The FBI Has Been Lying About Seth Rich 222

A persistent American lawyer has uncovered the undeniable fact that the FBI has been continuously lying, including giving false testimony in court, in response to Freedom of Information requests for its records on Seth Rich. The FBI has previously given affidavits that it has no records regarding Seth Rich.

A Freedom of Information request to the FBI which did not mention Seth Rich, but asked for all email correspondence between FBI Head of Counterterrorism Peter Strzok, who headed the investigation into the DNC leaks and Wikileaks, and FBI attorney Lisa Page, has revealed two pages of emails which do not merely mention Seth Rich but have “Seth Rich” as their heading. The emails were provided in, to say the least, heavily redacted form.

Before I analyse these particular emails, I should make plain that they are not the major point. The major point is that the FBI claimed it had no records mentioning Seth Rich, and these have come to light in response to a different FOIA request that was not about him. What other falsely denied documents does the FBI hold about Rich, that were not fortuitously picked up by a search for correspondence between two named individuals?

To look at the documents themselves, they have to be read from the bottom up, and they consist of a series of emails between members of the Washington Field Office of the FBI (WF in the telegrams) into which Strzok was copied in, and which he ultimately forwarded on to the lawyer Lisa Page.

The opening email, at the bottom, dated 10 August 2016 at 10.32am, precisely just one month after the murder of Seth Rich, is from the media handling department of the Washington Field Office. It references Wikileaks’ offer of a reward for information on the murder of Seth Rich, and that Assange seemed to imply Rich was the source of the DNC leaks. The media handlers are asking the operations side of the FBI field office for any information on the case. The unredacted part of the reply fits with the official narrative. The redacted individual officer is “not aware of any specific involvement” by the FBI in the Seth Rich case. But his next sentence is completely redacted. Why?

It appears that “adding” references a new person added in to the list. This appears to have not worked, and probably the same person (precisely same length of deleted name) then tries again, with “adding … for real” and blames the technology – “stupid Samsung”. The interesting point here is that the person added appears not to be in the FBI – a new redacted addressee does indeed appear, and unlike all the others does not have an FBI suffix after their deleted email address. So who are they?

(This section on “adding” was updated after commenters offered a better explanation than my original one. See first comments below).

The fourth email, at 1pm on Wednesday August 10, 2016, is much the most interesting. It is ostensibly also from the Washington Field Office, but it is from somebody using a different classified email system with a very different time and date format than the others. It is apparently from somebody more senior, as the reply to it is “will do”. And every single word of this instruction has been blanked. The final email, saying that “I squashed this with …..”, is from a new person again, with the shortest name. That phrase may only have meant I denied this to a journalist, or it may have been reporting an operational command given.

As the final act in this drama, Strzok then sent the whole thread on to the lawyer, which is why we now have it. Why?

It is perfectly possible to fill in the blanks with a conversation that completely fits the official narrative. The deletions could say this was a waste of time and the FBI was not looking at the Rich case. But in that case, the FBI would have been delighted to publish it unredacted. (The small numbers in the right hand margins supposedly detail the exception to the FOIA under which deletion was made. In almost every case they are one or other category of invasion of privacy).

And if it just all said “Assange is talking nonsense. Seth Rich is nothing to do with the FBI” then why would that have to be sent on by Strzok to the FBI lawyer?

It is of course fortunate that Strzok did forward this one email thread on to the lawyer, because that is the only reason we have seen it, as a result of an FOI(A) request for the correspondence between those two.

Finally, and perhaps this is the most important point, the FBI was at this time supposed to be in the early stages of an investigation into how the DNC emails were leaked to Wikileaks. The FBI here believed Wikileaks to be indicating the material had been leaked by Seth Rich who had then been murdered. Surely in any legitimate investigation, the investigators would have been absolutely compelled to check out the truth of this possibility, rather than treat it as a media issue?

We are asked to believe that not one of these emails says “well if the publisher of the emails says Seth Rich was the source, we had better check that out, especially as he was murdered with no sign of a suspect”. If the FBI really did not look at that, why on earth not? If the FBI genuinely, as they claim, did not even look at the murder of Seth Rich, that would surely be the most damning fact of all and reveal their “investigation” was entirely agenda driven from the start.

In June 2016 a vast cache of the DNC emails were leaked to Wikileaks. On 10 July 2016 an employee from the location of the leak was murdered without obvious motive, in an alleged street robbery in which nothing at all was stolen. Not to investigate the possibility of a link between the two incidents would be grossly negligent. It is worth adding that, contrary to a propaganda barrage, Bloomingdale where Rich was murdered is a very pleasant area of Washington DC and by no means a murder hotspot. It is also worth noting that not only is there no suspect in Seth Rich’s murder, there has never been any semblance of a serious effort to find the killer. Washington police appear perfectly happy simply to write this case off.

