Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Mysterious Death of Seth Rich
Who was Seth Rich? 

[Image: seth-rich-2.jpg]

Quote:Seth Conrad Rich (January 3, 1989 – July 10, 2016) was fatally shot in the Bloomingdale neighborhood of Washington, D.C. He was a 27-year-old employee of the Democratic National Committee (DNC).[/url]

The crime was used as the basis for conspiracy theories, which have since been debunked in statements by law enforcement agencies. These theories falsely stated that Rich was the source of the [url=]2016 Democratic National Committee email leak

Source Link

The quote above says the conspiracy involving Seth Rich as the source for the leaked emails has been debunked by police.

Oh, really?! 

Let's look further into this DEBUNKED theory, shall we?

Assange has hinted that deceased Seth Rich may have been a secret source for WikiLeaks. That definitely made him a big target.
But, who gave the order to kill him?

And, get a load of this next video!  Seth was expected to live until the local law enforcement officers swarmed the hospital and blocked the doctor from attending to Seth.  He died shortly after. 

(Start at the 1:34 mark to avoid the beginning ad.)

The police have officially closed this case, saying it was a botched robbery, but if you believe that, I have some great land for sale in the swamps of Louisiana great for vacation buyers.   smallwink

I hope the REAL truth comes out someday, and Seth's murderers get what they deserve. I don't think Seth's soul will rest until it does. tinycrying

Well don't expect any assistance from The Washington Post because they did this
back in February...

John Podesta joins The Washington Post as a contributing columnist.

'The Washington Post today announced that John Podesta will join the Opinion
section as a contributing columnist. Podesta, former chairman of the 2016 Hillary
Clinton campaign, will provide commentary and analysis on the intersection of
politics and policy, the Trump administration and the future of the Democratic Party.

“No one knows more about how Washington works, how the White House operates,
and how policy ideas are translated into reality than John Podesta,” said Editorial
Page Editor Fred Hiatt.

“His long experience in Congress, inside two Democratic White Houses and on the
front lines of numerous presidential campaigns, will offer readers vital insight into
Washington and politics at the start of a new era.”...'
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
(05-25-2017, 01:33 PM)BIAD Wrote: Well don't expect any assistance from The Washington Post because they did this
back in February...

John Podesta joins The Washington Post as a contributing columnist.

'The Washington Post today announced that John Podesta will join the Opinion
section as a contributing columnist. Podesta, former chairman of the 2016 Hillary
Clinton campaign, will provide commentary and analysis on the intersection of
politics and policy, the Trump administration and the future of the Democratic Party.

“No one knows more about how Washington works, how the White House operates,
and how policy ideas are translated into reality than John Podesta,” said Editorial
Page Editor Fred Hiatt.

“His long experience in Congress, inside two Democratic White Houses and on the
front lines of numerous presidential campaigns, will offer readers vital insight into
Washington and politics at the start of a new era.”...'

Well, if they keep him after this, they are crazy!  I hope his political career, and anything to do with the public, is over. tinysure

[Image: 20PLEA2-master768.jpg]

Anthony Weiner Pleads Guilty to Federal Obscenity Charge

Quote:Anthony D. Weiner, the former Democratic congressman whose sexting scandals ended his political career and embroiled him in a tumultuous F.B.I. investigation of Hillary Clinton before the election, pleaded guilty to a felony on Friday, crying openly as he admitted to conduct that he knew was “as morally wrong as it was unlawful.”

The plea agreement ended a federal investigation into a series of sexually explicit pictures and messages that Mr. Weiner sent last year to a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina.

It capped the long, tortured downfall of Mr. Weiner, who ruined a once-promising career in Congress and then spoiled various attempts at resurrecting his reputation, all through his uncontrolled habit of using social media and texts to send explicit images to women.
It also cost him his marriage: His estranged wife, Huma Abedin, a top aide to Mrs. Clinton, filed for divorce from Mr. Weiner on Friday in New York, according to two people with knowledge of the action.
Continue reading the main story

Continue reading the main story
“I engaged in obscene communications with this teenager,” Mr. Weiner said, his voice high and shaky, and his body trembling. Those communications “included sharing explicit images and encouraging her to engage in sexually explicit conduct,” just as he had done with adult women, he said.

