311&lpg=PA311&dq=gavin+macfadyen+craig+murray+cia&source=bl&ots=KKy1_V2atM&sig=1CYGRZjnOxmcRIGk9RNx1iQhWcA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigk-7br_3TAhXo7oMKHTOrCT0Q6AEIOzAE#v=onepage&q=gavin%20macfadyen%20craig%20murray%20cia&f=false)

    Obviously, the answer to our impasse is: Interview Craig Murray

    We have two questions:

    a. Was Seth Rich involved in leaking to Wikileaks?
    b. Who killed Seth Rich?

    The answer to question “a” greatly changes the odds and focus for question “b”. Of course, the DNC could also be the unluckiest organization going in that the guy who destroyed them via leaking had the temerity to go get himself killed by some random thugs who got away!

    I see that Mike Whitney has just written about this, including Craig Murray, at Counterpunch:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/05/19/seth-rich-craig-murray-and-the-sinister-stewards-of-the-national-security-state/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dahlia
    Within the Mike Whitney article is a more detailed take-away of Craig Murray's account from "A Spy Coup in America?"
    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/18/a-spy-coup-in-america/

    Although Assange recently has sought to muzzle Murray’s public comments – out of apparent concern for protecting the identity of sources – Murray offered possibly his most expansive account of the sourcing during a podcast interview with Scott Horton on Dec. 13.

     


    But he appears to have undertaken a mission for WikiLeaks to contact one of the sources (or a representative) during a Sept. 25 visit to Washington where he says he met with a person in a wooded area of American University. At the time, Murray was at American University participating in an awards ceremony for former CIA officer John Kiriakou who was being honored by a group of former Western intelligence officials, the Sam Adams Associates, named for the late Vietnam War-era CIA analyst and whistleblower Sam Adams.

     


    Murray has disputed a report in London’s Daily Mail that he was receiving a batch of the leaked Democratic emails. “The material, I think, was already safely with WikiLeaks before I got there in September,” Murray said in the interview with Scott Horton. “I had a small role to play.”

     


    “The Podesta emails and the DNC emails are, of course, two separate things and we shouldn’t conclude that they both have the same source,” Murray said. “In both cases we’re talking of a leak, not a hack, in that the person who was responsible for getting that information out had legal access to that information.”

     

    And here's the link to the podcast
    https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/scotthortonshow/121316-craig-murray-dnc-podesta-emails-leaked-americans-not-hacked-russia/

    According to Consortium, Murray says he met with one person, not plural as in the Daily Mail article, and it did not involve a batch of Democratic emails; we don't know what it is.
    , @RobinG
    You can interview Craig Murray all you want, but (as your posts 61,62,and 63 make clear)
    a) Murray may not know the identity, by name, of the source of the leak, and
    b) even after death, Murray may not be willing to identify the source.

    Just to repeat the salient parts,

    [Murray]... to contact one of the sources (or a representative) during a Sept. 25 visit to Washington where he says he met with a person....

    ...Murray has declined to say exactly what the meeting in the woods was about...

    The material, I think, was already safely with WikiLeaks before I got there in September,” Murray said.... “I had a small role to play.”

    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/18/a-spy-coup-in-america/
     
    So, no thumb drive, no confirmation Seth Rich involved, no confirmation Murray met -or knew- the primary source of leak. But bravo to Hannity. I hope he sticks with this story.
    , @Logan
    "the DNC could also be the unluckiest organization going in that the guy who destroyed them via leaking had the temerity to go get himself killed by some random thugs who got away!"

    Stuff like that does happen.

    What about the possibility that the killing was a targeted killing of a white guy for the crime of being white?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Dahlia says:
    @Dahlia
    There's been so much smoke and mirrors on this, that it makes one want to throw his hands up...

    Before I even start, if anyone reporting on this does not mention Craig Murray, a well-known and respected associate of Julian Assange involved with Wikileaks, and his claim back in December that he personally received the hand-off of the DNC emails from insiders in DC, that person IS A HACK.

    I followed it closely when he came out and was shocked and dismayed that barely anybody (nobody?) in the United States followed up with him. They just ignored him. I guess because he couldn't be dismissed as a hack and what he said torpedoed the "Russians did it" narrative, so just hope nobody heard him.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

    Craig Murray did not mention Seth Rich. What the American MSM's ignoring of him shows, though, is that *anything* that casts doubt on the "Russians did it" narrative will be obfuscated, ignored, etc. Expect to be gaslit.
    Anyway...

    One issue muddying the waters is that the two major "breakthroughs" come from "FOX": a local affiliate and Fox News.

    I understand that there are problems with the local affiliate, but I gather, NOT the Fox News story... Am I wrong?

    If the Fox News reporting is correct, it's huge, and their's was the more substantive to begin with: law enforcement sources said Seth Rich had been in contact with Gavin MacFadyen.
    (if the local guy was bluffing in order to have fresh attention and get people to come forward, it was worth it)

    Gavin MacFadyen seems to have had a relationship with Craig Murray, and both had/have a relationship with Julian Assange. Seth Rich being in contact with Gavin MacFadyen greatly lends credibility to Craig Murray's account.
    (Here, both are mentioned together in the book "Ghost Plane: The True Story Story of the CIA Torture Program"
    https://books.google.com/books?id=NLzB7YXDHNUC&pg=PA311&lpg=PA311&dq=gavin+macfadyen+craig+murray+cia&source=bl&ots=KKy1_V2atM&sig=1CYGRZjnOxmcRIGk9RNx1iQhWcA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigk-7br_3TAhXo7oMKHTOrCT0Q6AEIOzAE#v=onepage&q=gavin%20macfadyen%20craig%20murray%20cia&f=false)


    Obviously, the answer to our impasse is: Interview Craig Murray
     
    We have two questions:

    a. Was Seth Rich involved in leaking to Wikileaks?
    b. Who killed Seth Rich?

    The answer to question "a" greatly changes the odds and focus for question "b". Of course, the DNC could also be the unluckiest organization going in that the guy who destroyed them via leaking had the temerity to go get himself killed by some random thugs who got away!

    I see that Mike Whitney has just written about this, including Craig Murray, at Counterpunch:
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/05/19/seth-rich-craig-murray-and-the-sinister-stewards-of-the-national-security-state/

    Within the Mike Whitney article is a more detailed take-away of Craig Murray’s account from “A Spy Coup in America?”

    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/18/a-spy-coup-in-america/

    Although Assange recently has sought to muzzle Murray’s public comments – out of apparent concern for protecting the identity of sources – Murray offered possibly his most expansive account of the sourcing during a podcast interview with Scott Horton on Dec. 13.

    But he appears to have undertaken a mission for WikiLeaks to contact one of the sources (or a representative) during a Sept. 25 visit to Washington where he says he met with a person in a wooded area of American University. At the time, Murray was at American University participating in an awards ceremony for former CIA officer John Kiriakou who was being honored by a group of former Western intelligence officials, the Sam Adams Associates, named for the late Vietnam War-era CIA analyst and whistleblower Sam Adams.

    Murray has disputed a report in London’s Daily Mail that he was receiving a batch of the leaked Democratic emails. “The material, I think, was already safely with WikiLeaks before I got there in September,” Murray said in the interview with Scott Horton. “I had a small role to play.”

    “The Podesta emails and the DNC emails are, of course, two separate things and we shouldn’t conclude that they both have the same source,” Murray said. “In both cases we’re talking of a leak, not a hack, in that the person who was responsible for getting that information out had legal access to that information.”

    And here’s the link to the podcast

    https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/scotthortonshow/121316-craig-murray-dnc-podesta-emails-leaked-americans-not-hacked-russia/

    According to Consortium, Murray says he met with one person, not plural as in the Daily Mail article, and it did not involve a batch of Democratic emails; we don’t know what it is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Dahlia says:

    Craig Murray on Seth Rich:

    In reference to the leak of the DNC emails, Murray noted that “Julian Assange took very close interest in the death of Seth Rich, the Democratic staff member” who had worked for the DNC on voter databases and was shot and killed on July 10 near his Washington, D.C., home.

    Murray continued, “WikiLeaks offered a $20,000 reward for information leading to the capture of his killers. So, obviously there are suspicions there about what’s happening and things are somewhat murky. I’m not saying – don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying that he was the source of the [DNC] leaks. What I’m saying is that it’s probably not an unfair indication to draw that WikiLeaks believes that he may have been killed by someone who thought he was the source of the leaks … whether correctly or incorrectly.

    It may be worth noting that conspiracy theories have sprung up around other Democratic figures, but Julian Assange hasn’t brought them up. Just took a strong interest in this one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. Dahlia says:

    Final comment in this string, so readers can check out Craig Murray’s site. Maybe Ron Unz can get a hold of him?

    Now both Julian Assange and I have stated definitively the leak does not come from Russia. Do we credibly have access? Yes, very obviously. Very, very few people can be said to definitely have access to the source of the leak. The people saying it is not Russia are those who do have access. After access, you consider truthfulness. Do Julian Assange and I have a reputation for truthfulness? Well in 10 years not one of the tens of thousands of documents WikiLeaks has released has had its authenticity successfully challenged. As for me, I have a reputation for inconvenient truth telling.

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/12/cias-absence-conviction/

    Can’t say it enough: Discount anybody who doesn’t reference Julian Assange or Craig Murray (and Gavin MacFadyen if the national Fox News stands by its sources and I believe they do) when opining on Seth Rich or the Democratic emails.

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    Dahlia,

    You have done some really good work here.

    Thanks for it.

    But I must say something ....Every recent article pertaining to Seth Rich, including Mike's , misses the MEAT of the entire story.

    The MEAT of the story is to be found in Seth Rich's JOB.

    What did he do, Dahlia ?

    He was a VOTER DATA DIRECTOR for the DNC....for gosh sakes!

    If the story begins anywhere, it begins HERE.

    Seth Rich's story begins when we recognize the high probability that Seth came across SUBSTANTIAL and REPEATED irregularities in the VOTER DATA, tilting the outcomes in favor of Hillary.

    This is the crux of the case.

    It is also fair to assume that Seth Rich , given his role as "data director" , was able to COLLECT these voter data discrepancies, and collate them into a fool proof evidentiary format.

    Its the DATA which Seth found , that is the key... ...its the MEAT of the story.

    But the DATA and the repeated systemic irregularities which he became aware of, could have been glitches in the system for all he KNEW.

    This is where we get to ......the POTATOES.

    What are the potatoes?.....the potatoes are the EMAILS which show an INTENTIONALITY behind the DATA irregularities......and expose them not just as "glitches" in the system,but as potentially deliberate and "treasonous" voter fraud.

    A very serious case of multiple felonies by the DNC machine, and its party bosses, could be made if you have both the MEAT (the data)and the POTATOES(the emails) of the case.

    But you need BOTH, one without the other is not enough.

    Givens Seth's JOB, the high probability he had the DATA in HAND, may well be why he was shot in the back at four in the morning on July 10th, 2016.

    If anyone wishes to solve this case..(or prosecute it)..they need to find the DATA CHIP....because
    while the emails may show an "intentionality" to usurp the voters say in the DNC nomination , the DATA provides the PROOF.

    May there be no doubt on this,.... everyone "involved" in these "dirty shenanigans" wants that data "exterminated" for all time, .....and the entire story SHUT DOWN.

    ASAP.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Dahlia says:

    I saw that Dave Weigel is planning on writing a piece on the Seth Rich conspiracy…

    The #1 thing fueling it is the Media ignoring Assange and his associates emphatically stating that it was insiders, not Russia, involved with the Democratic leaks. These people received them, and long after the election when they have no possible motive, still vehemently deny that it was Russia. Craig Murray spoke out in December. They have perfect credibility, and at this stage, no motive that could be suspect. But they continue to be utterly, completely, ignored while the Russia circus runs on. So, a bona fide Bernie supporter is murdered and Julian Assange took extreme interest… How do people *not* question what is going on?

    My spidey sense tells me that Seth Rich was a provider of intelligence to Julian Assange, but he really does not know who killed him. I think Assange holds out some hope that it was a random one-off thug thing, but deep down, suspects it’s not. The guilt would be tremendous. But, he doesn’t know. Strongly suspects. Tortured with guilt.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  65. RobinG says:
    @Dahlia
    There's been so much smoke and mirrors on this, that it makes one want to throw his hands up...

    Before I even start, if anyone reporting on this does not mention Craig Murray, a well-known and respected associate of Julian Assange involved with Wikileaks, and his claim back in December that he personally received the hand-off of the DNC emails from insiders in DC, that person IS A HACK.

    I followed it closely when he came out and was shocked and dismayed that barely anybody (nobody?) in the United States followed up with him. They just ignored him. I guess because he couldn't be dismissed as a hack and what he said torpedoed the "Russians did it" narrative, so just hope nobody heard him.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

    Craig Murray did not mention Seth Rich. What the American MSM's ignoring of him shows, though, is that *anything* that casts doubt on the "Russians did it" narrative will be obfuscated, ignored, etc. Expect to be gaslit.
    Anyway...

    One issue muddying the waters is that the two major "breakthroughs" come from "FOX": a local affiliate and Fox News.

    I understand that there are problems with the local affiliate, but I gather, NOT the Fox News story... Am I wrong?

    If the Fox News reporting is correct, it's huge, and their's was the more substantive to begin with: law enforcement sources said Seth Rich had been in contact with Gavin MacFadyen.
    (if the local guy was bluffing in order to have fresh attention and get people to come forward, it was worth it)

    Gavin MacFadyen seems to have had a relationship with Craig Murray, and both had/have a relationship with Julian Assange. Seth Rich being in contact with Gavin MacFadyen greatly lends credibility to Craig Murray's account.
    (Here, both are mentioned together in the book "Ghost Plane: The True Story Story of the CIA Torture Program"
    https://books.google.com/books?id=NLzB7YXDHNUC&pg=PA311&lpg=PA311&dq=gavin+macfadyen+craig+murray+cia&source=bl&ots=KKy1_V2atM&sig=1CYGRZjnOxmcRIGk9RNx1iQhWcA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigk-7br_3TAhXo7oMKHTOrCT0Q6AEIOzAE#v=onepage&q=gavin%20macfadyen%20craig%20murray%20cia&f=false)


    Obviously, the answer to our impasse is: Interview Craig Murray
     
    We have two questions:

    a. Was Seth Rich involved in leaking to Wikileaks?
    b. Who killed Seth Rich?

    The answer to question "a" greatly changes the odds and focus for question "b". Of course, the DNC could also be the unluckiest organization going in that the guy who destroyed them via leaking had the temerity to go get himself killed by some random thugs who got away!

    I see that Mike Whitney has just written about this, including Craig Murray, at Counterpunch:
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/05/19/seth-rich-craig-murray-and-the-sinister-stewards-of-the-national-security-state/

    You can interview Craig Murray all you want, but (as your posts 61,62,and 63 make clear)
    a) Murray may not know the identity, by name, of the source of the leak, and
    b) even after death, Murray may not be willing to identify the source.

    Just to repeat the salient parts,

    [Murray]… to contact one of the sources (or a representative) during a Sept. 25 visit to Washington where he says he met with a person….

    …Murray has declined to say exactly what the meeting in the woods was about…

    The material, I think, was already safely with WikiLeaks before I got there in September,” Murray said…. “I had a small role to play.”

    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/18/a-spy-coup-in-america/

    So, no thumb drive, no confirmation Seth Rich involved, no confirmation Murray met -or knew- the primary source of leak. But bravo to Hannity. I hope he sticks with this story.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. How common is it for the FBI to seize the computer of a homicide victim and analyze the contents?

    Read More
    • LOL: Logan
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  67. jim jones says:

    It looks as if the Seth Rich story has destroyed Reddit, all the Trump supporters are moving to Voat.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  68. Read More
    • Replies: @JackOH
    SR42, your references are exactly what I was getting at in my comment #12 above.

    I never took seriously the notion that American political decisions are made by violence and other criminal activities until I got a very minor rough-up by a crooked cop for my smalltime local politicking. That cop later got a cushy government job under the influence of a local Mr. Big whom I'd offended. Karma kicked in, and that cop's alcoholism and boorish behavior got him canned. I never quit writing, but I was pretty damn scared for a while.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. alexander says:
    @Dahlia
    Final comment in this string, so readers can check out Craig Murray's site. Maybe Ron Unz can get a hold of him?

    Now both Julian Assange and I have stated definitively the leak does not come from Russia. Do we credibly have access? Yes, very obviously. Very, very few people can be said to definitely have access to the source of the leak. The people saying it is not Russia are those who do have access. After access, you consider truthfulness. Do Julian Assange and I have a reputation for truthfulness? Well in 10 years not one of the tens of thousands of documents WikiLeaks has released has had its authenticity successfully challenged. As for me, I have a reputation for inconvenient truth telling.

     

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/12/cias-absence-conviction/

    Can't say it enough: Discount anybody who doesn't reference Julian Assange or Craig Murray (and Gavin MacFadyen if the national Fox News stands by its sources and I believe they do) when opining on Seth Rich or the Democratic emails.

    Dahlia,

    You have done some really good work here.

    Thanks for it.

    But I must say something ….Every recent article pertaining to Seth Rich, including Mike’s , misses the MEAT of the entire story.

    The MEAT of the story is to be found in Seth Rich’s JOB.

    What did he do, Dahlia ?

    He was a VOTER DATA DIRECTOR for the DNC….for gosh sakes!

    If the story begins anywhere, it begins HERE.

    Seth Rich’s story begins when we recognize the high probability that Seth came across SUBSTANTIAL and REPEATED irregularities in the VOTER DATA, tilting the outcomes in favor of Hillary.

    This is the crux of the case.

    It is also fair to assume that Seth Rich , given his role as “data director” , was able to COLLECT these voter data discrepancies, and collate them into a fool proof evidentiary format.

    Its the DATA which Seth found , that is the key… …its the MEAT of the story.

    But the DATA and the repeated systemic irregularities which he became aware of, could have been glitches in the system for all he KNEW.

    This is where we get to ……the POTATOES.

    What are the potatoes?…..the potatoes are the EMAILS which show an INTENTIONALITY behind the DATA irregularities……and expose them not just as “glitches” in the system,but as potentially deliberate and “treasonous” voter fraud.

    A very serious case of multiple felonies by the DNC machine, and its party bosses, could be made if you have both the MEAT (the data)and the POTATOES(the emails) of the case.

    But you need BOTH, one without the other is not enough.

    Givens Seth’s JOB, the high probability he had the DATA in HAND, may well be why he was shot in the back at four in the morning on July 10th, 2016.

    If anyone wishes to solve this case..(or prosecute it)..they need to find the DATA CHIP….because
    while the emails may show an “intentionality” to usurp the voters say in the DNC nomination , the DATA provides the PROOF.

    May there be no doubt on this,…. everyone “involved” in these “dirty shenanigans” wants that data “exterminated” for all time, …..and the entire story SHUT DOWN.

    ASAP.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    Seth Rich , given his role as “data director” , was able to COLLECT these voter data discrepancies, and collate them into a fool proof evidentiary format.
     
    This explanation - that Seth Rich had direct evidence of massive vote fraud - has always seemed most likely to me. The leaks are secondary.

    Again, he most likely went to the FBI and/or the U.S. media FIRST, but was betrayed by them leading to his murder. He ALSO passed the data to Wikileaks.

    So let's estimate the NUMBER of fraudulent votes controlled by the DNC. There are several categories:

    (1) Illegal aliens registered to vote through La Raza, SEIU and similar DNC fronts.

