5 ms·

Is there any evidence suggesting this Seth Rich story is believable? There's certainly ample evidence suggesting it is not. The (FOX) article that peddled this

Is there any evidence suggesting this Seth Rich story is believable? There's certainly ample evidence suggesting it is not. The (FOX) article that peddled this story has been retracted and Seth Rich's family is suing the network over it.

derision 7y ago
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/ https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-r...
- three_seagrass 7y ago
  This conspiracy has been debunked. The VIPS statement you linked to doesn't name their "independent cybersecurity" source, which was later proven to be the work of UK trolls: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180802/07182740351/as-dnc-hacked-itself-conspiracy-theory-collapses-key-backer-claim-exposed-as-uk-troll.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180802/07182740351/as-dn...
  - derision 7y ago
    Here's more information in another comment in this thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22369830 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22369830
    - ccaleb 7y ago
      I don't mean to be condescending but perhaps you should continue your research. All of the stuff you're posting has been widely and thoroughly debunked. Additionally, you should think about which sources pushed this debunked information upon you. Are those trustworthy news sources?
      - derision 7y ago
        I keep seeing people say it's debunked but their source for that is a news article that looks no different than my sources that doesn't provide convincing evidence in my opinion. Maybe you should continue your research on your debunking sources and think who pushed that theory onto you
      - netsharc 7y ago
        I thought Hacker News had higher quality commenters than reddit, but lately I've been getting more and more disappointed. (Not with you but with the likes of Seth Rich-conspiracy-theory spreading idiots).
    - three_seagrass 7y ago
      That HN comment was debunked as well. See the response in the thread.
  - castlecrasher2 7y ago
    How is that a debunking? Sure, it points out an asinine argument but it's certainly not disproving anything.
    - three_seagrass 7y ago
      It's proving their source was false, which was the premise of their entire argument, effectively debunking it.
- ccaleb 7y ago
  Again, this has been debunked, multiple times. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170814/11490537992/stories-claiming-dnc-hack-was-inside-job-rely-heavily-stupid-conversion-error-no-forensic-expert-would-make.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170814/11490537992/stori...
akvadrako 7y ago
There is evidence from the leaks it was an inside job - basically the time stamps indicate the files were copied at USB2 speeds.
- orf 7y ago
  Imagine the lack of thought that goes into saying something like that. Not just saying it but also believing it. You’re getting this data from a third party. One that may well have used a USB stick to copy the data AFTER exfiltrating it using some other method, but BEFORE handing it to wiki leaks. Some shoddy timestamp correlations don’t mean that the data was stolen via USB in any way. They are inherently mutable and could well have been modified by an adversary to spread FUD.
  - akvadrako 7y ago
    Everything in the leak could be faked and nothing about it makes it definitionally due to a Russian hack either. But the evidence certainly seems to indicate a local copy done by somebody who wasn't trying to cover their tracks: https://theforensicator.wordpress.com/guccifer-2-ngp-van-metadata-analysis/ https://theforensicator.wordpress.com/guccifer-2-ngp-van-met... The only evidence pointing to Russians is the CIA says so. The NSA gave it about a 50% chance before joining the other agencies to parrot what the CIA said.
    - orf 7y ago
      Yeah a guy working for an organization who would outright murder you for leaking sensitive information sure wouldn’t bother covering his tracks while leaking sensitive information. Or, you know, this data was copied to a USB by Wikileaks at some point before publishing.
      - akvadrako 7y ago
        That doesn't make any sense. The source of the archive isn't wikileaks and the timestamps originate a couple months before publishing in the EDT timezone, before being organized and packaged for release.
tropo 7y ago
Fox didn't create the highly suspicious facts. What Fox does or doesn't report is not relevant. Also, anybody can sue anybody for anything, so that means nothing either. Here we have an email recently obtained via FOIA, from Peter Strzok, showing he "squashed" the investigation: https://imgur.com/a/9r44Qf4 https://imgur.com/a/9r44Qf4 That adds to the pile of suspicion. Seth had the means and the motive. Random killings are not so likely, even in DC. The attacker didn't take anything of value. Podesta's emails also have very chilling comments about dealing with leakers.