Continue reading the main story
Mr. Weiner, 52, will have to register as a sex offender where he works and lives, and he may face a prison term. He pleaded guilty to transferring obscene material to a minor, which carries a sentence of up to 10 years in prison.
Federal prosecutors said in the plea agreement that a sentence in the range of 21 to 27 months would be “fair and appropriate.” Mr. Weiner is to be sentenced on Sept. 8 in Federal District Court in Manhattan.
Mr. Weiner was led into the courtroom for the brief hearing wearing a slim navy suit with a white shirt and maroon tie; a wedding band could be seen on his left hand. He sat quietly between his lawyers, exchanging whispers with one, Arlo Devlin-Brown, and an occasional smile.

[Image: anthony-weiner-plea-agreement-master180.gif]

But Mr. Weiner quickly dissolved into tears as he read from a written statement when the judge, Loretta A. Preska, asked that he describe what he had done.

Continue reading the main story
“I’ve given this some thought,” he told her.
As he paused to brace himself, Mr. Devlin-Brown placed a hand on his lower back to comfort him and a courtroom worker brought over a box of tissues.

Continue reading the main story
Mr. Weiner told Judge Preska that from the time he was in Congress through the first half of last year, “I’ve compulsively sought attention from women who contacted me on social media, and I engaged with many of them in both sexual and nonsexual conversation.”
“These destructive impulses brought great devastation to my family and friends, and destroyed my life’s dream in public service,” he said. “Yet I remained in denial even as the world around me fell apart.”

Reports of the federal investigation surfaced in September after reported that Mr. Weiner had engaged in an online relationship with the girl, which included explicit messages sent over social media and suggestive texts.

Continue reading the main story
It was during the investigation that the F.B.I. seized Mr. Weiner’s electronic devices, including a laptop on which agents found a trove of emails to Ms. Abedin. That discovery led to the surprise announcement in late October by James B. Comey, then the F.B.I. director, that the bureau was conducting a new investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s handling of official email, an inquiry that ended two days before the election, with no charges brought. Mrs. Clinton recently attributed her election loss in part to Mr. Comey’s announcement.

Continue reading the main story
After the guilty plea, Joon H. Kim, the acting United States attorney in Manhattan, said, “Weiner’s conduct was not only reprehensible but a federal crime, one for which he is now convicted and will be sentenced.”
Mr. Devlin-Brown said that his client had “accepted full responsibility” for his conduct, and that the resolution was “on terms far less severe than could have been sought.” He said Mr. Weiner would have no further comment and “remains focused on his recovery.”

Continue reading the main story
As Judge Preska informed Mr. Weiner of his rights during the hearing, he stood with his hands together before him, listening intently. When the judge asked if he was pleading guilty because he was guilty, he responded directly, “I am guilty, your honor.”

It is Plain for everyone to see, Yes, he was Murdered and we know who ordered the hit and why.

Well the MSM actually INVESTIGATE? NO!  
They aren't into the the Truth. They don't have actual investigative reporters anymore.

Besides, they won't want to upset the Clinton Crime Family.
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]

I wanted to post this video, because My husband often visits this programs site and listens, he says they are very good at what they do.
I have watched and I agree.
So now that we're back I wanted to add to the thread if I could.

The next video is a Must see, we think. You decide.

If you're a Guest and you are not sure Seth Rich Was Murdered,,, These two videos should help to convince you along with the other post.
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]