    (2) Other spurious voter registrations, e.g. dead voters, double voting (different addresses), completely fictitious voter registrations concocted by complicit SEIU staff at registrars' offices.

    (3) Zombie votes - technically correct voter registration, but the vote is actually cast by the SEIU, e.g. residents of nursing homes, mental hospitals, military votes (which often mysteriously are not delivered to the military voter),

    Given the period of time during which this has been operative, and the need to make a serious nation-wide impact, it seems reasonable to estimate that the DNC controls about 3-7 million illegal votes nationwide.

    The largest number would be in California. Although California overall is a blue state, there are conservative pockets and some conservative candidates came close to the Democratic candidate in statewide and local races.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. JackOH says:
    @SteveRogers42
    Coincidences abound:

    http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/08/shawn-lucas-cause-of-death-still-unknown-as-clintons-campaign-lawyer-tries-to-move-dnc-lawsuit-into-the-weeds/

    http://truthuncensored.net/julian-assanges-lawyer-found-dead-after-being-struck-by-train-video/

    SR42, your references are exactly what I was getting at in my comment #12 above.

    I never took seriously the notion that American political decisions are made by violence and other criminal activities until I got a very minor rough-up by a crooked cop for my smalltime local politicking. That cop later got a cushy government job under the influence of a local Mr. Big whom I’d offended. Karma kicked in, and that cop’s alcoholism and boorish behavior got him canned. I never quit writing, but I was pretty damn scared for a while.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    Until the Clintons came along, LBJ was probably the heavyweight champ of that sort of $#!t:

    http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKwallaceM.htm
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Is Seth Rich the only victim on the bloody Clinton trail? The Clinton company is the only one that should be investigated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Eagle Eye
    Seth Rich was quite young and perhaps not 100% wise to the ways of the world.

    Is it conceivable that he passed the DNC emails to Comey's FBI FIRST as evidence of criminal wrongdoing, and THEN handed another copy to Wikileaks as backup?

    Perhaps Rich went to Wikileaks only after Comeys' FBI gave him the brush-off?

    Seth Rich was quite young and perhaps not 100% wise to the ways of the world….snip…Perhaps Rich went to Wikileaks only after Comeys’ FBI gave him the brush-off?

    /pol/ found his twitter handle etc yesterday and people on the The_Donald subreddit were going through his various social media posts looking for evidence

    (before reddit shut it down)

    and yes from looking at his posts, very much the doe-eyed idealist type the modern Left uses for its nefarious purposes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Agent76 says:
    @Anon
    Yeah, I had doubts from the start.

    Never trust a Negro.

    How old are you having to use derogatory terms in your communications? You should learn a vocabulary selection a step above redneck.

    May 01, 2017 How long before Nancy Pelosi is officially diagnosed with Alzheimer’s or dementia?

    Some of the Democratic Party’s Marxist stalwarts are getting up there in age and it’s finally beginning to show: In public appearances they are having an increasingly difficult time enunciating their words, remembering key facts and clearly conveying their hatred for President Donald J. Trump.

    http://newstarget.com/2017-05-01-how-long-before-nanci-pelosi-is-officially-diagnosed-with-alzheimers-or-dementia.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Eagle Eye says:
    @alexander
    Dahlia,

    You have done some really good work here.

    Thanks for it.

    But I must say something ....Every recent article pertaining to Seth Rich, including Mike's , misses the MEAT of the entire story.

    The MEAT of the story is to be found in Seth Rich's JOB.

    What did he do, Dahlia ?

    He was a VOTER DATA DIRECTOR for the DNC....for gosh sakes!

    If the story begins anywhere, it begins HERE.

    Seth Rich's story begins when we recognize the high probability that Seth came across SUBSTANTIAL and REPEATED irregularities in the VOTER DATA, tilting the outcomes in favor of Hillary.

    This is the crux of the case.

    It is also fair to assume that Seth Rich , given his role as "data director" , was able to COLLECT these voter data discrepancies, and collate them into a fool proof evidentiary format.

    Its the DATA which Seth found , that is the key... ...its the MEAT of the story.

    But the DATA and the repeated systemic irregularities which he became aware of, could have been glitches in the system for all he KNEW.

    This is where we get to ......the POTATOES.

    What are the potatoes?.....the potatoes are the EMAILS which show an INTENTIONALITY behind the DATA irregularities......and expose them not just as "glitches" in the system,but as potentially deliberate and "treasonous" voter fraud.

    A very serious case of multiple felonies by the DNC machine, and its party bosses, could be made if you have both the MEAT (the data)and the POTATOES(the emails) of the case.

    But you need BOTH, one without the other is not enough.

    Givens Seth's JOB, the high probability he had the DATA in HAND, may well be why he was shot in the back at four in the morning on July 10th, 2016.

    If anyone wishes to solve this case..(or prosecute it)..they need to find the DATA CHIP....because
    while the emails may show an "intentionality" to usurp the voters say in the DNC nomination , the DATA provides the PROOF.

    May there be no doubt on this,.... everyone "involved" in these "dirty shenanigans" wants that data "exterminated" for all time, .....and the entire story SHUT DOWN.

    ASAP.

    Seth Rich , given his role as “data director” , was able to COLLECT these voter data discrepancies, and collate them into a fool proof evidentiary format.

    This explanation – that Seth Rich had direct evidence of massive vote fraud – has always seemed most likely to me. The leaks are secondary.

    Again, he most likely went to the FBI and/or the U.S. media FIRST, but was betrayed by them leading to his murder. He ALSO passed the data to Wikileaks.

    So let’s estimate the NUMBER of fraudulent votes controlled by the DNC. There are several categories:

    (1) Illegal aliens registered to vote through La Raza, SEIU and similar DNC fronts.

    (2) Other spurious voter registrations, e.g. dead voters, double voting (different addresses), completely fictitious voter registrations concocted by complicit SEIU staff at registrars’ offices.

    (3) Zombie votes – technically correct voter registration, but the vote is actually cast by the SEIU, e.g. residents of nursing homes, mental hospitals, military votes (which often mysteriously are not delivered to the military voter),

    Given the period of time during which this has been operative, and the need to make a serious nation-wide impact, it seems reasonable to estimate that the DNC controls about 3-7 million illegal votes nationwide.

    The largest number would be in California. Although California overall is a blue state, there are conservative pockets and some conservative candidates came close to the Democratic candidate in statewide and local races.

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    You may be 100% correct ,Eagle eye,

    In all the categories of potential voter fraud you cited.

    But I would imagine the vote "switching" from Bernie to Hillary, or the mysterious "disappearance" of a substantial percentage of "Bernie votes" in key districts and perhaps certain states, too, is what caught Seth's eye.

    But it could be all of it....and more too...for all we know....Without the data to look at..it's all just speculation.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. alexander says:
    @Eagle Eye

    Seth Rich , given his role as “data director” , was able to COLLECT these voter data discrepancies, and collate them into a fool proof evidentiary format.
     
    This explanation - that Seth Rich had direct evidence of massive vote fraud - has always seemed most likely to me. The leaks are secondary.

    Again, he most likely went to the FBI and/or the U.S. media FIRST, but was betrayed by them leading to his murder. He ALSO passed the data to Wikileaks.

    So let's estimate the NUMBER of fraudulent votes controlled by the DNC. There are several categories:

    (1) Illegal aliens registered to vote through La Raza, SEIU and similar DNC fronts.

    (2) Other spurious voter registrations, e.g. dead voters, double voting (different addresses), completely fictitious voter registrations concocted by complicit SEIU staff at registrars' offices.

    (3) Zombie votes - technically correct voter registration, but the vote is actually cast by the SEIU, e.g. residents of nursing homes, mental hospitals, military votes (which often mysteriously are not delivered to the military voter),

    Given the period of time during which this has been operative, and the need to make a serious nation-wide impact, it seems reasonable to estimate that the DNC controls about 3-7 million illegal votes nationwide.

    The largest number would be in California. Although California overall is a blue state, there are conservative pockets and some conservative candidates came close to the Democratic candidate in statewide and local races.

    You may be 100% correct ,Eagle eye,

    In all the categories of potential voter fraud you cited.

    But I would imagine the vote “switching” from Bernie to Hillary, or the mysterious “disappearance” of a substantial percentage of “Bernie votes” in key districts and perhaps certain states, too, is what caught Seth’s eye.

    But it could be all of it….and more too…for all we know….Without the data to look at..it’s all just speculation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    But I would imagine the vote “switching” from Bernie to Hillary, or the mysterious “disappearance” of a substantial percentage of “Bernie votes” in key districts and perhaps certain states, too, is what caught Seth’s eye.
     
    Undoubtedly also correct - one must also include post-vote manipulation through mis-counting, "disappearing" votes, etc. as further techniques used by the SEIU and other parties to get the "correct" results.

    The slow-motion daylight robbery that produced "Al" Franken as the unelected senator for the put-upon but patient people of Minnesota is a case in point.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. FKA Max says:

    From Vox Day’s blog:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DAE8tcsW0AANXI7.jpg

    DC surgery resident on call the night of Seth Rich’s death says Rich’s gunshot wounds were non-fatal, access to him by the doctors was blocked by DC police, and no code was called when he died.

    That’s not fishy, right?

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/05/and-yet-still-curiouser.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @JackOH
    I read the links. My understanding is that some cops will go rogue without instruction and on their own initiative to jump the queue for advancement. There's not much deep-think to it. The political benefactor won't know any more than something like "the problem was taken care of".

    Seth Rich. Is there someone in the food chain who can apply pressure to find a credible suspect and, if possible, a motive? Again, I'm just a casual reader, but the failure to get to the truth of the Seth Rich killing seems to empower a whole lot of political mischief.
    , @Eagle Eye

    DC surgery resident on call the night of Seth Rich’s death says Rich’s gunshot wounds were non-fatal, access to him by the doctors was blocked by DC police, and no code was called when he died.

    That’s not fishy, right?
     
    Nah, occasionally resolving embarrassing situations is part of what the DC police do for their masters.

    Remember when they chased down the black mother from Connecticut and murdered her on the steps of the Capitol, and were expressly applauded by Nancy Pelosi?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/police-lock-down-capitol-after-shots-fired/2013/10/03/48459e0e-2c5a-11e3-8ade-a1f23cda135e_story.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. JackOH says:
    @FKA Max
    From Vox Day's blog:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DAE8tcsW0AANXI7.jpg

    DC surgery resident on call the night of Seth Rich's death says Rich's gunshot wounds were non-fatal, access to him by the doctors was blocked by DC police, and no code was called when he died.

    That's not fishy, right?
     
    - http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/05/and-yet-still-curiouser.html

    I read the links. My understanding is that some cops will go rogue without instruction and on their own initiative to jump the queue for advancement. There’s not much deep-think to it. The political benefactor won’t know any more than something like “the problem was taken care of”.

    Seth Rich. Is there someone in the food chain who can apply pressure to find a credible suspect and, if possible, a motive? Again, I’m just a casual reader, but the failure to get to the truth of the Seth Rich killing seems to empower a whole lot of political mischief.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    I am not sure what to think of this entire story either; just sharing some interesting new info I came across. Can't vouch for the sincerity or credibility of this anonymous 4chan poster though, obviously.

    Here is the archived 4chan thread with the either real/sincere or fake/lying doctor's other replies. Many of the commenters were skeptical of the validity of the story: http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/125912863


    Anonymous ID:rhotYJAg Wed 17 May 2017 13:26:47 No.125914751 Report
    Quoted By: [...]
    When he arrived to the trauma ward he had LR running, I don't keep up with how much he got but less than 2 liters before we rolled to the OR.

    No transfusion was done in trauma; the massive transfusion protocol was started because he was hypotensive on arrival but by the time the cooler (4u PRBC, 2u FFP) was ready we were on the way to the OR and honestly I don't remember if he got any of it beforehand; he responded well to just IVF resuscitation so we went ahead with the surgery any just ended up giving him 2 units afterwards (the crit we got in trauma was returned just after we left and was low, ~24 IIRC but it wasn't communicated to us... teamwork fail for sure but that can happen when we're rushing to the OR)

    As for the rest of the meds? You'd have to ask anesthesia I guess. He didn't need anything from us in the ICU except a propofol/fentanyl drip to maintain sedation while intubated but that's pretty par for the course. The important part was that he was hemodynamically stable and not requiring pressors.
    -----------------------

    Anonymous ID:rhotYJAg Wed 17 May 2017 13:36:13 No.125915975 Report
    Quoted By: [...]

    I haven't spoken to the attending who was on staff that night but the other resident I was with that night doesn't remember it in any clarity (he was called to traumas as part of his rotation but that was ancillary to his ICU -different ICU btw- duties). Basically he said, "yeah that was weird, right?" At the time we were way more concerned with the rising class / new interns (July 1st is a terrifying time to be a patient lol) to make much notice... it always stuck in my head as something super bizarre but it was a long time before I even realized it was Seth Rich. When he arrived he was assigned by our system a trauma number, not a name as his patient ID. I only knew him at that time as Tra### (no freaking way that I remember the actual number). When it came to light who he was a while later I was floored. And terrified.

    ------------------------------------

    Anonymous ID:rhotYJAg Wed 17 May 2017 13:39:36 No.125916400 Report
    Quoted By: [...]
    Nope, nothing in the head so no freaking way we'd CT before going to the OR with a clear intraabdominal GSW. No need to FAST or anything, just stabilize and go to the OR
    [...]
    One could always just increase the propofol drip or give him a ton of roc and screw with the vent settings. No idea if that happened but it'd be easy if you have the right meds and access

    ----------------------------------

    Anonymous ID:rhotYJAg Wed 17 May 2017 13:53:57 No.125918189 Report
    Quoted By: [...]
    He had two holes in his right flank and one in the left upper quadrant. In trauma you always assume by protocol that 3 holes = 3 bullets but it was pretty clear that he was shot twice by the trajectory of the bullet (eg, his liver injury). I've also seen enough GSWs to know that the media doesn't get the number right every time.

    [...]
    Yeah, I'm not going to do that. Way too dangerous.

    Alright anons it's been swell but I'll be gone for the next few hours for regular residency meeting / journal club BS. Take everything you read especially from the MSM with a grain of salt as usual but don't stop digging.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. FKA Max says:
    @JackOH
    I read the links. My understanding is that some cops will go rogue without instruction and on their own initiative to jump the queue for advancement. There's not much deep-think to it. The political benefactor won't know any more than something like "the problem was taken care of".

    Seth Rich. Is there someone in the food chain who can apply pressure to find a credible suspect and, if possible, a motive? Again, I'm just a casual reader, but the failure to get to the truth of the Seth Rich killing seems to empower a whole lot of political mischief.

    I am not sure what to think of this entire story either; just sharing some interesting new info I came across. Can’t vouch for the sincerity or credibility of this anonymous 4chan poster though, obviously.

    Here is the archived 4chan thread with the either real/sincere or fake/lying doctor’s other replies. Many of the commenters were skeptical of the validity of the story: http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/125912863

    [MORE]

    Anonymous ID:rhotYJAg Wed 17 May 2017 13:26:47 No.125914751 Report
    Quoted By: [...]
    When he arrived to the trauma ward he had LR running, I don’t keep up with how much he got but less than 2 liters before we rolled to the OR.

    No transfusion was done in trauma; the massive transfusion protocol was started because he was hypotensive on arrival but by the time the cooler (4u PRBC, 2u FFP) was ready we were on the way to the OR and honestly I don’t remember if he got any of it beforehand; he responded well to just IVF resuscitation so we went ahead with the surgery any just ended up giving him 2 units afterwards (the crit we got in trauma was returned just after we left and was low, ~24 IIRC but it wasn’t communicated to us… teamwork fail for sure but that can happen when we’re rushing to the OR)

    As for the rest of the meds? You’d have to ask anesthesia I guess. He didn’t need anything from us in the ICU except a propofol/fentanyl drip to maintain sedation while intubated but that’s pretty par for the course. The important part was that he was hemodynamically stable and not requiring pressors.
    ———————–

    Anonymous ID:rhotYJAg Wed 17 May 2017 13:36:13 No.125915975 Report
    Quoted By: [...]

    I haven’t spoken to the attending who was on staff that night but the other resident I was with that night doesn’t remember it in any clarity (he was called to traumas as part of his rotation but that was ancillary to his ICU -different ICU btw- duties). Basically he said, “yeah that was weird, right?” At the time we were way more concerned with the rising class / new interns (July 1st is a terrifying time to be a patient lol) to make much notice… it always stuck in my head as something super bizarre but it was a long time before I even realized it was Seth Rich. When he arrived he was assigned by our system a trauma number, not a name as his patient ID. I only knew him at that time as Tra### (no freaking way that I remember the actual number). When it came to light who he was a while later I was floored. And terrified.

    ————————————

    Anonymous ID:rhotYJAg Wed 17 May 2017 13:39:36 No.125916400 Report
    Quoted By: [...]
    Nope, nothing in the head so no freaking way we’d CT before going to the OR with a clear intraabdominal GSW. No need to FAST or anything, just stabilize and go to the OR
    [...]
    One could always just increase the propofol drip or give him a ton of roc and screw with the vent settings. No idea if that happened but it’d be easy if you have the right meds and access

    ———————————-

    Anonymous ID:rhotYJAg Wed 17 May 2017 13:53:57 No.125918189 Report
    Quoted By: [...]
    He had two holes in his right flank and one in the left upper quadrant. In trauma you always assume by protocol that 3 holes = 3 bullets but it was pretty clear that he was shot twice by the trajectory of the bullet (eg, his liver injury). I’ve also seen enough GSWs to know that the media doesn’t get the number right every time.

    [...]
    Yeah, I’m not going to do that. Way too dangerous.

    Alright anons it’s been swell but I’ll be gone for the next few hours for regular residency meeting / journal club BS. Take everything you read especially from the MSM with a grain of salt as usual but don’t stop digging.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @JackOH
    SR42, your references are exactly what I was getting at in my comment #12 above.

    I never took seriously the notion that American political decisions are made by violence and other criminal activities until I got a very minor rough-up by a crooked cop for my smalltime local politicking. That cop later got a cushy government job under the influence of a local Mr. Big whom I'd offended. Karma kicked in, and that cop's alcoholism and boorish behavior got him canned. I never quit writing, but I was pretty damn scared for a while.

    Until the Clintons came along, LBJ was probably the heavyweight champ of that sort of $#!t:

    http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKwallaceM.htm

    Read More
    • Replies: @JackOH
    Thanks, and also to FKA Max.

    My own experience, which included a failed blackmail attempt against me, and, possibly, the failed solicitation of a bribe, taught me something about American political process. I asked myself why in the hell are a few important local people getting their knickers in a twist over a not very important guy who's doing no more than writing a lot and doing local radio a lot? The only answer I came up with was they believed, falsely, I was staging a run for political office, that I was reasonably persuasive and therefore a threat of some sort, and they wanted me pre-emptively in the bag. BTW-I did consider legal action against some of these slobs, but effective legal process costs money I didn't have.

    FWIW-I'm unhappy, too, about the hair-tearing speculation over the Seth Rich case. The only way I can think of to put much of that speculation to rest is to find the killer and make the case against him.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. JackOH says:
    @SteveRogers42
    Until the Clintons came along, LBJ was probably the heavyweight champ of that sort of $#!t:

    http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKwallaceM.htm

    Thanks, and also to FKA Max.