I anticipate two responses to this article in terms of irrelevant and illogical whataboutery:

Firstly, it is very often the case that family members are extremely resistant to the notion that the murder of a relative may have wider political implications. This is perfectly natural. The appalling grief of losing a loved one to murder is extraordinary; to reject the cognitive dissonance of having your political worldview shattered at the same time is very natural. In the case of David Kelly, of Seth Rich, and of Wille Macrae, we see families reacting with emotional hostility to the notion that the death raises wider questions. Occasionally the motive may be still more mixed, with the prior relationship between the family and the deceased subject to other strains (I am not referencing the Rich case here).

You do occasionally get particularly stout hearted family who take the opposite tack and are prepared to take on the authorities in the search for justice, of which Commander Robert Green, son of Hilda Murrell, is a worthy example.

(As an interesting aside, I just checked his name in the Wikipedia article on Hilda, which I discovered describes Tam Dalyell “hounding” Margaret Thatcher over the Belgrano and the fact that ship was steaming away from the Falklands when destroyed with massive loss of life as a “second conspiracy theory”, the first of course being the murder of Hilda Murrell. Wikipedia really has become a cesspool.)

We have powerful cultural taboos that reinforce the notion that if the family do not want the question of the death of their loved one disturbed, nobody else should bring it up. Seth Rich’s parents, David Kelly’s wife, Willie Macrae’s brother have all been deployed by the media and the powers behind them to this effect, among many other examples. This is an emotionally powerful but logically weak method of restricting enquiry.

Secondly, I do not know and I deliberately have not inquired what are the views on other subjects of either Mr Ty Clevenger, who brought his evidence and blog to my attention, or Judicial Watch, who made the FOIA request that revealed these documents. I am interested in the evidence presented both that the FBI lied, and in the documents themselves. Those who obtained the documents may, for all I know, be dedicated otter baiters or believe in stealing ice cream from children. I am referencing the evidence they have obtained in this particular case, not endorsing – or condemning – anything else in their lives or work. I really have had enough of illogical detraction by association as a way of avoiding logical argument by an absurd extension of ad hominem argument to third parties.


Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations



Account name
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

222 thoughts on “The FBI Has Been Lying About Seth Rich

1 2 3
  • Carla

    “Stupid Samsung” refers, I’m assuming, to some dumb autocorrect. The sender has resent with what s/he meant to say 1 minute later, as we often do when correcting autocorrects.

    • craig Post author

      That’s plausible, Carla, but don’t quite know how that fits in with “for real”. But I would be truly surprised if emails of this kind – which contain names of officers which have to be redacted – between FBI field officers were sent over mobile phones as opposed to classified computer systems.

      • craig Post author

        Carla, I think you are very probably right. The name redaction seems to be precisely the same length. I trust the Chinese are noting the FBI communicate this stuff over mobile phones 🙂

      • Sharon

        In the previous email, the person wrote “Adding .” So the name of who was being added to the email thread was redacted. In the next email, the person said “Adding for real. Stupid Samsung.” That implied that because of an error on their phone, they didn’t add the person they meant to add. Nothing more to this than that.

        • craig Post author

          Yes, that would make sense, Sharon. The interesting thing is they do add in another person in the redacted addressees, and that person they add is the only one not to have an FBI suffix after their address. So they have added someone in outside the FBI.

          • Blobby

            The person added DOES have an FBI suffix. In the email where they try and fail to add the new person (“Adding _____ I’m aware of this….”), there are 3 people in the CC list, one of which does not have an FBI suffix (the one just above the subject).

            In the email when they actually manage to add the new person, there are 4 email addresses in the CC list, and still only one of those does not have an FBI suffix. The person added was the third in the CC list, and it does have an FBI suffix.

          • uncle tungsten

            It seems to me that having autocorrect active on such high secure phones is really asking for immense trouble and in itself should be seen as a major security flaw by the operator. Consider- what if the (autocorrected) address was valid as someone else and more significantly the address was in the world at large and not restricted to FBI. Sender would never get an ‘undeliverable notice’ and all further commentary would be revealed until initial address error was discovered! Amateurs and Fools.

    • Tom Welsh

      “Stupid Samsung” also reveals a degree of ignorance on the part of the writer. The inconvenience, if any, would have been due to software not hardware.

  • Gary

    Yes, anything supporting the official line need not be deleted apart from anything that could identify an individual or organisation, but as they’ve deleted almost everything aside from the original question you have to think that the e-mails do more to dent the official story than support it. I will say, being devil’s advocate, that many in the trade suffer from ‘secret squirrel syndrome’ and will redact ANYTHING that they can get away with rather than show everything they can. So it may not be AS incriminating as we’d think, anything incriminating would NOT be put in writing but would be said over a secure line – I see the reference to calling someone rather than replying with an e-mail, leaving the caller deniability over the conversation.