Quote:REAKING: I've found evidence that the DNC fabricated the Russian conspiracy all the way in June 2016, and that Seth Rich may have died to cover it up. Long but worth it!Important (self.The_Donald)
submitted 1 day ago * by byecomeyx4
Added 3 FAQs relating to Warren Flood's involvement, why Guccifer 2.0 leaked RNC data, and Robbin Young. Please see them below.
Proof that DNC manufactured the Russian controversy in June 2016
Democrats manufactured the Russian interference story as a disinformation campaign all the way back in June 2016. 
And this post will prove this beyond reasonable doubt with evidence. Not just that, but there is great circumstantial evidence of illegal activity going all the way up to the Obama administration, and provides new motive for why Seth Rich was murdered.
The evidence is presented in this post.
Understanding the order in which the events happened will be important to understand why it was the DNC and only the DNC could have manufactured the Russian campaign.
SourceJune 14, 2016
The DNC releases a statement stating they have been hacked.
Washington Post
June 15, 2016
Crowdstrike (cybersecurity firm) releases reports suggesting the DNC was hacked by Russians
June 15, 2016
Guccifer 2.0 publishes first DNC email documents and claims he has sent them to Wikileaks.Guccifer insists he is not Russian.
Guccifer 2.0 blog
June 16, 2016
Vice publishes article titled "'Guccifer 2.0' Is Likely a Russian Government Attempt to Cover Up Its Own Hack." Other media outlets follow suit calling Guccifer a Russian government job
July 22, 2016
Wikileaks releases the DNC email documents
July 27, 2016
Trump makes infamous "Russia: If you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing" joke that starts allegations of Russian collusion
In bullet point form:
  1. DNC announces they've been hacked.
  2. The day after, a hacker calling himself Guccifer 2.0 claims to have taken credit for the hack and announces he will be giving his documents to Wikileaks. Guccifer 2.0 vehemently denies being Russian, a façade he keeps up throughout his activity.
  3. Bolstered by Crowdstrike's report and the metadata in Guccifer 2.0's documents, media outlets immediately start screaming that Guccifer 2.0 must be Russian agents.
  4. Finally, Wikileaks releases the DNC documents a month after Guccifer 2.0 did.  
This post unmasks Guccifer 2.0's identity as none other than the DNC.
What did Guccifer 2.0 do?
Guccifer 2.0 hosted a Wordpress site where the DNC documents could be publicly downloaded. June 15th was the date of the first Guccifer 2.0 leak; further leaks would continue thereafter. I focus only on the first leak, as they contain the metadata which are essential to proving it was a DNC operation. 
What were in the leaked Guccifer documents? 
Guccifer 2.0 leaked a total of 10 Office documents from the DNC in the first batch (many more would come, but none contain the same "mistakes" as the ones I shall detail).
All Microsoft Office documents have metadata entries which contain attributes about the document itself such as the user that created them, the user that modified them, and so on. This metadata is usually invisible to viewers but can be viewed with a raw text editor like Notepad, or on Mac OS, vim.
It would be unusual for a leaker to modify the metadata, but Guccifer 2.0 did, claiming that it was his "watermark."
In Office, the metadata includes the owner of the Office application who created the file and the owner of the Office application who modified the file. I present a list of the document names having metadata values for original author & modified author:
Document name
Original author
Modified author1.doc
Warren Flood
Феликс Эдмундович
Warren Flood
Феликс Эдмундович
Warren Flood
Феликс Эдмундович
Феликс Эдмундович
Феликс Эдмундович, or Felix Edmundovich in the English alphabet, was an early Soviet statesman who died in 1926.
So what... Warren Flood, Blake, and jbs836 were the original authors?
Short answer: No. Non-technical answer: For one thing, we can cross-reference the actual authors from the Wikileaks dump. 1.doc is in the "verified" Wikileaks release as the attachment which can be downloaded from here which has the original author of "Lauren Dillon." So, wait, who is Warren Flood et al? Each of these documents had a creation date of June 15, and were modified by "Феликс Эдмундович" a few minutes later.
In Office 2007 format specification, there is a certain stylesheet template which dictates overall formatting for the document. In three of the documents by Warren Flood, we find the identical metadata.
{\s108\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\wrapdefault\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\contextualspace \rtlch\fcs1 \af1\afs20\alang1025 \ltrch\fcs0\f1\fs20\lang1049\langfe1049\cgrid\langnp1049\langfenp1049\sbasedon0 \snext108 \slink107 \sqformat \spriority1 \styrsid11758497 No Spacing;}  
The above line appears across all three of Warren Flood's documents. styrsid11758497 is an unique identifier that is author-associative. The fact that it does not appear in the other documents indicates it's associated with Warren Flood and not Феликс Эдмундович.
Why is this important? Well, the \langfe1049 portion is a setting saying that Russian language should be used as the default language for the document.
Had Феликс Эдмундович been setting the "watermark," it would be the same across all documents. But instead, distinct watermarks were created for each document creator, suggesting inconsistent application or three different creators applying their own watermark.
In other words, document creators set the document properties to use Russian language and created three distinct so-called 'watermarks' in doing so, not 'Феликс Эдмундович.'
Also, cross-reference to Wikileaks shows that Warren Flood did not author any of the documents. And given that the timestamps are all on June 15th, this is the sequence of events:
  • Warren Flood opens a DNC document, copies it, and pastes it as a new document to his computer.
  • Warren Flood sets the theme language to Russian in some way (this process is different for all authors).
  • Warren Flood modifies the document's author to Феликс Эдмундович.
  • The modified document is then uploaded to the Guccifer website and publicly published a short time thereafter.
Who is Warren Flood?
Warren Flood is a high-ranking technology official for Democratic operatives, having worked for Obama for America, DNC, and Joe Biden.  It's a unique name.
His name does not appear in any of the Wikileaks emails, meaning that he appears to be a third party as far as the DNC email leaks are concerned. He was working for Joe Biden at the time.