    My own experience, which included a failed blackmail attempt against me, and, possibly, the failed solicitation of a bribe, taught me something about American political process. I asked myself why in the hell are a few important local people getting their knickers in a twist over a not very important guy who’s doing no more than writing a lot and doing local radio a lot? The only answer I came up with was they believed, falsely, I was staging a run for political office, that I was reasonably persuasive and therefore a threat of some sort, and they wanted me pre-emptively in the bag. BTW-I did consider legal action against some of these slobs, but effective legal process costs money I didn’t have.

    FWIW-I’m unhappy, too, about the hair-tearing speculation over the Seth Rich case. The only way I can think of to put much of that speculation to rest is to find the killer and make the case against him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dahlia

    FWIW-I’m unhappy, too, about the hair-tearing speculation over the Seth Rich case. The only way I can think of to put much of that speculation to rest is to find the killer and make the case against him.

     

    I think this is almost inevitable. Truth is, the vast majority of people cannot dispassionately examine a crime; all crimes are "political", but when you get into potential national politics which affects everyone, then no. You get hysterical hacks.

    I learned every crime was political as a twelve-year-old when I was a victim of a crime. There was the period of the crime before I spoke out, and the period after when the authorities got involved.
    There were adults who knew what was going on before who either ignored or empathized and desperately hated it, but felt helpless to stop it.
    Stunningly, very stunningly, was how people acted after I got an adult outside the group involved (who alerted authorities): Regardless of what they said or how they felt before, WHO/WHOM kicked in, and whether I was a victim of a crime was only determined by who they liked better, my advocate or the bad guy. They retconned their own memories!

    People who had provided a shoulder to cry on were now gaslighting me. I got yelled at, told my advocate was brainwashing me... Literally, the "bad guy" brought over all these people one night to castigate me, and when they all left, walked by, and whispered, "I still have power over you."

    I also believe this case is complicated more by what Steve likes to point out: things that tend to be close to 50/50 get our attention most for wanting to argue over. On one side here, we have very trustworthy individuals (Craig Murray, Julian Assange, and others close) saying it wasn't the Russians, but insiders. And Julian Assange has shown great interest and even highlighted those interested. On the other side, is the sheer craziness of the idea.

    I was being serious upthread when I said Seth Rich could have both been the source and a victim of random crime. A vulnerable emotional state from everything he was witnessing plus his involvement, leading to personal trouble, leading to excessive drinking that night, walking alone at such awful hours....

    Anyway, no, all crime is political because of who/whom and can rarely be examined dispassionately.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Eagle Eye says:
    @alexander
    You may be 100% correct ,Eagle eye,

    In all the categories of potential voter fraud you cited.

    But I would imagine the vote "switching" from Bernie to Hillary, or the mysterious "disappearance" of a substantial percentage of "Bernie votes" in key districts and perhaps certain states, too, is what caught Seth's eye.

    But it could be all of it....and more too...for all we know....Without the data to look at..it's all just speculation.

    But I would imagine the vote “switching” from Bernie to Hillary, or the mysterious “disappearance” of a substantial percentage of “Bernie votes” in key districts and perhaps certain states, too, is what caught Seth’s eye.

    Undoubtedly also correct – one must also include post-vote manipulation through mis-counting, “disappearing” votes, etc. as further techniques used by the SEIU and other parties to get the “correct” results.

    The slow-motion daylight robbery that produced “Al” Franken as the unelected senator for the put-upon but patient people of Minnesota is a case in point.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Eagle Eye says:
    @FKA Max
    From Vox Day's blog:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DAE8tcsW0AANXI7.jpg

    DC surgery resident on call the night of Seth Rich's death says Rich's gunshot wounds were non-fatal, access to him by the doctors was blocked by DC police, and no code was called when he died.

    That's not fishy, right?
     
    - http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/05/and-yet-still-curiouser.html

    DC surgery resident on call the night of Seth Rich’s death says Rich’s gunshot wounds were non-fatal, access to him by the doctors was blocked by DC police, and no code was called when he died.

    That’s not fishy, right?

    Nah, occasionally resolving embarrassing situations is part of what the DC police do for their masters.

    Remember when they chased down the black mother from Connecticut and murdered her on the steps of the Capitol, and were expressly applauded by Nancy Pelosi?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/police-lock-down-capitol-after-shots-fired/2013/10/03/48459e0e-2c5a-11e3-8ade-a1f23cda135e_story.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. Dahlia says:
    @JackOH
    Thanks, and also to FKA Max.

    My own experience, which included a failed blackmail attempt against me, and, possibly, the failed solicitation of a bribe, taught me something about American political process. I asked myself why in the hell are a few important local people getting their knickers in a twist over a not very important guy who's doing no more than writing a lot and doing local radio a lot? The only answer I came up with was they believed, falsely, I was staging a run for political office, that I was reasonably persuasive and therefore a threat of some sort, and they wanted me pre-emptively in the bag. BTW-I did consider legal action against some of these slobs, but effective legal process costs money I didn't have.

    FWIW-I'm unhappy, too, about the hair-tearing speculation over the Seth Rich case. The only way I can think of to put much of that speculation to rest is to find the killer and make the case against him.

    FWIW-I’m unhappy, too, about the hair-tearing speculation over the Seth Rich case. The only way I can think of to put much of that speculation to rest is to find the killer and make the case against him.

    I think this is almost inevitable. Truth is, the vast majority of people cannot dispassionately examine a crime; all crimes are “political”, but when you get into potential national politics which affects everyone, then no. You get hysterical hacks.

    I learned every crime was political as a twelve-year-old when I was a victim of a crime. There was the period of the crime before I spoke out, and the period after when the authorities got involved.
    There were adults who knew what was going on before who either ignored or empathized and desperately hated it, but felt helpless to stop it.
    Stunningly, very stunningly, was how people acted after I got an adult outside the group involved (who alerted authorities): Regardless of what they said or how they felt before, WHO/WHOM kicked in, and whether I was a victim of a crime was only determined by who they liked better, my advocate or the bad guy. They retconned their own memories!

    People who had provided a shoulder to cry on were now gaslighting me. I got yelled at, told my advocate was brainwashing me… Literally, the “bad guy” brought over all these people one night to castigate me, and when they all left, walked by, and whispered, “I still have power over you.”

    I also believe this case is complicated more by what Steve likes to point out: things that tend to be close to 50/50 get our attention most for wanting to argue over. On one side here, we have very trustworthy individuals (Craig Murray, Julian Assange, and others close) saying it wasn’t the Russians, but insiders. And Julian Assange has shown great interest and even highlighted those interested. On the other side, is the sheer craziness of the idea.

    I was being serious upthread when I said Seth Rich could have both been the source and a victim of random crime. A vulnerable emotional state from everything he was witnessing plus his involvement, leading to personal trouble, leading to excessive drinking that night, walking alone at such awful hours….

    Anyway, no, all crime is political because of who/whom and can rarely be examined dispassionately.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JackOH
    Dahlia, thanks. Mike Whitney's relevant article, plus the links and comments of you and other folks here pretty much say what I'm thinking better than I can about the Seth Rich case.

    FWIW-I'm something of a Gloomy Gus, so I'll speculate mischievously and without evidence that it's possible for a "managed investigation" and "managed judicial process" to muddy the water so badly that the Russian hack theory will remain foremost in the public mind, even if unsupported by evidence, and, even if the evidence shows Seth Rich was killed in retaliation for having leaked DNC insider info.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. Dahlia says:

    Just found something that genuinely stuns me, and is important to know in context of “debunking” articles…

    Ali, a political activist involved with the Anthony Weiner contretemps says:

    “How disillusioned would you become if we had and shared evidence with media that #Weiner was after underaged kids and no one acted?”

    and

    “Most of you will never know the extent to the work we did on the Weiner case from the get-go. Media silenced @AndrewBreitbart’s facts.”

    and

    “Weiner’s underage child molesting and sexting ‘problem’ only became a ‘problem’ when it ran up against Hillary Clinton’s coming presidency.”

    Thread here:

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ali/status/866429043595288578

    I’d heard something echoing this a couple days ago, but found it so unbelievable. Then, Dave Weigel, et al., knowing for a fact that statements from Julian Assange, Craig Murray, and the late Gavin MacFadyen are the reasons for interest in Seth Rich’s murder, completely write them out. They don’t exist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  85. Dahlia says:

    William Binney, arguably one of the best mathematicians ever to work at the National Security Agency, and former CIA officer Ray McGovern, have argued that the emails must have come from a leak because a hack would be traceable by the NSA.

    I’d forgotten this…so many people including Scott Ritter of “Iraq has no WMD” fame have said similar.

    But seriously, if you don’t believe Assange or Murray who have firsthand knowledge, William Binney rests the case: leak not hack.

    Doesn’t mean the murdered DNC operative was involved with leaks or that even if he was, that’s why he was killed, but one can’t be closed-minded.

    https://consortiumnews.com/2017/05/17/seth-rich-murder-case-stirs-russia-doubts/

    Scott Ritter on DNC emails

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/cia-russia-dnc-hacking_us_584f535ee4b0bd9c3dfe722e

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  86. pseudonym says:

    A DNC IT guy gets shot in the back, taken to hospital and dies. Julian Assange all but directly confirms Seth Rich was the source, not the Russians. Who figured out Seth Rich handed over the DNC emails? Someone or some people identified Seth, presumably IT folks. Who did they inform? The who knew branches out finitely up to the point of Seth’s murder.

    Take that list and look at motive. Who has clout? Who has resources? Who has contacts? Et cetera.

    Who at D.C. Metro Police allegedly got told to back off of Seth Rich investigation? From where does that order come–from where outside of the police department does that alleged order come?

    Seth Rich was murdered. Big news repeats robbery or botched robbery. Beam me up already. Someone shoots you in the back three time, you die, that is murder. Then there is the DNC data. On and on about the data. Seth is out but there is the data. All the talk about the data or emails doesn’t identify suspects.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  87. Logan says:
    @Ram
    Three days after the Seth Rich murder Comey had the information (IF he didn't already know) gleaned from Rich's laptop that he had been in correspondence with Wikileaks, yet went along with the canard that the DNC was hacked by the Russians till the very end. Assange's confirmation that Russians had no connection to the LEAK was also ignored, because they wanted Assange painted as a criminal.

    I think it’s pretty clear that Assange, or at minimum his organization, with him claiming plausible deniability, conspired to violate a host of US laws against espionage.

    Now you can believe that he was justified in doing so, or that he served a higher purpose, or that the laws in question are overly broad, or some other rationale why he shouldn’t be punished for breaking those laws.

    But I really don’t think it’s possible to claim he didn’t violate laws and is therefore by definition a criminal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    Assange, or at minimum his organization, with him claiming plausible deniability, conspired to violate a host of US laws against espionage.
     
    Nice try but 95% of criminal law in the U.S. on its face simply does not apply to people who are not resident in the U.S.

    Even laws against espionage are typically aimed at U.S. residents and often further restricted, e.g. to federal employees.

    Even where U.S. laws could technically be said to apply, it is exceedingly rare for countries to seek the extradition of foreigners on those grounds. Obviously, such attempts strain relations with the extraditing country (Sweden) as well as the country of nationality (Australia). In addition, the U.S. does not want to trigger tit-for-tat reprisals.

    In SUBSTANCE, Assange has made a HUGE contribution to safeguarding what is left of freedom and democracy in the U.S.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Logan says:
    @Dahlia
    There's been so much smoke and mirrors on this, that it makes one want to throw his hands up...

    Before I even start, if anyone reporting on this does not mention Craig Murray, a well-known and respected associate of Julian Assange involved with Wikileaks, and his claim back in December that he personally received the hand-off of the DNC emails from insiders in DC, that person IS A HACK.

    I followed it closely when he came out and was shocked and dismayed that barely anybody (nobody?) in the United States followed up with him. They just ignored him. I guess because he couldn't be dismissed as a hack and what he said torpedoed the "Russians did it" narrative, so just hope nobody heard him.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

    Craig Murray did not mention Seth Rich. What the American MSM's ignoring of him shows, though, is that *anything* that casts doubt on the "Russians did it" narrative will be obfuscated, ignored, etc. Expect to be gaslit.
    Anyway...

    One issue muddying the waters is that the two major "breakthroughs" come from "FOX": a local affiliate and Fox News.

    I understand that there are problems with the local affiliate, but I gather, NOT the Fox News story... Am I wrong?

    If the Fox News reporting is correct, it's huge, and their's was the more substantive to begin with: law enforcement sources said Seth Rich had been in contact with Gavin MacFadyen.
    (if the local guy was bluffing in order to have fresh attention and get people to come forward, it was worth it)

    Gavin MacFadyen seems to have had a relationship with Craig Murray, and both had/have a relationship with Julian Assange. Seth Rich being in contact with Gavin MacFadyen greatly lends credibility to Craig Murray's account.
    (Here, both are mentioned together in the book "Ghost Plane: The True Story Story of the CIA Torture Program"
    https://books.google.com/books?id=NLzB7YXDHNUC&pg=PA311&lpg=PA311&dq=gavin+macfadyen+craig+murray+cia&source=bl&ots=KKy1_V2atM&sig=1CYGRZjnOxmcRIGk9RNx1iQhWcA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigk-7br_3TAhXo7oMKHTOrCT0Q6AEIOzAE#v=onepage&q=gavin%20macfadyen%20craig%20murray%20cia&f=false)


    Obviously, the answer to our impasse is: Interview Craig Murray
     
    We have two questions:

    a. Was Seth Rich involved in leaking to Wikileaks?
    b. Who killed Seth Rich?

    The answer to question "a" greatly changes the odds and focus for question "b". Of course, the DNC could also be the unluckiest organization going in that the guy who destroyed them via leaking had the temerity to go get himself killed by some random thugs who got away!

    I see that Mike Whitney has just written about this, including Craig Murray, at Counterpunch:
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/05/19/seth-rich-craig-murray-and-the-sinister-stewards-of-the-national-security-state/

    “the DNC could also be the unluckiest organization going in that the guy who destroyed them via leaking had the temerity to go get himself killed by some random thugs who got away!”

    Stuff like that does happen.

    What about the possibility that the killing was a targeted killing of a white guy for the crime of being white?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dahlia
    I outlined a theory for stranger-murder even as leaker above -emotionally in a state of vulnerability, unwittingly puts self in dangerous position to random bad guys.

    I now think this scenario is now less plausible than I did before. (But don't rule out!)

    There has been found a very damning tweet that has not been debunked; not being a tech person *at all*, I was waiting for it to be, but now Diana West has included it, and frankly, this isn't the kind of thing someone makes up:

    "Former DNC director of Data Science Andr*w Therria*lt shot off a tweet posthumously mocking Seth Rich - referring to him as "An Embarrasment." Clearly he knew this was Rich's account. Therria*lt deleted the tweet today, but the internet never forgets..."
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-05-19/seth-richs-reddit-account-discovered-loved-pandas-patriotic-clothes-and-joe-rogan

    This is something one does in anger or bitterness. It's like, he couldn't help himself.
    Is there any context where this is okay? Friendly? He let it just hang there with no "tells" for friendliness like, "miss you, man" or some such.

    This pings my intuition in ways I can't describe and I want *nothing* to do with the man above, hence the asterisks. See the tweet with your own eyes in zerohedge link.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. Logan says:
    @jim jones
    I believe the MAOA gene is assumed to be the problem:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2933872/

    IF such complex behaviors are genetic in nature, which they almost certainly are to at least some extent, the chance of their being simple single-gene switches is extremely unlikely.

    It is probable that tendencies towards differences in behavior are caused by complex interactions of a host of genes, interactions we aren’t even close to understanding.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. JackOH says:
    @Dahlia

    FWIW-I’m unhappy, too, about the hair-tearing speculation over the Seth Rich case. The only way I can think of to put much of that speculation to rest is to find the killer and make the case against him.

     

    I think this is almost inevitable. Truth is, the vast majority of people cannot dispassionately examine a crime; all crimes are "political", but when you get into potential national politics which affects everyone, then no. You get hysterical hacks.

    I learned every crime was political as a twelve-year-old when I was a victim of a crime. There was the period of the crime before I spoke out, and the period after when the authorities got involved.
    There were adults who knew what was going on before who either ignored or empathized and desperately hated it, but felt helpless to stop it.
    Stunningly, very stunningly, was how people acted after I got an adult outside the group involved (who alerted authorities): Regardless of what they said or how they felt before, WHO/WHOM kicked in, and whether I was a victim of a crime was only determined by who they liked better, my advocate or the bad guy. They retconned their own memories!

    People who had provided a shoulder to cry on were now gaslighting me. I got yelled at, told my advocate was brainwashing me... Literally, the "bad guy" brought over all these people one night to castigate me, and when they all left, walked by, and whispered, "I still have power over you."

    I also believe this case is complicated more by what Steve likes to point out: things that tend to be close to 50/50 get our attention most for wanting to argue over. On one side here, we have very trustworthy individuals (Craig Murray, Julian Assange, and others close) saying it wasn't the Russians, but insiders. And Julian Assange has shown great interest and even highlighted those interested. On the other side, is the sheer craziness of the idea.

    I was being serious upthread when I said Seth Rich could have both been the source and a victim of random crime. A vulnerable emotional state from everything he was witnessing plus his involvement, leading to personal trouble, leading to excessive drinking that night, walking alone at such awful hours....

    Anyway, no, all crime is political because of who/whom and can rarely be examined dispassionately.

    Dahlia, thanks. Mike Whitney’s relevant article, plus the links and comments of you and other folks here pretty much say what I’m thinking better than I can about the Seth Rich case.

    FWIW-I’m something of a Gloomy Gus, so I’ll speculate mischievously and without evidence that it’s possible for a “managed investigation” and “managed judicial process” to muddy the water so badly that the Russian hack theory will remain foremost in the public mind, even if unsupported by evidence, and, even if the evidence shows Seth Rich was killed in retaliation for having leaked DNC insider info.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. Eagle Eye says:
    @Logan
    I think it's pretty clear that Assange, or at minimum his organization, with him claiming plausible deniability, conspired to violate a host of US laws against espionage.

    Now you can believe that he was justified in doing so, or that he served a higher purpose, or that the laws in question are overly broad, or some other rationale why he shouldn't be punished for breaking those laws.

    But I really don't think it's possible to claim he didn't violate laws and is therefore by definition a criminal.

    Assange, or at minimum his organization, with him claiming plausible deniability, conspired to violate a host of US laws against espionage.

    Nice try but 95% of criminal law in the U.S. on its face simply does not apply to people who are not resident in the U.S.

    Even laws against espionage are typically aimed at U.S. residents and often further restricted, e.g. to federal employees.

    Even where U.S. laws could technically be said to apply, it is exceedingly rare for countries to seek the extradition of foreigners on those grounds. Obviously, such attempts strain relations with the extraditing country (Sweden) as well as the country of nationality (Australia). In addition, the U.S. does not want to trigger tit-for-tat reprisals.

    In SUBSTANCE, Assange has made a HUGE contribution to safeguarding what is left of freedom and democracy in the U.S.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Franklin
    Assange and others have said the DNC leaker had LEGAL access to the emails.

    When the emails were passed to Wikileaks, the unclassified material wasn't stolen, it was leaked by an insider.

    Assange didn't do anything illegal that thousands of other news outlets haven't done before.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Dahlia says:

    Diana West has just written the first part of the most definitive timeline of Seth Rich.
    Very thorough, she includes statements and actions from the principal, Julian Assange, and close principal, Craig Murray. She also includes the report Seth Rich was in contact with the late Gavin McFadyen.