    That said, the ‘sense’ I get of this is that ultimately someone was shocked to discover the public narrative was untrue. Not sure what part of it and I doubt whether ANYONE would EVER admit to having had the man killed, even over a secure line. Why would you admit that to the press office? They wouldn’t need to know anything except the story they were being asked to feed the public/press, again I think this may be LESS incriminating than it appears.

    I’m NOT saying that there’s nothing to this, only that even the stupidest FBI employee or CIA/NSA would never admit what they’d done outside of their own command chain. It is obvious now that the file were taken physically and not by a remote hack and that the FBI knew it, that they knew or suspected Rich and it seems likely that some agency or other decided to end the possibility of Rich confirming the provenance of the leak by ending his life. No doubt done arms length and very deniable.

    With cases like this it’s hard to find an actual smoking gun BUT the fact these documents were illegally withheld then accidentally released means that someone high enough up to interfere with the process of FOI requests was worried enough to hide everything they possibly could lest the government be suspected of foul play. The public being left thinking that that ‘kind of thing’ doesn’t happen here or anymore etc when in fact it does on both counts…

  • nevermind

    Did we not suspect it all the while? With his doctor in hospital saying he’s stable and recovering, he dies… remarcably after doctors were told to scramble out of his room.
    Great scoopied, and on our 35th.anniversary, thanks for another tick in the history books.

    • jmg

      Strategist wrote:
      > What sources would people recommend reading to learn more about the Seth Rich case?

      There are many, but I would mention the excellent, impressive report by award-winning investigative reporter Malia Zimmerman in 2017. It was almost immediately modified purging key information, and then completely removed, after overwhelming pressures. A must-read. No wonder they fully censored it.

      For example, among the different mentioned sources are DC homicide detective Rod Wheeler, and an unnamed federal investigator:

      “A federal investigator who reviewed an FBI forensic report . . . detailing the contents Rich’s computer said he made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter . . . ‘I have seen and read the emails between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks,’ the federal investigator told Fox News, . . . The revelation is consistent with the findings of Rod Wheeler, a former DC homicide detective . . . The federal investigator, who requested anonymity . . . The FBI’s national office declined to comment, but sources said the bureau provided cyber expertise to examine Rich’s computer.”

      The report also gives details such as:

      “Around 4:17 a.m., Rich was about a block from his home when Mulka, still on the phone with him, heard voices in the background. Rich reassured her that he was steps away from being at his front door and hung up.
      “Two minutes later, Rich was shot twice. . . .
      “Police also have refused to release security footage from a market on the corner of the crosswalk where Rich was killed. The footage, sources told Fox News, shows two people following Rich across the tiny crosswalk just moments before he was attacked. The camera captured grainy footage of the assailants’ legs and Rich as he fell backward into the street after being shot.”

      That is, coincidentally, the “botched robbery” without robbery happened, of all places, when he was arriving at his home. Or rather, two hitmen knew who he was and where he lived, had a plan, and were waiting for him.

      “Rich’s father, Joel Rich, . . . said above all, his son ‘wanted to make a difference in the world.’”

      There is still an automatically archived version. So better save a copy now:

      Seth Rich, slain DNC staffer, had contact with WikiLeaks, say multiple sources | By Malia Zimmerman | Fox News | May 16, 2017

    • bj

      Consortium News Live from about half a year ago: the interview by Joe Lauria of Ed Butowski, and the latter’s conversation with reporter of note Seymour (‘Sy’) Hersch.

      I think Seymour Hersch in his phone converation with Butowski (secretly recorded by the latter) even mentions how the FBI Washington DC fumbled the case.
      And in the Lauria-Butowski conversation, the Hersch’ family ‘handler’ from Washington is mentioned — I am surprised Craig doesn’t mention that here, especially since he notes how family might cope with the death of a loved one.

      Well worth re-viewing. The episode was re-broadcast a week ago, and the Butowski interview starts here:

      The tape recording of the phone conversation between Butowski and Hersch is here:

    • Public Servant

      There’s a really comprehensive overview of the Seth Rich case made by the BBC called “Conspiracy Files: Murder in Washington.” It’s currently available as a t*rrent via (ahem) P*rate B*y. It’s surprisingly objective.

      There’s no way Mr Rich was the victim of a botched robbery.

  • DavidH

    Sometimes I think you can try and read too much into things.

    The Adding / Samsung lines are very simple. Somebody tried to add Joe Bloggs into the chain: “Adding Joe Bloggs”. But they made a mistake and Joe didn’t get added. 1 minute later they realize their mistake, add Joe correctly, send the email again, and blame their technology for the mistake: “Adding Joe for real. Stupid Samsung”.

  • lysias

    New appointments to the DNC. Looks like it’s being set up to deny Sanders the nomination again.

