1. No reasonable person can deny that evidence exists indicating that Seth Rich may have been the DNC leaker.
I think reasonable people can disagree on the quality of the evidence (how much does Kim Dotcom really know, how reliable is he, how
-
-
indicative are the Wikileaks and Assange statements, etc.), and some people might say that there's a 10% chance he was the leaker while
-
others may say there's over a 90% chance. That's fine, there's room for debate there. I think the odds are pretty high. But the
-
position of "this is just an insane conspiracy theory with no evidence whatsoever" is blatantly wrong and willfully ignorant.
-
2. Any unsolved murder of a possible/likely leaker should be regarded with extra suspicion. This is fairly obvious. Some people really don't
-
want those kinds of damaging documents to get out, and if they knew who was responsible they might take matters into their own hands.
-
3. Coincidences can happen, and sometimes even a leaker could just be a DC crime victim. This is possible, but it does not appear that the
-
assassination angle has been fully investigated.
-
One can only conclude people screaming about how this must be ended to protect the family are just politically motivated to protect the DNC.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.