derision 7y ago

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/ https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-r...

three_seagrass 7y ago
This conspiracy has been debunked. The VIPS statement you linked to doesn't name their "independent cybersecurity" source, which was later proven to be the work of UK trolls: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180802/07182740351/as-dnc-hacked-itself-conspiracy-theory-collapses-key-backer-claim-exposed-as-uk-troll.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180802/07182740351/as-dn...
- derision 7y ago
  Here's more information in another comment in this thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22369830 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22369830
  - ccaleb 7y ago
    I don't mean to be condescending but perhaps you should continue your research. All of the stuff you're posting has been widely and thoroughly debunked. Additionally, you should think about which sources pushed this debunked information upon you. Are those trustworthy news sources?
    - derision 7y ago
      I keep seeing people say it's debunked but their source for that is a news article that looks no different than my sources that doesn't provide convincing evidence in my opinion. Maybe you should continue your research on your debunking sources and think who pushed that theory onto you
    - netsharc 7y ago
      I thought Hacker News had higher quality commenters than reddit, but lately I've been getting more and more disappointed. (Not with you but with the likes of Seth Rich-conspiracy-theory spreading idiots).
  - three_seagrass 7y ago
    That HN comment was debunked as well. See the response in the thread.
- castlecrasher2 7y ago
  How is that a debunking? Sure, it points out an asinine argument but it's certainly not disproving anything.
  - three_seagrass 7y ago
    It's proving their source was false, which was the premise of their entire argument, effectively debunking it.
ccaleb 7y ago
Again, this has been debunked, multiple times. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170814/11490537992/stories-claiming-dnc-hack-was-inside-job-rely-heavily-stupid-conversion-error-no-forensic-expert-would-make.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170814/11490537992/stori...

akvadrako 7y ago

There is evidence from the leaks it was an inside job - basically the time stamps indicate the files were copied at USB2 speeds.

orf 7y ago
Imagine the lack of thought that goes into saying something like that. Not just saying it but also believing it. You’re getting this data from a third party. One that may well have used a USB stick to copy the data AFTER exfiltrating it using some other method, but BEFORE handing it to wiki leaks. Some shoddy timestamp correlations don’t mean that the data was stolen via USB in any way. They are inherently mutable and could well have been modified by an adversary to spread FUD.
- akvadrako 7y ago
  Everything in the leak could be faked and nothing about it makes it definitionally due to a Russian hack either. But the evidence certainly seems to indicate a local copy done by somebody who wasn't trying to cover their tracks: https://theforensicator.wordpress.com/guccifer-2-ngp-van-metadata-analysis/ https://theforensicator.wordpress.com/guccifer-2-ngp-van-met... The only evidence pointing to Russians is the CIA says so. The NSA gave it about a 50% chance before joining the other agencies to parrot what the CIA said.
  - orf 7y ago
    Yeah a guy working for an organization who would outright murder you for leaking sensitive information sure wouldn’t bother covering his tracks while leaking sensitive information. Or, you know, this data was copied to a USB by Wikileaks at some point before publishing.
    - akvadrako 7y ago
      That doesn't make any sense. The source of the archive isn't wikileaks and the timestamps originate a couple months before publishing in the EDT timezone, before being organized and packaged for release.

tropo 7y ago

Fox didn't create the highly suspicious facts. What Fox does or doesn't report is not relevant. Also, anybody can sue anybody for anything, so that means nothing either. Here we have an email recently obtained via FOIA, from Peter Strzok, showing he "squashed" the investigation: https://imgur.com/a/9r44Qf4 https://imgur.com/a/9r44Qf4 That adds to the pile of suspicion. Seth had the means and the motive. Random killings are not so likely, even in DC. The attacker didn't take anything of value. Podesta's emails also have very chilling comments about dealing with leakers.