His name was Seth Rich. The mainstream media is about to go into overdrive about a possible impeachment of President Trump. They are beginning to show their desperation as the Russian narrative is about to be broken. The only justification ever offered for the Russian collusion is that Russia hacked the DNC servers and gave the information to Wikileaks. If the information did not come from Russians then they would have done very little or nothing to help Trump.

Leak Vs. Hack

From the very start there has been very little discussion in the media about whether the information was leaked or hacked. The Democrats needed the information to be hacked to fit in with their Russian narrative and so it was a hack not a leak. Some of the DNC operatives have recently said in their new book that the Russian angle was determined right after Hillary lost the election. It makes sense as the Clinton team would need to find employment in the future and would need to justify why they lost a campaign and states that have not been lost for decades when they had twice the money the other campaign had. The fact that there was a possibility that it could have been a leak was not even discussed.

Make no mistake evidence does exist for both sides and it is not as one sided as it seems. On the one hand you have the intelligence community saying that it was a hack. Except that you don’t really have anyone on the intelligence community providing anything specific instead we have the press quoting some “anonymous sources” confirming that it was the Russian who gave the info to Wikileaks. I hope i do not need to tell anyone that blind trust in the intelligence community is not a good thing. Democrats seem to have forgotten the lessons taught by Iraq.

On the other hand you have Wikileaks. Julian Assange has consistently said that the information came from a leaker not a hacker. Wikileaks has a reputation as never having to recant any of the information they have given out. Even the DNC emails themselves were proven to be completely true. I am not advocating for blind trust for Wikileaks as well. Yet the only argument the left has for accepting the anonymous sources of the NYT is their reputations. Surely in that case the reputation of the organization with a 100% accuracy rating should be considered.

Motive

This next part is not discussed at all. In fact I may be the first person to point this out. If you pay attention to nothing else in this article please pay attention to the next sentence. The Intelligence Community has motive to discredit Wikileaks. I have bolded it for your convenience. Read the bolded sentence five times if possible. With the information given during Iraq, the Vault 7 release, Chelsea Manning and others Wikileaks has proven to be a very effective check on the powers of the government. The intelligence community would love nothing more than for Wikileaks to be tied to the Russians so that they would lose the trust of the American people. With no independent party to check them the intelligence community can go back to doing whatever they want.

Seth Rich

We now go to Seth Rich. According to his family, most of which are democrats and some of which are current democrat political operatives, Seth Rich was a lifelong committed democrat who loved Hillary and would never ever think of leaking to Wikileaks. Julian Assange on the other hand has been hinting heavily that his source was Seth Rich. He has offered a reward for information of the murder and has publicly stated that the operatives which gave him the emails put their life on the line doing so. Right after Rich was murdered. Of course Seth Rich is dead so we can attribute anything we want to him. His family can say that he would die before betraying Hillary Clinton and we can say otherwise. The only thing that matters is what he actually did. Anonymous sources as well as the investigator assigned to his case have stated that his computer forwarded 44000 emails from the DNC servers to Wikileaks. The exact amount of emails that have been published. The investigator has of course been silenced by the family of Seth and a confidentiality agreement but the questions still remain.

We now go to the murder of Seth Rich. This comes after emails from Podesta saying that they should make “examples” of the leakers. The murder of Seth Rich has been ruled as a “botched robbery”. This is very strange. In a robbery the primary motive is financial gain. In a botched robbery what usually happens is the items of value are stolen but the victim is killed in the process. In this case the victim was killed but everything of value was left alone. It is almost like the killer was not interested in them.

Bias

Given that the intelligence community has more motive to lie about Wikileaks than they ever did about Iraq. The credibility of Wikileaks itself. The suspicious murder of Seth Rich and the heavy insinuation from Assange that the leaker was Rich. The fact that the DNC denied the FBI access to their servers despite being sure of the hacking (why bother about your privacy when everything has been compromised anyway). Why exactly are we not even looking into the possibility that this was a leak and not a hack? Could the media have some sort of bias and are pushing their preconceived conclusion for their own ends?

If the media will not do their job then we will have to do it for them.

His Name Was Seth Rich.