BREAKING: Assange Suggests Murdered Seth Rich Was Wikileaks DNC Source!

The media is framing this in a negative light, as WikiLeaks 'fueling' conspiracy theories. It's no surprise, but this offer from WikiLeaks is better than nothing. Hopefully it leads to a conclusion.

That said, i think it is important to not jump to conclusions. While it appears that Assange was suggesting that Rich was a source, he also said that he wasn't implying that. Furthermore:

The editor of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, said in a statement issued through an intermediary that he would not confirm or deny whether Rich or any person was a source for the organisation, which over the years has obtained and released massive amounts of internal emails and other documents from the military, the State Department and other agencies. The statement says that policy "also covers alleged sources who were deceased."

"We treat threats towards any suspected WikiLeaks sources with extreme gravity," the statement says. "This should not be taken to imply that Seth Rich was a source to WikiLeaks or that his murder is connected to our publications. We hope our efforts will contribute to the family's calls for information and to the separate reward issued by police. We have a history of obtaining information that has significantly contributed to many legal proceedings, including successful prosecutions."

www.smh.com.au...

The plot f#%king thickens...

Come November, the sh1t is hitting the fan. Brace yourselves, America.

I'm still trying to figure out how a 27 year old that works in the voter expansion division could have access to sensitive DNC information.

I'm also trying to figure out where the hell the story that he was en route to the FBI on the night of his murder, originated from...when his family said he told his girlfriend he was on his way home and "almost there"

Snopes

Assange is an anarchist that would love to see the world burn and personally has an axe to grind against Hillary

originally posted by: Annee
Benghazi cleared.
Emails cleared.

If by cleared you mean all her supporters ignore her lies, then by all means it's cleared.

The proof is documented. She's lied about both. Time to deflect, because you can't deny the proof. It's documented. She lied.

originally posted by: muse7
I'm still trying to figure out how a 27 year old that works in the voter expansion division could have access to sensitive DNC information.

I'm also trying to figure out where the hell the story that he was en route to the FBI on the night of his murder, originated from...when his family said he told his girlfriend he was on his way home and "almost there"

Hard to figure out? Hillary doesn't care who has access to information. It probably wasn't secure. Who cares what gets out, will just be ignored anyway.... Democratic party staple these days.

I'm just saying, neither here nor there, take it for what it's worth,
this sounds a lot like that Mary Mahoney incident.

originally posted by: muse7

Assange is an anarchist that would love to see the world burn and personally has an axe to grind against Hillary

No.

He wants governments held accountable for their massive corruption. It's amusing Americans like to tell everyone how corrupt Russia is, China is, Mexico is, yet when someone puts their life at stake to prove our country is just as corrupt, we see some folks grabbing at straws and attempting to spin it as anarchy and wanting to see the world burn.

Here's some perspective for you since you're in need. The fastest way to see the world burn is to allow corrupt governments like the US to continue in their corrupt ways behind the scenes with little to no accountability. And Hillary should be in prison right now. There's our "accountability". Clinton to the FBI to the DOJ up thru the Whitehouse. All paid off. All blackmailed. All compromised to the point a career criminal with blood on her hands like Hillary is skating free and running for President.

a reply to: daaskapital

Fair enough. Things are happening so fast right now.

originally posted by: tweetie
a reply to: daaskapital

Fair enough. Things are happening so fast right now.

A further breakdown of his interview on Netherlands TV shows that he was ultimately saying they are investigating Rich's death because these incidents tend to concern potential sources.

Of course, i think there is more to it. Assange has alluded to the possibility that his source was an insider. He may or may not know if Rich was his source, but he is probably intending to find out why he, a DNC staffer, was murdered and if it has anything to do with the leaks. If they can identify some crucial information, then they may know if he was the source or not. If their reward, on top of that already offered by law enforcement, works - then great.

Yeah, it's freaky how many major things have happened in the last week. This election cycle is insane.

I truly believe it's a defining moment in our nation's future.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

By the way Rich was conscious when he was found by police but died in the hospital.

Is the Washington DC police dept in on the conspiracy too?

I think Assange should start investigating Trump.

Seems only fair.

If Assange does indeed have "dirt" why didn't he release it during the primaries? Why wait all this time? Why annouce the 20k reward in a Dutch TV program that probably no one in the US knows about or watches?

And more importantly I'm trying to figure out how a 27 year old staffer that works in voter expansion would have access to sensitive information.

Guccifer had nothing, and according to the same people peddling assange's bull crap he was going to bring Clinton down.

a reply to: Annee

Cause trump murders people?

originally posted by: Annee
I think Assange should start investigating Trump.

Seems only fair.

Hillary has a trail of death and corruption spanning numerous countries and numerous continents across this globe.

Trump doesn't. He has 4 bankruptcies out of 100+ businesses and harsh "tone".

It's only logical to concentrate on Hillary, the far bigger threat, especially when the liberal MSM will not.

a reply to: Annee
How do you know he isn't? Besides, didn't anyone ever tell you that life isn't fair?

Didn't Assange recently say he was going to release something huge that would guarantee a Clinton indictment?

Was that before or after this murder?

a reply to: muse7

How do you know Guccifer had nothing?

Relying on the corrupt MSM to bring it to you? If he had nothing our government wouldn't have wasted time/money extraditing him to the US.

originally posted by: Annee
I think Assange should start investigating Trump.

Seems only fair.

I'm honestly sick of this argument. If you have had any decent conversations or debates with people, you would know that WikiLeaks can only publish what they receive. This whole DNC leak is not an attack on the Democrats by Assange/Trump/Russia/whoever else is declared an enemy. WikiLeaks had leaked Republican campaign details 7 years ago, and Assange made a sly remark on Netherlands TV to 'watch the space' for any Trump/Republican leaks. Certainly, it seems that he may have something up his sleeve.

Any self-respecting media outlet would publish those leaks, because they are in the public interest. Indeed, some media organisations were publishing material released by Guccifer 2.0. If you want to have a go at Assange, have a go at those other media outlets too.

originally posted by: daaskapital


Any self-respecting media outlet would publish those leaks, because they are in the public interest. Indeed, some media organisations were publishing material released by Guccifer 2.0. If you want to have a go at Assange, have a go at those other media outlets too.

I'm totally over it.

But, if its going to be - - throw Trump into the mix too.

Mostly the usual responses. At least yours is creative.