    Will repeat what I’ve said before: these guys are the principals, literally, they are original sources. The old adage about original sources…. Any report that pretends they and their statements don’t exist is hackery.

    http://dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/3559/A-Seth-Rich-Chronology-Part-1.aspx#.WSLtFJAmt0U.twitter

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dahlia
    "Primary" sources, not original. D'oh!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Dahlia says:
    @Dahlia
    Diana West has just written the first part of the most definitive timeline of Seth Rich.
    Very thorough, she includes statements and actions from the principal, Julian Assange, and close principal, Craig Murray. She also includes the report Seth Rich was in contact with the late Gavin McFadyen.

    Will repeat what I've said before: these guys are the principals, literally, they are original sources. The old adage about original sources.... Any report that pretends they and their statements don't exist is hackery.

    http://dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/3559/A-Seth-Rich-Chronology-Part-1.aspx#.WSLtFJAmt0U.twitter

    “Primary” sources, not original. D’oh!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Dahlia says:
    @Logan
    "the DNC could also be the unluckiest organization going in that the guy who destroyed them via leaking had the temerity to go get himself killed by some random thugs who got away!"

    Stuff like that does happen.

    What about the possibility that the killing was a targeted killing of a white guy for the crime of being white?

    I outlined a theory for stranger-murder even as leaker above -emotionally in a state of vulnerability, unwittingly puts self in dangerous position to random bad guys.

    I now think this scenario is now less plausible than I did before. (But don’t rule out!)

    There has been found a very damning tweet that has not been debunked; not being a tech person *at all*, I was waiting for it to be, but now Diana West has included it, and frankly, this isn’t the kind of thing someone makes up:

    “Former DNC director of Data Science Andr*w Therria*lt shot off a tweet posthumously mocking Seth Rich – referring to him as “An Embarrasment.” Clearly he knew this was Rich’s account. Therria*lt deleted the tweet today, but the internet never forgets…”

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-05-19/seth-richs-reddit-account-discovered-loved-pandas-patriotic-clothes-and-joe-rogan

    This is something one does in anger or bitterness. It’s like, he couldn’t help himself.
    Is there any context where this is okay? Friendly? He let it just hang there with no “tells” for friendliness like, “miss you, man” or some such.

    This pings my intuition in ways I can’t describe and I want *nothing* to do with the man above, hence the asterisks. See the tweet with your own eyes in zerohedge link.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dahlia
    This stuff is scary! Here is a screenshot of people the embattled and ultimately fired Bernie Sanders' National Data Director, Josh Uretsky, followed: it includes Seth Rich's secret Panda accounts as well as "Scary Andrew"!

    https://mobile.twitter.com/LadyReverb/status/866058824565706752

    Uretsky was accused by the Bernie campaign of being a rogue plant put there by the DNC. (Google it)

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Dahlia says:
    @Dahlia
    I outlined a theory for stranger-murder even as leaker above -emotionally in a state of vulnerability, unwittingly puts self in dangerous position to random bad guys.

    I now think this scenario is now less plausible than I did before. (But don't rule out!)

    There has been found a very damning tweet that has not been debunked; not being a tech person *at all*, I was waiting for it to be, but now Diana West has included it, and frankly, this isn't the kind of thing someone makes up:

    "Former DNC director of Data Science Andr*w Therria*lt shot off a tweet posthumously mocking Seth Rich - referring to him as "An Embarrasment." Clearly he knew this was Rich's account. Therria*lt deleted the tweet today, but the internet never forgets..."
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-05-19/seth-richs-reddit-account-discovered-loved-pandas-patriotic-clothes-and-joe-rogan

    This is something one does in anger or bitterness. It's like, he couldn't help himself.
    Is there any context where this is okay? Friendly? He let it just hang there with no "tells" for friendliness like, "miss you, man" or some such.

    This pings my intuition in ways I can't describe and I want *nothing* to do with the man above, hence the asterisks. See the tweet with your own eyes in zerohedge link.

    This stuff is scary! Here is a screenshot of people the embattled and ultimately fired Bernie Sanders’ National Data Director, Josh Uretsky, followed: it includes Seth Rich’s secret Panda accounts as well as “Scary Andrew”!

    https://mobile.twitter.com/LadyReverb/status/866058824565706752

    Uretsky was accused by the Bernie campaign of being a rogue plant put there by the DNC. (Google it)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    This is new news? I know this is a shocking story and should be disseminated widely again and again to expose the lies and corruption of the left, but I thought this particular one has been known since before the election.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  97. Dahlia says:

    Is Kim Dotcom a fourth principal?

    His statement today:

    I KNOW THAT SETH RICH WAS INVOLVED IN THE DNC LEAK.
    I know this because in late 2014 a person contacted me about helping me to start a branch of the Internet Party in the United States. He called himself Panda. I now know that Panda was Seth Rich.

    Panda advised me that he was working on voter analytics tools and other technologies that the Internet Party may find helpful.

    I communicated with Panda on a number of topics including corruption and the influence of corporate money in politics.

    “He wanted to change that from the inside.”
    I was referring to what I knew when I did an interview with Bloomberg in New Zealand in May 2015. In that interview I hinted that Julian Assange and Wikileaks would release information about Hillary Clinton in the upcoming election.

    The Rich family has reached out to me to ask that I be sensitive to their loss in my public comments. That request is entirely reasonable.

    I have consulted with my lawyers. I accept that my full statement should be provided to the authorities and I am prepared to do that so that there can be a full investigation. My lawyers will speak with the authorities regarding the proper process.

    If my evidence is required to be given in the United States I would be prepared to do so if appropriate arrangements are made. I would need a guarantee from Special Counsel Mueller, on behalf of the United States, of safe passage from New Zealand to the United States and back. In the coming days we will be communicating with the appropriate authorities to make the necessary arrangements. In the meantime, I will make no further comment.

    http://kim.com/

    Will leave it for others to judge. Personally, will wait and see. Looking at the principals, especially Assange, remains prudent and best course; Assange wants more information dug up about this case. More a job for other, and at this time, unknown close sources with information, as well as hackers and computer guys. The latter have done a phenomenal job with finding and archiving the twitter, reddit accounts, etc. Especially since some unknown persons have clandestinely altered them though they didn’t realize they’d already been archived.

    Now, time to circle back to Craig Murray…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  98. @Anon
    Yeah, I had doubts from the start.

    Never trust a Negro.

    Agreed. But why hire a Negro??

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Dahlia says:

    Craig Murray is a primary source. He is unimpeachable: Corbynite, human rights activist who paid a price…

    Anyway, there has been much confusion about the “Democratic emails” and who leaked what. And who were the intermediaries for which? Murray has knowledge about the Podesta emails and the DNC emails and is the hand-off guy for one of them.

    He’s left a wide trail of statements including a lengthy radio interview, but our MSM hasn’t been much interested in them. Like at all.

    “Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan and whistleblower, discusses his article claiming the DNC and Podesta emails came from U.S., not Russian, sources.”

    https://scotthorton.org/interviews/121316-craig-murray-dnc-podesta-emails-leaked-by-americans-not-hacked-by-russia/

    But he appears to have undertaken a mission for WikiLeaks to contact one of the sources (or a representative) during a Sept. 25 visit to Washington where he says he met with a person in a wooded area of American University.

    “The Podesta emails and the DNC emails are, of course, two separate things and we shouldn’t conclude that they both have the same source,” Murray said. “In both cases we’re talking of a leak, not a hack, in that the person who was responsible for getting that information out had legal access to that information.”

    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/18/a-spy-coup-in-america/

    Seth Rich is killed July 10, 2016.
    The DNC emails were published by Wikileaks July 22, 2016. (wikipedia)
    Craig Murray picks up emails bound for Wikileaks on September 25.
    The Podesta emails were published by Wikileaks in October and November 2016. (wikipedia)

    (Pertinent because they were released about the same time: The DCCC hack/leak released by Guccifer 2.0. Commenting with regards to that, Julian Assange maintains the DNC and Podesta emails he obtained were leaks and had nothing to do with the Russians. Commenting on the DCCC hack/leaks as an interested observer, he says they look Russian, possibly “too” Russian, almost amateurish.

    http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/310654-assange-some-leaks-may-have-been-russian)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  100. Dahlia says:

    By the way, here is a great comment, including a brief restatement of his own actions, by Craig Murray on the insanity in The Guardian… Sad!

    I had a call from a Guardian journalist this afternoon. The astonishing result was that for three hours, an article was accessible through the Guardian front page which actually included the truth among the CIA hype:

    The Kremlin has rejected the hacking accusations, while the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has previously said the DNC leaks were not linked to Russia. A second senior official cited by the Washington Post conceded that intelligence agencies did not have specific proof that the Kremlin was “directing” the hackers, who were said to be one step removed from the Russian government.
    Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who is a close associate of Assange, called the CIA claims “bullshit”, adding: “They are absolutely making it up.”
    “I know who leaked them,” Murray said. “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.
    “If what the CIA are saying is true, and the CIA’s statement refers to people who are known to be linked to the Russian state, they would have arrested someone if it was someone inside the United States.
    “America has not been shy about arresting whistleblowers and it’s not been shy about extraditing hackers. They plainly have no knowledge whatsoever.”

    But only three hours. While the article was not taken down, the home page links to it vanished and it was replaced by a ludicrous one repeating the mad CIA allegations against Russia and now claiming – incredibly – that the CIA believe the FBI is deliberately blocking the information on Russian collusion.

    “The CIA’s Absence of Conviction”, Dec 11, 2016

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/12/cias-absence-conviction/

    Also, more exasperation with regards to the MSM and their gullibility/malfeasance:

    I am about twenty four hours behind on debunking the “evidence” of Russian hacking of the DNC because I have only just stopped laughing. I was sent last night the “crowdstrike” report, paid for by the Democratic National Committee, which is supposed to convince us. The New York Times today made this “evidence” its front page story.

    It appears from this document that, despite himself being a former extremely competent KGB chief, Vladimir Putin has put Inspector Clouseau in charge of Russian security and left him to get on with it.

    “The Russian Bear Uses a Keyboard”, Dec 14, 2016

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/12/russian-bear-uses-keyboard/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  101. Dahlia says:

    One more thing:

    Wikileaks/Julian Assange retweeted the Craig Murray article, “The CIA’s Absence of Conviction”.
    Assange is very purposeful and careful about what he retweets.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  102. Dahlia says:

    I’ve transcribed the 20+ minute interview Craig Murray did with Scott Horton from December 13, 2016 as it contained the most information about a primary source’s role and knowledge of Seth Rich and the DNC and Podesta emails. If someone could archive, submit to archive.is, or whatever -I’d try, but probably fail- I’d appreciate it. I hope I did the tag thing right, Ron. I really wish I wasn’t so retarded with tech, but I am :(

    https://scotthorton.org/interviews/121316-craig-murray-dnc-podesta-emails-leaked-by-americans-not-hacked-by-russia/

    Abt. 2:00
    Scott Horton: This is a very important thing that you’ve written [The CIA's Absence of Conviction] here, the context is, of course,
    the CIA’s claim to The Washington Post that the Russians ran an Op to hack the Democrats’ emails, uh, I guess that goes for the
    DNC and the Podesta emails, to leak them to Wikileaks in order to help Donald Trump win the election. And to a degree that I think
    is actually sort of surprising to me, um, this story really seems to have legs and there are even the Electoral College is now
    saying they want a briefing -I don’t think they really would dare try to overturn the results of the election- but they’re at
    least trying to use this to “hem in” Trump on his Russia policy as Greg Sargent reported in The Washington Post, and yet, uh,
    what you’ve written here and what you’ve told the Guardian was, “HOLD IT RIGHT THERE, THIS ISN’T RIGHT AT ALL!”, but how can
    you know?

    Craig Murray (2:58): Um, well, it’s not really new. I mean, the people who are in the position to know are Wikileaks and the people who
    work with Wikileaks, of which I am one. Julian Assange has said plainly that the information does not come from Russia. He’s said
    that (unintelligible) I have inside knowledge that the sources of the leaks was not the Russian government. It’s American source.
    So, really the CIA, who’ve offered no evidence whatsoever for this anonymously (unintelligible) claim, the CIA is talking complete
    and utter nonsense. I just know for certain that what they say is not true.

    Scott Horton (3:52): Well now first of all can you explain what exactly is your role with Wikileaks?

    Craig Murray (3:57): Oh, well, I’m not, I should say I’m not a member of Wikileaks staff. They have staff and they have directors.
    I’m not any of those. I’m a member of Sam Adams Associates, a whistleblower organization which we work very closely with Wikileaks
    and I’ve been close to Julian for a number of years and I’m one of the people who was able to visit him in the Equadorian Embassy
    and speak with him and discuss strategy and help him move things along so I cooperate with Wikileaks without being a full member of
    the structure.

    Scott Horton (4:34): I see. And then, can you tell us how it is that you know who the source is? Is it just that Assange told you or
    do you have more direct information yourself?

    Craig Murray (4:43): No, I have rather more direct information than that which relates to a visit I paid to Washington in September of
    this year, when I, I should be plain that Podesta emails and the DNC emails are of course two separate things. You shouldn’t conclude
    that they both have the same source. But, in both cases, we’re talking of a leak, not a hack. In the person who, the person who was
    responsible for getting the information out had legal access to that information.

    Scott Horton (5:31): And then in the trip to Washington, are you saying that you were the recipient of at least one of these leaks?

    Craig Murray (5:37): Uh, no, the material was already, I think, safely with Wikileaks before I, I, before I got there in September.
    Um, I, um, had a small role to play, which I hope you’ll understand which I don’t expand on it too much.

    Scott Horton (6:03): Sure I do understand. I hope you understand if I keep trying to push a little bit to try to understand what’s
    going on here. I read a post by my friend George Washington over there at George Washington’s blog and he put two and two together
    and a couple of statements and said, and um I guess comparing your statements with those of the famous NSA whistleblower, William
    Binney, that when you say this is a leak, I think George Washington’s blog’s conclusion there was that that meant a leak from the
    inside of the American Intelligence Community, although I guess the way I read your statement, it possibly could just be a Democrat,
    or a member of the Democratic National Committee, or someone who had access through that route. And again, I’m not exactly sure
    whether we’re talking about the Podesta or the DNC leaks or one or both here, as you say, they are at least, presumable separate.
    But, can you give us any insight on whether, for example, you can confirm Binney’s claim that this comes from inside American Police
    and Intelligence rather than inside the political apparatus like the DNC?

    Craig Murray (7:15): Well, I think, again, the key point to remember in answering that question is that the DNC leak and the Podesta
    leak are two different things and the answer is they probably aren’t going to be the same in both cases. I also want you to consider
    John Podesta was a paid lobbyist for the Saudi government. That’s open and declared, it’s not secret or a leak in a sense. John
    Podesta was paid a very substantial sum every month by the Saudi government to lobby for their interests in Washington and if the
    American Security services were not watching the communications of the Saudi government’s paid lobbyists, than the American
    Intelligence services would not be doing their job. And of course it’s also true that the Saudi’s man, the Saudi’s lobbyist in
    Washington, his communications are going to be of interest to a great many other intelligence services as well.

    Scott Horton (8:59): I hope I’m not being too annoying here, I’m trying to read between the lines, it sounded like your first answer
    was, “well maybe, one is one and the other’s the other, meaning one came from inside Intelligence services and the other maybe came
    from a political source and then your allusion, I think, was to, “Geez, the NSA must have been looking at what Podesta was doing since
    he was operating as a registered agent of a foreign power.” Is it fair to say that you’re saying that the Podesta leak came from inside
    the Intelligence services, NSA or another agency?

    Craig Murray (9:35): Well, what I think I said is compatible with that kind of interpretation, yeah.

    Scott Horton (9:40): Thank you very much, you’re very polite. I appreciate that. Alright and now, so, is it the case that you can
    say you know in terms of the DNC leak as well?

    Craig Murray (9:55): It’s the case, I mean, what I can say to you, I know what Wikileaks (unintelligible, lots of hesitation) on the
    DNC case. And, I believe, that Julian, who I’ve known for many years and says (unintelligible) nothing to do with the Russians, so
    that’s a but, I, I have never, um, you know I don’t have direct personal access to the source, and I wouldn’t like to pretend
    that I did.

    Scott Horton (10:40) But in both of these cases, you’re saying that these are leaks from Americans, too. I saw, this is part of what you
    said to the Guardian was if these people are acting as Russian agents, they’d be in jail right now.

    Craig Murray (10:56) Yeah, exactly. In both cases they are leaks by Americans. It’s perfectly possible that Wikileaks themselves
    don’t know precisely what is going on, I mean one thing, which I’m sure everybody noticed, was that Julian Assange took a very close
    interest in the death of Seth Rich, the Democratic staff member, and Wikileaks offered a 20,000 reward for information leading to
    the capture of his killers. So, obviously they’re suspicions there about what’s happening and things are somewhat murky. I’m not
    saying, don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that he was the source of the leaks. What I’m saying is, is that it’s probably not an
    unfair indication to draw that Wikileaks believes that he may have been killed by someone who thought he was the source of the
    leaks.

    Scott Horton (12:09): Whether correctly or incorrectly?

    Craig Murray (12:10): Whether correctly or incorrectly.

    Scott Horton (12:12): But you’re, are you saying that Assange says that he is not the source, but that maybe someone mistook him
    for the source, or he just is not saying either way.

    Craig Murray (12:22): No, Assange is not saying (unintelligible) not clarifying that either way. But obviously, the fear that he
    may have been killed (unintelligible) had something to do with these leaks by someone who thought he was the source (unintelligible)
    motivation.

    Scott Horton (12:40): Well, I think that occurred to a lot of people, but it’s the kind of thing that’s easily dismissed as
    conspiricism as well.

    Craig Murray (12:49): That’s also true, but people do die of this sort of stuff. You have to remember there were billions of
    dollars, literally billions of dollars, behind Hillary Clinton’s election campaign. Those people have lost their money. And you
    have also to remember, there’s a big financial interest (unintelligible) armaments industry in a bad American relationship with Russia.
    The worse the relationship with Russia is, the larger the contracts the armaments industry can expect, especially in the most
    high-tech, high profit side of fighter jets and missiles and that kind of thing. And Trump has actually already indicated he’s
    looking to make savings on the defense budget, particularly in things like fighter projects. And so, there are people standing to
    lose billions of dollars and anybody who thinks in that situation bad things don’t happen to people is very naive.

    Scott Horton (13:56): Well you know if we could go off on this tangent for a second, would you like to comment on the relative danger
    of the new Cold War with Russia at this point, Craig?

    Craig Murray (14:07): I find it very worrying, frankly, that people want to get into a new Cold war with Russia. I am no fan of
    Putin. I’m a critic of Putin’s internal policy. I think his control of the Media and shutting down a lot of the independent
    media in Russia has really undermined the sources, the (unintelligible) democracy we’ve seen in that country. And so I’m not a
    big fan of Putin. I don’t like the oligarch system where wealth is even more concentrated in Russia than it is in the West.
    But, the idea that we want to go back into a system where we regard Russia as an enemy, and we have these fantasies about a war
    with Russia is absolutely crazy. There is no way that Russia is every going to attack the United States or the United Kingdom.
    It’s got no interest whatsoever in doing that. Where Putin has had some foreign policy adventureism is in bringing back into Russia
    parts of the former Soviet Union which have a majority ethnic Russian population. That’s not a thing I support. I think
    it’s dangerous and disruptive, but he’s almost finished now. And there aren’t really any more -very few- parts of the former
    Soviet Union with a majority ethnic Russian population. He’s essentially achieved what he wanted to achieve. There’s no evidence
    that he’s looking for further land acquisitions for Russia. And in Syria, frankly, his policy appears more sensible than the
    Western policy, where the West is promoting jihadists who support the Saudi-exported Wahabbist doctrine, so I just don’t see
    how we have this profound conflict of interest with Russia, which necessitates a new cold war and a new arms race.

