Beet
Atlas Star
Posts: 29,067
|
|
« on: May 15, 2017, 11:56:19 PM » |
|
Unlike others, I have no double standard here. I find this story interesting.
Evidence 1. Rich was a high level Democratic staffer, in charge of voter access. 2. He fits the demographic profile of a leaker (all the leakers so far have been white men, or in one case, a trans white woman). 3. The night he was killed, he was at a bar that he frequented very regularly, and stayed until 1:30 am. 4. He made calls to his father, a friend, and spoke with his girlfriend for hours. 5. He spent 3 hours walking home when it should have taken 40 minutes, talking to his girlfriend. 6. He was shot 300 feet from his door. As if someone was waiting for him. 7. He was shot in the back. Why would robbers do that? 8. He didn't realize he was shot. Why would he not realize if he was shot in the back? 9. Nothing was taken. 10. Last year, Julian Assange hinted he may have been a source a couple of times. 11. In April, Guccifer 2.0 suggested he was a source.
Needless to say, I would be very surprised if someone at the DNC put a hit on him and coordinated with mayor Bowser to suppress the police investigation. But the story is bizarre.
Countering the conspiracy theory is that Rich was supposed alive and talking for more than an hour afterward. Would he not have connected his contact with wikileaks (if shown) to being shot? Would he not have mentioned it? That would be one hell of a coverup.
Also, if Rich was the source, where did the two Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear source codes come from, on the DNC servers? Could they have been planted there, and the logs backdated after the fact, to fool cybersecurity investigators?
And what about the Podesta e-mails? Those were clearly cases of phishing. So even if Rich was involved as a "mole", it does not mean the Russians were not involved.
|