    In 1912, after winning all the Republican primaries, Teddy Roosevelt was denied the nomination, so he ran third-party. He didn’t win in the general election. He came in second, ahead of the Republican Taft and behind the Democrat Wilson. A respectable showing.

    Maybe American disgust with the two major parties is so much greater now that a third party could win.

      • Muscleguy

        Thanks for the support for Scotland’s right to self determination Ken. We know that our beef is not with the English people but your rulers and ruling system. In the latter stages of the first indyref in the summer I was helping at a street stall very locally and a nice guy up on holiday from England came up to me and wished us well and said he recognised ours was a progressive campaign seeking more equity and better lives for all. There is also English Scots for Yes who have been given the front row in some of the AUOB marches. English folk in Scotland who want where they live to be independent.

        Later on when we were just delivering leaflets at the death one of us came running up and said you have to come see this street. Just up from the city Centre here in Dundee, tenement buildings either side a sea of Yes flags, saltires and Estelladas the Catalan independence flag.

        Now don’t get me wrong, I deplore Spain’s heavy handed handling of the Catalans but their struggle is not ours and I don’t live in Catalunya. But Catalans living here absolutely have a vote and a say in Scottish independence, especially in the hostile immigration environment and Brexit. If they want to express that in Estelladas then fine by me.

        • Muscleguy


          I might be both born in and resident in Scotland but my father’s line comes from a small village in Northamptonshire smack bang on Watling St, on the Danish side. The family surname also suggests a Danish background.

          Also here in Scotland we came to agreements and dynastic marriages with the Vikings. The Northern Isles and Sutherland came to Scotland in lieu of an unpaid dowry for one such marriage. The Viking derived Lord of the Isles had to be brought fully to heel by martial means in the end but then the Scots were renowned for their love of a good scrap.

          After Bannockburn the Bruce’s brother did a swing through Moray (Elgin and surrounds) butchering the relatives of the Red Comyn whom the Bruce had knifed in that kirk leaving the kingship open for himself. Just business as usual securing the throne.

          The past is a foreign country, they did things differently there. In modern Scotland we have solved knife crime (the Met has consulted but the UK govt is unconvinced and not providing the necessary resources to implement the solution). Your chance of meeting violence here has been greatly reduced. We have also been greatly impressed by the Catalan’s impressive restraint and commitment to peaceful protest.

          Those days are past now
          And in the past they must remain
          But we can still RISE now
          And be that nation again

    • Whaley Turco

      Bwahahaha.. I’m going to go out on a limb here and predict Trump Gets 70 million plus votes. After the democrats shot themselves in the foot they will also lose 2 senate seats and control of the house.

  • Shatnersrug

    “I really have had enough of illogical detraction by association as a way of avoiding logical argument by an absurd extension of ad hominem argument to third parties.”

    Wel said Craig, please feel free to delete the usual suspects when they start their shenanigans. They really are useless and allowing them to derail debate does absolutely nothing for the cause of free speech. Commenters that act in bad faith in service of vested interests do nothing for free debate.

  • james

    thanks craig.. nothing adds up in the seth rich story, but catching the fbi in a lie is helpful and leaves open the question what we are not being told – redacted info be damned… “When truth is replaced by silence, then silence is a lie.” Yevgeny Yevtushenko”

  • sapo

    Craig, has the intermediary who gave you the package knowledge of who the source is? And if they don’t, then how can you know it was not “the Russians” or anyone else for that matter? (Is this because of the analysis of file transfer speeds indicating use of a thumb drive?)

  • Antonym

    D.N.C. staffer Seth Rich was murdered in Washington D.C. on July 10th 2016, so under the jurisdiction of the WF. How come these Feds never even tried to solve that nationally important murder?

    I’ll answer that myself. The FBI is also specialized in burying political cases; Robert Mueller III helped both the 9/11 and HRC private server cases to their graves for example. They are in prime position for this dirty work.

    • Whaley Turco

      It wasn’t their case. It was a Local case in the District of Columbia Proper. It was not in the Federal City or on Specific Federal land. They can’t big foot a murder case unless they have reason to believe something is wrong and can prove it to a judge.

      • Antonym

        The FBI top didn’t want this case or anybody else to solve it. Same with the Awan case around US Congress. Serious investigations could reveal serious Cabal moves. Bury them. Judges around DC are also handpicked to come up with desired rulings. This SWAMP is even to sticky and muddled for an elected maverick president like Trump.

  • Neil

    “The opening email, at the bottom, dated 8 October 2016 at 10.32am, four months after the murder of Seth Rich, is from the media handling department of the Washington Field Office. ”

    Beware the US date format!

    The opening email was dated 10 August 2016 (not 8 October) – exactly ONE month after his murder on 10 July, as is clear from the rest of the correspondence.

    Needs to be corrected.