    I’m sorry, that was rather a long answer to give you.

    Scott Horton (16:31): Yeah, no, that’s kind of what I was looking for cause I’m glad you brought up the question about the
    minority Russian-speaking populations in the Baltic States, for example, and that kind of thing because, I mean, people do
    seem to think that that’s a real problem, but you’re saying that the threat of any real conflict there, that the Russians are
    going to try to redraw those borders, or something like that, that basically this is all negotiable and it’s already been
    negotiated.

    Craig Murray (17:00): Yeah, I think that’s true. The places where Putin has, um, taken action like in (unintellible), Georgia,
    and the Crimea are places which have a majority Russian population, not a minority Russian population. There’s no evidence
    that he’s daft enough to try to move into areas which have a minority Russian population. And he’s not mad enough to attack
    the European Union. That’s definitely not going to happen. Or to attack NATO. An awful lot of this saber rattling is much
    ado about nothing, but as I say, it’s extremely profitible for the armaments industry.

    Scott Horton (17:45): Well, no question about that. Alright, so now what do you make of all the CIA claims about, “well, you
    have Guccifer here, GRU and FSB and they’re hacking here, and they’re pshing there, and that they’ve traced all of it, this stuff, is it
    just all made up out of whole cloth do you think?

    Craig Murray (18:04): Well, I think the Guccifer thing is (unintelligible), Guccifer is not the source for Wikileaks. And
    the idea that the Russian FSB would, you know, carefully hack these emails then have this vainglorious, weirdo personality boasting
    about it all over the internet, you can see through the script (laughs), is just not at all probably when you think about it
    (laughs) especially when they’re a great deal more professional than that. And, yes, of course the Russians spy on the United
    States, the United States spies on the Russians. The United States spies on the (unintelligible) the Germans. That’s part
    of the game of International politics and international diplomacy. Nobody’s saying that the Russians don’t spy on the United
    States, they do. It’s an on-going mutual game that’s always been part of human history, I suppose. But, it so happens that they
    are not the people who hacked this particular material and passed it on to Wikileaks.

    Scott Horton (19:17): And then, so what about all that stuff about the GRU phishing email and all of that? Is that just
    something that happened but is unconnected to the leaks themselves, is what you’re saying?

    Craig Murray (19:32): Well, a phishing email (unintelligible) GRU (unintelligible) I have my doubts. It’s not the
    source of the leak.

    Scott Horton (19:44): Got you. Well, I wish I was a little more proficient on the technical aspects of all this kind of
    stuff so I could try to come up with some better questions to ask along those lines, but, it sounds like, really what you’re
    saying certainly on at least half of what’s at issue here, you personally know at least one and on the second, you
    personally know what Assange told you, and in that case you certainly believe him. And in both cases -the DNC leak and the
    Podesta leak- you’re saying both sources are not hacks, but insider leaks, and Americans in both cases.

    Craig Murray (20:22): Yeah. Looking for the source in both of these, you have to look to Americans. And it’s worth saying
    that if Hillary Clinton hadn’t connived with the DNC to fix the Primary schedule in order to disadvantage Bernie Sanders, if
    she hadn’t accepted the questions in advance of the televised debates against Bernie in order to give her an unfair advantage,
    if the Clinton Foundation hadn’t accepted donors from all kinds of dictators in exchange for access to meetings in the State
    Department, or foreign policy decisions, or purchase of uranium, or whatever else they wanted in exchange… If all that
    hadn’t happened, then we wouldn’t be talking about any of this. (laughs) One of the very peculiar things is, is that the
    mainstream media is still completely in denial about all the stories I just told you, which weren’t much featured in the
    mainstream media. And yet, at the same time, they’re saying that these emails, which were Russian, affected the election.

    It’s quite strange. They can’t be totally unimportant and meaningless, and at the same time, affected the election.

    Scott Horton (21:33): Right, all they did was show how business was done on a daily basis inside the Democratic Party and
    the Clinton campaign. Why would that do anything but help Hillary Clinton’s chances, right?

    (Both laugh)

    Craig Murray (21:47): Well, exactly. I think lots of people were surprised, for example, by the (unintelligible) media
    collusion, which we know journalists keep up their contacts and that kind of thing, but discussing how to present stories
    to best political advantage for a political candidate and that kind of thing is (unintelligible) unethical journalism.
    I think those emails are an absolutely fascinating glance into the way politics operates in Washington, and it’s not very
    pretty, and I actually think it says a great deal about the sophistication of the American Voter that they did have such
    a profound effect on so many people. And people are capable of understanding and analyzing what’s going on and reacting
    to it.

    Scott Horton (22:40): So now because of this whole controversy, you’re really trying, in a sense, as I was saying in the
    introduction here, they’re trying to really undermine the incoming presidency of Donald Trump. I mean, Hillary has said
    she concedes, we have to accept the results, but at the same time, she’s saying, “Oh, yeah” she supports the CIA giving
    a briefing to the Electoral College. I guess just trying to cause trouble, that kind of thing. But so it raises the
    question of whether the source, one or both sources, might just as well come forward at this point and say, “It was me,
    not them. It wasn’t the Russians, I’m not a Russian. I did this because I’m a Bernie fan or whatever it was.” Do you
    think there’s any chance of that at this point? That the source or sources might change their mind and come forward?

    Craig Murray (23:29): I can’t know. The whole Obama-Clinton attitude to whistleblowers, the way they (unintelligible)
    Americans like Thomas Jake and William Binney and John (unintelligible) been treated. The way that Chelsea Manning is
    treated. The way that Edward Snowden is still in exile… doesn’t actually encourage anybody to come forth. And the
    doubt hovering around the death of Seth Rich doesn’t encourage anybody to come forward, either. So, I wouldn’t, myself,
    lean on anyone to come out because the -I know the whistleblower myself- the consequences for you and your family are
    extreme. So, I think that’s a decision that people have to make (unintelligible).

    Scott Horton (24:21): Alright, well listen, thank you very much for coming on the show, Craig, I greatly appreciate it
    a lot.

    Craig Murray (24:27): Thank you, it’s always good to talk.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    So Dahlia, the names you don't recognize are Thomas Drake and John Kiriakou. Fine that you venture into territory that's clearly new to you, but why flood the comments with the same speculation over and over and no value added.
    , @Eagle Eye
    Thanks for a labor of love!

    Reviewing and compiling the record is the indispensible first step on the path to finding and fixating the truth in the face of hurricane-level disinformation.

    We now live in a country where DC is a safe jurisdiction in which to whack someone.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Agent76 says:

    May 23, 2017 Seth Rich BOMBSHELLS Will Bring Hillary & Podesta To Their Knees — Bix Weir

    The Seth Rich bombshells that are being dropped now are earth shattering, and according to sources, there is absolute panic at the highest levels of the DNC in Washington.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  104. @Eagle Eye

    Assange, or at minimum his organization, with him claiming plausible deniability, conspired to violate a host of US laws against espionage.
     
    Nice try but 95% of criminal law in the U.S. on its face simply does not apply to people who are not resident in the U.S.

    Even laws against espionage are typically aimed at U.S. residents and often further restricted, e.g. to federal employees.

    Even where U.S. laws could technically be said to apply, it is exceedingly rare for countries to seek the extradition of foreigners on those grounds. Obviously, such attempts strain relations with the extraditing country (Sweden) as well as the country of nationality (Australia). In addition, the U.S. does not want to trigger tit-for-tat reprisals.

    In SUBSTANCE, Assange has made a HUGE contribution to safeguarding what is left of freedom and democracy in the U.S.

    Assange and others have said the DNC leaker had LEGAL access to the emails.

    When the emails were passed to Wikileaks, the unclassified material wasn’t stolen, it was leaked by an insider.

    Assange didn’t do anything illegal that thousands of other news outlets haven’t done before.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    Laibach – The Whistleblowers 2.0 – Assange+Snowden+Manning +…version
    http://www.unz.com/forum/the-washington-post-blacklist-story-is-shameful-and-disgusting/#comment-1668899
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5GaqdVtNag


    Statement from Kim Dotcom on Seth Rich:
    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/05/seth-rich-was-panda.html

    I KNOW THAT SETH RICH WAS INVOLVED IN THE DNC LEAK.

    I know this because in late 2014 a person contacted me about helping me to start a branch of the Internet Party in the United States. He called himself Panda. I now know that Panda was Seth Rich.

    Panda advised me that he was working on voter analytics tools and other technologies that the Internet Party may find helpful.

    I communicated with Panda on a number of topics including corruption and the influence of corporate money in politics.

    I was referring to what I knew when I did an interview with Bloomberg in New Zealand in May 2015. In that interview I hinted that Julian Assange and Wikileaks would release information about Hillary Clinton in the upcoming election.

    The Rich family has reached out to me to ask that I be sensitive to their loss in my public comments. That request is entirely reasonable.

    I have consulted with my lawyers. I accept that my full statement should be provided to the authorities and I am prepared to do that so that there can be a full investigation. My lawyers will speak with the authorities regarding the proper process.

    If my evidence is required to be given in the United States I would be prepared to do so if appropriate arrangements are made. I would need a guarantee from Special Counsel Mueller, on behalf of the United States, of safe passage from New Zealand to the United States and back. In the coming days we will be communicating with the appropriate authorities to make the necessary arrangements. In the meantime, I will make no further comment.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. FKA Max says:
    @Joe Franklin
    Assange and others have said the DNC leaker had LEGAL access to the emails.

    When the emails were passed to Wikileaks, the unclassified material wasn't stolen, it was leaked by an insider.

    Assange didn't do anything illegal that thousands of other news outlets haven't done before.

    Laibach – The Whistleblowers 2.0 – Assange+Snowden+Manning +…version

    http://www.unz.com/forum/the-washington-post-blacklist-story-is-shameful-and-disgusting/#comment-1668899

    Statement from Kim Dotcom on Seth Rich:

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/05/seth-rich-was-panda.html

    I KNOW THAT SETH RICH WAS INVOLVED IN THE DNC LEAK.

    I know this because in late 2014 a person contacted me about helping me to start a branch of the Internet Party in the United States. He called himself Panda. I now know that Panda was Seth Rich.

    Panda advised me that he was working on voter analytics tools and other technologies that the Internet Party may find helpful.

    I communicated with Panda on a number of topics including corruption and the influence of corporate money in politics.

    I was referring to what I knew when I did an interview with Bloomberg in New Zealand in May 2015. In that interview I hinted that Julian Assange and Wikileaks would release information about Hillary Clinton in the upcoming election.

    The Rich family has reached out to me to ask that I be sensitive to their loss in my public comments. That request is entirely reasonable.

    I have consulted with my lawyers. I accept that my full statement should be provided to the authorities and I am prepared to do that so that there can be a full investigation. My lawyers will speak with the authorities regarding the proper process.

    If my evidence is required to be given in the United States I would be prepared to do so if appropriate arrangements are made. I would need a guarantee from Special Counsel Mueller, on behalf of the United States, of safe passage from New Zealand to the United States and back. In the coming days we will be communicating with the appropriate authorities to make the necessary arrangements. In the meantime, I will make no further comment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    Fake News Story of epic proportions. Just like this "revelation".

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/05/panic-at-dnc.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. RobinG says:
    @Dahlia
    I've transcribed the 20+ minute interview Craig Murray did with Scott Horton from December 13, 2016 as it contained the most information about a primary source's role and knowledge of Seth Rich and the DNC and Podesta emails. If someone could archive, submit to archive.is, or whatever -I'd try, but probably fail- I'd appreciate it. I hope I did the tag thing right, Ron. I really wish I wasn't so retarded with tech, but I am :(
    https://scotthorton.org/interviews/121316-craig-murray-dnc-podesta-emails-leaked-by-americans-not-hacked-by-russia/

    Abt. 2:00
    Scott Horton: This is a very important thing that you've written [The CIA's Absence of Conviction] here, the context is, of course,
    the CIA's claim to The Washington Post that the Russians ran an Op to hack the Democrats' emails, uh, I guess that goes for the
    DNC and the Podesta emails, to leak them to Wikileaks in order to help Donald Trump win the election. And to a degree that I think
    is actually sort of surprising to me, um, this story really seems to have legs and there are even the Electoral College is now
    saying they want a briefing -I don't think they really would dare try to overturn the results of the election- but they're at
    least trying to use this to "hem in" Trump on his Russia policy as Greg Sargent reported in The Washington Post, and yet, uh,
    what you've written here and what you've told the Guardian was, "HOLD IT RIGHT THERE, THIS ISN'T RIGHT AT ALL!", but how can
    you know?

    Craig Murray (2:58): Um, well, it's not really new. I mean, the people who are in the position to know are Wikileaks and the people who
    work with Wikileaks, of which I am one. Julian Assange has said plainly that the information does not come from Russia. He's said
    that (unintelligible) I have inside knowledge that the sources of the leaks was not the Russian government. It's American source.
    So, really the CIA, who've offered no evidence whatsoever for this anonymously (unintelligible) claim, the CIA is talking complete
    and utter nonsense. I just know for certain that what they say is not true.

    Scott Horton (3:52): Well now first of all can you explain what exactly is your role with Wikileaks?

    Craig Murray (3:57): Oh, well, I'm not, I should say I'm not a member of Wikileaks staff. They have staff and they have directors.
    I'm not any of those. I'm a member of Sam Adams Associates, a whistleblower organization which we work very closely with Wikileaks
    and I've been close to Julian for a number of years and I'm one of the people who was able to visit him in the Equadorian Embassy
    and speak with him and discuss strategy and help him move things along so I cooperate with Wikileaks without being a full member of
    the structure.

    Scott Horton (4:34): I see. And then, can you tell us how it is that you know who the source is? Is it just that Assange told you or
    do you have more direct information yourself?

    Craig Murray (4:43): No, I have rather more direct information than that which relates to a visit I paid to Washington in September of
    this year, when I, I should be plain that Podesta emails and the DNC emails are of course two separate things. You shouldn't conclude
    that they both have the same source. But, in both cases, we're talking of a leak, not a hack. In the person who, the person who was
    responsible for getting the information out had legal access to that information.

    Scott Horton (5:31): And then in the trip to Washington, are you saying that you were the recipient of at least one of these leaks?

    Craig Murray (5:37): Uh, no, the material was already, I think, safely with Wikileaks before I, I, before I got there in September.
    Um, I, um, had a small role to play, which I hope you'll understand which I don't expand on it too much.

    Scott Horton (6:03): Sure I do understand. I hope you understand if I keep trying to push a little bit to try to understand what's
    going on here. I read a post by my friend George Washington over there at George Washington's blog and he put two and two together
    and a couple of statements and said, and um I guess comparing your statements with those of the famous NSA whistleblower, William
    Binney, that when you say this is a leak, I think George Washington's blog's conclusion there was that that meant a leak from the
    inside of the American Intelligence Community, although I guess the way I read your statement, it possibly could just be a Democrat,
    or a member of the Democratic National Committee, or someone who had access through that route. And again, I'm not exactly sure
    whether we're talking about the Podesta or the DNC leaks or one or both here, as you say, they are at least, presumable separate.
    But, can you give us any insight on whether, for example, you can confirm Binney's claim that this comes from inside American Police
    and Intelligence rather than inside the political apparatus like the DNC?

    Craig Murray (7:15): Well, I think, again, the key point to remember in answering that question is that the DNC leak and the Podesta
    leak are two different things and the answer is they probably aren't going to be the same in both cases. I also want you to consider
    John Podesta was a paid lobbyist for the Saudi government. That's open and declared, it's not secret or a leak in a sense. John
    Podesta was paid a very substantial sum every month by the Saudi government to lobby for their interests in Washington and if the
    American Security services were not watching the communications of the Saudi government's paid lobbyists, than the American
    Intelligence services would not be doing their job. And of course it's also true that the Saudi's man, the Saudi's lobbyist in
    Washington, his communications are going to be of interest to a great many other intelligence services as well.

    Scott Horton (8:59): I hope I'm not being too annoying here, I'm trying to read between the lines, it sounded like your first answer
    was, "well maybe, one is one and the other's the other, meaning one came from inside Intelligence services and the other maybe came
    from a political source and then your allusion, I think, was to, "Geez, the NSA must have been looking at what Podesta was doing since
    he was operating as a registered agent of a foreign power." Is it fair to say that you're saying that the Podesta leak came from inside
    the Intelligence services, NSA or another agency?

    Craig Murray (9:35): Well, what I think I said is compatible with that kind of interpretation, yeah.

    Scott Horton (9:40): Thank you very much, you're very polite. I appreciate that. Alright and now, so, is it the case that you can
    say you know in terms of the DNC leak as well?

    Craig Murray (9:55): It's the case, I mean, what I can say to you, I know what Wikileaks (unintelligible, lots of hesitation) on the
    DNC case. And, I believe, that Julian, who I've known for many years and says (unintelligible) nothing to do with the Russians, so
    that's a but, I, I have never, um, you know I don't have direct personal access to the source, and I wouldn't like to pretend
    that I did.

    Scott Horton (10:40) But in both of these cases, you're saying that these are leaks from Americans, too. I saw, this is part of what you
    said to the Guardian was if these people are acting as Russian agents, they'd be in jail right now.

    Craig Murray (10:56) Yeah, exactly. In both cases they are leaks by Americans. It's perfectly possible that Wikileaks themselves
    don't know precisely what is going on, I mean one thing, which I'm sure everybody noticed, was that Julian Assange took a very close
    interest in the death of Seth Rich, the Democratic staff member, and Wikileaks offered a 20,000 reward for information leading to
    the capture of his killers. So, obviously they're suspicions there about what's happening and things are somewhat murky. I'm not
    saying, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that he was the source of the leaks. What I'm saying is, is that it's probably not an
    unfair indication to draw that Wikileaks believes that he may have been killed by someone who thought he was the source of the
    leaks.

    Scott Horton (12:09): Whether correctly or incorrectly?

    Craig Murray (12:10): Whether correctly or incorrectly.

    Scott Horton (12:12): But you're, are you saying that Assange says that he is not the source, but that maybe someone mistook him
    for the source, or he just is not saying either way.

    Craig Murray (12:22): No, Assange is not saying (unintelligible) not clarifying that either way. But obviously, the fear that he
    may have been killed (unintelligible) had something to do with these leaks by someone who thought he was the source (unintelligible)
    motivation.

    Scott Horton (12:40): Well, I think that occurred to a lot of people, but it's the kind of thing that's easily dismissed as
    conspiricism as well.

    Craig Murray (12:49): That's also true, but people do die of this sort of stuff. You have to remember there were billions of
    dollars, literally billions of dollars, behind Hillary Clinton's election campaign. Those people have lost their money. And you
    have also to remember, there's a big financial interest (unintelligible) armaments industry in a bad American relationship with Russia.
    The worse the relationship with Russia is, the larger the contracts the armaments industry can expect, especially in the most
    high-tech, high profit side of fighter jets and missiles and that kind of thing. And Trump has actually already indicated he's
    looking to make savings on the defense budget, particularly in things like fighter projects. And so, there are people standing to
    lose billions of dollars and anybody who thinks in that situation bad things don't happen to people is very naive.

