4 ms·

Julian Assange suggested it on a Dutch news show

lowiqengineer 6y ago
More evidence of it being a crazed conspiracy theory then!
slg 6y ago
There has been a lot of support for Assange on HN lately, but I rarely see any discussion of his relation to the whole Seth Rich debacle. Is there any possible defense for Assange's role in that?
- fit2rule 6y ago
  IF Julian was able to exercise his right to free speech, I'm sure he would provide ample evidence to support his position. However, that is not the case with Julian today - but he would be the one who actually knew whether Seth Rich leaked the DNC documents.
  - belorn 6y ago
    Unless Assange meet the person who provided the documents he would not be able to know for sure who it was.
  - slg 6y ago
    Assange had first started to insinuate a connection to Seth Rich in 2016. He has had plenty of opportunities since then to share any supporting evidence, but he hasn't. That isn't due to any free speech issue. Also Assange was still communicating with and receiving DNC documents from his source after Seth Rich was already dead. Seth Rich wasn't Assange's source. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-rich-assange.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-ri...
- justaguy1 6y ago
  The possible defense would be that Julian wasn’t trying to mislead people, but he was actually telling the truth. He hinted that Seth rich was a Leaker to him, and encouraged people to think that without saying it explicitly. He was either A) lying to cover up getting information from The Russians, or B) telling the truth and the “analysis” that says the Russians hacked the DNC server is actually false.
  - slg 6y ago
    >A) lying to cover up getting information from The Russians, or B) telling the truth and the “analysis” that says the Russians hacked the DNC server is actually false. Assange was still communicating with and receiving DNC documents from his source after Seth Rich was already dead. Assange was not telling the truth. It was obviously option A. A journalist should try to hide their sources. A journalist doesn't try to hide their actual source by pretending their source is a dead person and as a result opening that dead person's family up to repeated harassment. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-rich-assange.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-ri...
    - nl 6y ago
      Notably the Republican led Senate report confirms that the GRU used fake personas to try to cover their links to Wikileaks, including this ("Seth Rich did it") specific theory (page 220) The report itself has a number of technical details of the hack. See page 174 onwards: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/docu...

More evidence of it being a crazed conspiracy theory then!

slg 6y ago

There has been a lot of support for Assange on HN lately, but I rarely see any discussion of his relation to the whole Seth Rich debacle. Is there any possible defense for Assange's role in that?

fit2rule 6y ago
IF Julian was able to exercise his right to free speech, I'm sure he would provide ample evidence to support his position. However, that is not the case with Julian today - but he would be the one who actually knew whether Seth Rich leaked the DNC documents.
- belorn 6y ago
  Unless Assange meet the person who provided the documents he would not be able to know for sure who it was.
- slg 6y ago
  Assange had first started to insinuate a connection to Seth Rich in 2016. He has had plenty of opportunities since then to share any supporting evidence, but he hasn't. That isn't due to any free speech issue. Also Assange was still communicating with and receiving DNC documents from his source after Seth Rich was already dead. Seth Rich wasn't Assange's source. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-rich-assange.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-ri...
justaguy1 6y ago
The possible defense would be that Julian wasn’t trying to mislead people, but he was actually telling the truth. He hinted that Seth rich was a Leaker to him, and encouraged people to think that without saying it explicitly. He was either A) lying to cover up getting information from The Russians, or B) telling the truth and the “analysis” that says the Russians hacked the DNC server is actually false.
- slg 6y ago
  >A) lying to cover up getting information from The Russians, or B) telling the truth and the “analysis” that says the Russians hacked the DNC server is actually false. Assange was still communicating with and receiving DNC documents from his source after Seth Rich was already dead. Assange was not telling the truth. It was obviously option A. A journalist should try to hide their sources. A journalist doesn't try to hide their actual source by pretending their source is a dead person and as a result opening that dead person's family up to repeated harassment. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-rich-assange.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-ri...
  - nl 6y ago
    Notably the Republican led Senate report confirms that the GRU used fake personas to try to cover their links to Wikileaks, including this ("Seth Rich did it") specific theory (page 220) The report itself has a number of technical details of the hack. See page 174 onwards: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/docu...