Other than his (professional Internet) profile, he is a virtual social media ghost, never having made any Tweets nor any evidence of real social media activity.
The pertinent point is that: the metadata forensic proof is irrefutable that Warren Flood, or someone who owned a copy of Word registered to Warren Flood, shoehorned in obvious "Russian" fingerprints all over the documents.
Guccifer 2.0 is none other than a botched DNC creation to create a false flag for Russia.
Impact of Guccifer 2.0 being a DNC creation
The "Russian influenced the US election" campaign all started from the DNC leak.
Allegations of Russian influence was built on a completely fabricated foundation of lies.
In hindsight, we now know that Obama administration unmasking of US campaign officials on the pretext of "Russian interference" started in June 2016, same date as when Guccifer 2.0 began. The implications that the unmasking all was predicated on a DNC psy-ops is staggering.
Who cares why the DNC did it?
Because it proves that "Russian interference" started as a total DNC fabrication that persists to today. The whole Russian campaign started before Trump made his infamous joke about Russians getting Hillary’s emails.
Illegal unmasking of Trump campaign officials over Russian interference began June 2016. Was this predicated on Russian interference with the DNC hacks? If so, this means that the leaks not only implicate DNC and plague President Trump himself, but also implicates Obama administration officials and all the involved intelligence agencies.
Why did DNC leak their own documents?
It’s right in Guccifer 2.0’s blog. Pertinent quote: "The main part of the papers, thousands of files and mails, I gave to Wikileaks. They will publish them soon." TheDNC knew they were having their documents leaked to Wikileaks, and wanted to make sure a Russian hacker took credit for the leaks.
How did the DNC know Wikileaks was going to release the DNC emails?
Great question. It’s hard to imagine them knowing without assistance from intelligence agencies – and indeed unmasking of campaign officials started in June 2016.
This is, of course, highly illegal, and would mean that the Russian disinformation campaign wasn’t just a DNC operation, it was also created from collusion with the Obama administration using highly illegal means including violations of the Fourth Amendment.
Since Guccifer 2.0 was a botched operation, that might make the continued existence of the real leaker who might draw scrutiny that much more precarious…
What about Crowdstrike report?
The metadata I described above can be independently verified by a non-technical person with access to any text editor like vim (which is available on Mac OS terminal command line). It does not require special forsenic analysis to identify. There are only two explanations: staggering incompetence, or DNC collusion.
I cannot say if Crowdstrike is competent, but I can say that their co-founder and CTO, Dmitri Alperovitch, is a senior fellow with the Atlantic Council, a think tank whose policies could be termed as anti-protectionist.
Who leaked the DNC emails to Wikileaks?
In short, all circumstantial evidence points to Seth Rich.
Seth Rich was killed on July 10, after the Guccifer drops and before the Wikileaks release. Wikileaks offered a 20,000 reward for information on Seth Rich’s death.
Craig Murray, a British national connected with Wikileaks, claims a disgusted Democrat insider was the leaker and he personally flew overseas to make the drop.
Was Seth Rich murdered by the DNC?
We are getting in speculative territory here. The circumstances of his death are suspicious – there had never been a homicide prior or after in his area. The assailants did not steal any of his valuables.
Conspiracy theorists assume Seth Rich was murdered by the DNC to "set an example."
Personally, I think that as long as Seth Rich existed, he could have spoken up as the leaker at any moment and drawn scrutiny to Guccifer 2.0 being a DNC operation. To our knowledge, the unmasking of Trump and related officials started in June 2016 using the DNC hacks as a pretext. Seth Rich’s continued existence could have lead to the fall of the White House and intelligence agencies.
Is that motive enough for a political hit? You tell me.
News sources say that the "documents contain DNC metadata" is disproven.
In addition to hosting them on the official Wordpress website, DNC documents were sent directly by Guccifer 2.0 to media outlets such as The Hill (despite Guccifer 2.0 himself claiming hatred of these very same media outlets accusing him of being Russian).
What Guccifer 2.0 sent was not always the same as what was on the official Guccifer 2.0 website. My speculation is that Guccifer 2.0 revised the documents to remove the metadata, and sent those corrected documents to media outlets. He could not do the same on his Wordpress site for without drawing intense scrutiny, so the botched documents remained.
Bottom line:it is unimpeachable that watermarked Russian metadata in Guccifer’s first document drop are associated with a DNC tech worker named Warren Flood who otherwise has nothing to do with the DNC emails.Any media outlet reporting otherwise are probably either working from their own "corrected" copy from Guccifer or spinning hard or both.
Did Warren Flood himself poison the docs? (Update 5/26)
The author of , who has done far more extensive metadata analysis, believes Warren Flood is innocent. See for his speculation; the documents correlate to strange foreign visitors occurring in Joe Biden's office, where Warren Flood worked in the past.
Come to think of it, these foreign visitors, as well as those shady foreign IT contractors with unprecedented top secret clearance, could technically constitute the "foreign national" requirements for unmasking...
What about Robbin Young? (Update 5/26)
/u/Holmgeir gives an excellent explanation for why Guccifer 2.0 was motivated to talk with Robbin Young here .
What about the RNC strategist who got voting model data from Guccifer 2.0? (Update 5/26)
Consider the following puzzle pieces:
  Put them all together, and you see that by communicating with "the foreign national" Guccifer 2.0, the RNC strategist exposed himself and the entire campaign to being unmasked and having all their data, emails, polls, etc monitored. Maybe worth sacrificing primary turnout models for, no?
Appendix – Technical details
Microsoft Word 2007 format specification:
Much more detailed analysis of the Warren Flood documents -
(Spezzes are for formatting/proofreading)
Spez: Corrected Феликс Эдмундович to say Felix Edmundovich . It's been pointed out in the comments that it is not a legitimate Russian surname, but rather someone copied and pasted only the first & middle name of this guy:
Spez (26-May): Updated to add 3 FAQs. Check them out.
Thank you @727Sky.  

