WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder • Hacker News Board

Re: WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder

#91

Post by Bartweiss » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 2:04 PM UTC

eli wrote: post #49

leaveyou wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what was Seth Rich's job at DNC ? Technically, could he have leaked those emails ? How can we be sure Assange is dishonest when he implies Seth Rich was the source ? Is there solid proof that Rich was really the victim of a failed robbery and not revenge disguised as robbery ?

> Is there solid proof that Rich was really the victim of a failed robbery and not revenge disguised as robbery ? What would "solid proof" look like? Someone confessing? What if that person were paid off? This is the problem with conspiracy theories: they are impossible to disprove to believers. Any evidence against them just serves to prove how deep the conspiracy goes.

I think that's a bit quick to accuse someone of conspiracy theories.

At the moment, Seth Rich's death consists of a nighttime shooting, no killer caught, and nothing stolen. Police are treating it as a "presumed attempted robbery". If some local criminal is found with the murder weapon and no alibi, I think that would satisfy a lot of people that it was a robbery gone wrong.

Yes, there will be conspiracy theorists, but we're not really at "impossible to disprove" yet. There's still plenty of room for ordinary discussion - it's still an open investigation to the police even. I don't believe the 'revenge' story at all, but I don't think people are crazy for asking "Hey, what was Rich's DNC job? And is there evidence for the robbery story?"

Re: WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder

#92

Post by skylan_q » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 2:05 PM UTC

Vermeulen wrote: post #30

it's pretty clear from interviews with Assange that Wikileaks is entirely ego driven, and always has been. When his trial was happening rather than let Wikileaks distance itself from it, like other leaders like this would, he used it as a tool to argue his case to the public. He has been releasing information out of spite rather than public good. An impartial organization like Wikileaks should exist, that whistleblow…

Yes, being cooped up in an embassy for years while state actors hold phony charges against you threatening your arrest must be for the thrill of it.

Re: WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder

#93

Post by 2close4comfort » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 2:05 PM UTC

dvcc wrote: post #2

WikiLeaks is becoming a political mess with Assange leading the charge. The philosophy that all information should be public is just absurd. There is a reason that the whistle-blowers prior passed their information to reporters, it allowed for certain pieces of information to be redacted. Sending out the name of every woman voter in Turkey does not benefit anyone. Leaking the private conversation of a man and his dau…

Information should be free the twist is that Wikileaks is brokering what is free and what is not...which is supposedly what they were working against. Assange (much like Greenwald) were not as true to the ideals that they set forth to the world and they are no better then the causes they were supposedly against. Reports are worse then Wikileaks they have no protection from Gov and worse they have no actual knowledge in the advanced areas but think they can make decisions that affect the dissemination of that information based on faulty reasoning.

Re: WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder

#94

Post by ceejayoz » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 2:05 PM UTC

tanderson92 wrote: post #24

ceejayoz wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They had a clear preference, just like the RNC preferred a non-Trump candidate. Imagine what you'd read about Trump in their emails. That's not evidence of election rigging.

This is a weak talking point. The DNC has in its charter that it must be neutral. What the RNC may have thought of Trump is irrelevant. Anyway, you really want to be playing moral limbo with the RNC right now? That is where the moral high ground is? As others mentioned, there was coordination on talking points as well to discredit his campaign.

The DNC also has in its charter that they must work to get Democratic candidates elected and work towards getting the ideals of the Democratic Party implemented.

Sanders didn't lose because the DNC said mean things in their internal email system. He likely lost because he never made much of a dent in the heavily black Democratic voting population in the South.

Re: WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder

#95

Post by evilDagmar » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 2:05 PM UTC

SmellTheGlove wrote: post #18

dvcc wrote: post #2

WikiLeaks is becoming a political mess with Assange leading the charge. The philosophy that all information should be public is just absurd. There is a reason that the whistle-blowers prior passed their information to reporters, it allowed for certain pieces of information to be redacted. Sending out the name of every woman voter in Turkey does not benefit anyone. Leaking the private conversation of a man and his dau…

It's simpler than that. In the past, information was passed to trusted reporters because the media was trusted. A lot of what Wikileaks is reporting now is that the media is coordinating with the same people that these leaks are about in the first place. In other words, the media isn't trustworthy. So it's a choice, put it out whole, or take a real risk that it'll never see the light of day. You could argue that Wiki…

You both appear to be forgetting something much more important.

