Brazile sheds some light on the Seth Rich Murder

[Raoul_Luke]

Like their broadcast license?

Admitting the Russians probably did hack the DNC and other systems is hardly helping his standing. He'd do better to follow your lead and discredit the information....but he can't.

Sure it is. When he says "I think the Russians hacked the election but not in collusion with my campaign" he makes it supremely difficult for you fake news hounds to claim he's up to his eyeballs in cahoots with the Russians. Am I moving to fast for ya boy? Because you seem to be havin trouble keeping up...

 

[georgephillip]

I have no idea what point you are trying to make here. All I can see is an example of good economic policies, when coupled with bad currency policies, not being destined to produce economic prosperity. And I'm not sure you are getting good information here, as you'll have to show the work behind the suggestion that we have experienced "cutbacks in social services

"Trump’s HUD budget cuts 42-year-old community assistance program..."

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/16/trumps-hud-budget-cuts-42-year-old-community-assistance-program.html

"Republicans and Democrats alike have cut ribbons at community centers, neighborhood rehabilitation projects and affordable housing developments — and for the past 42 years those initiatives have been supported by the Community Development Block Grant Program.

"Now, President Donald Trump wants to wipe out the program, according to the budget proposal released Thursday (3/2017) by the Office of Management and Budget.

"The program's current year funding is $3 billion.

"'The Federal Government has spent over $150 billion on this block grant since its inception in 1974, but the program is not well-targeted to the poorest populations and has not demonstrated results,' the budget proposal says.

"'The Budget devolves community and economic development activities to the State and local level, and redirects Federal resources to other activities.'"
Like tax cuts for billionaires and more money to murder poor Muslims in the Middle East?

 

[middleview]

Sure it is. When he says "I think the Russians hacked the election but not in collusion with my campaign" he makes it supremely difficult for you fake news hounds to claim he's up to his eyeballs in cahoots with the Russians. Am I moving to fast for ya boy? Because you seem to be havin trouble keeping up...

Bullshit....So he made that admission and there is still an investigation going on and it seems like every couple of days something new comes out pinning him and his cronies to at least a knowledge of the source of the DNC emails....

 

[Raoul_Luke]

For one thing it would help if you kept in mind there was more than one round of sanctions against Russia. Early on there was the Magnitsky bill. That was in 2010 when we still had hopes of improving relations.

https://www.snopes.com/hillary-bill-clinton-russia-sanctions-speech/

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/trump-may-lift-russia-sanctions-to-give-cooperation-a-chance.html

"Unproven" isn't the same as "untrue." You do know that right? And for someone who puts down ZeroHedge to turn around and cite nymag.com is delicious irony. So, then, like why don't we still have hopes of "improving relations?" It can't be the fake "human rights" argument used to justify the Magnetsky Act, when we know that the Obama Administration had no problem making deals with tyrants:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-glaser/why-obama-supports-tyrann_b_3540864.html

Obama was telling Medvedev he could "be more flexible after the election" at the every time the Congress was drafting the Magnitsky bill. There's way more to this than meets the eye. I don't have all the facts and neither do you. But it's clear that there was one thing that this BS wasn't important enough to stop - the Uranium One deal.

 

[middleview]

"Unproven" isn't the same as "untrue." You do know that right? And for someone who puts down ZeroHedge to turn around and cite nymag.com is delicious irony. So, then, like why don't we still have hopes of "improving relations?" It can't be the fake "human rights" argument used to justify the Magnetsky Act, when we know that the Obama Administration had no problem making deals with tyrants:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-glaser/why-obama-supports-tyrann_b_3540864.html

Obama was telling Medvedev he could "be more flexible after the election" at the every time the Congress was drafting the Magnitsky bill. There's way more to this than meets the eye. I don't have all the facts and neither do you. But it's clear that there was one thing that this BS wasn't important enough to stop - the Uranium One deal.

You seem to miss that it was congress that pushed the Magnitsky legislation.

Did you read the NYMAG article? For one thing the author used his own name. For another the sources were clearly identified...Gorka was a White House appointee.