    Scott Horton (13:56): Well you know if we could go off on this tangent for a second, would you like to comment on the relative danger
    of the new Cold War with Russia at this point, Craig?

    Craig Murray (14:07): I find it very worrying, frankly, that people want to get into a new Cold war with Russia. I am no fan of
    Putin. I'm a critic of Putin's internal policy. I think his control of the Media and shutting down a lot of the independent
    media in Russia has really undermined the sources, the (unintelligible) democracy we've seen in that country. And so I'm not a
    big fan of Putin. I don't like the oligarch system where wealth is even more concentrated in Russia than it is in the West.
    But, the idea that we want to go back into a system where we regard Russia as an enemy, and we have these fantasies about a war
    with Russia is absolutely crazy. There is no way that Russia is every going to attack the United States or the United Kingdom.
    It's got no interest whatsoever in doing that. Where Putin has had some foreign policy adventureism is in bringing back into Russia
    parts of the former Soviet Union which have a majority ethnic Russian population. That's not a thing I support. I think
    it's dangerous and disruptive, but he's almost finished now. And there aren't really any more -very few- parts of the former
    Soviet Union with a majority ethnic Russian population. He's essentially achieved what he wanted to achieve. There's no evidence
    that he's looking for further land acquisitions for Russia. And in Syria, frankly, his policy appears more sensible than the
    Western policy, where the West is promoting jihadists who support the Saudi-exported Wahabbist doctrine, so I just don't see
    how we have this profound conflict of interest with Russia, which necessitates a new cold war and a new arms race.

    I'm sorry, that was rather a long answer to give you.

    Scott Horton (16:31): Yeah, no, that's kind of what I was looking for cause I'm glad you brought up the question about the
    minority Russian-speaking populations in the Baltic States, for example, and that kind of thing because, I mean, people do
    seem to think that that's a real problem, but you're saying that the threat of any real conflict there, that the Russians are
    going to try to redraw those borders, or something like that, that basically this is all negotiable and it's already been
    negotiated.

    Craig Murray (17:00): Yeah, I think that's true. The places where Putin has, um, taken action like in (unintellible), Georgia,
    and the Crimea are places which have a majority Russian population, not a minority Russian population. There's no evidence
    that he's daft enough to try to move into areas which have a minority Russian population. And he's not mad enough to attack
    the European Union. That's definitely not going to happen. Or to attack NATO. An awful lot of this saber rattling is much
    ado about nothing, but as I say, it's extremely profitible for the armaments industry.

    Scott Horton (17:45): Well, no question about that. Alright, so now what do you make of all the CIA claims about, "well, you
    have Guccifer here, GRU and FSB and they're hacking here, and they're pshing there, and that they've traced all of it, this stuff, is it
    just all made up out of whole cloth do you think?

    Craig Murray (18:04): Well, I think the Guccifer thing is (unintelligible), Guccifer is not the source for Wikileaks. And
    the idea that the Russian FSB would, you know, carefully hack these emails then have this vainglorious, weirdo personality boasting
    about it all over the internet, you can see through the script (laughs), is just not at all probably when you think about it
    (laughs) especially when they're a great deal more professional than that. And, yes, of course the Russians spy on the United
    States, the United States spies on the Russians. The United States spies on the (unintelligible) the Germans. That's part
    of the game of International politics and international diplomacy. Nobody's saying that the Russians don't spy on the United
    States, they do. It's an on-going mutual game that's always been part of human history, I suppose. But, it so happens that they
    are not the people who hacked this particular material and passed it on to Wikileaks.

    Scott Horton (19:17): And then, so what about all that stuff about the GRU phishing email and all of that? Is that just
    something that happened but is unconnected to the leaks themselves, is what you're saying?

    Craig Murray (19:32): Well, a phishing email (unintelligible) GRU (unintelligible) I have my doubts. It's not the
    source of the leak.

    Scott Horton (19:44): Got you. Well, I wish I was a little more proficient on the technical aspects of all this kind of
    stuff so I could try to come up with some better questions to ask along those lines, but, it sounds like, really what you're
    saying certainly on at least half of what's at issue here, you personally know at least one and on the second, you
    personally know what Assange told you, and in that case you certainly believe him. And in both cases -the DNC leak and the
    Podesta leak- you're saying both sources are not hacks, but insider leaks, and Americans in both cases.

    Craig Murray (20:22): Yeah. Looking for the source in both of these, you have to look to Americans. And it's worth saying
    that if Hillary Clinton hadn't connived with the DNC to fix the Primary schedule in order to disadvantage Bernie Sanders, if
    she hadn't accepted the questions in advance of the televised debates against Bernie in order to give her an unfair advantage,
    if the Clinton Foundation hadn't accepted donors from all kinds of dictators in exchange for access to meetings in the State
    Department, or foreign policy decisions, or purchase of uranium, or whatever else they wanted in exchange... If all that
    hadn't happened, then we wouldn't be talking about any of this. (laughs) One of the very peculiar things is, is that the
    mainstream media is still completely in denial about all the stories I just told you, which weren't much featured in the
    mainstream media. And yet, at the same time, they're saying that these emails, which were Russian, affected the election.

    It's quite strange. They can't be totally unimportant and meaningless, and at the same time, affected the election.

    Scott Horton (21:33): Right, all they did was show how business was done on a daily basis inside the Democratic Party and
    the Clinton campaign. Why would that do anything but help Hillary Clinton's chances, right?

    (Both laugh)

    Craig Murray (21:47): Well, exactly. I think lots of people were surprised, for example, by the (unintelligible) media
    collusion, which we know journalists keep up their contacts and that kind of thing, but discussing how to present stories
    to best political advantage for a political candidate and that kind of thing is (unintelligible) unethical journalism.
    I think those emails are an absolutely fascinating glance into the way politics operates in Washington, and it's not very
    pretty, and I actually think it says a great deal about the sophistication of the American Voter that they did have such
    a profound effect on so many people. And people are capable of understanding and analyzing what's going on and reacting
    to it.

    Scott Horton (22:40): So now because of this whole controversy, you're really trying, in a sense, as I was saying in the
    introduction here, they're trying to really undermine the incoming presidency of Donald Trump. I mean, Hillary has said
    she concedes, we have to accept the results, but at the same time, she's saying, "Oh, yeah" she supports the CIA giving
    a briefing to the Electoral College. I guess just trying to cause trouble, that kind of thing. But so it raises the
    question of whether the source, one or both sources, might just as well come forward at this point and say, "It was me,
    not them. It wasn't the Russians, I'm not a Russian. I did this because I'm a Bernie fan or whatever it was." Do you
    think there's any chance of that at this point? That the source or sources might change their mind and come forward?

    Craig Murray (23:29): I can't know. The whole Obama-Clinton attitude to whistleblowers, the way they (unintelligible)
    Americans like Thomas Jake and William Binney and John (unintelligible) been treated. The way that Chelsea Manning is
    treated. The way that Edward Snowden is still in exile... doesn't actually encourage anybody to come forth. And the
    doubt hovering around the death of Seth Rich doesn't encourage anybody to come forward, either. So, I wouldn't, myself,
    lean on anyone to come out because the -I know the whistleblower myself- the consequences for you and your family are
    extreme. So, I think that's a decision that people have to make (unintelligible).

    Scott Horton (24:21): Alright, well listen, thank you very much for coming on the show, Craig, I greatly appreciate it
    a lot.

    Craig Murray (24:27): Thank you, it's always good to talk.

    So Dahlia, the names you don’t recognize are Thomas Drake and John Kiriakou. Fine that you venture into territory that’s clearly new to you, but why flood the comments with the same speculation over and over and no value added.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dahlia
    No expertise required to transcribe this very important interview from a close source, and since nobody else had done it...

    I have seven little ones and nobody paid me for the hours I spent doing it. It is now available for everyone and I even put in time stamps to aid people, especially for the parts I could not understand. *You* can take my work and reprint with the corrections. Please do so!

    Next time, a simple thanks will do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. Svigor says:

    I mentioned to my wife about five years ago that the phrase
    “My son just bought a waterproof Bluetooth speaker so he could listen to songs from his phone in the shower”

    Would have been absolutely meaningless fifteen years previously.

    Nah. 15 years ago, the only place young men living at home could get any “privacy” was in the shower, too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  108. Svigor says:

    What about the possibility that the killing was a targeted killing of a white guy for the crime of being white?

    What’s the coffee like at DNC HQ?

    even if the evidence shows Seth Rich was killed in retaliation for having leaked DNC insider info.

    If a Democrat Party bagman killed Rich, I doubt this was the motive. It wouldn’t be worth the risk. Only prophylactic assassination makes sense in this situation. Someone wanted to shut him up, or prevent him from taking some other action in future.

    It’s possible this was an “unsanctioned” assassination, too; some Democrat Party bagman makes the call on his own, possibly spurred by personal concerns, heat of the moment. I could see “retaliation” being at least part of the motive, in this situation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin O'Keeffe

    Only prophylactic assassination makes sense in this situation. Someone wanted to shut him up, or prevent him from taking some other action in future.
     
    Keep in mind, it's not clear that the murder wasn't intended to be prophylactic, but that it simply occurred a bit too late.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. Dahlia says:
    @RobinG
    So Dahlia, the names you don't recognize are Thomas Drake and John Kiriakou. Fine that you venture into territory that's clearly new to you, but why flood the comments with the same speculation over and over and no value added.

    No expertise required to transcribe this very important interview from a close source, and since nobody else had done it…

    I have seven little ones and nobody paid me for the hours I spent doing it. It is now available for everyone and I even put in time stamps to aid people, especially for the parts I could not understand. *You* can take my work and reprint with the corrections. Please do so!

    Next time, a simple thanks will do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. Eagle Eye says:
    @Dahlia
    I've transcribed the 20+ minute interview Craig Murray did with Scott Horton from December 13, 2016 as it contained the most information about a primary source's role and knowledge of Seth Rich and the DNC and Podesta emails. If someone could archive, submit to archive.is, or whatever -I'd try, but probably fail- I'd appreciate it. I hope I did the tag thing right, Ron. I really wish I wasn't so retarded with tech, but I am :(
    https://scotthorton.org/interviews/121316-craig-murray-dnc-podesta-emails-leaked-by-americans-not-hacked-by-russia/

    Abt. 2:00
    Scott Horton: This is a very important thing that you've written [The CIA's Absence of Conviction] here, the context is, of course,
    the CIA's claim to The Washington Post that the Russians ran an Op to hack the Democrats' emails, uh, I guess that goes for the
    DNC and the Podesta emails, to leak them to Wikileaks in order to help Donald Trump win the election. And to a degree that I think
    is actually sort of surprising to me, um, this story really seems to have legs and there are even the Electoral College is now
    saying they want a briefing -I don't think they really would dare try to overturn the results of the election- but they're at
    least trying to use this to "hem in" Trump on his Russia policy as Greg Sargent reported in The Washington Post, and yet, uh,
    what you've written here and what you've told the Guardian was, "HOLD IT RIGHT THERE, THIS ISN'T RIGHT AT ALL!", but how can
    you know?

    Craig Murray (2:58): Um, well, it's not really new. I mean, the people who are in the position to know are Wikileaks and the people who
    work with Wikileaks, of which I am one. Julian Assange has said plainly that the information does not come from Russia. He's said
    that (unintelligible) I have inside knowledge that the sources of the leaks was not the Russian government. It's American source.
    So, really the CIA, who've offered no evidence whatsoever for this anonymously (unintelligible) claim, the CIA is talking complete
    and utter nonsense. I just know for certain that what they say is not true.

    Scott Horton (3:52): Well now first of all can you explain what exactly is your role with Wikileaks?

    Craig Murray (3:57): Oh, well, I'm not, I should say I'm not a member of Wikileaks staff. They have staff and they have directors.
    I'm not any of those. I'm a member of Sam Adams Associates, a whistleblower organization which we work very closely with Wikileaks
    and I've been close to Julian for a number of years and I'm one of the people who was able to visit him in the Equadorian Embassy
    and speak with him and discuss strategy and help him move things along so I cooperate with Wikileaks without being a full member of
    the structure.

    Scott Horton (4:34): I see. And then, can you tell us how it is that you know who the source is? Is it just that Assange told you or
    do you have more direct information yourself?

    Craig Murray (4:43): No, I have rather more direct information than that which relates to a visit I paid to Washington in September of
    this year, when I, I should be plain that Podesta emails and the DNC emails are of course two separate things. You shouldn't conclude
    that they both have the same source. But, in both cases, we're talking of a leak, not a hack. In the person who, the person who was
    responsible for getting the information out had legal access to that information.

    Scott Horton (5:31): And then in the trip to Washington, are you saying that you were the recipient of at least one of these leaks?

    Craig Murray (5:37): Uh, no, the material was already, I think, safely with Wikileaks before I, I, before I got there in September.
    Um, I, um, had a small role to play, which I hope you'll understand which I don't expand on it too much.

    Scott Horton (6:03): Sure I do understand. I hope you understand if I keep trying to push a little bit to try to understand what's
    going on here. I read a post by my friend George Washington over there at George Washington's blog and he put two and two together
    and a couple of statements and said, and um I guess comparing your statements with those of the famous NSA whistleblower, William
    Binney, that when you say this is a leak, I think George Washington's blog's conclusion there was that that meant a leak from the
    inside of the American Intelligence Community, although I guess the way I read your statement, it possibly could just be a Democrat,
    or a member of the Democratic National Committee, or someone who had access through that route. And again, I'm not exactly sure
    whether we're talking about the Podesta or the DNC leaks or one or both here, as you say, they are at least, presumable separate.
    But, can you give us any insight on whether, for example, you can confirm Binney's claim that this comes from inside American Police
    and Intelligence rather than inside the political apparatus like the DNC?

    Craig Murray (7:15): Well, I think, again, the key point to remember in answering that question is that the DNC leak and the Podesta
    leak are two different things and the answer is they probably aren't going to be the same in both cases. I also want you to consider
    John Podesta was a paid lobbyist for the Saudi government. That's open and declared, it's not secret or a leak in a sense. John
    Podesta was paid a very substantial sum every month by the Saudi government to lobby for their interests in Washington and if the
    American Security services were not watching the communications of the Saudi government's paid lobbyists, than the American
    Intelligence services would not be doing their job. And of course it's also true that the Saudi's man, the Saudi's lobbyist in
    Washington, his communications are going to be of interest to a great many other intelligence services as well.

    Scott Horton (8:59): I hope I'm not being too annoying here, I'm trying to read between the lines, it sounded like your first answer
    was, "well maybe, one is one and the other's the other, meaning one came from inside Intelligence services and the other maybe came
    from a political source and then your allusion, I think, was to, "Geez, the NSA must have been looking at what Podesta was doing since
    he was operating as a registered agent of a foreign power." Is it fair to say that you're saying that the Podesta leak came from inside
    the Intelligence services, NSA or another agency?

    Craig Murray (9:35): Well, what I think I said is compatible with that kind of interpretation, yeah.

    Scott Horton (9:40): Thank you very much, you're very polite. I appreciate that. Alright and now, so, is it the case that you can
    say you know in terms of the DNC leak as well?

    Craig Murray (9:55): It's the case, I mean, what I can say to you, I know what Wikileaks (unintelligible, lots of hesitation) on the
    DNC case. And, I believe, that Julian, who I've known for many years and says (unintelligible) nothing to do with the Russians, so
    that's a but, I, I have never, um, you know I don't have direct personal access to the source, and I wouldn't like to pretend
    that I did.

    Scott Horton (10:40) But in both of these cases, you're saying that these are leaks from Americans, too. I saw, this is part of what you
    said to the Guardian was if these people are acting as Russian agents, they'd be in jail right now.

    Craig Murray (10:56) Yeah, exactly. In both cases they are leaks by Americans. It's perfectly possible that Wikileaks themselves
    don't know precisely what is going on, I mean one thing, which I'm sure everybody noticed, was that Julian Assange took a very close
    interest in the death of Seth Rich, the Democratic staff member, and Wikileaks offered a 20,000 reward for information leading to
    the capture of his killers. So, obviously they're suspicions there about what's happening and things are somewhat murky. I'm not
    saying, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that he was the source of the leaks. What I'm saying is, is that it's probably not an
    unfair indication to draw that Wikileaks believes that he may have been killed by someone who thought he was the source of the
    leaks.

    Scott Horton (12:09): Whether correctly or incorrectly?

    Craig Murray (12:10): Whether correctly or incorrectly.

    Scott Horton (12:12): But you're, are you saying that Assange says that he is not the source, but that maybe someone mistook him
    for the source, or he just is not saying either way.

    Craig Murray (12:22): No, Assange is not saying (unintelligible) not clarifying that either way. But obviously, the fear that he
    may have been killed (unintelligible) had something to do with these leaks by someone who thought he was the source (unintelligible)
    motivation.

    Scott Horton (12:40): Well, I think that occurred to a lot of people, but it's the kind of thing that's easily dismissed as
    conspiricism as well.

    Craig Murray (12:49): That's also true, but people do die of this sort of stuff. You have to remember there were billions of
    dollars, literally billions of dollars, behind Hillary Clinton's election campaign. Those people have lost their money. And you
    have also to remember, there's a big financial interest (unintelligible) armaments industry in a bad American relationship with Russia.
    The worse the relationship with Russia is, the larger the contracts the armaments industry can expect, especially in the most
    high-tech, high profit side of fighter jets and missiles and that kind of thing. And Trump has actually already indicated he's
    looking to make savings on the defense budget, particularly in things like fighter projects. And so, there are people standing to
    lose billions of dollars and anybody who thinks in that situation bad things don't happen to people is very naive.

    Scott Horton (13:56): Well you know if we could go off on this tangent for a second, would you like to comment on the relative danger
    of the new Cold War with Russia at this point, Craig?

    Craig Murray (14:07): I find it very worrying, frankly, that people want to get into a new Cold war with Russia. I am no fan of
    Putin. I'm a critic of Putin's internal policy. I think his control of the Media and shutting down a lot of the independent
    media in Russia has really undermined the sources, the (unintelligible) democracy we've seen in that country. And so I'm not a
    big fan of Putin. I don't like the oligarch system where wealth is even more concentrated in Russia than it is in the West.
    But, the idea that we want to go back into a system where we regard Russia as an enemy, and we have these fantasies about a war
    with Russia is absolutely crazy. There is no way that Russia is every going to attack the United States or the United Kingdom.
    It's got no interest whatsoever in doing that. Where Putin has had some foreign policy adventureism is in bringing back into Russia
    parts of the former Soviet Union which have a majority ethnic Russian population. That's not a thing I support. I think
    it's dangerous and disruptive, but he's almost finished now. And there aren't really any more -very few- parts of the former
    Soviet Union with a majority ethnic Russian population. He's essentially achieved what he wanted to achieve. There's no evidence
    that he's looking for further land acquisitions for Russia. And in Syria, frankly, his policy appears more sensible than the
    Western policy, where the West is promoting jihadists who support the Saudi-exported Wahabbist doctrine, so I just don't see
    how we have this profound conflict of interest with Russia, which necessitates a new cold war and a new arms race.

    I'm sorry, that was rather a long answer to give you.

    Scott Horton (16:31): Yeah, no, that's kind of what I was looking for cause I'm glad you brought up the question about the
    minority Russian-speaking populations in the Baltic States, for example, and that kind of thing because, I mean, people do
    seem to think that that's a real problem, but you're saying that the threat of any real conflict there, that the Russians are
    going to try to redraw those borders, or something like that, that basically this is all negotiable and it's already been
    negotiated.