Information was passed to trusted reporters because they were the only ones who had access and the ability to publish in a newspaper so that many people could be informed at once.

This is no longer exclusively the purview of newspaper/television reporters.

Re: WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder

#96

Post by bsbechtel » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 2:06 PM UTC

Clubber wrote: post #67

HelloMcFly wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if we generously interpret the "whole lot of reporters", the implication here is that they were left with no reporters to work with. That's absurd. There are many, many reporters, and even many credible reporters. It would not have been difficult to find non-implicated reporters that could deliver this with an impact. You're acting as if there is a small group of reporters who, if compromised, make it impossible…

I agree with this. There is no vast media conspiracy. If nothing else, Fox would be all over it, as would the tabloid (most of these days) media. There's no honor among thieves.

I'm not sure an organization as biased as Fox News would improve the credibility of the leaks by any measurable amount.

Re: WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder

#97

Post by skylan_q » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 2:06 PM UTC

parfe wrote: post #6

Wikileaks, and Assange specifically, keep implying Seth Rich leaked them DNC emails to attention whore on his death. Really disgusting behavior.

No, it has nothing to do with the fact that the DNC is corrupt and willing to kill people to rig elections.

That's not the problem here.

The problem is that attention has been brought to this murder which highlights the corruption.

We can't let anyone know that the DNC is corrupt!

Re: WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder

#98

Post by busterarm » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 2:07 PM UTC

Clubber wrote: post #62

SmellTheGlove wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think about it like a data project at a company (because that's my job, heh). There's this weird, but accurate, assumption that the first to report something is assumed true, and anything that comes later either has to conform to that or is presumed to be wildly inaccurate. It's not so much the risk that the media buries it, I was incorrect in framing it that way. The bigger risk is that the media spins and reports i…

The media is spinning it and reporting it now. I'm fine with the release, I'm not fine with essentially doxxing all the donors. Also, Assange is currently putting his own spin on it implying the DNC staffer that died was murdered. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

> implying the DNC staffer that died was murdered.

The DNC staffer that died _was murdered_. That's exactly what happened. I think what you mean is they're implying motive and conspiracy.

A $20k reward might clear the air either way.

Re: WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder

#99

Post by DominikR » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 2:07 PM UTC

patrickaljord wrote: post #36

ceejayoz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge > The site was described by CNNMoney as offering a "deeply conspiratorial, anti-establishment and pessimistic view of the world." Financial journalists Felix Salmon and Justin Fox have characterized the site as conspiratorial. Fox described Ivandjiiski as "a wonderfully persistent investigative reporter" and credited him for successfully turning high-frequency trading "into a…

Zero Hedge clearly has a pro-Russia bias just like CNN has a pro-US bias. Doesn't mean you should ignore everything CNN or zerohedge say. Every once in a while, cnn and zerohedge publish interesting stuff, just keep in mind their bias while reading them.

> like CNN has a pro-US bias

Only if you believe it is pro-US to abolish the right to bear arms, the right to free speech (hate speech laws) and to impose Socialism on US citizens.

Re: WikiLeaks offers $20,000 for information on former DNC staffer's murder

#100

Post by yaskyj » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 2:07 PM UTC

leaveyou wrote: post #16

parfe wrote: post #6

Wikileaks, and Assange specifically, keep implying Seth Rich leaked them DNC emails to attention whore on his death. Really disgusting behavior.

I wonder what was Seth Rich's job at DNC ? Technically, could he have leaked those emails ? How can we be sure Assange is dishonest when he implies Seth Rich was the source ? Is there solid proof that Rich was really the victim of a failed robbery and not revenge disguised as robbery ?

Snopes' take: http://www.snopes.com/seth-conrad-rich/