patrick.net

Tim Aurora says

A week after publishing a problematic account about the death of former Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich — an article that said Rich made contact with WikiLeaks before he was shot and killed in Washington — Fox News retracted the story, saying it did not meet the organization’s editorial standards

Any comment on Kim Dotcom's offer to testify?

Contacts and interactions-yeah like the Russian hotel showers.

He has a long record of delivering the party line, including reportedly allegedly perjuring himself. Consider, for example, The Guardian: "John Brennan blatantly lied to the American public. Again." The neo-McCarthy Democrats are trying to reignite the red scare in order to escalate their prized war in Syria and accelerate Islamic hijrah.

As between the Russia and Seth Rich narratives, neither is proved conclusively, but so far the Seth Rich narrative has more evidence. In his case, confirmed reports state that (a) he was shot twice in the back, a block from where he lived, (b) he was found awake with valuables still on him and did not report anything stolen, (c) he died in hospital hours later. Police evidence showed two possible shooters fleeing the scene. Countless people have been murdered in hospitals, too. It looks more like a hit than a robbery, but neither the police nor the FBI have examined the allegedly hacked DNC server for evidence as to who might have had motive. The DNC refused to turn over their allegedly hacked e-mail server to the FBI for investigation. There have been no arrests.

In contrast, the Russia narrative has mainly "appeal to authority," people with an established record of reportedly allegedly perjuring themselves for the team. Partisans deem them credible whenever the statements coincide with what the partisans want to hear. There is no physical evidence to prove anything illegal, only vague hints and innuendoes.

It is unfortunate that partisans distract from an actual murder, definitely really a murder, by yammering on about "contacts" that were almost certainly legal. (Flynn might have failed to disclose his contacts, and he might need a pardon for that, but the contacts themselves were legal.)

I floated this theory here on patent a while ago. It's pretty obvious. They could also have framed the leak on him.

The evidence is damning.

Tim Aurora says

Fox news just retracted the story.

So you're a Faux Noise viewer? I didn't hear it from them, don't care why they changed their tune, the facts I listed remain proved. If you find fault with any specific fact I listed, please specify and link a credible source rather than Faux Noise.

Tim Aurora says

And why should DNC turn over its server unless they are subpoenaed .

FBI requested it, DNC refused. FBI opted not to litigate the matter. The question you should be asking DNC is, why did they refuse.

Tim Aurora says

They may have stuff which could be private and susceptible to leak to general public.

They claim it had already been hacked by Russians. You're saying they trust the Russians more than the FBI. The refusal casts doubt on their whole narrative, which consists mainly of repetition without evidence. And if you're going to tell people to "STFU", you might rather lead by example.

If the DNC was confident it would prove, or at least strongly suggest, Russian hacking, they would have turned it over.

I wouldn't be surprised if they wiped it.

Tim Aurora says

17 spy agencies

Of course they aren't spying on any innocent/not guilty American's anywhere.

When will CBOE retract ?

Tim Aurora says

That is such a ruse, Russian hacking is already proved, no need to turn over any documents

By media consensus, not by any sort of actual proof. Truth by acclamation is your cup of tea, there buttercup?

Yes, hard to imagine that the DNC wouldn't want to turn over their private correspondence and documents to an organization that leaks like a sieve.

There is as much evidence that the Russians murdered Seth Rich and tried to pin it in on the DNC as there is of any other scenario.

* A computer can be 'hacked'. An election is not a computer.
* As 3d technology advances putting people virtually at any spot in the world at any moment, it is fair to say that the whole fuckin world 'came' to inauguraton.
* Proof of obama ordering wiretap is contained in the DNC emails. The fact the russkies have not published these findings is proof the russkies did not 'hack' the DNC computers.
* Given the three turks that were kicked out of managing the DNC computers, only a pompous ass would assume anyone other than the three turks were responsible for any 'hacking' of the DNC computers.

Tim Aurora says

* Russia did not hack the election

* Crowd of million more than Obama came to his inauguration

* Obama ordered Trump monitoring/wiretap

BlueSardine says

As 3d technology advances putting people virtually at any spot in the world at any moment, it is fair to say that the whole fuckin world 'came' to inauguraton.

LOL. Everybody in the world watched it with their 3d glasses. Everybody!

Tim Aurora says

curious2 says

As between the Russia and Seth Rich narratives, neither is proved conclusively, but so far the Seth Rich narrative has more evidence. In his case, we have confirmed reports that (a) he was shot twice in the back, a block from where he lived, (b) he was found awake with valuables still on him and did not report anything stolen, (c) he died in hospital hours later. Police evidence showed two possible suspects fleeing the scene. Countless people have been murdered in hospitals, too. The DNC refused to turn over their allegedly hacked e-mail server to the FBI for investigation.

Fox news just retracted the story.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/23/statement-on-coverage-seth-rich-murder-investigation.html

Their entire story was an anonymous FBI and/DC police source. If it's unverified it should be retracted, just like all the fake news coming out about trump. This doesn't mean Seth rich wasn't the DNC leaker.

