• entries
    213
  • comments
    4,005
  • views
    50,273
william.scherk

Entry posted by william.scherk

401 views

 Share

Another unsavoury emission from the hoopla turbines. It looks like Sean Spicer may have been 'in the loop' when FoxNews got in trouble with an unwarranted story they published -- while deeper intrigue is found in the form of a lawsuit filing. A dumptruck of details arranged in a narrative of wrong-doing, true or not. The plaintiff feels FoxNews fucked him over and escaped accountability.

To set the scene (with light editing and bolded items):

On 5/28/2017 at 2:32 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

In case you are not aware of it, Seth Rich was in charge of the very material that got leaked to Wikileaks that led to the dismissal of Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC leader, blew Donna Brazile off CNN, and pissed off Bernie folks to no end. It's the material that proved the DNC was rigged in favor of Hillary Clinton. Two weeks after Rich's murder, Wikileaks made this material public. That's about the time it would have taken them to vet the material if they had gotten it from Rich (which they probably did).

I had earlier taken issue with the root of these assertions in an OL-Mail to our thought leader:

On 5/19/2017 at 8:56 PM, william.scherk said:

I note that the Infowars show snippet with Stone misrepresented the position Seth Rich had within the Democratic National Committee. They said he was not a grunt at the DNC, but the head of IT (information technology). That assertion is wholly untrue. If Infowars can't get the basics correct, for me the credibility ...

I followed up  on the Stone truth-mishap when it was raised again.

On 5/28/2017 at 7:47 AM, william.scherk said:
On 5/28/2017 at 2:32 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

In case you are not aware of it, Seth Rich was in charge of the very material that got leaked to Wikileaks

That is not true. Why claim this when it is not true?

Quote

that led to the dismissal of Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC leader, blew Donna Brazile off CNN, and pissed off Bernie folks to no end. It's the material that proved the DNC was rigged in favor of Hillary Clinton.

Wrong. You have this wrong.

Whatever happened to "identify correctly"?

Which gave me back this closely-reasoned rejoinder ... not where I had raised it, but on the front porch (emphases added).

On 5/28/2017 at 11:21 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I got a complaint offline that my statement that Rich was "in charge of the very material that got leaked to Wikileaks" is not true.

It's a minor gotcha so let me restate it: Seth Rich "had [ ... ] unaided access to the very material that got leaked to Wikileaks." He could mess with it to his heart's content if he so wished.

So there.

All fixed now.

I have a feeling in the mind of the gotcha person, this small correction will be grounds to claim that Rich wasn't even murdered, much less for political reasons, or that I'm lying and didn't understand that Rich had no idea what a computer was.

:evil:  :) 

Here's the thing.  Seth Rich access ... to the very material that got leaked is not evident. There is no evidentiary argument to support that claim. Seth Rich had his own niche within the DNC, but was not "head of IT" with unimpeded top-level access.  It is Roger Stone that misrepresented the DNC position as vastly greater than prosaic truth. He got it wrong -- and it was an essential part of his argument. I meant to highlight this misrepresentation from Infowars as a key falsehood in the argument structure.

Anyway, to "I have a feeling," being the 'gotcha person,' and noting that dear leader did not quote me, let me get all epistemological:  

Here's the minor question unanswered: what exactly was Seth Rich's position within the DNC?  

A follow-up question would be: what is the probability that Seth Rich had an all-access pass to the superstructure of the DNC computer networks?

And one can ask, "If Rich was not likely to be the leaker/conduit, then what does that say about the motive for his murder in DC?"

Anyway, who cares?  Right? Well,  I''d say one can't go wrong to rationally examine competing hypotheses. Among which is 'other parties ransacked the DNC.'

To the point, finally, the all-access-Seth  claim aside, the issue has caught fire again today. Today the hoopla units turned up sleaze and dishonesty knobs. Here is a sample of Grand Supreme Hoopla from Memeorandum:

Quote
OP ITEMS: 
i30.jpgshare.png David Folkenflik / NPR:
Behind Fox News' Baseless Seth Rich Story: The Untold Tale  —  The Fox News Channel and a wealthy supporter of President Trump worked in concert under the watchful eye of the White House to concoct a story about the murder of a young Democratic National Committee aide, according to a lawsuit filed Tuesday.
–
Discussion:
 
i49.jpgshare.png Oliver Darcy / CNNMoney:
Lawsuit: Fox News concocted Seth Rich story with oversight from White House  —  This is why the Seth Rich conspiracy won't disappear  —  The White House worked with Fox News and a wealthy Republican donor to push a story about the murder of Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich …
–
Discussion:
 
 
 
 

 

 Share

2 Comments

Recommended Comments

Michael Stuart Kelly

Something ain't going to age well in this thread.

The FBI has to give up the contents on Seth Rich's laptop, which it has according to government records, but it wants a 66 year period before it has to give out the information.

HUGE: FBI Now Wants 66 Years Before Releasing Information on Seth Rich – Information They Originally DENIED They Had!

seth-rich-in-fact.jpg

tgpfavicon.png HUGE: FBI Now Wants 66 Years Before Releasing Information on Seth Rich - Information They Originally DENIED They Had!

WWW.THEGATEWAYPUNDIT.COM
THIS IS A HUGE DEVELOPMENT– In September US District Judge for the Eastern District of Texas ordered the FBI to “produce the information it possesses related to Seth Rich’s laptop.” In our previous...

Hmmmmmm...

They want 66 years to give out information they said they don't have.

Nice...

Where are words like concocted, baseless, false, knowingly faked, conspiracy, manufactured, and so on when you need them?

Ah... I see...

In the headlines of the mainstream press back then.

:)

Michael

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now