patrick.net

marcus says

It's a total coincidence that Fox is coming out with this now.

I keep hearing the Seth Rich story broke before the trump classified leaks story. Timestamps are hard to factcheck but they broke within the same hour regardless.

So im not saying i know for certain you are wrong, but the other side is claiming the exact same logic.

Remember I told everybody last year before the summer both these guys had the dirt?

PS This is from Seth Rich's social media. He was a big league Bernie Bro and "Didn't Trust Hillary":

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says

Vince Foster

Clinton fired Wiliam Sessions 24 hours before Vince Foster was killed.

TwoScoopsMcGee says

Remember I told everybody last year before the summer both these guys had the dirt?

PS This is from Seth Rich's social media. He was a big league Bernie Bro and "Didn't Trust Hillary":

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says

Vince Foster

Clinton fired Wiliam Sessions 24 hours before Vince Foster was killed.

Poll: on Tuesday after Kim dotcom releases his statement explaining how he helped Seth Rich leak documents to wikileaks, the fake news MSM will 1) attack Kim dotcom and JA as Russian spies 2) ignore the facts of the statement completely 3) release fresh anonymous sourced fake news as a cover, or 4) all of the above.

I vote for 4.

CBOEtrader says

I vote for 4.

You're probably right. When more Seth Rich stuff comes out they'll find some Knickerbocker Dem Donor to say he grabbed their pussy in 1993.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4531696/Panic-DNC-Kim-Dotcom-s-claims-Seth-Rich.html

'Complete panic' at highest levels of DNC over internet hacker Kim Dotcom's claims murdered Democratic aide Seth Rich WAS the source of Wikileaks

Kim offers to testify about Seth Rich.

#SethRich was a hero
I know that Setch Rich was involved in the DNC leak.

I know this because in late 2014 a person contacted me about helping me to start a branch of the Internet Party in the United States. He called himself Panda. I now know that Panda was Seth Rich.

Panda advised me that he was working on voter analytics tools and other technologies that the Internet Party may find helpful.

I communicated with Panda on a number of topics including corruption and the influence of corporate money in politics.
“He wanted to change that from the inside.”

I was referring to what I knew when I did an interview with Bloomberg in New Zealand in May 2015. In that interview I hinted that Julian Assange and Wikileaks would release information about Hillary Clinton in the upcoming election.

The Rich family has reached out to me to ask that I be sensitive to their loss in my public comments. That request is entirely reasonable.

I have consulted with my lawyers. I accept that my full statement should be provided to the authorities and I am prepared to do that so that there can be a full investigation. My lawyers will speak with the authorities regarding the proper process.

If my evidence is required to be given in the United States I would be prepared to do so if appropriate arrangements are made. I would need a guarantee from Special Counsel Mueller, on behalf of the United States, of safe passage from New Zealand to the United States and back. In the coming days we will be communicating with the appropriate authorities to make the necessary arrangements. In the meantime, I will make no further comment.

http://kim.com/

Kim dotcom was under FISA warrant. " I know this because in LATE 2014 a person contacted me about helping me..."

Seth rich was unmasked.

Jan 2015 podesta "I'm for making an example of a leaker"...

Great Article on how the WaPo has been trying to poison the Seth Rich story from the get go,

and are now saying that even if Seth Rich WAS the leaker, it could still be Russian collusion.

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/washington-post-already-claiming-russiagate-is-still-valid-even-if-seth-rich-was-dnc-leaker-69002b556fa3

WaPo, totally biased Journalism.

TwoScoopsMcGee says

are now saying that even if Seth Rich WAS the leaker, it could still be Russian collusion.

Ahhh that was one of my spin predictions!!! Get some original fake news already

TwoScoopsMcGee says

http://kim.com/

Kim Schmitz is an interesting guy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Dotcom

Yet again, zero evidence of collusion as per brennans testimony under oath.

Its time to admit the Russia story is a scam.

Fox News retracted their Seth Rich disgusting BS story. Now what?

CBOEtrader says

Kim dotcom was under FISA warrant. " I know this because in LATE 2014 a person contacted me about helping me..."

Seth rich was unmasked.

Jan 2015 podesta "I'm for making an example of a leaker"...

If Seth Rich was unmasked by the intel comunity around February 2015, that's a lot of circumstantial evidence. It's nothing like what is piling up against Trump, but it's worth an investigation. Trump should be able to figure that out pretty easily, huh?

Patnet Republican CONservatives are next on her list.
Hope Republicans who lost children in the Lying Republican WMD War are still suffering.
Republican injured servicemen in Iraq got what you deserve.

Ignorant fucks are welcome to defend the Lying LIARS.

Rew says

Fox News retracted their Seth Rich disgusting BS story. Now what?

Give them 5 minutes,they will have a long list of their same old BS.

Wow--what a nothingburger statement. That was worse than Rachel Maddow's leadup to the Trump taxes. He knows it was Seth Rich because he called himself Panda? Are you kidding me?

And he's going to hide behind his lawyers and Mueller so he doesn't have to release any of these supposed documents?

The funny thing is that CBOE and Lips eat up this stuff. I guess they don't need evidence and sources anymore.

joeyjojojunior says

I guess they don't need evidence and sources anymore.

Whats the evidence for trump/russia collusion? Testimony again today admitted there was no direct evidence.