Seth Rich was the leaker. The turks were the leakers. Brennan and the fbi were playing the long game warning the dnc that there were hacks and warning the Russians to stop meddling back in the summer 2016. They wanted to set Hillary up with an excuse for her loss, even though everyone knew Hillary was going to win and Comey is a Republican.

Anybody but the Russians! Never Russians!

Brennan confirmed again yesterday that there is zero evidence of Russia collusion. In fact he also confirmed zero evidence of Russian hacking.

Its all modeling and inference and "this looks like" because "we know how the Russians act all over the world", etc...

The entire display was particularly hypocritical considering we KNOW the DNC actually did hack our election process. DNC admitted it in court with the bizarre argument that the DNC has no obligation to hold a fair primary.

When will you admit you are wrong about trump/russia? The DNC has shown themselves to be the clear and present danger to our elections and to Seth rich.

Tim Aurora says

YesYNot says

I floated this theory here on patent a while ago. It's pretty obvious. They could also have framed the leak on him.

Two scenarios

* When they found he was murdered, they pinned the leaks on him.

* They found a guy who can be pinned with the leak and then murdered him

The latter most likely.

They're already shifting to the "Just because the DNC wasn't hacked it doesn't mean it wasn't Russia", when up until now they pushed the never officially inspected DNC Server as hacked by Russia.

Tim Aurora says

I floated this theory here on patent a while ago. It's pretty obvious. They could also have framed the leak on him.

What was his last name? LOL. He's a NeverTrumper and Religious Fanatic who is famous for trying to ban gays from the NFL.

This Russian conspiracy theory is getting complicated.

Tell us once more what happened, Alex jones

CBOEtrader says

Brennan confirmed again yesterday that there is zero evidence of Russia collusion

Brennan said that there were enough contacts to justify an investigation, so he passed it along to the FBI. He left over 3 months ago, and did not know at the time he left whether or not there was collusion. He didn't say that there was zero evidence of Russian hacking. He also didn't say that there was zero evidence of Russia collusion. You are lying. Why don't you want the investigation to go on unimpeded? If you don't trust them, do you think we should just fold up the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc. and make do without them?

The Media needs to stop mistaking Sikhs for Muslims, as several outlets, including Cosmopolitan, did the other day.

Such a tragedy.

What evidence was that? Not the estimation, but the evidence behind the estimation.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on, shame on, you can't get fooled again.

Yellowcake, No Domestic Spying, now we need to see the proof.

I think Louise Mensch is nearing 300 Russian Spies. When I last saw a tweet of hers, she was nominating Al Qaeda Liason Evan McMuffin for special prosecutor, hahhahahaha

YesYNot says

, do you think we should just fold up the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc. and make do without them?

Yes, I do think we'd be better off without them. Look at the bloated bureaucratic mess they have become, but this is a totally different discussion.

YesYNot says

Brennan said that there were enough contacts to justify an investigation, so he passed it along to the FBI.

Yes Brennan acknowledged circumstantial evidence only, with no known direct evidence of collusion or even a crime.

YesYNot says

He didn't say that there was zero evidence of Russian hacking.

He was asked about Russia hacking, and Russia collusion over and over again. He gave the same scripted answer for each. That he saw a pattern of behavior from the Russians that looked like past behavior a wherein he felt it was necessary to look more closely. When asked for direct evidence he confirmed he only had circumstantial.

YesYNot says

You are lying

You are a half-wit buying into proaganda. Did you even listen to the testimony? If I'm lying, show me where he says there is direct evidence of anything involving the Russians. Otherwise lets just be clear that you are speaking out-of-your partisan ass

CBOEtrader says

Brennan confirmed again yesterday that there is zero evidence of Russia collusion. In fact he also confirmed zero evidence of Russian hacking.

YesYNot says

He didn't say that there was zero evidence of Russian hacking. He also didn't say that there was zero evidence of Russia collusion. You are lying.

CBOEtrader says

When asked for direct evidence he confirmed he only had circumstantial.

You do realize that circumstantial is a type of evidence, right? You cannot say that there is circumstantial evidence and also say that there is no evidence. Here's more circumstantial evidence that you don't know what the terms evidence, circumstantial evidence, and direct evidence mean. It is circumstantial evidence, because I cannot prove your comments come from ignorance. You might just be lying.

Lol yes you are playing word games... Although this same exchange occurred yesterday. Brennan refused to call I it evidence when pressed he called it "information". He's talking about meta data that might maybe be construed as circumstantial evidence.

Go listen to the testimony before you get all righteous about it.

Brennan just confirmed under oatht hat the CIA unmasked American citizens. Oh and per the latest reporting from circa which has been accurate-Obama pretty much admitted they violated the 4th amendment rights of Americans.

