Sorting Truth on Seth Rich Murder and Wikkileaks Source
UPDATE 7/10 - it now appears to be confirmed that the Guccifer 2.0 files were not the result of a hack. Rather someone with access to them took the files locally directly from the computers. This fits with the theory I floated that Guccifer 2.0 was actually a front for the DNC, not a front for Russia. See details on that below....
**************************
I have never seen the establishment close ranks so fast on a story as they have with the Seth Rich murder. Even though there are enough facts out there so that real journalists ought to be curious and ask questions as to whether the official story adds up, I don't see one iota of curiosity about it from the establishment media. Instead, they seem like they are in a frenzy to attack whoever raises questions about it.
Relations with Russia are deteriorating, and while we can feel sympathy for what the parents want to believe about their son, many more lives are potentially at stake and the moral thing to do is continue to seek the truth about this story. Right now the Russians are getting the blame, which they deny, and tensions are high. If they are innocent of this act and it really was Rich doing the leaking, some of that pressure for conflict can be released.
A major question in the investigation is whether or not Seth Rich was the source of Wikkileaks documents from the Democratic party which were damaging to Hillary Clinton in the closing days of the 2016 campaign. Specifically proof that DNC officials colluded to cheat Senator Bernie Sanders out of the nomination. Where did Wikkileaks get the data? The two leading theories are 1) Russian Hackers and 2) the worst stuff did not come from a hack at all but rather was a "leak" from a disgruntled insider.
The biggest support for theory #1 is that government spook (and proven liar) James Clapper testified before congress that all the Federal intelligence agencies agreed that the data came from a Russian hack. That version of events is repeated endlessly by the media. The biggest knock against the biggest support for theory #1 is that Federal intelligence agencies in general, and James Clapper in particular, are well-documented liars. Having already led us into a war with Iraq based on politically motivated faulty intelligence, we would have to be fools to take them solely on their word with a line of investigation which could take us into conflict with nuclear super-power Russia.
And yet, all they are offering us is their word and most of that anonymously. The intelligence agencies have provided no proof to back their assertions that the Wikkileaks information came from Russia. So what we have are the word of known liars. It is not like they have some super-secret evidence they can show to Congress but not us either. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher is about as conservative as the come, and he says even the Intelligence Agencies' report to them has no hard evidence to show the connection,
"I do not believe that the evidence at this time proves that the Russians are the ones who hacked the DNC. We have heard every report from the intelligence groups that are making their reports and they have weasel words in them, and they are based on opinion based on someone who is probably a strong liberal democrat,”
The strongest evidence against the Russians being the source- and thus Rich being the likely source, is that Assange himself steadfastly denied that his source was a state actor. Further, he strongly implied that Rich was the leaker and has offered a reward for information leading to the capture of the killer. So far as we know Assange has never lied to the American people. In addition a former British Ambassador, Craig Murray, said he went to Washington and picked up the leak documents and it was an inside leak and not a hack. A shadier character, a hacker from New Zealand named "Kim Dotcom" claims that he knows that Seth Rich was the Wikkileaks DNC leaker and that he helped him. That would explain how Rich, who was in the IT department for the DNC but would not normally have access to all of that leaked info in the course of his regular duties, gathered the emails.
The Rich family then attacked Dotcom and claimed that Dotcom tried to hack their dead son's email account, prompting Dotcom to issue a statement warning them against defamation. Dotcom has offered to provide his evidence "to the authorities" but since he is under indictment in the U.S. it is plausible to assume he is angling for those charges to be dropped in exchange. The joke is on him, no one in the ruling class on either side seems the least bit interested in even solving the murder.
That is the other bizarre thing. It seems like it would be very easy to catch the killer. Rich was conscious and talking when police got there. It seems like he could have told them something about who attacked him, yet the PD has not given us any hint of a description of an assailant. In addition, the police were wearing body cams. That footage seems to be missing. There were also cameras filming every possible entry Rich could have used to get to the spot where he was gunned down- though none in the two block area where the crime happened. Whoever did it either was caught on those cameras entering or leaving the crime scene or they took just the right path to avoid being caught on camera - not exactly consistent with the incompetence of a "botched robbery" hypothesis. You have a still-living victim talking to police who could have at least told them which way the suspects went, and cameras nearby on most avenues of escape. Yet despite all of this there is not even a mention of a "person of interest".
The other wild card in this is the "hacker" known as Guccifer 2.0. The original Guccifer was a Romanian hacker. This one claimed to be but not only does that appear to be untrue, there is considerable evidence that he is not even a hacker. Read this report if you want to examine the detailed evidence, but it appears to me that Guccifer 2.0 only came on the scene after the DNC realized that it had been hacked. No documents that Guccifer 2.0 released on his own proved to be damaging to the Democrats. I examined the evidence and it looks like Guccifer is a front for the DNC trying to make their leak look like a Russian hack. No matter what version of events Guccifer told, the common thread was that the Russians were behind it. Even the version where Guccifer 2.0 said that Seth Rich was the Wikkileaks leaker, the Russians were inserted into the chain of events.
Until the U.S. intelligence services provide us a report with evidence pointing to the Russians that is as convincing as the report I linked to above indicating Guccifer 2.0 is a fraud, the most reasonable conclusion is that Seth Rich was the Wikkileaker- without Russia or Guccifer 2.o anywhere in the chain. The other thing that could tip the balance away from that conclusion is that the D.C. police solve the murder and it turns out to be someone who had robbed other people in the past.
When the fact change, my opinion will change. My opinion will not change because people who are less interested in truth than I am snarl at me or call me names because I won't switch my views to those the media insist I have on this issue regardless of the quality of the evidence. This could be a random tragedy, or it could be something really big.