  • Vivian O'Blivion

    From Wiki; “Hilda [Murrell] was the aunt of Commander Robert Green”. Wiki may not be 100% trustworthy but this my recollection of the relationship between Murrell and Green also (not that I’m implying that my memory is in any way reliable).

  • Giyane

    Buffalo Ken

    Satan’s plan is weak. All this Huwaei guff from plummy UK and US politicians is supposed to make us think there is a rift between USUKIS and Chinese authorities.
    In reality, all leading governments are on exactly the same page on cyber uses and technologies.
    Western governments don’t want us to know this, because they want us to think they are cuddly and cute.

    The real schism is between us the people and the entire world governing class. Even the despised Assad has spy technology and and electoral technology the same as and compatible with the West. The only difference is that Assad uses his technology to threaten people who dare to vote against him, while the UK records who didn’t vote before and uses their ballot.

    This is what is meant by Global Order. You can be absolutely confident that whatever piece of septic pus is in power is involved in it.

    • uncle tungsten

      Ok Giyane, I’ll bite, show the proof of your wild allegation against Assad. Or does Integrity Initiative restrain you from handing that information to the public?

    • david camp

      I believe satan realized human beings would eventually be over the angels (even judging them as the NT says). he understood this to mean him, too. This led to bitterness, envy, anger, rage, revenge, attempting total annihilation (God found sin in him and banished him).

  • jmg

    News from Strasbourg on Julian Assange:

    > The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has called on member states to oppose the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to the United States and resolve that “he must be promptly released.” Assange is fighting extradition to the United States in an unprecedented Espionage Act prosecution for journalistic activity. His extradition hearing opens at Woolwich Crown Court in London on 24 February 2020.

    Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly calls for Assange’s “prompt release” — Bridges for Media Freedom — 28 January 2020

  • carmel townsend

    Just a small point. Commander Rob Green was Hilda Murrell’s nephew. As far as I’m aware, she had no children of her own.
    Excellent article.

  • OnlyHalfALooney

    As far as I know – and I think it is worth stressing this – we do not know if Seth RIch leaked any information or not.

    If he did, he presumably did because he saw that the DNC had turned the primary elections into a sham and travesty. I think that most people would agree that exposure of election rigging is commendable. Obviously, some others, including the “Putin did it” Hillary-fascists, think otherwise.

    But it is quite possible that certain persons and interests may have simply suspected Seth Rich of having done something that he actually hadn’t.

    The official story made no sense. Furthermore, there was apparently no attempt to even make the murder of Seth Rich even look like a “random crime” or an accident. It was very obviously an execution. A full investigation is needed. Why hasnt there been?

    It is a pity that the family is so resistant to establishing the truth. It makes discussion difficult because I do not think any of us want to cause any distress or further pain to the grieving to his family and friends.

  • Tom Welsh

    “The FBI here believed Wikileaks to be indicating the material had been leaked by Seth Rich who had then been murdered. Surely in any legitimate investigation, the investigators would have been absolutely compelled to check out the truth of this possibility, rather than treat it as a media issue?”

    The obvious exception would be if the FBI already knew who had killed Rich and why – and had decided not to investigate further.

    For whatever reason.

  • Cubby

    “Extra powers may not be on the ballot paper but they are on the table”

    “There is super devo on the table now”

    The words of the Britnat Labour man Galloway in 2014. Standing shoulder to shoulder with the Tories and the Lib Dems and of course lying with the Tories and LibDems.

    Funny how if Scotland now has all this super devo powers and as the Tories are always saying the most powerful devolved Parliament in the world (its a lie of course its not even the most devolved in the UK) how come Labours Starmer is up in Scotland talking about federalism and more powers for Scotland. Labour has been promising Home Rule since the days of Keir Hardie centuries ago. Labour has been lying to Scotland for centuries.

    When anyone mentions Galloway’s name – I immediately think “super devo Galloway”

  • Sarge

    Why has Trump been uncharacteristically silent about the Seth Rich issue for three years? Especially with its prominence in alt-Right discourse and Trump’s torment at the hands of the FBI and the Democrats? If his enemies are behind an outrageous murder why has he not demanded a proper investigation?

    • Robyn

      Possibly he’s uncharacteristically silent about Seth Rich for the same reason he didn’t pursue his promise to re-examine the JFK assassination.

    • uncle tungsten

      I would say because he has a truce with the Clintonites and her successors. So he won’t reopen Seth Rich, he won’t prosecute the two biggest national security breaches in USA history, 1-HRC keeping her Sec of State emails on an unsecured home server, and, 2- the Awan family IT spy/blackmail scandal that netted ten+ Democrat Congress members.

      Both of the above 2 national security breaches would likely put Debbie Wasserman Schultz behind bars and that is forbidden! These two prosecutions would make the impeachment circus submerge without trace. Trump is the preferred president of the Democrats and the Republicans just have to go along with it. Actions speak louder than words.

