CNN ignoring SETH RICH

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
The family used the plural "murderers" in their statement.

They know damn well it was not a a single random robber.

"We are a family who is committed to facts, not fake evidence that surfaces every few months to fill the void and distract law enforcement and the general public from finding Seth's murderers."

Good catch. Either a typo or they were speaking generally. But good catch.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: proximo

You mean this? Oh wait, you guys are pretending that link doesn't exist. Sorry.

I think a company hired by the DNC has a slight conflict of interest, especially when the DNC wouldn't allow the FBI the same access. The company is funded by Warburg Pincus, whose president is Timothy Geithner, the 75th Secretary of Treasury under Obama, and friend of the Clintons.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

This does not prove Russia did not hack the DNC, but why in gods name would the DNC not leave government agencies investigate their server, but instead rely on a private firm with connections to Hillary?

Not to butt in, but perhaps they used a private company because the DNC itself is a private entity and it is not the responsibility of government agencies to investigate private matters.

Fine, but then they don't get to claim that Russia hacked the election.

Oh and eta, not butting in at all I appreciate the conversation.

To claim Russia hacked the election would be false. There is no evidence they hacked any voting machine, etc.

What they can say is that Russia may have hacked the DNC and collected emails/info they would leak to the public, with the intent of swaying public opinion about Hillary/DNC.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

This does not prove Russia did not hack the DNC, but why in gods name would the DNC not leave government agencies investigate their server, but instead rely on a private firm with connections to Hillary?

Not to butt in, but perhaps they used a private company because the DNC itself is a private entity and it is not the responsibility of government agencies to investigate private matters.

Fine, but then they don't get to claim that Russia hacked the election.

Oh and eta, not butting in at all I appreciate the conversation.

To claim Russia hacked the election would be false. There is no evidence they hacked any voting machine, etc.

What they can say is that Russia may have hacked the DNC and collected emails/info they would leak to the public, with the intent of swaying public opinion about Hillary/DNC.

But if they felt it was that serious of an issue, and clearly they do considering how they are demanding investigations into Trump/Russia conclusion, why would they refuse the FBI's offer to look at their servers?

The idea that they are just a private organizations doesn't jive with their rhetoric on how the Russian influence is an enormous deal to free elections in the US.

There seems to be no logical reason as to why they wouldn't allow the FBI to see these servers (and instead had a firm connected to the dems do the investigation) if they were truly interested in preventing further hacks.

a reply to: introvert

But if Hillary had nothing to hide then who cares

Circumstances have a lot to do with what a real investigator would look at IF they were actually trying to find the truth.

Let's say the Philadelphia police found Joey Merlino lying in a pool of blood in an alley in Philadelphia, not missing any valuables on his person.... but having a number of bullet holes in his back.
Do you think they would call it a botched robbery?

Dropping this in here too:

Seth was scheduled to be a witness in a voter fraud case that was filed the day after the murder.

Regards the Family Spokesperson:

"originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: BlueAjah

Gee, let's see what we can find out about this guy:

The Pastorum Group is a full-service communications and political strategy firm specializing in crisis operations, strategic planning, digital engagement, media relations and coalition building for progressive clients. TPG leverages our experience and deep ties with the progressive community and elected officials to create meaningful social change.

Media Release(direct .pdf link)

This guy usually deals on the big stage of election campaigns.

And here's this:

— BRAD BAUMAN and JOSH COHEN’s new firm: “The Pastorum Group (TPG), a new full-service communications firm working for progressive candidates, clients and causes opened its doors in Washington, D.C. today.” Cohen is an SEIU, DNC and OFA alum. Bauman is the former executive director of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Tory Brown is a principal who previously worked for Media Matters and In the Public Interest and Managing Principal Michelle Coyle served as VP at Rising Tide Interactive. politi.co...

And lookie here:

Before launching the new communications firm that works with progressive candidates, The Pastorum Group, with three other partners—Josh Cohen, Brad Bauman and Tory Brown—this past January, Edwards acted as vice president for Rising Tide Interactive, where her chief mission was securing Hillary Clinton the title of first female president of the United States.

Michele Coyle Edwards: A Colorful Profile in Courage

Am I seeing that right?!?

One of the partners in the firm co-founded by the guy who is now the Rich family spokesman actively worked to get Hillary elected?!?

I'm not imaging that, am I?"

Oh, one more thing...Seth had accepted a position with and was to begin working directly for the Clinton campaign, just before his murder.

But nah, there is nothing fishy about his murder... it was only a botched robbery after all.

I wonder why the DNC isn't calling for a deeper investigation or reaching out for anyone with any knowledge of the robbery to come forward so that they can get justice for their coworker.

a reply to: Grambler

But if they felt it was that serious of an issue, and clearly they do considering how they are demanding investigations into Trump/Russia conclusion, why would they refuse the FBI's offer to look at their servers?

