https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.1534cedc7b9b
Aren't all of you "patriots" and "informed" voters who've been peddling this sh!t on here for the past two weeks so proud of yourselves?
We’re Seth Rich’s parents. Stop politicizing our son’s murder.
- Thread starter tommyjo
- Start date
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.1534cedc7b9b
Aren't all of you "patriots" and "informed" voters who've been peddling this sh!t on here for the past two weeks so proud of yourselves?
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
But what if they are not conspiracies and lies?
This_person
Well-Known Member
Now, why wouldn't you post this paragraph:
To those who sincerely want to get to the bottom of Seth’s murder, we don’t hold this against you. We don’t think you are monsters, and we don’t think you are terrible people. We know that so many people out there really do care, don’t know what to think and are angry at the lack of answers.
I would say that if you really want to get to the bottom of Seth's murder, you would want people to investigate the possibility it had something to do with his job. Multiple people have given good reason to think this is a valuable avenue down which we should travel in the investigation.
I agree that constantly going after the parents is harmful - they've given their statement, and that should be the end. But, if they really want to know about his murder, they should shut up and let the people looking into it look into it - regardless of where it leads.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Proud for what? That Rich was murdered under suspicious circumstances? That Rich was in engaged in politics and decided to ALLEGEDLY leak DNC information to Wikileaks? How can something like this NOT get politicized?
Where "sh!t" lies with me is, when there is a Clinton a scandal, there is death. Someone ends up dead. You tell me TJ, what's there to be proud of there?
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
The allegations are what politicized the death. Otherwise we just have a suspected robbery gone wrong as reported by the police.
Any idea why they called it that? Seeing how a) he was shot in the back and b) the "thief" took nothing from his body. Pretty dumb "thief", huh?
PsyOps
Pixelated
Your typical "nothing to see here" response, when it suits your thinking, doesn't surprise me.
Last edited:
This_person
Well-Known Member
I would guess that the reward offered by Wikileaks had something to do with it, too; as (now, much later) does Mr. Dotcom. The fact that this statement was made:
“Our whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often [face] very significant risks. A 27-year-old that works for the DNC was shot in the back, murdered just a few weeks ago for unknown reasons, as he was walking down the street in Washington, D.C.,” Assange said.
lends a lot of credence to the idea that Mr. Rich had at least more than a passing acquaintance with Wikileaks.
Or, instead of "the Russians", was it Guccifer 2.0? http://thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/dnc-hacker-leaks-trump-oppo-report-647293
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
its a lot more beleivable than a political assaination where the hitman decided to beat up his victim prior to shooting him in the back
This_person
Well-Known Member
I would suspect the beating had something to do with getting a thumb-drive or other thing that was needed. At least, that makes more sense than the thieves beat him, then shot him, then tried to get his watch off, then just ran away empty-handed.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Well, we know political assassinations have never happened before.
"Beat up"? The account from his girlfriend said there was a struggle. What this means is this murderer approached Rich, Rich saw the gun and tried do what he could save his life. My suspicion is, Rich recognized the person. No, this is not from any sort of evidence; it's solely my opinion. Rich was shot twice in the back. I don't know what getting "beat up" has to do with it anyway. The initial investigation said it was a robbery. Nothing was taken from Rich. There was no robbery.
You don't see this murder suspicious at all?
He can't. He has to stick to narratives that favor his gal Hillary. Of course.
PsyOps
Pixelated
He's too embarrassed to admit this, but is transparently obvious about it.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
I'd say pretty dumb hitman.....
Well, we know political assassinations have never happened before.
"Beat up"? The account from his girlfriend said there was a struggle. What this means is this murderer approached Rich, Rich saw the gun and tried do what he could save his life. My suspicion is, Rich recognized the person. No, this is not from any sort of evidence; it's solely my opinion. Rich was shot twice in the back. I don't know what getting "beat up" has to do with it anyway. The initial investigation said it was a robbery. Nothing was taken from Rich. There was no robbery.
You don't see this murder suspicious at all?
I see it as suspicious as any other unsolved meeting.
The struggle doesn't jive with an assassination IMO. I just don't see how any assassin is going to let himself be seen, let alone get close enough to struggle with the victim, if he intended to shoot him in the back in the first place.
A struggle is much more indicative of a botched robbery/mugging IMO, and apparently in the opinion of the authorities.
I've never seen progbots evidence any embarrassment or shame about their ridiculous narratives; that's probably what keeps them immune from the effects of critical thinking or facts to the contrary.
How many do you know?