(12-04-2017 07:51 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(12-03-2017 10:09 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Wikileaks (100% history of accuracy) founder all but admitted that Rich was their source, and former dnc chairwoman Donna Brazile admitted her suspicions surrounding Rich's murder. She said she feared for her life after he was killed, and would close the blinds to her office so that snipers couldn't take her out.

Like #pizzagate, just because the fake news media builds up and knocks over a strawman, doesn't mean they have debunked anything.

1. Wikileaks data dumps have been, up until this point, accurate. But Assange himself has lied on many occasions, Wikileaks has shown a distinct bias by literally coordinating with Trump Jr to time their leaks, and tellingly there have been no leaks harmful to Putin or Russia in the last few years. Assange admitted he had RNC emails, but stated he chose not to release them. He stated he would never name a source, yet he claims the DNC emails came from Seth Rich. Provide some sort of evidence that is the case, Assange certainly has the ability to do so if he knew his source, yet there's nothing.

2. A person whose coworker was murdered, working on an election in which there was well known and documented foreign involvement, stated she was scared? Color me shocked. But contorting that to be evidence that Seth Rich was murdered by the DNC because he leaked emails? It's not as if she's been silent, where are any follow up claims which clarify this to mean what you claim it to mean? Sure seems like you're working backwards, trying to find evidence to fit your narrative, and ignoring evidence from those same sources which run contrary to it.

3. What is there to debunk about the Pizzagate that hasn't been debunked? Specific examples.

1. He says he won't name a source (in order to protect them), but if that source has already been killed, what harm does it do to *hint* at them? Particuarly when the alt-left is pushing their Russia collusion conspiracy theories.

3. podesta's emails.