  • MrK

    I have a long thread about Seth Rich here:

    My Seth Rich murder hypothesis:
    1. The days after the deaths of Seth Rich and Shawn Lucas, the DNC transferred about 100,000 to Crowdstrike.
    2. Shawn Henry, head of Crowdstrike and the FBI’s Washington office, knew and worked with MD AG Rod Rosenstein.
    3. Rod Rosenstein was pointed at as the organizer behind the Seth Rich shooters, by ‘Luke’, Jack Burkman’s witness.
    4. John Podesta and Robby Mook stated in emails – Podesta: “I’m definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it.”; Mook in response: “And I would love an example being made.”

    That’s method, motive, statement of intent, a paper trail, and explanations for why the robbery was ‘botched’. Also, I think the fear and exhaustion in the voice of ‘Luke’ are real.

    ‘Luke’ also stated other interesting things – like that the robbery had been successful, in that a thumbdrive had been stolen and was the object of their murder. It makes sense that if they were after data he carried on him, they wouldn’t want to incriminate themselves any further by stealing his valuables as well. Seth Rich’s wallet and golden jewelry were not stolen.

    Also, one of the shooters’ associates, Kevin Doherty, was also convicted for shooting Jack Burkman himself. (Google: “Ex-marine admits he lured seth rich conspiracy theorist” washingtonpost)

    All the links are here:

    • OnlyHalfALooney

      “It makes sense that if they were after data he carried on him, they wouldn’t want to incriminate themselves any further by stealing his valuables as well. Seth Rich’s wallet and golden jewelry were not stolen.”

      Why not steal his valuables and just throw them away? It would have looked more like an “ordinary” robbery gone wront if they had.
      My guess is that whoever did it wanted it to be clear that this was an execution. No attempt was made to make it look like anything else.

      • MrK

        “Why not steal his valuables and just throw them away? It would have looked more like an “ordinary” robbery gone wront if they had.”

        Because they might have been caught with them. Why unnecessarily incriminate themselves. Also, if they’d throw them away, they may be found and end up in a pawn shop, and be found that way. Then they’d have a witness who could tell them where they found the valuables. And then they’d still be in the same position – having people wonder why the robbers threw away gold and money.

      • Tom Welsh

        Exactly. All they want is “plausible deniability” – enough doubt to avoid actual criminal conviction. (It also helps if the judges and prosecutors are on the payroll).

        Once that has been achieved, the more people know about it the better. “Pour decourager les autres”.

  • MJ

    The irony being that had Bernie Sanders been allowed to lead the Democrats into the last election he would have wiped the floor with Trump.

  • remember kronstadt

    I have no doubt that██████████████████████████████truth ████████ interest of ████████ will prevail. ███████████████████████████

  • John Goss

    All too true I’m sorry to say. Seth Rich was almost certainly murdered by the state and you can understand Julian Assange’s concerns being extradited to the extra-judicial US. How bad it is going to get I don’t know. If the root problem is not removed we are all doomed. We might not be murdered but we will be monitored and controlled for the rest of our lives. Shelley knew the answer. But things are a lot worse 200 years later.

    • David

      John, I was surprised to hear on BBC Radio 4 last week a short interview with Yuval Noah Harari

      (I’d never previously heard of him, he has a home page

      His opinion seemed to be that we could soon see a totalitarian data-driven hegemony , based upon a state (or two) knowing everything about everyone, and quoting Yuval directly here knowing us more than we know ourselves. He didn’t name names or States, other than China, but he implied there was of course at least one other unitedly serious place where bad things could grow…..and he sounded scared. I think he was presenting at Davos

      As I have been tangentially involved in data-retention, met ILETS and the teams at Lawful Interception. Yes Yuval, that gloomy-doomy scenario came to me too. Hence my presence here on the ONLY UK website who has mentioned Seth Conrad Rich’s name today (according to a quick ‘Slurp’ search) (eventually, after repeated searches Google even pointed me at Craig’s excellent blog)

      • John Goss

        i don’t know about Professor Harari. I have difficulty trusting the BBC but Radio 4 is a little better than the television channels. We, all of us, should be concerned.

        • David

          True, that’s why I was surprised to hear a counter-narrative honest person on BBC radio! he did talk a lot of sense, perhaps that’s why Been is ‘sacking’ 450 journalists (replacing them with Buzzfeed or Integrity Initiative, in worst case)

          Several years ago I did meet an entire year’s internet of an entire country, in a surprisingly small box.
          The smart search tools were not even AI then, but could narrow down, say “All ethiopian copts in the country” by their metadata.

          Or, as Debonair says, targets for bribery, blackmail, or just targets – getting back to Seth.