PS...Presidents make deals with tyrants all the time. Trump just made one with the dictatorship running Chyna....

 

[middleview]

She describes the "rigging" and then says there's "no evidence" it was rigged. Clinton controlled the DNC throughout the primaries, including the purse strings. The idea that she didn't use that control to sew up all the "super delegates" which gave her the nomination is beyond laughable. Elizabeth Warren said it was rigged and then walked it back. The Clinton's still control much of the party apparatus. The pressure on these Democrats to back off the "rigged primary" meme is probably unfathomable...

Hillary won by a much larger margin than the super delegates.

DNC purse strings did not change financing for Sander's campaign. The DNC was dependent on the Clinton campaign for cash...they had no money to give. Why is that so hard for you to understand.

To me rigging means that resources that Sander's would normally have thought available to him were not....but my knowledge of insider politics is that the two parties do not get involved in the primaries for fear of pissing off the winner.

Did the RNC attempt to get anyone into the top spot other than Trump? Probably. Did it qualify as attempting to rig the primary?

 

[Raoul_Luke]

You seem to miss that it was congress that pushed the Magnitsky legislation.

Did you read the NYMAG article? For one thing the author used his own name. For another the sources were clearly identified...Gorka was a White House appointee.

PS...Presidents make deals with tyrants all the time. Trump just made one with the dictatorship running Chyna....

Wait, what? You were the one saying Putin hated Obama (and ostensibly Clinton) for imposing (and supporting) those "sanctions." And now you want to pretend it was all Congress? Which, by the way, I clearly stated in my post (that you quoted) that it was being drafted by congress, so in the real world, I didn't actually "miss that its was congress that pushed the Magnitsky legislation." ZeroHedge clearly cites their sources as well. It's merely a few of the "reporters" who go by a pseudonym, because they work in the banking industry and frequently post pieces critical of the guys they work for.

 

[middleview]

Wait, what? You were the one saying Putin hated Obama (and ostensibly Clinton) for imposing (and supporting) those "sanctions." And now you want to pretend it was all Congress? Which, by the way, I clearly stated in my post (that you quoted) that it was being drafted by congress, so in the real world, I didn't actually "miss that its was congress that pushed the Magnitsky legislation." ZeroHedge clearly cites their sources as well. It's merely a few of the "reporters" who go by a pseudonym, because they work in the banking industry and frequently post pieces critical of the guys they work for.

As I already pointed out there have been more than one round of sanctions. The ones related to Crimea and Russian involvement in the violence in Eastern Ukraine are the ones that Obama and Clinton supported...having given up on anything improving with Putin in charge.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Hillary won by a much larger margin than the super delegates.

DNC purse strings did not change financing for Sander's campaign. The DNC was dependent on the Clinton campaign for cash...they had no money to give. Why is that so hard for you to understand.

To me rigging means that resources that Sander's would normally have thought available to him were not....but my knowledge of insider politics is that the two parties do not get involved in the primaries for fear of pissing off the winner.

Did the RNC attempt to get anyone into the top spot other than Trump? Probably. Did it qualify as attempting to rig the primary?

Yes, both parties tried to keep the non-establishment candidate from winning, but the DNC is the only one that succeeded. Which caused quite a bit of discord within the party apparatus. Perhaps you heard about it, someone wrote a book detailing it. And as I keep telling you, the disgruntled Bernie supporters had a much more visceral motive for tipping the general election away from Hillary than the Russians did. Which is what lends supreme credence to Assange's longstanding claim that that is precisely who it was that hacked the emails and gave them to him.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

As I already pointed out there have been more than one round of sanctions. The ones related to Crimea and Russian involvement in the violence in Eastern Ukraine are the ones that Obama and Clinton supported...having given up on anything improving with Putin in charge.

Yes, how dare Putin challenge Obama's puppet regime in Kiev?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/30/russia-ukraine-war-kiev-conflict

If Russia had meddled in an election in Mexico to install a leader that was his puppet, how do you think the US would respond?

