(Tea Party 247) – The mainstream media has been gleeful over the last few weeks over what they’ve deemed a serious “body blow” to the “conspiracy theorists” on the right.
This “blow” of course, is that, as they profess, the Mueller report definitely fingers the Russians as being the source for the hacked DNC emails later shared by WikiLeaks.
The theory, since Rich’s death in 2016 just before the election, is that he was WikiLeaks’ source and that he was found out and killed by DNC operatives.
Anyone knowing how the Clinton political cabal tends to operate would find this to be a pretty plausible theory, but the establishment has been working hard to debunk and scoff at the theory every since.
Let’s digest this fact, for a moment, though, under the assumption that the theory was incorrect and that Rich’s death had nothing to do with WikiLeaks or the DNC.
You have the left-wing, establishment media, who has been scoffing at the idea that Rich was killed over leaking DNC emails to WikiLeaks.
Folks on the right like Sean Hannity and Alex Jones pushed this theory, and quite irresponsibly so, they claim, especially when the police determined Rich’s death to be a “botched robbery.”
Case closed, right?
These very same people for over two years tried to convince us, at the very same time, that President Trump won the election with the help of the Russians because of a phony dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton’s opposition research firm.
These are the very same people who were honest-to-goodness upset that Mueller’s report revealed that the Russians, with no help from Trump, attempted to influence the 2016 election.
Yet, they are relieved to hear that the Russians, not Rich, leaked the DNC emails to WikiLeaks?
Confirmation bias at its finest.
So, moving forward and setting aside confirmation bias, let’s just assume that Mueller’s conclusion was correct and that Rich was not the DNC’s source.
There’s already something very suspicious about that to begin with.
Because the DNC seemed to take great efforts to avoid the hack of their servers in the first place.
Don’t believe me?
WND explained in 2018:
On June 15, 2016, CrowdStrike, a private computer security company working for the Democratic National Committee, announced that it had detected Russian malware on the DNC’s computer server. The next day, a self-described Romanian hacker, Guccifer 2.0, claimed he was a WikiLeaks source and had hacked the DNC’s server. He then posted online DNC computer files that contained metadata that indicated Russian involvement in the hack.
On July 22, 2016, just days before the Democratic National Convention, WikiLeaks published approximately 20,000 DNC emails.
Much to the embarrassment of Hillary Clinton, the released files showed that the DNC had secretly collaborated with her campaign to promote her candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination over that of Bernie Sanders. This caused the Clinton campaign serious political damage at the Democratic convention.
Well after the convention, Jennifer Palmieri, Clinton’s public relations chief, said in a March 2017 Washington Post essay that she worked assiduously during the nominating convention to “get the press to focus on… the prospect that Russia had not only hacked and stolen emails from the DNC, but that it had done so to help Donald Trump and hurt Hillary.”
We now know that at about the same time that WikiLeaks made its announcement, the DNC and the Clinton campaign were funding efforts by Fusion GPS and its hireling, former British spy Christopher Steele, to dredge up anti-Trump dirt purportedly from Russian sources.
Ultimately Steele produced a dossier which former FBI Director James Comey has publicly characterized as “salacious” and “unverified.” Nevertheless, for reasons yet to be disclosed, Comey’s FBI saw fit to use that same dossier as a basis for obtaining a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign and administration in its quest to uncover Russian ties to Trump.
Despite these revelations, the mainstream media have stubbornly clung to the Trump-Russia collusion narrative. And central to that the narrative is that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to hack the DNC email server.
But, in their coverage, the mainstream media have downplayed the very odd behavior of the DNC, the putative target of the alleged hack. For, when the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI learned of the hacking claim, they asked to examine the server.
And the DNC refused.
Why would the purported victim of a crime refuse to cooperate with law enforcement in solving that crime? Is it hiding something? Is it afraid the server’s contents will discredit the Russia-hacking story?
These are good questions.
Also good questions are why Mueller was investigating Rich’s death to begin with:
Lawyer Ty Cleavenger explained on his blog, also in 2018, before it was known for certain whether or not Mueller was even looking at Rich’s death, that:
As my regular readers know, I filed a federal lawsuit in Brooklyn to force the FBI and Justice Department to release records about Seth Rich, a Democratic National Committee employee who was murdered in the summer before the 2016 election. Thus far, DOJ officials have maintained that the FBI has no such records, and that DC police declined the bureau’s offer to assist the investigation.
In a hearing last month, however, I pointed out that Aaron alleges in a lawsuit against one of my clients that he is cooperating with “state and federal law enforcement officials” to solve his brother’s murder. That suggests FBI involvement. Near the end of the hearing, U.S. Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom ordered the FBI to produce an affidavit from someone declaring under penalty of perjury (1) how the FBI conducted the records search, and (2) whether or not any responsive records were found. The affidavit is due no later than October 9, 2018 at 10 a.m., when we have our next status conference.
There are some obvious reasons why Mueller would be interested in Aaron Rich’s financial records. I can’t divulge all of my sources, but Matt Couch and others have openly alleged that Wikileaks directed payment to the Rich brothers via eBay and PayPal, further claiming that they received the tip from Julian Assange. Mueller, meanwhile, is charged with determining whether the Trump campaign “colluded” with the Russians, which would include determining whether the Russians hacked the DNC. Any competent investigator would want to determine whether the DNC emails were hacked by the Russians versus hacked or leaked by someone else, e.g., Seth Rich.
That begs a question: If Mueller knows whether Wikileaks directed payment to Aaron, then why hasn’t he said anything one way or another? Perhaps because the answer might undermine the very basis for his investigation. After all, there’s not much need for a special counsel if the Russians were not responsible for the hacking / leaking.
In May of 2018, the DOJ also refused to release any information they had on the former DNC staffer death:
The Department of Justice is refusing to release any records related to the murder of former Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich, according to a lawyer who has been investigating the unsolved case.
But that stance by the federal government is an improvement over its previous refusal even to look for records, says the lawyer, Ty Clevenger.
Clevenger wrote on his blog, LawFlog, he received the news Wednesday in a letter from the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys.
“Actually, they have refused to release any records about Seth Rich at all, e.g., whether he had a security clearance or a background check.”
But he pointed out the “same office originally refused to even search for records related to Seth Rich, but it was overruled on October 2, 2017, after I appealed to DOJ’s Office of Information Policy.’
Six months later, he said, “they’re still refusing to release anything.”
The letter from the DOJ to Clevenger said: “The records you seek are located in a Privacy Act system of records that, in accordance with regulations promulgated by the attorney general, is exempt from the access provisions of the Privacy Act … We have processed your request under the Freedom of Information Act and are making all records required to be released, or considered appropriate for release as a matter of discretion, available to you.
“The letter is a [X] full denial.”
The letter, which provides a list of options for appeal, was signed by Kevin Krebs, assistant director in the Freedom of Information and Privacy office.
You’d think, if there was nothing going on with Seth Rich’s death or the DNC emails, the federal government and the DNC would have been a lot more forthcoming about this lack of information.
Just some food for thought.