GOP operative who sought Clinton's emails from Russian hackers, committed suicide.

a reply to: tadaman

How did Clinton become a part of this?
Murder would only make sense from either Russia or trump.
Basically this tarnishes trump. Not Hillary why would they care at all?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: tadaman

How did Clinton become a part of this?
Murder would only make sense from either Russia or trump.
Basically this tarnishes trump. Not Hillary why would they care at all?

Exactly. If the Clintons were going to assassinate the guy, they'd have done it years ago when he was digging into the Troopergate thing, or when he tried to dig up dirt on a 1969 trip Clinton took to Russia.

The guy made a career out of being a thorn in the Clintons side.

But the second he touches something relating to Trump and Russia, and he's dead?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Are you that daft? The story is a GOP sought Clinton's emails. We're there emails not seen yet? We're they damaging too the Clinton's? Would the Clinton's benefit from silencing a man who obtained emails they didn't want in the public?

Even the most modest critical thinking would take you there.

a reply to: tadaman

They weren't investigating the Clinton's. They were looking for emails that were never hacked and were never in Russia's hands.
The Clinton's wouldn't care at all what he was doing. He made the russia story and collusion a greater probability. The Clinton's would support that.
You're twists wouldn't make any sense at all.

originally posted by: Painterz

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: tadaman

How did Clinton become a part of this?
Murder would only make sense from either Russia or trump.
Basically this tarnishes trump. Not Hillary why would they care at all?

Exactly. If the Clintons were going to assassinate the guy, they'd have done it years ago when he was digging into the Troopergate thing, or when he tried to dig up dirt on a 1969 trip Clinton took to Russia.

The guy made a career out of being a thorn in the Clintons side.

But the second he touches something relating to Trump and Russia, and he's dead?

What does a man seeking emails about Clinton from Russian hackers have to do with Trump?

You know what, nevermind, I must have woken up in upside down world.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

Yeah but she knows her emails were never hacked so she wouldn't care.
But really this is so stupid it's laughable.
I knew when I saw this on the news that you morons would make a thread just like this.
Come on.
If it was murder it would only play if it was Russia or trump.
But the man was dying and his insurance was expiring and there's no reason not to believe him. But this is ATS so I should not hold out hope for sanity should I?

a reply to: Konduit

Why? He could and did rat out his Russian collusion. LOL
No I don't believe that. I don't think for a moment the man was murdered.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Yes it does. Most policies have a waiting period of two years but life insurance does cover suicide.

a reply to: Kalixi

Extremely suspicious? Or just rare.

It's not suspicious and who said anything about pages and pages?

a reply to: NorthOf40

Common misconception I see.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Wait...What? Hillary didn't care so much about the 33.000 emails that she ordered getting them erased via bleachbit and destroyed all the phones and other devices that came in sheer proximity with said emails. Yeah nothing to see and completely normal and innocent behavior. I hope Donald junior invokes the Hillary defense because "What difference does it make?" is apparently like cryptonite for every court on the #ing planet. Can't argue with her logic.

I understand your hate for Trump even if it is misguided imo but defending the Clinton empire that manages to hide behind a mountain of evidence for shady deals and blackmail is insane. Bill and Hillary deserve to rot in a maximum prison.

a reply to: Perfectenemy

Actually every government agency has said that the Russians did hack the into the election. Every single one of them. You must have better sources then the government has. Unreal.

a reply to: Stevenjames15

I'm going to assume that you just missed the news about the Associated Press and New York Times being forced to issue a retraction since as it turns out only four, not all seventeen, agencies made that claim. You wouldn't push a narrative you knew to be false, right?

originally posted by: Stevenjames15
a reply to: Perfectenemy

Actually every government agency has said that the Russians did hack the into the election. Every single one of them. You must have better sources then the government has. Unreal.

Yes and you take that as face value just because of what exactly? Nobody has produced or provided any evidence since up to this point. All i heard in the public hearings were accusations but they didn't explain the how,why and who. It's basically russia bad let's go to war with them. Obama himself assured the public that the election wasn't hackable and rigging it would be impossible. So he lied obviously? Don't you see that this whole russian narrative makes no sense. How did russia convince 60 million people to vote for Trump? Why are certain states refusing to cooperate with the voter fraud investigation? The Dems screamed the election was rigged and demanded recounts but all their efforts suddenly stopped and nothing happened. Trump wants to investigate the voter fraud manipulation and the Dems stall him as hard as they can. So i ask you again if russia helped him to win the election why is the other party blocking every attempt to uncover the truth?

Looks like some Democrats are also finding the suicide a bit off.

Free Beacon‏Verified account @FreeBeacon 10m10 minutes ago

Dem Congressman Insinuates Conspiracy Theory About GOP Operative’s Suicide Without Evidence

Dem Congressman Insinuates Conspiracy Theory About GOP Operative’s Suicide Without Evidence

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Perfectenemy

Of course it would be trumps camp lol.
Why would Clinton care?
The Russia story supports the DNC claim of Russian interference. Putting this in the Clinton camp would be totally idiotic.
But saying trump had anything to do with it is just as idiotic.

There's a lot of that going around.

Let me guess... If a DNC operative was to die suspiciously while attempting to get dirt from the Russians on Trump you would suspect - Trump again of course, since it "supports the DNC claim of Russian interference" right? Boy, it's a win-win for you every time, innit?

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You weren't supposed to read past the first story obviously.

At the time, the newspaper reported Smith's May 14 death came about 10 days after he granted the interview. Mystery shrouded how and where he had died, but the lead reporter on the stories said on a podcast he had no reason to believe the death was the result of foul play and that Smith likely had died of natural causes.

Bags over heads are clear evidence of natural causes.

I will say this however. The man was 81 years old, and even if his policy was expiring, they are fairly cheap, no? Also, IRRC suicide nullifies most policies. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

OK. Many policies have a suicide clause that stays in effect for a couple of years. This is to prevent people buying an expensive policy, then immediately killing themselves. But after a couple of years this clause is nullified. If the policy was "about to expire," then this would indicate a policy that has been around for awhile, so the reasoning fits.

a reply to: schuyler

Its plausible... I want to know if the policy in question actually contains a suicide clause and if so when it was added. Secondly his suicide is just out of place. Why start an investigate into Clintons emails, taking the time to contact sources and journalists, only to kill yourself in the middle of it.

A number of people trying to get to the bottom of Clintons emails and the DNC hack bs have turned up dead.

A lot of questions still need to be answered.

I don't think all the speculation over whether or not he had a suicide clause in his policy matters.

I am confident that he would have known if his insurance, which was mature, covered suicide. I am pretty sure if it didn't he wouldn't have been so obvious. He didn't care so the insurance will most likely pay out.

a reply to: Terminal1

They will only pay out if his policy had a suicide clause and only if the time frame was met. If no clause exists then his death would have no impact financially. The reason he gave in his "suicide note", financial and it close to expiring, only makes sense if it existed.