I don't know. Perhaps there are some things on the server they would rather the FBI not see.

No matter, they can still say what I posted and it appears the investigation is going along well without the DNC server.

The idea that they are just a private organizations doesn't jive with their rhetoric on how the Russian influence is an enormous deal to free elections in the US.

There seems to be no logical reason as to why they wouldn't allow the FBI to see these servers (and instead had a firm connected to the dems do the investigation) if they were truly interested in preventing further hacks.

It's not the FBI's duty to help them secure their servers from potential future attacks.

a reply to: introvert

But thre is a huge investigation into Russia going on, that the Dems want. And this investigation is going to costs far more money, last far longer, and have the chance of being less successful because the DNC would not allow them access to the server.

Its like asking police to investigate a murder without being allowed to see the body. Sure they may solve the crime, but it will be far more difficult and take more time, and they may not be able to do so without seeing the body.

I am only saying that I find it disingenuous of Hillary's people and others at the DNC to act like this Russian influence is the biggest deal in the country that needs to be reported on 24/7 and used to attack Trump at every possible chance, but at the same time they didn't feel it was a big enough deal to let the FBI look into the server.

If they did have something they didn't want the FBI to see, it must have been a whopper considering they were willing to hinder the investigation into russian influencing which they claim is the biggest deal in the whole country.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: iWontGiveUP

RE: "was a botched robbery"

You snowflakes don't accept this narrative as being true? Why would the police lie?

Wouldn't a professional hit make it look like a "Botched Robbery"? You don't leave a calling card, you make it look like an amateur did it.

But what do I know .......m

While I will patiently wait for all the facts about Rich to make their way out into the open...I have absolutely no doubt that murder and assignation is on the agenda for the left. I'm simply convinced it has been done before, probably more often that even the conspiracy minded may believe.

I would even suggest it created during the Clinton's reign and that both of them ordered killings. There is probably even an established method of "suggesting" a death for it to make its way to the right person.

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: proximo

You mean this? Oh wait, you guys are pretending that link doesn't exist. Sorry.

Ok fine, assume that is all true. I have no doubt hackers are routinely trying to and succeeding in getting into the DNC.

This proves your inexperience with cyber security. Hackers aren't routinely breaking the DNC firewall.

originally posted by: iWontGiveUP
a reply to: introvert

But if Hillary had nothing to hide then who cares

Not sure what you mean or how that applies to Russia and their intentions.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

You're right. The right is too dumb to plan conspiracies and "assignations".

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Plus anyone going in with intent of robbery or worse would know to use a burner gun. Normally a gun linked to gangs and other robberies and murders. Cops probably more than not take the shortcut out of the cases explaining it away as robbery and crime.

a reply to: Grambler

Those links take a lot of circumstantial evidence and assumptions to "prove" that CrowdStrike is lying. It doesn't actually dispute the information in that blog post though. Example:

If the company’s analysis was “delusional” when it came to Ukraine, why should we have any confidence that its analysis on Russia and the DNC is more sound?

Answer: We shouldn’t.

As you can see here. The article is asking questions it doesn't have the answer to and answering them based on its biases. Even if the company's analysis on Ukraine is bad that is not evidence that the Russian hacking blog post is wrong.

That whole link is a sorry attempt to discredit CrowdStrike using circumstantial evidence.

a reply to: Grambler

But thre is a huge investigation into Russia going on, that the Dems want. And this investigation is going to costs far more money, last far longer, and have the chance of being less successful because the DNC would not allow them access to the server.

Its like asking police to investigate a murder without being allowed to see the body. Sure they may solve the crime, but it will be far more difficult and take more time, and they may not be able to do so without seeing the body.

I did not know the DNC hack was at the center of the Russia investigation. I thought it was looking at people within the Trump team and their connections with Russia. Honestly, I think the DNC hack is small beans at this point.

I am only saying that I find it disingenuous of Hillary's people and others at the DNC to act like this Russian influence is the biggest deal in the country that needs to be reported on 24/7 and used to attack Trump at every possible chance, but at the same time they didn't feel it was a big enough deal to let the FBI look into the server.

Sure. I can see how it can be considered hypocritical.

That's the big problem with CNN overall more real news than most other networks like MSNBC, Fox, ABC etc but they deceive us by ommision. They just don't tell us what's really going on. If the Democratic Primaries last year taught us anything it's that CNN will not air or talk about anything that is negative to Hillary Clinton in any way.

To be honest, in the time i was a police officer i would say about once a year there was an event with national security implications that we were ordered to lie about if asked.