The Mad Patriots » Shocking Coverup: Did Democrats Kill DNC Staffer Behind Email Leaks?

SSgt Christopher Brose - Allegedly Trump had collusions with the Russians, during the campaign and ever since the Democrats have said that the Russians hacked the election (release of information is not hacking), and the releases were done by Wikileaks. Therefore, if you are going to look into Trump's supposed collusion with Russia, then you have to look at where the Dems say the "evidence" is, which are the Wikileaks.

SSgt Christopher Brose - RE: "The link seems tenuous to me, please elaborate." ANSWER: The letter appointing the special prosecutor gave him very general authority to investigate any matters uncovered during the election of President Trump the exact wording used: “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump...as well as other matters that may arise directly from the investigation.” One of the primary accusations is that the "Russians" hacked the DNC and provided the information to Wikileaks in an effort to sway the election. However, the opposing theory (confirmed by Wikileaks) is that DNC staffer Seth Rich provided the information to Wikileaks before his death (under suspicious circumstances). Both theories will need to be investigated and that would include the cause of Seth Rich's death.

This was pointed out by someone on another board but so far no one has refuted it. 1. No one has ever proven that the DNC computer system was hacked, and the DNC has yet to allow anyone to look at their system. 2. Wikeleaks has always insisted the emails they released were never from Russian Hacking, not sure why Assange would lie about that, he sole purpose is supposedly to reveal stuff like that.

MSgt James Mullis, LT Brad McInnis - Thank you for fleshing that out for me. I knew it was related, I was just thrown by the word "directly."

LT Brad McInnis - Yeah, that too.

SSG Ken Gouchenour - See, I have this very simple idea that you should never be afraid of an investigation. If you don't do bad sh3t, then you never got in sh3t!

LT Brad McInnis - That assumes complete integrity on the part of the investigators, no intentional smear job by interested 3rd parties, no manufactured evidence, no changing standards, consistent definitions, etc. I know if I was being investigated for anything, I'd be nervous as hell until it was finished, even if I did nothing wrong and was squeaky clean.

SSG Ken Gouchenour - I'm referring to ME. If I was under an investigation for anything, I'd have the comfort of knowing I didn't do it (assuming I didn't do it), but I'd still be sweating bullets on occasion because my fate would be in the hands of someone else, and my life could get really complicated really fast if something beyond my control went wrong.