          For many years I ran fake traffic mixers, generators, deployed ‘no-scripting’ protections on devices, Privacy Badgered as much data as I could – but now I’m satisfied to be simply identified as a harmless highly visible “zealous idealist” as Snowden calls us in his autobiography “Permanent Record”

        • Mighty Drunken

          Professor Harari is worth reading, quite interesting. To spoil his book Sapiens: Humans are the only animal which believes in fictions. This is what makes them so powerful. Football, nations, Microsoft, money are fictions, just like religion. But if enough people believe in them they can cooperate in massive numbers and achieve great things.

          I think he over does the Big Data/AI knowing ourselves better than we do, but I think the things he says we should be wary of are true. We are being manipulated better than ever. Our growing knowledge in AI, surveillance and biology could change everything and lead to grim dystopias.
          In regard to Israel I don’t remember him saying very much. Other than in his view that Jews and Judaism hasn’t had a massive effect on the world. compared to say the Enlightenment or Western culture in general.

      • Deb O'Nair

        Big data farming and AI are both excellent tools for spotting dissenters and political opposition, just as readily as they are at spotting snow leopards on a mountain.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    My thoughts remain that Hilary Clinton has been, will be and shall always be, in point of fact, deeply connected to the death of Seth Rich.

  • EricT

    Interesting, the To: line in the email list Peter Strzok as one of the recipients. Wasn’t he the guy who got fired for anti Trump messages, and was also associated with the Clintons? His wife was running for office as well and was receiving support from the DNC. Not sure, but its interesting his name showed up in an email associated with the topic of Seth Rich.

    • uncle tungsten

      That is McCabe Deputy Director FBI, sacked for lying just one day before his retirement and pension entitlements fell due. The only swamp leach that Trump sacked worthy of mention.

  • Spencer Eagle

    I agree, Craig, it’s unbelievable that the FBI should be satisfied that the murder of Seth Rich was a street robbery gone wrong. Kim Dotcom’s lawyers wrote twice to special counsel Robert Mueller offering information pertinent to his investigation and never received a reply.

  • Jackrabbit

    “Epstein belonged to intelligence”

    Maybe Seth Rich did too?

    Doesn’t take a genius to figure out the game here.

    Unless you don’t want to see it.

    Rich family strangely silent about the lack of investigation. LOL.

    Also: The ONLY other person that we’ve heard about that was “disturbed” enough by Sanders (sheepdog) treatment in 2016 to take action was Tulsi Gabbard (she resigned from her senior position). But she says nothing about Rich.


      • Jackrabbit

        John A: your comment should’ve begun with “I’ve been told that …”

        I haven’t seen Epstein’s or Rich’s body. Have you?

        Rich’s supposed death conveniently ensured that the true source of the “hacked” emails would not be available to testify.

        The “hack” was blamed on Russia and contributed to “Russiagate” – a strategic initiative to create a new McCarthyism.


        • Jackrabbit

          For clarity: we’ve been led to believe certain things that may not actually be true:

          1) That Epstein was murdered – ignoring the possibility that he might’ve been extracted:
          – Epstein was identified by his brother, not dna (despite Epstein’s having been a convicted sex offender);
          – There was a number of strange occurrences surrounding the death, including: an internet message about his being “switched out”, very limited info about the body (which some say doesn’t match Epstein’s), cc-video that went missing, the relative ease of killing Epstein BEFORE he was jailed (if someone was really concerned about the potential for Epstein’s releasing info), etc.

          2) That Rich was murdered – but the Rich family doesn’t seem too interested in finding the truth of why.

          We have numerous examples of intelligence agencies trying to shape our perception of events. The White Helmets being a good example. We should be skeptical of narratives that herd us into a certain understanding of events – especially when we find that there are inconsistencies and hidden info.


          • squirrel

            I definitely believe Epstein was switched. I have seen nothing reported as evidence from the autopsy identifying the body (rule of thumb – where evidence matches the official narrative, it is reported, where it doesn’t, it is withheld).

            As you mention there was the reddit post from the prison worker about the switch before his death was announced.

            The CCTV footage from the reported first unsuccessful suicide attempt was admitted in court to have been destroyed. This suggests that the first ‘suicide attempt’ was not a suicide attempt. I would suggest that it was a ‘convincer’ to set up the body switch. Of course we don’t have CCTV footage from the second one either.

          • lysias

            I think it’s highly significant that the media never mention the possibility that Epstein was extracted.

          • Christy

            I’ve definitely wondered about Epstein being extracted, but my hope would be that he is in protective custody spilling everything and that would help to explain why Barr corroborated the suicide. One can dream.

          • Mosaic

            “an internet message about his being “switched out””

            Huh. First time I have heard of this!
            Where is that info, and what did the internet message say?
            ‘What is an “internet message”?
            An email?