 

[middleview]

Yes, both parties tried to keep the non-establishment candidate from winning, but the DNC is the only one that succeeded. Which caused quite a bit of discord within the party apparatus. Perhaps you heard about it, someone wrote a book detailing it. And as I keep telling you, the disgruntled Bernie supporters had a much more visceral motive for tipping the general election away from Hillary than the Russians did. Which is what lends supreme credence to Assange's longstanding claim that that is precisely who it was that hacked the emails and gave them to him.

Funny...You think Assange and Tyler Durden are credible sources of information...because the crap they put out reinforces what you already believe.

I don't care that Hillary won the primary. I wouldn't have voted for either Sanders or Clinton.

I ask for details about how the primary was rigged and nobody has any realistic explanation as to how votes magically went from Bernie to Hillary.
Your thought that it was the super delegates loses out because the margin of regular delegates was so great....the super delegates by themselves suck...but that is another issue.

If Russia was Assange's source it stands to reason he'd do all he could to make people think it was Seth Rich...a dead guy who can't deny it. Assange hinted that Rich was the source by putting up $25k to find the killer...but he didn't come out and tell us that, did he.

 

[middleview]

Yes, how dare Putin challenge Obama's puppet regime in Kiev?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/30/russia-ukraine-war-kiev-conflict

If Russia had meddled in an election in Mexico to install a leader that was his puppet, how do you think the US would respond?

And how dare Obama to help undermine Putin's puppet in Kiev....

Do some freakin' research. How many hundreds of thousands of people showed up in the streets to protest against the pro-Moscow leadership? Do you actually think the US paid a few hundred thousand people to participate in those marches?

 

[Raoul_Luke]

And how dare Obama to help undermine Putin's puppet in Kiev....

Do some freakin' research. How many hundreds of thousands of people showed up in the streets to protest against the pro-Moscow leadership? Do you actually think the US paid a few hundred thousand people to participate in those marches?

Hundreds of thousands? No, but that doesn't mean the "revolution" wasn't funded by an outsider:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-20/leaked-memo-proves-soros-ruled-ukraine-2014-minutes-“breakfast-us-ambassador-pyatt”

Paying protestors to riot is Soros's SOP.

 

[middleview]

Hundreds of thousands? No, but that doesn't mean the "revolution" wasn't funded by an outsider:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-20/leaked-memo-proves-soros-ruled-ukraine-2014-minutes-“breakfast-us-ambassador-pyatt”

Paying protestors to riot is Soros's SOP.

For Soros to help the Ukraine doesn't seem all that evil to me. Imagine if there had been someone like him working to undermine dictatorships in the 1930s....

As yet I've seen no evidence that Soros has paid people to riot and every time someone comes up with something it turns out to be bullshit.

These people had had enough of the pro-Putin government

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Funny...You think Assange and Tyler Durden are credible sources of information...because the crap they put out reinforces what you already believe.

I don't care that Hillary won the primary. I wouldn't have voted for either Sanders or Clinton.

I ask for details about how the primary was rigged and nobody has any realistic explanation as to how votes magically went from Bernie to Hillary.
Your thought that it was the super delegates loses out because the margin of regular delegates was so great....the super delegates by themselves suck...but that is another issue.

If Russia was Assange's source it stands to reason he'd do all he could to make people think it was Seth Rich...a dead guy who can't deny it. Assange hinted that Rich was the source by putting up $25k to find the killer...but he didn't come out and tell us that, did he.

I think independent sources are generally more honest than the bureaucrats you fall in lockstep with. The primary was rigged because the DNC was a wholly owned subsidiary of the Clinton campaign. Brazille didn't have to "leak" the debate questions to Hillary because she probably WROTE them. The super delegates committing to her early are what gave Hillary the air of inevitability, and took the wind out of Bernie's sails. The final count is irrelevant because Bernie's supporters had given up. I never said Rich was the source of the emails. I just said it was likely someone with access to the DNC offices who hated Clinton for how she rail roaded Bernie. Or maybe for something else she did to someone else, who knows? Maybe Assange just put up the reward as a favor to the guy who was his source, after Hillary refused to do it.

