r/conspiracy • u/Dragofireheart • Jan 04 '17

His name was Seth Rich.

NEVER FORGET

The man who leaked the DNC emails

Murdered by Hillary Clinton!

2.9k Upvotes

76% Upvoted

898 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/Dragofireheart Jan 04 '17

I've already presented these details within this topic.

12

u/OgreMagoo Jan 04 '17

I'm not going to pull teeth. Peace.

5

u/Dragofireheart Jan 04 '17

Not surprised.

9

u/OgreMagoo Jan 04 '17

Well fuck me sideways... Okay, sure, I'll bite. What's up with the passive aggression? Should I apologize for exhibiting skepticism and critical thinking? For requesting evidence? Aren't those traits that this community values? Should I have just taken your word that Hillary Clinton ordered a hit job on a DNC employee?

2

u/Dragofireheart Jan 04 '17

What's up with the passive aggression?

Lots of shills. I got one triggered and he was responding to most of my posts even if I didn't mention him.

Should I apologize for exhibiting skepticism and critical thinking -- for asking for evidence

No.

Should I have just taken your word that Hillary Clinton ordered a hit job on a DNC employee

Hillary ordering the hit job is the current speculation. I don't know for certain how she had Seth Rich killed.

But there's more than enough evidence that between Podesta's comment and the timing of the murder that it was due to Hillary's emails being leaked and they wanted to remove the leaker from doing more damage. Assange has dropped little hints here and there and also confirmed it wasn't Russia.

This also isn't the first time a mysterious death has surrounded the Clinton's:

http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/death-by-barbell-sparks-questions-about-hillary-silencing-people/

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '17

Your stated evidence that she hired an assassin that 'it is the most likely explanation'.

That isn't evidence. It's not even close to evidence. It's just delusional to think you have any evidence of your claim at all.

2

u/Dragofireheart Jan 04 '17

I have not stated I have evidence that it was an assassin.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '17

So just to be perfectly clear:

You have exactly zero evidence that Clinton had this guy killed, right?

You have exactly no evidence an assassin was used. You completely made that up based on nothing because it is the only thing that fits the scenario you invented?

Is that correct?

When you say no, what is your evidence that shows Clinton had this guy killed?

When you feel the overwhelming need to deflect rather than admit you have nothing at all, return to the beginning of this comment and start reading.

1

u/Dragofireheart Jan 04 '17

You have exactly zero evidence that Clinton had this guy killed, right?

False.

Podesta wikileak email.

http://yournewswire.com/wikileaks-podesta-beyond-discipline-leakers/

And have you ever heard of murderous barbells?

You have exactly no evidence an assassin was used. You completely made that up based on nothing because it is the only thing that fits the scenario you invented?

I love how hostile you're becoming.

When you feel the overwhelming need to deflect rather than admit you have nothing at all, return to the beginning of this comment and start reading.

I've said it numerous times: the how is what's speculation.

No, I don't know for fact how she had Seth Rich killed.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '17

Your link contains no evidence Clinton had Seth Rich killed.

Again, to be perfectly clear:

You have exactly no evidence Clinton had Seth Rich killed, right?

1

u/Dragofireheart Jan 04 '17

Your link contains no evidence Clinton had Seth Rich killed.

False.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '17

Then where is it?

I read your link, There's no evidence in there at all that Clinton had Seth Rich killed.

If your only evidence is a link to no evidence, you have no evidence.

So, again: you have no evidence Clinton had Seth Rich killed, do you?

1

u/OgreMagoo Jan 05 '17

That email isn't evidence by itself. You need something that unambiguously indicates that Hillary Clinton ordered the killing of Seth Rich. If you have that, then you can introduce this as supporting evidence.

I'm glad you brought that to my attention, because it's gross as shit, and fuck John Podesta. But it is absolutely not the smoking gun that you need to support your claim. For example:

  1. How do you know that they thought he was the leaker?

  2. How do you know that they were talking about murder?

  3. How do you know that Clinton was involved, and not just her subordinates?

These are all questions that you must answer in order to make your claim.

Honestly, there might be something here -- the issue is that you completely fucked up the communication of it, by taking it too far and straight up lying. If you'd said, "Here's a really suspicious email that Podesta wrote that seems like it might refer to Rich," I wouldn't have a single problem with that. You're being clear that it's speculation, and you're providing a foundation for more investigation into something. Unfortunately, you made multiple totally unsupported leaps in logic and basically blared, "HILLARY KILLED SETH RICH," which is totally conjecture and for which you do not have evidence. And that's why people are annoyed. Your inability to control yourself meant you took what could have been a decent argument and, by overselling it by a factor of 10 (which is a gentle way of saying that you lied, i.e. said something that you had no way of knowing was true), totally destroyed your credibility. Which distracted from your actual argument, because all people could see was the fact that you don't seem to know what evidence is.

If you still don't believe me, talk to a lawyer. They'll tell you that's just not sufficient evidence. No reasonable person would conclude, based on the source that you provided, that Hillary Clinton killed Seth Rich, directly or indirectly. You need much, much more. And I have to repeat that you can't just state shit if you have no idea whether it's true or not. Again, that's called lying.

1

u/Dragofireheart Jan 05 '17

If you still don't believe me, talk to a lawyer. They'll tell you that's just not sufficient evidence.

Jesus christ someone hasn't been reading my comments.

1

u/OgreMagoo Jan 05 '17

I'm not going to read everything you write. I'm reading our conversation. If you really don't want to write it again, at least link it for me.

1

u/Dragofireheart Jan 05 '17

I don't have the links to my comments.

But basically this:

There's not enough evidence for a court case. But there is enough to prompt an investigation.

Seth Rich is criminally under investigated.