**************************
I have never seen the establishment close ranks so fast on a story as they have with the Seth Rich murder. Even though there are enough facts out there so that real journalists ought to be curious and ask questions as to whether the official story adds up, I don't see one iota of curiosity about it from the establishment media. Instead, they seem like they are in a frenzy to attack whoever raises questions about it.
Relations with Russia are deteriorating, and while we can feel sympathy for what the parents want to believe about their son, many more lives are potentially at stake and the moral thing to do is continue to seek the truth about this story. Right now the Russians are getting the blame, which they deny, and tensions are high. If they are innocent of this act and it really was Rich doing the leaking, some of that pressure for conflict can be released.
A major question in the investigation is whether or not Seth Rich was the source of Wikkileaks documents from the Democratic party which were damaging to Hillary Clinton in the closing days of the 2016 campaign. Specifically proof that DNC officials colluded to cheat Senator Bernie Sanders out of the nomination. Where did Wikkileaks get the data? The two leading theories are 1) Russian Hackers and 2) the worst stuff did not come from a hack at all but rather was a "leak" from a disgruntled insider.
The biggest support for theory #1 is that government spook (and proven liar) James Clapper testified before congress that all the Federal intelligence agencies agreed that the data came from a Russian hack. That version of events is repeated endlessly by the media. The biggest knock against the biggest support for theory #1 is that Federal intelligence agencies in general, and James Clapper in particular, are well-documented liars. Having already led us into a war with Iraq based on politically motivated faulty intelligence, we would have to be fools to take them solely on their word with a line of investigation which could take us into conflict with nuclear super-power Russia.
And yet, all they are offering us is their word and most of that anonymously. The intelligence agencies have provided no proof to back their assertions that the Wikkileaks information came from Russia. So what we have are the word of known liars. It is not like they have some super-secret evidence they can show to Congress but not us either. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher is about as conservative as the come, and he says even the Intelligence Agencies' report to them has no hard evidence to show the connection,
"I do not believe that the evidence at this time proves that the Russians are the ones who hacked the DNC. We have heard every report from the intelligence groups that are making their reports and they have weasel words in them, and they are based on opinion based on someone who is probably a strong liberal democrat,”
The strongest evidence against the Russians being the source- and thus Rich being the likely source, is that Assange himself steadfastly denied that his source was a state actor. Further, he strongly implied that Rich was the leaker and has offered a reward for information leading to the capture of the killer. So far as we know Assange has never lied to the American people. In addition a former British Ambassador, Craig Murray, said he went to Washington and picked up the leak documents and it was an inside leak and not a hack. A shadier character, a hacker from New Zealand named "Kim Dotcom" claims that he knows that Seth Rich was the Wikkileaks DNC leaker and that he helped him. That would explain how Rich, who was in the IT department for the DNC but would not normally have access to all of that leaked info in the course of his regular duties, gathered the emails.
The Rich family then attacked Dotcom and claimed that Dotcom tried to hack their dead son's email account, prompting Dotcom to issue a statement warning them against defamation. Dotcom has offered to provide his evidence "to the authorities" but since he is under indictment in the U.S. it is plausible to assume he is angling for those charges to be dropped in exchange. The joke is on him, no one in the ruling class on either side seems the least bit interested in even solving the murder.
That is the other bizarre thing. It seems like it would be very easy to catch the killer. Rich was conscious and talking when police got there. It seems like he could have told them something about who attacked him, yet the PD has not given us any hint of a description of an assailant. In addition, the police were wearing body cams. That footage seems to be missing. There were also cameras filming every possible entry Rich could have used to get to the spot where he was gunned down- though none in the two block area where the crime happened. Whoever did it either was caught on those cameras entering or leaving the crime scene or they took just the right path to avoid being caught on camera - not exactly consistent with the incompetence of a "botched robbery" hypothesis. You have a still-living victim talking to police who could have at least told them which way the suspects went, and cameras nearby on most avenues of escape. Yet despite all of this there is not even a mention of a "person of interest".
The other wild card in this is the "hacker" known as Guccifer 2.0. The original Guccifer was a Romanian hacker. This one claimed to be but not only does that appear to be untrue, there is considerable evidence that he is not even a hacker. Read this report if you want to examine the detailed evidence, but it appears to me that Guccifer 2.0 only came on the scene after the DNC realized that it had been hacked. No documents that Guccifer 2.0 released on his own proved to be damaging to the Democrats. I examined the evidence and it looks like Guccifer is a front for the DNC trying to make their leak look like a Russian hack. No matter what version of events Guccifer told, the common thread was that the Russians were behind it. Even the version where Guccifer 2.0 said that Seth Rich was the Wikkileaks leaker, the Russians were inserted into the chain of events.
Until the U.S. intelligence services provide us a report with evidence pointing to the Russians that is as convincing as the report I linked to above indicating Guccifer 2.0 is a fraud, the most reasonable conclusion is that Seth Rich was the Wikkileaker- without Russia or Guccifer 2.o anywhere in the chain. The other thing that could tip the balance away from that conclusion is that the D.C. police solve the murder and it turns out to be someone who had robbed other people in the past.
When the fact change, my opinion will change. My opinion will not change because people who are less interested in truth than I am snarl at me or call me names because I won't switch my views to those the media insist I have on this issue regardless of the quality of the evidence. This could be a random tragedy, or it could be something really big.
posted by Mark Moore (Moderator) at Sunday, May 28, 2017
2 Comments:
You should probably not trust in your spell check so much. Every time you mention Julian Assange, it comes through as "Assuage". :-\
Let me assuage your concerns on that one- I changed it, thanks.
Post a Comment
<< Home