Hell, come on man! Brazille has said she feared for her life after Seth's murder and now Joe Biden is hinting he didn't run because of what he feared the Clinton machine would do to his (fragile at the time) family. These aren't conspiracy theorists saying this stuff - it's establishment Democrats. That's the kind of malevolence that causes well placed and well trained deep state spooks to take matters into their own hands. The more that comes out about this deep dark schism cleaved into the Democratic Party by the Clinton campaign, the more these email hacks look like an inside job. Seriously, if Assange got the emails from the Russians, he wouldn't have known it because they aren't dumb enough to pull up in front of the Ecuadorian embassy in a Kortezh and toss him a messenger bag emblazoned with a Russian flag. He wouldn't ever be in a position to cover for Putin because Putin isn't that stupid. Besides, the last thing Assange would do is cover for any government. That's who he is in the business of f*cking over. And if it was just some run of the mill anonymous hacker (or someone set up to appear as such) he'd have likely said so. My guess is he's telling the truth. And the more we learn about the whole Russian "meddling" meme, the less it seems plausible. In fact, the more we learn about this stuff the more it looks like the one "colluding" with the Russians was Hillary:

http://nypost.com/2017/11/07/firm-behind-trump-dossier-met-with-russian-lawyer-involved-in-trump-jr-meeting/

I know it gets your panties in a wad, but the only evidence that is "stacking up" is that Hillary was acting like a psychopathic megalomanic who would bludgeon 1000 grannies (and their little dogs, too) if it would have gotten her into the Oval Office...

 

[middleview]

I think independent sources are generally more honest than the bureaucrats you fall in lockstep with. The primary was rigged because the DNC was a wholly owned subsidiary of the Clinton campaign. Brazille didn't have to "leak" the debate questions to Hillary because she probably WROTE them. The super delegates committing to her early are what gave Hillary the air of inevitability, and took the wind out of Bernie's sails. The final count is irrelevant because Bernie's supporters had given up. I never said Rich was the source of the emails. I just said it was likely someone with access to the DNC offices who hated Clinton for how she rail roaded Bernie. Or maybe for something else she did to someone else, who knows? Maybe Assange just put up the reward as a favor to the guy who was his source, after Hillary refused to do it.

Hell, come on man! Brazille has said she feared for her life after Seth's murder and now Joe Biden is hinting he didn't run because of what he feared the Clinton machine would do to his (fragile at the time) family. These aren't conspiracy theorists saying this stuff - it's establishment Democrats. That's the kind of malevolence that causes well placed and well trained deep state spooks to take matters into their own hands. The more that comes out about this deep dark schism cleaved into the Democratic Party by the Clinton campaign, the more these email hacks look like an inside job. Seriously, if Assange got the emails from the Russians, he wouldn't have known it because they aren't dumb enough to pull up in front of the Ecuadorian embassy in a Kortezh and toss him a messenger bag emblazoned with a Russian flag. He wouldn't ever be in a position to cover for Putin because Putin isn't that stupid. Besides, the last thing Assange would do is cover for any government. That's who he is in the business of f*cking over. And if it was just some run of the mill anonymous hacker (or someone set up to appear as such) he'd have likely said so. My guess is he's telling the truth. And the more we learn about the whole Russian "meddling" meme, the less it seems plausible. In fact, the more we learn about this stuff the more it looks like the one "colluding" with the Russians was Hillary:

http://nypost.com/2017/11/07/firm-behind-trump-dossier-met-with-russian-lawyer-involved-in-trump-jr-meeting/

I know it gets your panties in a wad, but the only evidence that is "stacking up" is that Hillary was acting like a psychopathic megalomanic who would bludgeon 1000 grannies (and their little dogs, too) if it would have gotten her into the Oval Office...

Wow....so the bottom line is the primary was rigged because you say so. You cannot cite a single action by the DNC that would have cost Bernie any votes.

I think it is highly likely that Assange doesn't actually know who the source is...but for him to put any faith in the information, he must have had a clue.