That is important and interesting information.  I hope they get to the bottom of this, but things seem so entangled and corrupted in the DNC, how will we ever know the real truth?   tinybighuh

Will we finally see arrests of the "higher-ups" this coming week?  

Watch this video now in case it gets pulled off YT.


Following the video in the previous post...

Watch them in order so you know the flow of the conversation.

All I got to say is this....

How in the hell can they call it simple "robbery" when NOTHING was taken from him????

Even his father mentioned that himself a while back. Almost questioning the murder and the so-called reason behind it. 

We will never know the truth of the matter, I'm sure.
Anyone who tries to figure it out will be called a 'conspiracy nut' and what have you.

We all know how that people names that they don't want to be associated with to shut them down. 
Dems are notorious for this, hence why they lost the election, constantly insulting half of the population.

But yes, this stinks to high heavens and you might as well add another body count to the list.
Just saying. 

Don't have to be a rocket scientist to know that something is "off" with this story.    smallnotamused

a.k.a. 'snarky412'


(05-30-2017, 11:27 AM)727Sky Wrote:

Thanks Sky.  If people can't connect the dots with this story, they are brain dead!  What's bad is, the killers might not ever be arrested without proof, and, so far, they have done a good job of covering it up.

However, I still have hope that someday Seth's murderers will see the inside of a jail cell, or better, the noose going around their neck!   tinyangry

Here is an interesting article that just came out from Kim Dotcom.



30 May 2017

Quote:In accordance with his previous statement on this matter, Kim Dotcom’s solicitors in New Zealand have today sent the following letter to Robert Mueller, Special Counsel appointed to investigate interference with the 2016 United States presidential election and related matters:

30 May 2017
Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Attention: Robert Mueller, Special Counsel

Dear Sir
1. We act for Kim Dotcom in New Zealand.