    Craig Murray (17:00): Yeah, I think that's true. The places where Putin has, um, taken action like in (unintellible), Georgia,
    and the Crimea are places which have a majority Russian population, not a minority Russian population. There's no evidence
    that he's daft enough to try to move into areas which have a minority Russian population. And he's not mad enough to attack
    the European Union. That's definitely not going to happen. Or to attack NATO. An awful lot of this saber rattling is much
    ado about nothing, but as I say, it's extremely profitible for the armaments industry.

    Scott Horton (17:45): Well, no question about that. Alright, so now what do you make of all the CIA claims about, "well, you
    have Guccifer here, GRU and FSB and they're hacking here, and they're pshing there, and that they've traced all of it, this stuff, is it
    just all made up out of whole cloth do you think?

    Craig Murray (18:04): Well, I think the Guccifer thing is (unintelligible), Guccifer is not the source for Wikileaks. And
    the idea that the Russian FSB would, you know, carefully hack these emails then have this vainglorious, weirdo personality boasting
    about it all over the internet, you can see through the script (laughs), is just not at all probably when you think about it
    (laughs) especially when they're a great deal more professional than that. And, yes, of course the Russians spy on the United
    States, the United States spies on the Russians. The United States spies on the (unintelligible) the Germans. That's part
    of the game of International politics and international diplomacy. Nobody's saying that the Russians don't spy on the United
    States, they do. It's an on-going mutual game that's always been part of human history, I suppose. But, it so happens that they
    are not the people who hacked this particular material and passed it on to Wikileaks.

    Scott Horton (19:17): And then, so what about all that stuff about the GRU phishing email and all of that? Is that just
    something that happened but is unconnected to the leaks themselves, is what you're saying?

    Craig Murray (19:32): Well, a phishing email (unintelligible) GRU (unintelligible) I have my doubts. It's not the
    source of the leak.

    Scott Horton (19:44): Got you. Well, I wish I was a little more proficient on the technical aspects of all this kind of
    stuff so I could try to come up with some better questions to ask along those lines, but, it sounds like, really what you're
    saying certainly on at least half of what's at issue here, you personally know at least one and on the second, you
    personally know what Assange told you, and in that case you certainly believe him. And in both cases -the DNC leak and the
    Podesta leak- you're saying both sources are not hacks, but insider leaks, and Americans in both cases.

    Craig Murray (20:22): Yeah. Looking for the source in both of these, you have to look to Americans. And it's worth saying
    that if Hillary Clinton hadn't connived with the DNC to fix the Primary schedule in order to disadvantage Bernie Sanders, if
    she hadn't accepted the questions in advance of the televised debates against Bernie in order to give her an unfair advantage,
    if the Clinton Foundation hadn't accepted donors from all kinds of dictators in exchange for access to meetings in the State
    Department, or foreign policy decisions, or purchase of uranium, or whatever else they wanted in exchange... If all that
    hadn't happened, then we wouldn't be talking about any of this. (laughs) One of the very peculiar things is, is that the
    mainstream media is still completely in denial about all the stories I just told you, which weren't much featured in the
    mainstream media. And yet, at the same time, they're saying that these emails, which were Russian, affected the election.

    It's quite strange. They can't be totally unimportant and meaningless, and at the same time, affected the election.

    Scott Horton (21:33): Right, all they did was show how business was done on a daily basis inside the Democratic Party and
    the Clinton campaign. Why would that do anything but help Hillary Clinton's chances, right?

    (Both laugh)

    Craig Murray (21:47): Well, exactly. I think lots of people were surprised, for example, by the (unintelligible) media
    collusion, which we know journalists keep up their contacts and that kind of thing, but discussing how to present stories
    to best political advantage for a political candidate and that kind of thing is (unintelligible) unethical journalism.
    I think those emails are an absolutely fascinating glance into the way politics operates in Washington, and it's not very
    pretty, and I actually think it says a great deal about the sophistication of the American Voter that they did have such
    a profound effect on so many people. And people are capable of understanding and analyzing what's going on and reacting
    to it.

    Scott Horton (22:40): So now because of this whole controversy, you're really trying, in a sense, as I was saying in the
    introduction here, they're trying to really undermine the incoming presidency of Donald Trump. I mean, Hillary has said
    she concedes, we have to accept the results, but at the same time, she's saying, "Oh, yeah" she supports the CIA giving
    a briefing to the Electoral College. I guess just trying to cause trouble, that kind of thing. But so it raises the
    question of whether the source, one or both sources, might just as well come forward at this point and say, "It was me,
    not them. It wasn't the Russians, I'm not a Russian. I did this because I'm a Bernie fan or whatever it was." Do you
    think there's any chance of that at this point? That the source or sources might change their mind and come forward?

    Craig Murray (23:29): I can't know. The whole Obama-Clinton attitude to whistleblowers, the way they (unintelligible)
    Americans like Thomas Jake and William Binney and John (unintelligible) been treated. The way that Chelsea Manning is
    treated. The way that Edward Snowden is still in exile... doesn't actually encourage anybody to come forth. And the
    doubt hovering around the death of Seth Rich doesn't encourage anybody to come forward, either. So, I wouldn't, myself,
    lean on anyone to come out because the -I know the whistleblower myself- the consequences for you and your family are
    extreme. So, I think that's a decision that people have to make (unintelligible).

    Scott Horton (24:21): Alright, well listen, thank you very much for coming on the show, Craig, I greatly appreciate it
    a lot.

    Craig Murray (24:27): Thank you, it's always good to talk.

    Thanks for a labor of love!

    Reviewing and compiling the record is the indispensible first step on the path to finding and fixating the truth in the face of hurricane-level disinformation.

    We now live in a country where DC is a safe jurisdiction in which to whack someone.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @Svigor

    What about the possibility that the killing was a targeted killing of a white guy for the crime of being white?
     
    What's the coffee like at DNC HQ?

    even if the evidence shows Seth Rich was killed in retaliation for having leaked DNC insider info.
     
    If a Democrat Party bagman killed Rich, I doubt this was the motive. It wouldn't be worth the risk. Only prophylactic assassination makes sense in this situation. Someone wanted to shut him up, or prevent him from taking some other action in future.

    It's possible this was an "unsanctioned" assassination, too; some Democrat Party bagman makes the call on his own, possibly spurred by personal concerns, heat of the moment. I could see "retaliation" being at least part of the motive, in this situation.

    Only prophylactic assassination makes sense in this situation. Someone wanted to shut him up, or prevent him from taking some other action in future.

    Keep in mind, it’s not clear that the murder wasn’t intended to be prophylactic, but that it simply occurred a bit too late.

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    I am not so sure about that, Kevin.

    I think there is a big distinction between the "Email dump" which already occurred...and the potential "Data dump" which had yet to.

    Given Seth's job at the DNC, as a "voter data director", there is a very strong likelihood Seth compiled a very serious dossier (either on disc or chip) that could demonstrate multiple counts of treasonous "voter fraud" which tipped the scales to Queen Hillary and essentially "gifted" to her the nomination ,when she didn't win it.

    This trove of data is the "silver bullet" in the smoking gun of the entire scandal.

    Nobody knows where it is.

    The emails shows complicity and intentionality...but they do not provide the PROOF of deliberate vote changes....The data does.

    For all we know the "botched robbery" may not have been "botched" at all...If the murderous thieves were assigned the task of acquiring Seth's Data chip...and he had it in his breast pocket.....then the robbery was quite successful.

    No ?

    The only person who could tell us otherwise...is six feet under (God rest his soul ).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. alexander says:
    @Kevin O'Keeffe

    Only prophylactic assassination makes sense in this situation. Someone wanted to shut him up, or prevent him from taking some other action in future.
     
    Keep in mind, it's not clear that the murder wasn't intended to be prophylactic, but that it simply occurred a bit too late.

    I am not so sure about that, Kevin.

    I think there is a big distinction between the “Email dump” which already occurred…and the potential “Data dump” which had yet to.

    Given Seth’s job at the DNC, as a “voter data director”, there is a very strong likelihood Seth compiled a very serious dossier (either on disc or chip) that could demonstrate multiple counts of treasonous “voter fraud” which tipped the scales to Queen Hillary and essentially “gifted” to her the nomination ,when she didn’t win it.

    This trove of data is the “silver bullet” in the smoking gun of the entire scandal.

    Nobody knows where it is.

    The emails shows complicity and intentionality…but they do not provide the PROOF of deliberate vote changes….The data does.

    For all we know the “botched robbery” may not have been “botched” at all…If the murderous thieves were assigned the task of acquiring Seth’s Data chip…and he had it in his breast pocket…..then the robbery was quite successful.

    No ?

    The only person who could tell us otherwise…is six feet under (God rest his soul ).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    The only person who could tell us otherwise…is six feet under (God rest his soul ).
     
    Come to think of it, the OTHER person(s) who could have told otherwise - Hillary's hitmen - quite likely were themselves Arkancided. Bill and Hill learned the virtue of tidiness back in their Mena days.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Eagle Eye says:
    @alexander
    I am not so sure about that, Kevin.

    I think there is a big distinction between the "Email dump" which already occurred...and the potential "Data dump" which had yet to.

    Given Seth's job at the DNC, as a "voter data director", there is a very strong likelihood Seth compiled a very serious dossier (either on disc or chip) that could demonstrate multiple counts of treasonous "voter fraud" which tipped the scales to Queen Hillary and essentially "gifted" to her the nomination ,when she didn't win it.

    This trove of data is the "silver bullet" in the smoking gun of the entire scandal.

    Nobody knows where it is.

    The emails shows complicity and intentionality...but they do not provide the PROOF of deliberate vote changes....The data does.

    For all we know the "botched robbery" may not have been "botched" at all...If the murderous thieves were assigned the task of acquiring Seth's Data chip...and he had it in his breast pocket.....then the robbery was quite successful.

    No ?

    The only person who could tell us otherwise...is six feet under (God rest his soul ).

    The only person who could tell us otherwise…is six feet under (God rest his soul ).

    Come to think of it, the OTHER person(s) who could have told otherwise – Hillary’s hitmen – quite likely were themselves Arkancided. Bill and Hill learned the virtue of tidiness back in their Mena days.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Junior says:

    Have a look at this very interesting article that talks about there having been a Vanity Fair article written in Jan. 2016 in which the writer talks about shooting a Panda which was Seth Rich’s online handle according to Kim DotCom. I don’t think it’s a coincidence in the LEAST. Why in the world would the writer use such an awkward analogy about Pandas unless it was a message.

    http://joehoft.com/was-vanity-fair-article-in-january-2016-a-warning-to-seth-rich-that-his-life-was-in-danger/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    WOW. The original Vanity Fair piece is still up (save a copy now - they'll scrub it soon).

    This sounds like massive intimidation, perhaps Seth Rich naively persuaded himself that he had discovered unauthorized wrongdoing by midlevel operators and tried to take his complaints to the top (John Podesta).

    Speaking of John Podesta, which Republican politicians and judges share his fondness for pizza?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Eagle Eye says:
    @Junior
    Have a look at this very interesting article that talks about there having been a Vanity Fair article written in Jan. 2016 in which the writer talks about shooting a Panda which was Seth Rich's online handle according to Kim DotCom. I don't think it's a coincidence in the LEAST. Why in the world would the writer use such an awkward analogy about Pandas unless it was a message.

    http://joehoft.com/was-vanity-fair-article-in-january-2016-a-warning-to-seth-rich-that-his-life-was-in-danger/

    WOW. The original Vanity Fair piece is still up (save a copy now – they’ll scrub it soon).

    This sounds like massive intimidation, perhaps Seth Rich naively persuaded himself that he had discovered unauthorized wrongdoing by midlevel operators and tried to take his complaints to the top (John Podesta).

    Speaking of John Podesta, which Republican politicians and judges share his fondness for pizza?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Junior

    Speaking of John Podesta, which Republican politicians and judges share his fondness for pizza?
     
    With the way they're all acting, seems to me it'd probably be easier to answer which ones don't share his fondness. The swamp is full of scum from both sides of the UniParty that need to be drained. The one to ask would probably be Lawrence E. King of the Franklin Cover-Up who was the supplier for the Republicans during the H.W. Bush years.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8b61iIQCapY
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Junior says:
    @Eagle Eye
    WOW. The original Vanity Fair piece is still up (save a copy now - they'll scrub it soon).

    This sounds like massive intimidation, perhaps Seth Rich naively persuaded himself that he had discovered unauthorized wrongdoing by midlevel operators and tried to take his complaints to the top (John Podesta).

    Speaking of John Podesta, which Republican politicians and judges share his fondness for pizza?

    Speaking of John Podesta, which Republican politicians and judges share his fondness for pizza?

    With the way they’re all acting, seems to me it’d probably be easier to answer which ones don’t share his fondness. The swamp is full of scum from both sides of the UniParty that need to be drained. The one to ask would probably be Lawrence E. King of the Franklin Cover-Up who was the supplier for the Republicans during the H.W. Bush years.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. @Anonymous
    I feel the same way about the plane crashing into the Pentagon on 9/11

    That must be literally the most surveillance heavy facility on the planet -- yet there is no footage of the crash/aftermath?

    The whole system is crooked. Anything that incriminates the power structure simply disappears. And there doesn't seem to be any mechanism to even look into it.

    There was ample evidence of the Pentagon crash. Many local businesses had videos.
    It was all stolen by the FBI within a couple of hours and has never seen the light of day.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Delinquent Snail
    It happened in new york as well. All footage was snatched as fast as possible, so people couldnt analyze it and see we have been lied to.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Svigor says:

    Why in the world would the writer use such an awkward analogy about Pandas unless it was a message.

    Well, sans context, it has value as humor. Pandas are sacred to leftist mopes (e.g., Seth Rich chose one as his totem), and killing them is sacrilege. There’s always humor to be had from that stuff, from a variety of angles.

    Okay, I read the quote, there’s nothing there that’s even remotely persuasive to anyone but Konspiracy Kooks. The point of using a Panda is precisely as I laid out above; they’re extremely cute, they’re harmless mopes, and they’re endangered, so leftists have fetishized them. They were being used to illustrate the risks Hillary faced in playing hardball with Bernie.

    Joe Hoft should go back on his meds.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Junior
    Ohhhhhhh, I get it now. It wasn't a message to shoot Seth Rich... it was only a message to shoot Bernie.

    How stupid of me and Joe Hoft for thinking that it was something sinister. ;)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Corvinus says:
    @FKA Max
    Laibach – The Whistleblowers 2.0 – Assange+Snowden+Manning +…version
    http://www.unz.com/forum/the-washington-post-blacklist-story-is-shameful-and-disgusting/#comment-1668899
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5GaqdVtNag


    Statement from Kim Dotcom on Seth Rich:
    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/05/seth-rich-was-panda.html

    I KNOW THAT SETH RICH WAS INVOLVED IN THE DNC LEAK.

    I know this because in late 2014 a person contacted me about helping me to start a branch of the Internet Party in the United States. He called himself Panda. I now know that Panda was Seth Rich.

    Panda advised me that he was working on voter analytics tools and other technologies that the Internet Party may find helpful.

    I communicated with Panda on a number of topics including corruption and the influence of corporate money in politics.

    I was referring to what I knew when I did an interview with Bloomberg in New Zealand in May 2015. In that interview I hinted that Julian Assange and Wikileaks would release information about Hillary Clinton in the upcoming election.

    The Rich family has reached out to me to ask that I be sensitive to their loss in my public comments. That request is entirely reasonable.

    I have consulted with my lawyers. I accept that my full statement should be provided to the authorities and I am prepared to do that so that there can be a full investigation. My lawyers will speak with the authorities regarding the proper process.

    If my evidence is required to be given in the United States I would be prepared to do so if appropriate arrangements are made. I would need a guarantee from Special Counsel Mueller, on behalf of the United States, of safe passage from New Zealand to the United States and back. In the coming days we will be communicating with the appropriate authorities to make the necessary arrangements. In the meantime, I will make no further comment.
     

    Fake News Story of epic proportions. Just like this “revelation”.

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/05/panic-at-dnc.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Junior says:
    @Svigor

    Why in the world would the writer use such an awkward analogy about Pandas unless it was a message.
     
    Well, sans context, it has value as humor. Pandas are sacred to leftist mopes (e.g., Seth Rich chose one as his totem), and killing them is sacrilege. There's always humor to be had from that stuff, from a variety of angles.

    Okay, I read the quote, there's nothing there that's even remotely persuasive to anyone but Konspiracy Kooks. The point of using a Panda is precisely as I laid out above; they're extremely cute, they're harmless mopes, and they're endangered, so leftists have fetishized them. They were being used to illustrate the risks Hillary faced in playing hardball with Bernie.

    Joe Hoft should go back on his meds.

    Ohhhhhhh, I get it now. It wasn’t a message to shoot Seth Rich… it was only a message to shoot Bernie.

    How stupid of me and Joe Hoft for thinking that it was something sinister. ;)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Junior
    Oops, meant to say Jim Hoft not Joe Hoft in that post.

    Where are those Deep State operatives changing posts when you need them. ;)

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Junior says:

    Deep State operatives are in full cover up mode when it comes to the murder of Seth Rich and they will stop at nothing as evidence mounts.

    Remarkably it has been discovered by members of the online community that posts Seth Rich made on Reddit before his death have been altered and 663 comments from the thread have been deleted.

    https://www.intellihub.com/seth-richs-original-reddit-posts-altered-663-comments-deleted/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  122. Junior says:
    @Junior
    Ohhhhhhh, I get it now. It wasn't a message to shoot Seth Rich... it was only a message to shoot Bernie.

    How stupid of me and Joe Hoft for thinking that it was something sinister. ;)

    Oops, meant to say Jim Hoft not Joe Hoft in that post.

    Where are those Deep State operatives changing posts when you need them. ;)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Junior says:

    Check out how the MSM-Deep-State-Shills squirm when this Congressman brings up the fact that the DNC Servers were never even looked at by the FBI to determine whether it was a hack or a leak, as Wikileaks said it was. The truth is coming out and they are in panic mode.

    LMAO!!!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    It was interesting watching the shills try to funnel him into their script with their questions.
    , @Corvinus
    Old news. It is common for initial computer forensic analysis to be examined by third party firms in these circumstances. Once the data has been retrieved, copied, and handed over to law enforcement (in this case the FBI), there is no need for law enforcement to "go back". It is part of a long-standing division of labor between private firms and the police/Feds. They coordinate their efforts in the way to avoid potential legal questions involving privacy laws. An incident response company was called in (CrowdStrike, a reputable firm used by both political parties) to determine breaches of security for the entire network and then turns over their findings to the police/Feds. Assuming that CrowdStrike was pressured by the DNC to misrepresent the information obtained, the police or FBI has the digital capacity to check their findings against the data directly culled from the network. Now, there have been legitimate criticisms of the FBI's work in interpreting and/or reporting this data, but these failings have nothing to do with the initial examination of the DNC server since a reputable third party company was called in to conduct an investigation. Again, this process is routine.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. res says:
    @Junior
    Check out how the MSM-Deep-State-Shills squirm when this Congressman brings up the fact that the DNC Servers were never even looked at by the FBI to determine whether it was a hack or a leak, as Wikileaks said it was. The truth is coming out and they are in panic mode.

