It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Seth Rich Mystery: DNC Leaks Came From Inside, Not Russian Hackers

page: 1
18
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2017 @ 08:22 AM
link   
I know I know it's from Alex

With that being said, it's a masterpiece

It is clear there is a danger present



www.prisonplanet.com...


Evidence reveals emails leaks an inside job not due to hacking

Jerome Corsi Prison Planet.com
May 30, 2017

This article is Part 2 in a series of three articles investigating the Seth Rich murder. Read Part 1 HERE. Part 1 developed the following: Hillary’s campaign, lax on cybersecurity and working with the DNC to make sure Sanders did not have a chance of winning, invited multiple attacks from both hackers on the outside and from leakers on the inside. Part 2 makes clear the multiple hacks and multiple leaks that plagued Hillary’s 2016 presidential campaign came from multiple sources.

The breakthrough in this series of articles is the attempt to apply intelligence analytical techniques to sort out the various known cybersecurity attacks on the Democrats during the 2016 presidential campaign to determine the rogue agent responsible for each separate known cybersecurity attack.





edit on 30-5-2017 by iWontGiveUP because: Edit




posted on May, 30 2017 @ 08:46 AM
link   
DNC Leaks Came From Inside, Not Russian Hackers

And what´s new about this?



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 08:51 AM
link   
"Dirty" and "underhanded" don't even begin to describe Clinton, The Clinton Foundation and the Democratic Party. We better be damned glad Clinton lost or Russia really would be controlling the U.S.
This "but, but Trump! Russia!" is nothing but a smokescreen to do damage control. Clinton and the Democrat's leaders are and have been deep in cahoots with Russia and are doing anything they can to direct attention away from themselves.
There is plenty of evidence to prove it and they still can't come up with a damn thing on Trump.



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Excellent! Thank you for posting!!! There is so much information here -- very much appreciated. I couldn't help but note the following towards the end of the article:


In the final analysis, if Hillary and the DNC had not conspired to steal the nomination from Sanders, and if Podesta’s emails were not so filled with dark brooding and scheming (often aimed at HRC herself), it would not have mattered their documents were hacked, leaked, and published.


Podesta is NOT Hillary's friend. I don't understand all the whys and wherefores, but when you dig into all the emails released that becomes very clear.... There is far far more to this than what's on the surface.



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: DAVID64

As much as you criticize Clinton as being a Democrat she really is a Republican. She worked on Barry Goldwater's campaign in college. The Democrat party has been hijacked.



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

The you should be happy she lost?



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

She flipped to the Democrat's side soon after. She's been a Democrat for the majority of her life.

storify.com...

But despite starting college on the right-hand side of politics, Hillary left a few years later as an "anti-war Democrat whose public rebuke of a Republican senator in a graduation won her notice in Life Magazine as a voice for her generation."



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: iWontGiveUP


Evidence reveals

Does it now? Would Alex Jones deem to let us know what this "evidence" is? The blog following that sentence isn't evidence of anything. Hell, the article even admits that it isn't evidence and just speculation:

The breakthrough in this series of articles is the attempt to apply intelligence analytical techniques to sort out the various known cybersecurity attacks on the Democrats during the 2016 presidential campaign to determine the rogue agent responsible for each separate known cybersecurity attack.

Speculation != Evidence. This entire article is a lie. Typical of Infowars to misrepresent its message to fool the gullible.
edit on 30-5-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It's just as good as all the "unnamed sources" the Left keeps coming up with.



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: iWontGiveUP

Except Seth's parents don't buy it...


Seth's parents accepted a Private investigator paid by Fox News, to help investigate his death.


Appearently he was so full of crap they fired him and even filed a cease and desist letter, because they did not fill like he was actually investigating their sons death. Instead he was only intrrested in pushing this conspiracy theory.


And how bad must the evidence be if he couldn't convince the greiving family desperate to give their sons death meaning...

None of this really adds up...

Assange STRONGLY eludes to rich being the leak, but won't confirm it because "Wikileaks doesn't reveal sources..""

Except by strongly eluding to Seth, is exactly the same as revealing your source...

It was like he wanted the world to think it was him, but so he would not be sued by the family, he never confirmed it..

The killing was absolutely not a professional job, as a pro completes the robbery and doesn't leave defensive wounds..


edit on 30-5-2017 by JoshuaCox because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: DAVID64
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It's just as good as all the "unnamed sources" the Left keeps coming up with.

Not even close. WaPo and NYT's anonymous sources may not be slam dunk evidence, but it is DEFINITELY higher up the credibility ladder than this piece of propaganda. There are actual investigations gaining traction operating around those leaks. The Seth Rich story is just conservative fan fiction not supported by any investigating forces.
edit on 30-5-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: DAVID64

Unnamed sources from infowars is not equal to unnamed sources from an actual accredited news org that fires people for publishing fake stories..

Lol



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

haha
my unnamed sources are good
your unnamed sources are bad


lol
you will need to sell that elsewhere



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: DAVID64

What?!!

Wasnt everyone saying it was ww3 if Hillary was elected????

Man y'all can't even keep your conspiracies straight lol...

How yall trust Trump and the conspiracy sites, more than actual news places , I will never know..

Jesus the conspiracy sites push Bigfoot and Nessie at the same time lol..



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t

haha
my unnamed sources are good
your unnamed sources are bad


lol
you will need to sell that elsewhere


Unnamed sources from conspiracy sites, who do not even have real journalists, let alone investigative teams...


They are only compilation sites anyway.. they troll the news sites you don't believe, and copy paste their stories..

Nothing they didn't make up even starts with them...

The logical fallacies in that are just obvious.. lol



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Are you sure it's not infowars that is real news????

You haven't seen the the elite interfiminsonal child rapists in line at the supermarket?!?!

You need to get woke!!!

Lol sarcasm hehe



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

wapo and cnn are "conspiracy" sites these days

anything with "unnamed" sources are suspect...equally suspect



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t

haha
my unnamed sources are good
your unnamed sources are bad


lol
you will need to sell that elsewhere

Laugh all you want, but all it takes is a modicum of critical thinking to see what I'm saying. Trump has even confirmed some of the things leaked and constantly calls for the arrest and investigation of the leakers (something that wouldn't be possible if the leaks were false).



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

www.forbes.com... d54df7ad5
That is forbes calling wapo out.



Yet, it turns out this narrative was false and as the chronology below will show, illustrates how effectively false and misleading news can ricochet through the global news echo chamber through the pages of top tier newspapers that fail to properly verify their facts.


You go right ahead and "believe" unnamed sources from sites you listed.
Shows how "critical" your thinking actually is.



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

So WaPo was wrong about something. That doesn't mean they set out to intentionally deceive or that they do it for every story they write. You are being willfully dishonest in a thread pushing an obvious propaganda technique of pushing speculation as evidence. CLEARLY you are missing the forest for the trees here.
edit on 30-5-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
18
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join