There are a number of scenarios that we may one day actually hear how the evidence plays out....Rich could simply have handed someone his logon and password....The idea that he would have known how to hack the email server seems unlikely to me...and I have been in IT since 1975 and have taught classes on operating system internals and system management....

You give Assange too much credit. He is hiding out to avoid standing trial for a sex crime, right?

It is dishonest of you to argue that Biden feared for his life...He clearly worried about the politics of personal destruction that we see in every campaign now....and if you think that is unique to Clinton you are blind.

Biden wrote in his book, “Promise Me, Dad,” that he was concerned about opposition research while dealing with the death of his son, Beau, and while his other son was in the process of getting a divorce.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Wow....so the bottom line is the primary was rigged because you say so. You cannot cite a single action by the DNC that would have cost Bernie any votes.

I think it is highly likely that Assange doesn't actually know who the source is...but for him to put any faith in the information, he must have had a clue.

There are a number of scenarios that we may one day actually hear how the evidence plays out....Rich could simply have handed someone his logon and password....The idea that he would have known how to hack the email server seems unlikely to me...and I have been in IT since 1975 and have taught classes on operating system internals and system management....

You give Assange too much credit. He is hiding out to avoid standing trial for a sex crime, right?

It is dishonest of you to argue that Biden feared for his life...He clearly worried about the politics of personal destruction that we see in every campaign now....and if you think that is unique to Clinton you are blind.

Biden wrote in his book, “Promise Me, Dad,” that he was concerned about opposition research while dealing with the death of his son, Beau, and while his other son was in the process of getting a divorce.

I'm not saying Bernie would have won if the DNC hadn't made its "deal with the devil" with Hillary Clinton, just that people felt the process wasn't fair. And maybe at least one of his "true believers" did think he would have. That's all it would take.

Now you sound like you buy the idea that Rich's murder may have been related to the hack, which is interesting. Yeah, maybe he was working with a deep state actor out to make sure Hillary Clinton never smelled the inside of the oval office - one who DID know how to hack the email server. And maybe that guy decided after the SHTF that he had to clean up loose ends. Maybe. Maybe not. It could have been someone else entirely, someone who worked in the IT department who had the login credentials and simply walked up to the server, put a Linux formatted USB stick in it and downloaded the email files and then walked it out the door. Or a US based hacker who didn't necessarily even have physical access to the building. But there is credible evidence that the hack was generated from an East Coast location, not Moscow. The "evidence" I've seen that points to Russia looks like a frame job to me (like the use of a US English MS Office Russian document template, some Russain IP addresses in their logs and the Russian equivalent of a gmail address). You aren't a stupid person (just extremely ideological) so I know you know that if the Russian government did this, there'd be exactly zero evidence that they were behind it.

So what I am almost 100% certain is that it wasn't a Russian, unless it was one working on behalf of a US based person or agency. Russia simply had no motive for trying to keep Hillary from winning. Your suggestion that Putin was quaking in his karate slippers from the Obama/Clinton geopolitical juggernaut (agh, I just threw up a little in my mouth) notwithstanding. The fact is that Putin did pretty much as he pleased while Obama and Clinton were running the show. They didn't even slow him down. You can't point to one thing he was trying to achieve that their policies prevented him from doing. That's a convenient (but baseless) meme the left is using to justify this "Russian collusion" witch hunt that is simply a seditious attempt to undermine a dully elected sitting President. I didn't vote for Trump, and I don't like very much of the policies he's put forward. But he won fair and square and I think it is borderline treasonous of the left to engage in this obviously fake jihad regarding Russia.

Oh, and I never said Biden feared for his life (it would help the process if you would read and respond to what I write) - I said he was afraid of what they would do to his family by dragging all their foibles out into the open. That can in many ways be even more enraging to someone than a perceived personal physical threat.

 

[middleview]

I'm not saying Bernie would have won if the DNC hadn't made its "deal with the devil" with Hillary Clinton, just that people felt the process wasn't fair. And maybe at least one of his "true believers" did think he would have. That's all it would take.