2. We are writing to you in your capacity as special counsel appointed to carry out the above investigation pursuant to Order 3915-2017 (Investigation).

3. Mr Dotcom has evidence that he considers relevant to the Investigation. The purpose of this letter is to confirm that, subject to appropriate arrangements being made and his constitutional rights being preserved, Mr Dotcom is willing to provide this evidence to the Investigation. He has instructed us to make this approach to initiate the necessary dialogue as to the required arrangements.

4. As you may be aware, Mr Dotcom resides in New Zealand. Since 2012, the United States has been seeking his extradition to face a criminal prosecution arising from his involvement in the Megaupload group of companies. Presently, Mr Dotcom is on bail while he exercises (as he is entitled to) his rights under New Zealand law to resist extradition. Mr Dotcom emphatically denies the alleged offending and is committed to defending the allegations in the extradition proceeding in New Zealand.

5. Mr Dotcom is also committed to achieving an outcome where his evidence can be properly received and reviewed by you as part of the Investigation. You will, however, appreciate that, given his current status, he is not in a position to voluntarily leave New Zealand's jurisdiction. Further, he is concerned that, should he travel to the United States voluntarily, he would be arrested and detained in custody on the current counts on which he has been indicted.

6. Accordingly, for Mr Dotcom to attend in person in the United States to make a statement, and/or give oral evidence at any subsequent hearing, special arrangements would need to be discussed and agreed between all relevant parties. Such arrangements would need to include arrangements for his safe passage from New Zealand and return. This is because Mr Dotcom is determined to clear his name in New Zealand.

7. Mr Dotcom invites the Department of Justice to contact him through counsel to progress the taking of his evidence once you have had an opportunity to consider this letter and are in a position to discuss the required process and appropriate safeguards.
8. We look forward to hearing from you. If you have any questions, or require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Yours faithfully

Phil Creagh
t: + 64 9 306 5791
copy: Ira P. Rothken
Rothken Law Firm
Novato, CA 94949
Ron Mansfield
22 Lorne Chambers


We'll have to wait and see how Mueller responds to this.  I hope he doesn't put it on the back burner until it is forgotten.
We will have to do our part in seeing that this murder is never forgotten until something is done!

(05-30-2017, 05:06 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote: ...We'll have to wait and see how Mueller responds to this.  I hope he doesn't put it on the back burner until it is forgotten.
We will have to do our part in seeing that this murder is never forgotten until something is done!
That's the thing I find odd about this incident, if there's nothing to it, why doesn't the
establishment just leave it alone and not respond to it?

Pulling Hannety's advertising at the behest of Journalists is a sign that something isn't
quite right, that certainly isn't the business newspapers are in.
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
mediumcouchpotato  Yes, yes, yes!!  Time to sit back and watch the show!   minusculebeercheers

And, another good video...

(05-31-2017, 01:04 AM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote: And, another good video...

yes it is. Very Good.
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
                   This just out. Has Seth's murderer been named?

Slightly off topic, but not really.  Don't you find it ironic that Killary comes out now, just as the Seth Rich story is getting hotter and pointing in her direction, trying to divert the public attention back to "Russia hacked the Election" bullshit?

Can I blame Russia for the fact the weather was too hot last night for me to sleep well?   Might as well, since they seem to be responsible for everything else!

Quote:Former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton opened up Wednesday in an appearance at a tech conference, arguing that reports of Russian interference in the election were ignored and that her campaign was plagued by sexism.

While Clinton has been largely reclusive since her November loss to President Trump, she has begun to make more public statements on her defeat, including an interview in New York magazine. She also gave the commencement address at her alma mater, Wellesley College, last week and criticized Trump’s leadership.

Clinton continued that trend with this week’s appearance at the Code Conference in San Francisco, discussing the current political environment with Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg. In the discussion, she hit out at former FBI Director James Comey and media members, who she said targeted her own scandals at the expense of potential Russian interference in the campaign.

“Comey was more than happy to talk about my emails, but he wouldn’t talk about investigation of the Russians,” Clinton said.

Read the full article here.

Or, maybe she's trying to do a bigger smear campaign on Comey before something comes out that he had in his files about her?


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)