Increasingly I am thinking this whole Russian thing is a panic coverup of the crime sof the Obama admin-they neevr thought Trump would win.

CBOEtrader says

Its all modeling and inference and "this looks like" because "we know how the Russians act all over the world", etc...

YesYNot says

You do realize that circumstantial is a type of evidence, right?

Thank you for correcting me. I should be more specific w words. Yes, Brennan sort of implied his "intelligence" was circumstantial evidence but refused to call it such.

Therefore zero actual evidence is still the most accurate statement.

Trump is guilty of..
No Repeal
No Replace
No millions of needed jobs.
No 35% tariff on import.
No Wall
No Mexican pesos
Russia knows how to pick a loser.

Where in hell is MAGA?
He'll send you to hell to try & see it.

CBOEtrader says

Brennan refused to call I it evidence when pressed he called it "information"

I was listening to this exchange. He balked a while, as he thought about how to characterize it. The exchange between him and Gowdy was adversarial. The point is that there is circumstantial evidence of collusion. You say there is no evidence. There is circumstantial evidence that Seth Rich stole and leaked emails to Wikileaks. On the other hand, there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that he didn't. For example, he didn't have access to those emails and told his parents and friends that he was excited to work for Hillary's campaign. For some reason, you characterized the evidence that Seth Rich was murdered as direct evidence. It's ridiculous how you classify 'information' depending on how it fits your narrative.

CBOEtrader says

Yes, I do think we'd be better off without them. Look at the bloated bureaucratic mess they have become, but this is a totally different discussion.

I don't really think it's another discussion. This is a perfect example of their responsibility. The CIA is supposed to protect against foreign agents and the FBI is also supposed to protect US citizens and investigate crimes by US citizens. Their behavior and utility in these investigations is directly related to whether or not they have any utility to the country.

The other option, I guess, is that we can leave these investigations up to reddit contributors. Did you see the story about Kim.com potentially trying to hack into to Rich's email by sending a possible phishing link to his gmail account? Should we just let him do the investigation?

YesYNot says

The point is that there is circumstantial evidence of collusion

It seemed like he implied the same, but he refused to use the word.YesYNot says

I was listening to this exchange.

So you didn't listen to the entire testimony where he refused to offer any shred of evidence over and over... Just saying my intelligence showed a pattern of behavior...

For the record. He's talking about meta data. Phones calls from one person to another signal red flags. That's not exactly evidence, its intelligence.

Then there was the gem of him admitting he couldn't say there was extraordinary meta data... When asked ( paraphrased) "was there measuresably more of this behavior in trumps campaign than past campaigns" he said "yes, but we are unclear if that is due to our extra intelligence collected today vs in campaigns past or if it's due to extraordinary actions in the campaign".

Translation: give me the man and ill show you the crime.

Did you see the part where the official said "I've seen the briefings, I disagree that this appears as a threat. It looks like normal behavior"...followed by "please tell me evidence you have to the contrary"... Brennan balked at that answer as well.

There is nothing there. This is political theater for the half wits

Texassians are fucked up,just don't know it.
It's really not bad.
Religionists are the problem,believing anything they are told
without proof. Some of these dumb fucks live in Texas.
Reminds one of WMD.

HEY YOU just coined to new words!

I am personally a fan of the Sikh religion, though I don't think I could ever be a believer there either. Have known quite a few SIkhs in the Bay Area and found them to be excellent people, sincerely happy and willing to help others.

I visited the Sikh temple in Fremont with a Sikh friend years ago. The only disturbing bit was large pictures of guys with guns who died in battles with the Indian army. The religion is quite martial, emphasizing fitness and discipline, which makes sense because of its history as the defenders of India against Islamic invaders.

It's like what Islam could be if Mohammed had not personally been such a loser. While the essence of Islam is holding a massive butt-hurt grudge against the whole non-Islamic world, Sikhism is nothing like that as far as I can tell. If you want to leave Sikhism, you can simply do that, unlike Islam where they have to kill you. Like one Sikh put it: "The penalty for leaving Sikhism is that you are no longer a Sikh."

Why didn't he use his kirpan for self-defense?

Interesting point. The guys with the turbans also all generally have that knife. They are obligated to have 5 things:

Kesh (uncut hair)
Kara (a steel bracelet)
Kanga (a wooden comb)
Kaccha - also spelt, Kachh, Kachera (cotton underwear)
Kirpan (steel sword)

rando says

Interesting point. The guys with the turbans also all generally have that knife. They are obligated to have 5 things:

Kesh (uncut hair)

Kara (a steel bracelet)

Kanga (a wooden comb)

Kaccha - also spelt, Kachh, Kachera (cotton underwear)

Kirpan (steel sword)

Not "generally", but always. Even in California, where carrying concealed dirk/dagger is generally prohibited but AG simply don't prosecute Sikhs for carrying kirpans.

This happened in sanfran.... Perhaps a better reaction would be fuck San Francisco.