Now you sound like you buy the idea that Rich's murder may have been related to the hack, which is interesting. Yeah, maybe he was working with a deep state actor out to make sure Hillary Clinton never smelled the inside of the oval office - one who DID know how to hack the email server. And maybe that guy decided after the SHTF that he had to clean up loose ends. Maybe. Maybe not. It could have been someone else entirely, someone who worked in the IT department who had the login credentials and simply walked up to the server, put a Linux formatted USB stick in it and downloaded the email files and then walked it out the door. Or a US based hacker who didn't necessarily even have physical access to the building. But there is credible evidence that the hack was generated from an East Coast location, not Moscow. The "evidence" I've seen that points to Russia looks like a frame job to me (like the use of a US English MS Office Russian document template, some Russain IP addresses in their logs and the Russian equivalent of a gmail address). You aren't a stupid person (just extremely ideological) so I know you know that if the Russian government did this, there'd be exactly zero evidence that they were behind it.

So what I am almost 100% certain is that it wasn't a Russian, unless it was one working on behalf of a US based person or agency. Russia simply had no motive for trying to keep Hillary from winning. Your suggestion that Putin was quaking in his karate slippers from the Obama/Clinton geopolitical juggernaut (agh, I just threw up a little in my mouth) notwithstanding. The fact is that Putin did pretty much as he pleased while Obama and Clinton were running the show. They didn't even slow him down. You can't point to one thing he was trying to achieve that their policies prevented him from doing. That's a convenient (but baseless) meme the left is using to justify this "Russian collusion" witch hunt that is simply a seditious attempt to undermine a dully elected sitting President. I didn't vote for Trump, and I don't like very much of the policies he's put forward. But he won fair and square and I think it is borderline treasonous of the left to engage in this obviously fake jihad regarding Russia.

Oh, and I never said Biden feared for his life (it would help the process if you would read and respond to what I write) - I said he was afraid of what they would do to his family by dragging all their foibles out into the open. That can in many ways be even more enraging to someone than a perceived personal physical threat.

1. Never said I knew that his death wasn't related. I did say that it didn't look like a professional hit....Rich was shot in the back and was still alive when the police got there.

2. Could it possibly have been some other individual who either feared that Rich knew too much or someone who was looking to mislead investigators? Sure.

3. Is there any evidence that someone had physical access to the email server to use a thumbdrive to steal the entire email data file? Are you kidding? The current technology is against the idea that someone simply pulled the DAT file. More like they had a way to scout through looking for email to or from specific people. There are utilities that exist to let you do that....which means that the software on the email server would be a clue.

4. I have not read that IP addresses found in the email server log pointed at Moscow. More likely they pointed to intermediate machines....so there was a trail that ended up
in a system or in systems that the investigators had tracked and knew belonged to GRU or other groups.

5. I think you give the Russians too much credit. Some murders traced to them have been fairly clumsy...including the injection of a small metal ball filled with poison...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9949856/Prime-suspect-in-Georgi-Markov-umbrella-poison-murder-tracked-down-to-Austria.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/list-of-people-putin-is-suspected-of-assassinating-2016-3

6. The idea that it was a botched mugging is not all that implausible. Rich appeared to have fought with his attacker. His knuckles were bruised and he was shot in the back...making me think there were either two attackers or that he was knocked down and shot on the ground...From police accounts the responding police officers were on scene within a couple of minutes. If the mugger was simply looking for a score and the shooting was not planned....the nearly instantaneous sound of a nearby police siren would be a good reason to run.

5. The bullshit about Seth Rich being murdered in the hospital and it being covered up by the police and attending doctors and nurses is just too over the top.

I'm always amazed at just how outlandish the conspiracy theories get. The idea that a botched murder is then somehow reported to the top dog and then all of the necessary top police, hospital employees and doctors are contacted, paid off and the murder in the OR is organized is too nuts.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

1. Never said I knew that his death wasn't related. I did say that it didn't look like a professional hit....Rich was shot in the back and was still alive when the police got there.

2. Could it possibly have been some other individual who either feared that Rich knew too much or someone who was looking to mislead investigators? Sure.