    LMAO!!!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDKeyIT6Oc0

    It was interesting watching the shills try to funnel him into their script with their questions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Junior
    The Deep State shills at CNN also just put a video out from CNNMoney on Seth Rich in which they're trying to brainwash the masses into their script. The comment section is HILARIOUS. There is not one positive comment in the whole thing and some of the posts got more upvotes than the actual video did. It has 149 thumbs up and 3,266 thumbs down. LMAO! Good to see that so many are awake and not buying their BS anymore.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZL3PbzVV4

    The news station One America News(OAN) put out a GREAT report on Seth Rich also that I posted below for anyone that hasn't seen it. Good to know that there's at least one news station on television that has some semblance of integrity left and OAN has shown that it has it in spades with this report.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OomLn6gut7E
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Junior says:
    @res
    It was interesting watching the shills try to funnel him into their script with their questions.

    The Deep State shills at CNN also just put a video out from CNNMoney on Seth Rich in which they’re trying to brainwash the masses into their script. The comment section is HILARIOUS. There is not one positive comment in the whole thing and some of the posts got more upvotes than the actual video did. It has 149 thumbs up and 3,266 thumbs down. LMAO! Good to see that so many are awake and not buying their BS anymore.

    The news station One America News(OAN) put out a GREAT report on Seth Rich also that I posted below for anyone that hasn’t seen it. Good to know that there’s at least one news station on television that has some semblance of integrity left and OAN has shown that it has it in spades with this report.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    This OAN video is super. Thanks for finding it, Junior!

    One might be a little curious where Herring Networks, Inc. gets its funding, but I could care less. It's a much needed antidote to the prevailing Russia-bashing nonsense. I hope OAN News gets more exposure (even though there's always the possibility they're just another arm of the ubiquitous Deep State, a conservative version of the limited hangout so familiar on the left, like DN! - Imperialism Now).

    The Useful Idiots will be out in force this week (as they have been since the Giant Pussy March). The June 3rd "March for Truth" - a big one in DC and many others all around the country - states as its purpose,

    DEMONSTRATIONS TO CALL FOR URGENT INVESTIGATIONS INTO RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE US ELECTION AND TIES TO DONALD TRUMP, HIS ADMINISTRATION AND HIS ASSOCIATES
    https://www.marchfortruth.info/
     
    I'd love to see counter-demonstrators...

    WHO KILLED
    SETH RICH
    AND WHY ?
     
    Hopefully this wouldn't become as violent as Antifa vs. BasedStickman, but a good confrontation is in order. Why aren't they (the Lib-Dem-Progs) criticizing Trump for his real crimes, the illegal and unconstitutional attacks on the sovereign gov't of Syria, and the huge sale of weapons which will likely find their way to terrorists! They hate Trump, but they love war. They just wanted their Big Vagina commanding the mayhem.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. RobinG says:
    @Junior
    The Deep State shills at CNN also just put a video out from CNNMoney on Seth Rich in which they're trying to brainwash the masses into their script. The comment section is HILARIOUS. There is not one positive comment in the whole thing and some of the posts got more upvotes than the actual video did. It has 149 thumbs up and 3,266 thumbs down. LMAO! Good to see that so many are awake and not buying their BS anymore.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZL3PbzVV4

    The news station One America News(OAN) put out a GREAT report on Seth Rich also that I posted below for anyone that hasn't seen it. Good to know that there's at least one news station on television that has some semblance of integrity left and OAN has shown that it has it in spades with this report.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OomLn6gut7E

    This OAN video is super. Thanks for finding it, Junior!

    One might be a little curious where Herring Networks, Inc. gets its funding, but I could care less. It’s a much needed antidote to the prevailing Russia-bashing nonsense. I hope OAN News gets more exposure (even though there’s always the possibility they’re just another arm of the ubiquitous Deep State, a conservative version of the limited hangout so familiar on the left, like DN! – Imperialism Now).

    The Useful Idiots will be out in force this week (as they have been since the Giant Pussy March). The June 3rd “March for Truth” – a big one in DC and many others all around the country – states as its purpose,

    DEMONSTRATIONS TO CALL FOR URGENT INVESTIGATIONS INTO RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE US ELECTION AND TIES TO DONALD TRUMP, HIS ADMINISTRATION AND HIS ASSOCIATES

    https://www.marchfortruth.info/

    I’d love to see counter-demonstrators…

    WHO KILLED
    SETH RICH
    AND WHY ?

    Hopefully this wouldn’t become as violent as Antifa vs. BasedStickman, but a good confrontation is in order. Why aren’t they (the Lib-Dem-Progs) criticizing Trump for his real crimes, the illegal and unconstitutional attacks on the sovereign gov’t of Syria, and the huge sale of weapons which will likely find their way to terrorists! They hate Trump, but they love war. They just wanted their Big Vagina commanding the mayhem.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JackOH
    Thanks, RobinG, Junior, and other commenters here. Looks like we are, in fact, getting the Russian hack theory hosepiped into our brains by the media, government interests, Democrat partisan and factional interests, gullible Americans, the whole mess. This, despite the Seth Rich leak theory seeming to this casual reader to have at least met the same bar of plausibility. I sure as hell hope something can be done before the political and policy implications of all this become hardened.

    We're in pretty serious trouble when the Democrats seem to have found a scandalous way of delegitimizing the election results. The corporations and the bureaucrats will do the actual governance in the meantime, and will likely accrue more unchecked and uncheckable power. We're in a real mess.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    CrossTalk: ‘Seth Rich’

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  128. JackOH says:
    @RobinG
    This OAN video is super. Thanks for finding it, Junior!

    One might be a little curious where Herring Networks, Inc. gets its funding, but I could care less. It's a much needed antidote to the prevailing Russia-bashing nonsense. I hope OAN News gets more exposure (even though there's always the possibility they're just another arm of the ubiquitous Deep State, a conservative version of the limited hangout so familiar on the left, like DN! - Imperialism Now).

    The Useful Idiots will be out in force this week (as they have been since the Giant Pussy March). The June 3rd "March for Truth" - a big one in DC and many others all around the country - states as its purpose,

    DEMONSTRATIONS TO CALL FOR URGENT INVESTIGATIONS INTO RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE US ELECTION AND TIES TO DONALD TRUMP, HIS ADMINISTRATION AND HIS ASSOCIATES
    https://www.marchfortruth.info/
     
    I'd love to see counter-demonstrators...

    WHO KILLED
    SETH RICH
    AND WHY ?
     
    Hopefully this wouldn't become as violent as Antifa vs. BasedStickman, but a good confrontation is in order. Why aren't they (the Lib-Dem-Progs) criticizing Trump for his real crimes, the illegal and unconstitutional attacks on the sovereign gov't of Syria, and the huge sale of weapons which will likely find their way to terrorists! They hate Trump, but they love war. They just wanted their Big Vagina commanding the mayhem.

    Thanks, RobinG, Junior, and other commenters here. Looks like we are, in fact, getting the Russian hack theory hosepiped into our brains by the media, government interests, Democrat partisan and factional interests, gullible Americans, the whole mess. This, despite the Seth Rich leak theory seeming to this casual reader to have at least met the same bar of plausibility. I sure as hell hope something can be done before the political and policy implications of all this become hardened.

    We’re in pretty serious trouble when the Democrats seem to have found a scandalous way of delegitimizing the election results. The corporations and the bureaucrats will do the actual governance in the meantime, and will likely accrue more unchecked and uncheckable power. We’re in a real mess.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Corvinus says:
    @Junior
    Check out how the MSM-Deep-State-Shills squirm when this Congressman brings up the fact that the DNC Servers were never even looked at by the FBI to determine whether it was a hack or a leak, as Wikileaks said it was. The truth is coming out and they are in panic mode.

    LMAO!!!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDKeyIT6Oc0

    Old news. It is common for initial computer forensic analysis to be examined by third party firms in these circumstances. Once the data has been retrieved, copied, and handed over to law enforcement (in this case the FBI), there is no need for law enforcement to “go back”. It is part of a long-standing division of labor between private firms and the police/Feds. They coordinate their efforts in the way to avoid potential legal questions involving privacy laws. An incident response company was called in (CrowdStrike, a reputable firm used by both political parties) to determine breaches of security for the entire network and then turns over their findings to the police/Feds. Assuming that CrowdStrike was pressured by the DNC to misrepresent the information obtained, the police or FBI has the digital capacity to check their findings against the data directly culled from the network. Now, there have been legitimate criticisms of the FBI’s work in interpreting and/or reporting this data, but these failings have nothing to do with the initial examination of the DNC server since a reputable third party company was called in to conduct an investigation. Again, this process is routine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Junior

    CrowdStrike, a reputable firm used by both political parties
     
    But IS Crowdstrike a reputable firm? Their recent retraction of the Ukrainian report seems to point to them not being one. I agree with the author of the article I've posted below when he says, "Congress needs to launch an investigation into CrowdStrike's relationship with the deep state and the Democratic party."

    http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=56499

    Washington's Blog also wrote an interesting article that looks into CrowdStrike and he brings up what you bring up about there being a way to check their findings against data directly culled from the network.

    With this in mind, Comey could have and should have simply phoned the NSA and received all the information he needed, chose not to. The question is why? Comey could have asked any of over 2000 analysts to look into it. Why didn’t the Director of the domestic CIA request information?

    “According to William Binney (former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA), the NSA’s “extensive domestic data-collection network,” any data removed remotely from Hillary Clinton or DNC servers would have passed over fiber networks and therefore would have been captured by the NSA who could have then analyzed packet data to determine the origination point and destination address of those packets.”

    After spending time in the election spotlight this year the only way FBI Director James Comey could not know any information about the alleged hack is that he didn’t want to.

     

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/01/crowdstrikes-russian-hacking-story-fell-apart-2-dni-report-faked-sources.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Sowhat says:

    The wealthy elite get taxed? Surely, you jest. I might recommend, if I am permitted, reading the Gods of Money by F. William Engdahl (amazn). He spent 30 years doing the research for this and other copiously footnoted books that chronicle the rise of the Rothschild/Morgan/Rockefeller/U.S. Government/MIIC Establishments and their control down through the decades. He takes the reader through the Wars and explains the WHY’S behind events that need an explanation, showing how the Gods of Money controlled our Federal Government Completely and how they eliminated those that didn’t comply. Once read, one will understand the enormity of their omnipotent and omniscient hegemony and also realize that our government does what THEY (the real power brokers) want to do and nothing short of a organized 10 million person march on D.C. that can’t be ignored by the press will change much. Even that probably won’t change things. The Mussolini Fascist, big-business and big-government in bed with one another (when they’re not looking for little boys) Coup took place in the early 1900′s and so our “Democracy” and all of the propaganda vomited by the MSM are but a facade. Anyone suggesting that “we” (the people) should do this or do that may not have a full understanding of what Real Power is. Suggestions about taxing the Power are misguided, IMO

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  131. Junior says:
    @Corvinus
    Old news. It is common for initial computer forensic analysis to be examined by third party firms in these circumstances. Once the data has been retrieved, copied, and handed over to law enforcement (in this case the FBI), there is no need for law enforcement to "go back". It is part of a long-standing division of labor between private firms and the police/Feds. They coordinate their efforts in the way to avoid potential legal questions involving privacy laws. An incident response company was called in (CrowdStrike, a reputable firm used by both political parties) to determine breaches of security for the entire network and then turns over their findings to the police/Feds. Assuming that CrowdStrike was pressured by the DNC to misrepresent the information obtained, the police or FBI has the digital capacity to check their findings against the data directly culled from the network. Now, there have been legitimate criticisms of the FBI's work in interpreting and/or reporting this data, but these failings have nothing to do with the initial examination of the DNC server since a reputable third party company was called in to conduct an investigation. Again, this process is routine.

    CrowdStrike, a reputable firm used by both political parties

    But IS Crowdstrike a reputable firm? Their recent retraction of the Ukrainian report seems to point to them not being one. I agree with the author of the article I’ve posted below when he says, “Congress needs to launch an investigation into CrowdStrike’s relationship with the deep state and the Democratic party.”

    http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=56499

    Washington’s Blog also wrote an interesting article that looks into CrowdStrike and he brings up what you bring up about there being a way to check their findings against data directly culled from the network.

    With this in mind, Comey could have and should have simply phoned the NSA and received all the information he needed, chose not to. The question is why? Comey could have asked any of over 2000 analysts to look into it. Why didn’t the Director of the domestic CIA request information?

    “According to William Binney (former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA), the NSA’s “extensive domestic data-collection network,” any data removed remotely from Hillary Clinton or DNC servers would have passed over fiber networks and therefore would have been captured by the NSA who could have then analyzed packet data to determine the origination point and destination address of those packets.”

    After spending time in the election spotlight this year the only way FBI Director James Comey could not know any information about the alleged hack is that he didn’t want to.

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/01/crowdstrikes-russian-hacking-story-fell-apart-2-dni-report-faked-sources.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    You are offering here a red herring. How does CrowdStrike's retraction of allegations of Russian hackers tampering with Ukranian artillery translate to a retraction of allegations of Russia interfering with the presidential election or with Trump's backdoor business dealings with Putin? It may indicate they are not fully accurate, but it does not mean their allegations on US elections are false by extension.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Corvinus says:
    @Junior

    CrowdStrike, a reputable firm used by both political parties
     
    But IS Crowdstrike a reputable firm? Their recent retraction of the Ukrainian report seems to point to them not being one. I agree with the author of the article I've posted below when he says, "Congress needs to launch an investigation into CrowdStrike's relationship with the deep state and the Democratic party."

    http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=56499

    Washington's Blog also wrote an interesting article that looks into CrowdStrike and he brings up what you bring up about there being a way to check their findings against data directly culled from the network.

    With this in mind, Comey could have and should have simply phoned the NSA and received all the information he needed, chose not to. The question is why? Comey could have asked any of over 2000 analysts to look into it. Why didn’t the Director of the domestic CIA request information?

    “According to William Binney (former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA), the NSA’s “extensive domestic data-collection network,” any data removed remotely from Hillary Clinton or DNC servers would have passed over fiber networks and therefore would have been captured by the NSA who could have then analyzed packet data to determine the origination point and destination address of those packets.”

    After spending time in the election spotlight this year the only way FBI Director James Comey could not know any information about the alleged hack is that he didn’t want to.

     

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/01/crowdstrikes-russian-hacking-story-fell-apart-2-dni-report-faked-sources.html

    You are offering here a red herring. How does CrowdStrike’s retraction of allegations of Russian hackers tampering with Ukranian artillery translate to a retraction of allegations of Russia interfering with the presidential election or with Trump’s backdoor business dealings with Putin? It may indicate they are not fully accurate, but it does not mean their allegations on US elections are false by extension.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. @Bill Jones
    There was ample evidence of the Pentagon crash. Many local businesses had videos.
    It was all stolen by the FBI within a couple of hours and has never seen the light of day.

    It happened in new york as well. All footage was snatched as fast as possible, so people couldnt analyze it and see we have been lied to.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Dahlia says:

    Transcript excerpt of audio of Seymour Hersh saying Seth Rich was the DNC leaker, obtained by Cassandra Fairbanks. What he knows and how. He proffers that the Russia collusion-Trump story is a Brennan op fed to reporters who are very dependent on sources and said reporters actually believe what they get told.
    Fairbanks also obtained audio of the detective and says there is more to come.

    The Washington field office is a hot shit unit. The guy running the Washington field office he’s like, he’s like, you know, he’s like a three star at an army base he’s already looking for four, you know what I mean? He’s gonna go in a top job. There’s a cyber unit there that’s excellent, given. What you get in a warrant is, the public information you get in a warrant doesn’t include, uh, it does not include the affidavit underlying what, why you are you going in, what the reasons are that.. That’s almost never available, um, I, I can tell you that the existence of a warrant is a public document 99% of the time. So, um, on the same warrant, they call in the feds. The feds get through, and this is what they find. This is according to the FBI report. What they find is he makes cont- first of all this is what you have to know, you have to know some basic facts, one of the basic factors, in that there’s no DNC or Podesta emails that exist beyond May 22nd. May 21st, May 22nd is the last email from either one of those groups. And so what the reports says is that sometime in late spring, we’re talking June you know summers in June 21st, late spring would be after, I presume, I don’t know, I’d just say late spring, early summer and he makes contact with Wikileaks. That’s in his computer and he makes contact.

    Now, I have to be careful because I, I’ve know, I, met Julian 10 or 12 years (ago?) I stay the fuck away from people like that, you know. He’s invited me, and when I’m in London I always get a message “Come see me at the Ecuadorian” but I say fuck no I’m not going there I’ve got enough trouble without getting photographed. And he’s under total surveillance by everybody but anyways. So, they found what he’d done. He had submitted a series of documents, of emails. Some juicy emails from the DNC, and you know, by the way all this shit about the DNC, um, you know, whether it was hacked or wasn’t hacked, whatever happened, the democrats themselves wrote this shit, you know what I mean? All I know is that he (Seth) offered a sample, an extensive sample, you know I’m sure dozens of email and said “I want money”. Then later Wikileaks did get the password, he had a Dropbox, a protected Dropbox, which isn’t hard to do, I mean you don’t have to be a wizard IT, you know, he was certainly not a dumb kid. They got access to the Dropbox. He also, and this is also in the FBI report, he also let people know, with whom he was dealing, and I don’t know how he dealt, I’ll tell you about Wikileaks in a second. I don’t know how he dealt with the Wikileaks and the mechanism but he also, the word was passed according to the NSA report, “I’ve also shared this box with a couple of friends so if anything happens to me it’s not going to solve your problem”. Ok. I don’t know what that means.

    I don’t know whether you- Anyways, Wikileaks got access, and before he was killed- I can tell you right now Brennan is an asshole. Uh, I’ve known all these people for years. Clapper is sort of a better guy but not rocket scientist, the NSA guy’s a fucking moron, and they don’t- you know the trouble with all of those guys is that the only way they’re going to make it to a board or two and get hired by (?) and get some fat cat contracts is if Hillary stayed in. With Trump they’re gone, they’re done, they’re going to live on their pension, they’re not going to make it. And I gotta tell you guys, they don’t want to live on their pension, they want to be on boards (?).

    I have somebody on the inside, you know I’ve been around a long time, and I write a lot of stuff. I have somebody on the inside who will go and read a file for me. This person is unbelievably accurate and careful, he’s a very high-level guy and he’ll do a favor. You’re just going to have to trust me. I have what they call in my business a long-form journalism, I have a narrative of how that whole fucking thing began, it’s a Brennan operation, it was an American disinformation and fucking the fucking President, at one point when they, they even started telling the press, they were back briefing the press, the head of the NSA was going and telling the press, fucking cock-sucker Rogers, was telling the press that we even know who in the GRU, the Russian Military Intelligence Service, who leaked it. I mean all bullshit. They were telling the studp- I worked at the New York Times for fucking years, and the trouble with the fucking New York Times is they have smart guys, but they’re totally beholden on sources. If the president or the head of the (???) to actually believe it. I was actually hired at the time to write, to go after the war in Vietnam War in 72 because they were just locked in. So that’s what the Times did. These guys run the fucking Times, and Trump’s not wrong. But I mean I wish he would calm down and had a better a better press secretary, I mean you don’t have to be so. Trump’s not wrong to think they all fucking lie about him. I can tell you right n….

    https://amp.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/6r2dpf/rough_transcript_seymour_hersh_on_seth_rich/

    https://mobile.twitter.com/CassandraRules/status/892506220678066176

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation