Seth Hannity and Sean Rich.What We Know

bill-clinton-guinessThe names have been changed to protect the innocent. Any identification with real life individuals is merely coincidental.  There is a compelling story that remains to be told about this matter but it did not start with the murder in July 2016 which the police passed off as a failed armed robbery as the victim was returning home in the early morning hours from a visit with his friend.

Too often the police for lack of effort where no witnesses are present and the likelihood of solving the case appears remote throw out the idea of a stranger to stranger murder where the tragedy resulted during a flubbed up situation.  It is sometimes hard to think outside the box when one horror piles upon another. How would the cops expect that what they came upon may have been a hit?  Isn’t the idea behind a”hit” is to make it appear like it wasn’t a hit? What better time for one than getting a chance in an empty street in the early morning hours before dawn begins to lighten up the scene and the cops are tired after a long journey through the perilous night? What better place than DC where street crime swells in the darkness?

But to understand what was going on one has to retract back to a time a couple of weeks prior to the time of the murder.  We have to go from the murder venue in Washington, DC to an airport tarmac in Phoenix, Arizona.  But first recall what happened on July 29, 1993, 23 years before in DC. Need I mention the death by gun shot of a friend of Bill Clinton, aka, Slick Willy.  One would think July is death by gun month in DC especially if there is a connection with Slick.

The meeting in Phoenix within a couple of weeks before the murder was between Slick and AG Loretta Lynch. Her plane had just landed and Slick who was at the airport went over and had a private discussion with her for about a half an hour. This was all before the murder. After the meeting which when disclosed showed the public was upset that it happened a cover story was put out.

Before the dust settled we had a person who had connections with the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) gunned down.  It was abundantly clear that the DNC was supporting Slick’s wife Hillary.  It is not clear whether Slick’s wife knew the victim worked for the DNC. But little doubt remains that Slick had the ability to learn that the victim did work for the DNC and may have been in a position to find out more than that.  Slick maintained friendship with most of the people in DNC which was one reason why it supported Hillary so strongly.

It is not clear that Hillary had a role in any of this. It is usually best to keep a high wall when such things occur. You probably will find very little inculpatory information but that is how these things are done. Slick’s friend Vince Foster’s death was tragic just like the one last summer of the DNC worker.

Don’t look for any quick answers. The DC police have not interviewed either one of the Clintons to determine their involvement. Nor have they conducted any searches of their homes and offices.  All we can really know now is that a good young man was struck down in his youth and remain confident that Seth Hannity will not let up on it






19 thoughts on “Seth Hannity and Sean Rich.What We Know

  1. The authority, Snopes:

    Clinton Foundation Acknowledges It Accepted $1 Million Gift from Qatar

    The Clinton Foundation has confirmed it accepted a $1 million gift from Qatar while Hillary Clinton was serving as the U.S. Secretary of State without informing the State Department, even though she had promised to let the agency review new or significantly increased support from foreign governments.

    Qatari officials pledged the money in 2011 to mark the 65th birthday of Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton’s husband, and sought to meet the former U.S. president in person the following year to present him the check, according to an email from a foundation official to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign chairman, John Podesta. The email, among thousands hacked from Podesta’s account, was published in October 2016 by WikiLeaks.

    Clinton signed an ethics agreement governing her family’s globe-straddling foundation in order to become secretary of state in 2009. The agreement was designed to increase transparency to avoid appearances that U.S. foreign policy could be swayed by wealthy donors.

    If a new foreign government wished to donate or if an existing foreign-government donor, such as Qatar, wanted to “increase materially” its support of ongoing programs, Clinton promised that the State Department’s ethics official would be notified and given a chance to raise any concerns.

    Clinton Foundation officials last month declined to confirm the Qatar donation. In response to additional questions, a foundation spokesman, Brian Cookstra, this week said that it accepted the $1 million gift from Qatar, but this did not amount to a “material increase” in the Gulf country’s support for the charity. Cookstra declined to say whether Qatari officials received their requested meeting with Bill Clinton.

    Officials at Qatar’s embassy in Washington and in its Council of Ministers in the capital, Doha, declined to discuss the donation.

  2. Sounds like Clintons are the gold standard of opprobrium. If its good enough for the Clintons–it must be o.k. What kind of logic is that?

  3. Clinton’s connections to Russia:

    Bill Clinton paid $500,000 for speech in Moscow by Russian bank
    Clinton Foundation given up to $140 million from investors in Uranium One, which sold Russia 20% uranium while HIllary Sec of State; Bill Clinton involved in Uranium deal since his trip to Kazakhstan.

    Hillary Campaign Manager Podesta on board of a Russian Company.
    Podesta has deep financial interests in Russia.
    Podesta’s brother’s a lobbyist for a Russia Bank, etc, etc.

    Which proves . . .

    1. Bill…..HRC is not President. HRC did not have multiple individuals linked to Russian officials and oligarchs who conveniently forgot about such connections when asked directly by Congress. If there is no there there, why did Trump ADMIT on national television that he fired Comey because of Russia? Why was Michael Flynn taking $45K, why was he still employed by Trump even after Trump knew he lied to Pence? Why was Flynn allowed to set policy on national security issues while still acting as a foreign agent for the Turkish government? What about Rosneft? Who ended up being the secret buyer? Gianforte from Montana, the body-slammer and known Trump snowflake has stake in it, I’m sure there are others. Enough about HRC, this is about your corrupt Siberian candidate.

  4. Kim Dot is an exceptionally dodgy character. A heavy discount on his statements is warranted.

    Perhaps Matt could help me with the rest. The police have not at this point revealed much interest in the crime. Perhaps they are being tight lipped. Perhaps not. Are most murders committed in mugging crimes somewhat accidental? That is, not originally intended.

    Rich was shot from behind. Outside of movies is there much science that can establish the distance from which he was shot? The further the distance the more likely an assassination to my way of thinking. A close up entanglement would argue a case for a robbery gone wrong and a panicking criminal hightailing it. Despite all the theorizing scant facts emerge from anything I have read.

    There are allegations that the victim was treated differently from normal procedures in some ways at the hospital. If true – why and at whose behest? The path that information about the early morning crime took could have value.

    It would be enlightening if Matt could outline what questions he would be asking about the crime itself either as a defense lawyer or a prosecutor. The above is what this amateur would be curious about. I would much appreciate what questions a seasoned professional would be posing.

    Additionally, yes, who actually provided wikileaks with the DNC hacks is relevant to any investigation of the alleged Russian involvement. Mueller should ferret out all the facts.

    1. Tadzio:

      A murder in the streets of Washington, DC in the early morning hours is not uncommon although the rate in 2016 was 134 compared to 162 in 2015. There are no witnesses to the murder as far as I know so the circumstances around it which I assume were not recorded on video are unknown. Seth Rich was shot in the back; did he turn around to run when confronted by the gunman or was he shot from behind not aware the gunman (or gunlady) was approaching. Was there more than one?

      Bottom line is how do you investigate a street homicide with no witnesses. That’s why there are unsolved murders in cities. What can the police say when there is nothing to say about their investigation? Keep in mind you need witnesses or accomplices or admissions but they require a starting point which seems to be lacking here.

      I had a murder where a girl of 15 years of age was found shot in a quarry in Wrentham. You learn the identity of the girl, try to track her last movements, but what do you then do other than hope for leads? In that case a school principal hearing of the murder came forward to explain that he might have given that girl a ride to Worcester since she looked like a girl who he picked up thumbing. Guess who became the number one suspect? Poor guy tried to help and then because there were no other leads the cops began investigating him.

      You can tell the distance of shots if there is a close up shooting because gunshot residue may be left on the clothing; other than that it is difficult telling how close the shooter was to the victim. I read the allegations of the victim being treated differently by some guy or gal who anonymously posted suggesting he/she was a doctor at the hospital. I doubt the veracity of it. If true, I’m sure his family would have raised a stink over it.

      The first thing anyone would want to know about this is what was the kids attitude toward the DNC. Was he having trouble there? What were his duties? Who were his friends? (I’ve seen pictures of him and he seemed like a guy who liked to party – he was dressed as Uncle Sam having a beer.) I’d want to learn as much about him as I could to figure out if he was the type that would want to betray the people he worked for — did he have some big grievance – – so he would want to undermine them by giving Wikileaks emails. Did he have the skill to do this? Did he have access to the computers?

      The obvious starting point of any investigation is to learn as much about him as possible through his friends, work mates, electronic records, family etc. There is little to learn from the scene of the crime other than trying to match up the bullets with other events and to learn the location of the video cameras in the area to see if any captured Seth or his assailants.

      As for providing Wikileaks with the DNC hacks I thought all 16 of our intelligence agencies agreed it was the Russians.

  5. Is Trump vindicated on his ban on Muslims from countries with failed states ( Libya, Syria, Yemen etc.) from coming to America? If his policy were in effect in the UK Salam Abedi would have been refused entry and the Manchester massacre would have been prevented. The UK has 400 returnees from ISIS walking the streets. Such a lax policy leads to mayhem. The judges who issued orders preventing Trump’s ban are endangering the lives of Americans and should be removed from their positions. As Cicero said Public Safety is the highest law. 2. Rich’s murder may have been a botched robbery, although none of his property was taken. It may also have been a planned, targeted killing. Assange has hinted that Rich may have been the leak of the DNC material and not the Russians. A real crime was committed and further investigation is needed. The NSA may be able to determine if a U S source sent the DNC items to Assange, Unlike the Russia collusion story where no evidence of a crime has been found the Rich case is real. There is more evidence of the tooth fairy’s existence than there is of Russian collusion. 3. Trump had a great meeting with the Pope. They are both pro life, pro family and pro peace.

      1. The suicide bomber went to Libya and returned. The recent suicide in Manchester would have been prevented if Trump’s ban were in place in Britain.
        Moverover, If the Tsarnaev brother was prevented from returning from Chechnya , the Boston Marathon Bombing may have been prevented.Preventing all from coming from (and from going to and from) hotbeds of terrorism until we have adequate vetting programs in place makes elemental sense.

        1. I agree it would help but the homegrown threat is massive in the UK. It’s not exactly missing here either.

        2. Bill:

          The Manchester suicide bomber was a British citizen. Trump’s ban did not apply to citizens.

    1. So we suspend the Constitution because of potential enemy threats? That is how you turn a democracy ( or what’s left of it) into a dictatorship.

    2. Why does Julian Assange have more credibility than anyone else? Assange has almost as much to lose as Trump should it turn out he was another stooge for Putin.

  6. The problem with the Seth Rich murder is he was killed and nothing was taken from his person . . . no jewelry, no wallet, no credit cards.
    Secondly, the founder of Wikileaks posted a reward. Why?
    Thirdly, a character named Kim Dotcom claims he knows Rich was a Wikileaks leaker of DNC data.

    We can readily dismiss the third factor perhaps, but not the first two facts—a murder, but no robbery; Wikileaks posting a reward.

    Despite the sensibilities of the Rich family, a thorough investigation is warranted.
    Whether or not the murder was random, was Seth Rich a source of DNC leaks? If so, perhaps the whole Russian interference story collapses. Law enforcement and the special prosecutor should pursue all leads and tie up all loose threads.

    So far there’s more to the Seth Rich case than the Russian collusion case; in the former, at least we know a crime was committed.

    1. Why does it collapse? The DNC wasn’t the only organization that was hacked. The Clinton campaign chair John Podesta’s personal emails were hacked, and also the emails of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Nothing in his background would suggest he is a hacking expert, and no one has alleged he hacked all three organizations. We have about 8 Trump individuals who have known connections to Russia, including our somehow still sitting AG who perjured himself in front of Congress. You ready to give up yet?

      1. Well, it would collapse in major part wouldn’t it? Moreover, if Rich were the source of DNC leaks, it would raise doubts about the whole Russian story, wouldn’t it?
        Has Sessions been charged with perjury? Glad to see you’re now prosecutor, judge, and jury. Sessions was asked obscure questions before Congress relating to the campaign. He answered honestly. Why would he lie about a casual few minute meeting in the Spring at a public conference or about a meeting with the Ambassador in his Senate Office that was on his schedule and which was attended by two military officers?

        Any idea how many Clinton people have “known connections to Russia”? How many Obama people have “known connections to Russia”?
        Do you know how many people at Harvard have known connections to Russia? What delusional “evidence” is that?

        Ever heard of guilt by association?

        I’d recommend that you give up your paranoiac conspiracy theories!

        1. No it would not for all of the reasons I previously stated. Sessions knowingly made a false statement. You asked why would he lie? That is an excellent question that needs to be answered. The FBI, CIA, the House of Representatives, and the Senate are investigating Trump’s Russia ties, while you spout nonsense of a debunked uranium deal scandal and a true tin-foil hat conspiracy about a poor 27 year old kid that was concocted to distract from the GOP’s complete dismemberment of our social programs and the Russia investigation. Do you not see the irony in that?

  7. In Jung’s ‘Psychological Types’ he discusses relationship between subject and object. He says that the relationship is biological. Any modifications made in the relationship constitute adaptation. When the subject and object are introvert and extrovert, or as Blake would put it ‘prolific’ and ‘devouring’, and one of the two has much to lose because of the possible actions of the other, it often ends badly.

    Or as my father use to say, two and two is four and I smell shit.

Comments are closed.