With seth rich, we have an actual 1st hand witness corroborated by wikileaks tweets. Thats called direct evidence. Im not claiming to know anything. I am pointing out seth rich as a far more likely hypothesis w some direct evidence, as opposed to the the wild conjecture of russia collusion which has no direct evidence.

CBOEtrader says

which has no direct evidence

Nobody knows what the fuck qualifies as direct evidence in your mind - that is other than suspicious things that confirm your worldview.

Can you post the Grand Jury indictment against Hillary?

"Its almost as if the MSM has an agenda..."

CBOEtrader says

HEY YOU says

CBOEtrader says

Fox News bombshell

Iraq has WMD!

So now you trust the MSM? Makes sense

Next FOX bombshell? : We found the WMD.

"With seth rich, we have an actual 1st hand witness corroborated by wikileaks tweets"

No you don't. You have one guy claiming he has some evidence that he can't or won't provide. Wiki hasn't corroborated anything.

joeyjojojunior says

"With seth rich, we have an actual 1st hand witness corroborated by wikileaks tweets"

No you don't. You have one guy claiming he has some evidence that he can't or won't provide. Wiki hasn't corroborated anything.

He's a first hand witness. Thats called direct evidence. Wikileaks directly corroborated the story multiple times. That also called direct evidence.

YesYNot says

Nobody knows what the fuck qualifies as direct evidence

Lol, nobody knows the distinction between direct vs circumstantial? https://www.google.com/#q=direct+vs+circumstantial+evidence

Idiot.

Wikileaks directly corroborated the story multiple times. That also called direct evidence.

No, it didn't. Wiki refuses to reveal any sources and has refused to confirm or deny anything about the source of the DNC docs. You are lying.

He's a first hand witness. Thats called direct evidence"

Great. I am now able to state categorically that Trump paid Russia $2MM dollars to hack into the DNC and harm Clinton's chances in the general election. He further laundered Russian mob money to pay for it.

So, there you go. We now have a first hand witness and direct evidence of Trump collusion with Russia.. So, please don't ever say we don't have evidence again.

joeyjojojunior says

Great. I am now able to state categorically that Trump paid Russia $2MM dollars to hack into the DNC and harm Clinton's chances in the general election. He further laundered Russian mob money to pay for it.

This is the difference between us. You make up stories.

I focus on facts.

It's called direct evidence.

idiot.

joeyjojojunior says

So, please don't ever say we don't have evidence again.

You have weak circumstantial evidence with which you are making inferences about guilt of an unknown crime.

W seth rich we have a crime, a motive, and direct evidence.

Flaming Neoliberal Asshole Leonid Bershisky "Don't Let Original Trump-Russia Question Fade"
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-05-23/don-t-let-the-original-trump-russia-question-fade

Don't stop, believin'
Hold on to that feeeeeelin'

Another forgotten story is the Pakistani Brothers who worked for House Dems.

CBOEtrader says

Lol, nobody knows the distinction between direct vs circumstantial?

Everybody knows what the distinction is in real life. Based on the fact that there is no direct evidence that Hillary and team killed Rich and you keep claiming that there is, it is clear that the distinction is different in your mind.

CBOEtrader says

You have weak circumstantial evidence with which you are making inferences about guilt of an unknown crime.

W seth rich we have a crime, a motive, and direct evidence.

No--there is a quote from someone who knows firsthand that Trump paid $2MM to the Russians to throw the election to him. That is direct evidence. As you so eloquently stated.

joeyjojojunior says

CBOEtrader says

You have weak circumstantial evidence with which you are making inferences about guilt of an unknown crime.

W seth rich we have a crime, a motive, and direct evidence.

No--there is a quote from someone who knows firsthand that Trump paid $2MM to the Russians to throw the election to him. That is direct evidence. As you so eloquently stated.

Link? I could use a good LOL.

YesYNot says

Based on the fact that there is no direct evidence that Hillary and team killed Rich and you keep claiming that there is, it is clear that the distinction is different in your mind.

There is direct evidence tying the motive to the crime. Fact. That evidence is questionable, for sure, but its still a mountain more than anyone can produce for Trump/Russia, even w the full resources of our corrupt deep state thrown at it.

CBOEtrader says

Link? I could use a good LOL.

joeyjojojunior says

I am now able to state categorically that Trump paid Russia $2MM dollars to hack into the DNC and harm Clinton's chances in the general election. He further laundered Russian mob money to pay for it.

TwoScoopsMcGee says

Flaming Neoliberal Asshole Leonid Bershisky "Don't Let Original Trump-Russia Question Fade"

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-05-23/don-t-let-the-original-trump-russia-question-fade

Don't stop, believin'

Hold on to that feeeeeelin'

When your thinking starts with "Proving collusion is far more important ...", the rest will always be pure confirmation bias. How about finding the truth? These vultures really don't care.

Amazing.

CBOEtrader says

That evidence is questionable,

The evidence is a body, a hint without confirmation by Assange, a lame ass retracted fox story, and a realization that rich was the panda a year later. Their is motive for Hillary, for Trump, for Russia, and for any ant Hillary group. There is testimony by the parents that Rich was about to move to NY to work for the Hillary campaign. That contradicts the conspiracy narrative you are spinning. There is evidence (torn watch band) supporting a botched robbery.

Seth Rich,
Next time "Be Careful who you piss off."
Damn! Too late.
The Big Club can reach out & touch anyone or give up your watch & wallet.