          • Jackrabbit

            The message (on 4Chan):

            Here’s a discussion of it: Epstein’s Death Was On 4Chan Before Officials Announced It — Now Authorities Are Investigating

            One guy in the discussion put together a timeline:
            05:16:36 Jeffrey Epstein dead — dont ask me how I know, but Epstein died an hour ago from hanging, cardiac arrest. Screencap this
            05:21:58 — Was called out as a cardiac arrest at the manhattan federal detention facility. Worked asystole for 40 mins
            05:31:30 — lets say I know. Dont need a glowie coming to my crib. But they declared death at New York Presbyterian Lower Manhattan ER
            05:36:45 — screencap this then brudda and post when the news breaks
            05:42:21 — hanging (in response to being asked cause of cardiac arrest)
            05:44:55 — (from a different poster than the OP) Not saying anything after this pls do not try to dox me but last night after 0415 count they took him medical in a wheelchair front cuffed but not 1 triage nurse says they spoke to him. Next thing we know a trip van shows up? We do not do releases on the weekends unless a judge orders it. Next thing we know, he’s put in a single man cell and hangs himself? Heres the thing, the trip van did NOT sign in and we did not record the plate number and a guy in a green dress military outfit was in the back of the van according to the tower guy who let him thru the gate. You guys i am shaking right now but i think they switched him out.
            05:47:56 — worked asystole arrest for 40 minutes, als intubated in the field/epi/2 liters NS infused. Telemetry advised bicarb and D50 in field. Pt transported to Lower Manhattan ER and worked for 20 minutes and called. Hospital administrator was alerted, preparing statements

            The first post confirming the news:
            06:00:35 — Holy # its true, check New York Post

            Note that the above times are PDT/MST. Add three hours for EDT — NY time.


          • squirrel

            Indeed Lysias – the media never mention it.

            One of the tricks of the propagandists is to put forth a debate, where neither option is the truth that they are concealing.

            So with Epstein, we have the official narrative of death by suicide.
            On the media, they allow a small amount of another theory, that Epstein was murdered.

            The apparent binary choice conceals the option being concealed, i.e. that Epstein was switched.
            Why is no-one in the media asking what identification took place in the autopsy? It is such a straightforward line of inquiry.

          • fedup

            You forgot Kenny Boy Lay founder, CEO and Chairman of Enron and was heavily involved in the Enron scandal, was the best pals with Dubya (Bush) who was convicted and whilst getting ready to go to jail had a “heart attack” and he was “Deaded”.

            Whence they could kill the president of the country before the millions of people (JFK); they can get away with small bear of switching an asset for Mossad. Where is Ghislaine Maxwell at?

        • pretzelattack

          i’ve seen reports of other prisoners’ being whacked, none of prisoners being extracted and switched. but it makes for a netflix show. epstein and rich were both whacked to prevent them from telling what they knew. that’s the simplest explanation, and absent evidence to the contrary i’ll go with it.

          • squirrel

            The issue pretzelattack is that criminals often employ deceptions to hide their crimes and intentions, so you can’t simply go around just believing people because that is the ‘simplest’ explanation.

          • pretzelattack

            the issues squirrel is dead men tell no tales. you don’t need to graft a mission impossible plot onto this to understand it. the empire whacks people all the time, activists in the middle east, iranian generals; there’s nothing sacred about americans. criminals don’t go around extracting canaries from jail, they have them killed.

          • Jackrabbit

            They didn’t ‘whack’ the Skripals.

            They haven’t ‘whacked’ Ghislaine Maxwell, Prince Andrew, and other Epstein associates.

            And we’ve seen other convenient ‘retirements’:
            – James Le Mesurier (White Helmets founder): with a very strange, very showy death right after OPCW scandal;
            – al Baghdadi: conveniently killed (again) to distract from Trump’s not leaving Syria.

            As a matter of fact, we’ve seen, time and time again, that the Empire promotes and rewards the worst of it’s useful idiots. Who went to jail for ‘rendition and torture’? Gina Haspel was involved and destroyed evidence but she was still confirmed as CIA Director.

          • pretzelattack

            we don’t know they haven’t whacked the skripals. has anyone seen them in the last few months? no?
            newsflash, maxwell et all aren’t in a jail cell, and aren’t being pressured by prosecutors dangling life sentences vs lesser punishments to induce said canaries to talk. but do tell me how you know they haven’t whacked the skripals. and tell me how that compares to substituting a dead guy into a jail cell for another guy who has incriminating information on you. one is easy, one is hard.

          • squirrel

            pretzelattack I don’t know why you think a switch is ‘mission impossible’ while a hitman is not. Far easier I would think to carry out a plan which involved the cooperation of Epstein.

      • Courtenay Barnett

        John A,

        ” Epstein was killed to silence him.
        Rich was killed to discourage other possible whistleblowers or leakers.
        Big difference.”

        Both were killed to ensure silence.

        Big similarity?

1 2 3