3. Is there any evidence that someone had physical access to the email server to use a thumbdrive to steal the entire email data file? Are you kidding? The current technology is against the idea that someone simply pulled the DAT file. More like they had a way to scout through looking for email to or from specific people. There are utilities that exist to let you do that....which means that the software on the email server would be a clue.

4. I have not read that IP addresses found in the email server log pointed at Moscow. More likely they pointed to intermediate machines....so there was a trail that ended up
in a system or in systems that the investigators had tracked and knew belonged to GRU or other groups.

5. I think you give the Russians too much credit. Some murders traced to them have been fairly clumsy...including the injection of a small metal ball filled with poison...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9949856/Prime-suspect-in-Georgi-Markov-umbrella-poison-murder-tracked-down-to-Austria.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/list-of-people-putin-is-suspected-of-assassinating-2016-3

6. The idea that it was a botched mugging is not all that implausible. Rich appeared to have fought with his attacker. His knuckles were bruised and he was shot in the back...making me think there were either two attackers or that he was knocked down and shot on the ground...From police accounts the responding police officers were on scene within a couple of minutes. If the mugger was simply looking for a score and the shooting was not planned....the nearly instantaneous sound of a nearby police siren would be a good reason to run.

5. The bullshit about Seth Rich being murdered in the hospital and it being covered up by the police and attending doctors and nurses is just too over the top.

I'm always amazed at just how outlandish the conspiracy theories get. The idea that a botched murder is then somehow reported to the top dog and then all of the necessary top police, hospital employees and doctors are contacted, paid off and the murder in the OR is organized is too nuts.

I don't think it was a professional hit either. If he was involved in the leaked emails, and Assange's actions and statements lead me to lean in that direction, his death might just be a tragic coincidence. I think, however, that it is intriguing that no one claims to have possession of his computer. If the authorities have it, why do they claim otherwise? If they don't have it, who does? The parents? The girlfriend? If so, and the contents have no evidence of contact with Wikileaks, what would be their motive for keeping the thing under wraps? It sure looks like someone is hiding something.

Is there evidence that no one who had physical access to the server could have obtained the emails? How big was the data file? I don't know, do you? Isn't it just a set of text files with headers and time stamps? Why wouldn't someone just copy the whole thing and then search it later for the juicy stuff? Is that not possible? I'm not aware that there has been any disclosure that evidence of that search utility software was found on the server - are you?

I think it is supremely interesting, after the "conclusion" by the "intelligence community" that the Russians were trying to engineer the outcome of a US election, and the central part in that case this DNC email server represents, that the Feds STILL haven't obtained and examined that machine. Don't you find that incredible?

 

[middleview]

I don't think it was a professional hit either. If he was involved in the leaked emails, and Assange's actions and statements lead me to lean in that direction, his death might just be a tragic coincidence. I think, however, that it is intriguing that no one claims to have possession of his computer. If the authorities have it, why do they claim otherwise? If they don't have it, who does? The parents? The girlfriend? If so, and the contents have no evidence of contact with Wikileaks, what would be their motive for keeping the thing under wraps? It sure looks like someone is hiding something.

Is there evidence that no one who had physical access to the server could have obtained the emails? How big was the data file? I don't know, do you? Isn't it just a set of text files with headers and time stamps? Why wouldn't someone just copy the whole thing and then search it later for the juicy stuff? Is that not possible? I'm not aware that there has been any disclosure that evidence of that search utility software was found on the server - are you?

I think it is supremely interesting, after the "conclusion" by the "intelligence community" that the Russians were trying to engineer the outcome of a US election, and the central part in that case this DNC email server represents, that the Feds STILL haven't obtained and examined that machine. Don't you find that incredible?

If they are using Outlook the .PST file is probably limited to 2gb...I have four of those on my PC because I've filled them up over time and had to create new ones....and no, they are not collections of text files. You couldn't simply copy one and make much sense out of it, especially if they use encryption or compression.

As far as I know about the laptop, Wheeler claimed the FBI had it...the FBI said no and the DC police said it had been examined and returned to the family...I can't find a link to that story because there are a few billion hits if you search on Seth Rich and laptop.