May 19, 2018
The Department of Justice is refusing to release any records related to the murder of former Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich, according to a lawyer who has been investigating the unsolved case.
But that stance by the federal government is an improvement over its previous refusal even to look for records, says the lawyer, Ty Clevenger.
Clevenger wrote on his blog, LawFlog, he received the news Wednesday in a letter from the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys.
“Actually, they have refused to release any records about Seth Rich at all, e.g., whether he had a security clearance or a background check.”
But he pointed out the “same office originally refused to even search for records related to Seth Rich, but it was overruled on October 2, 2017, after I appealed to DOJ’s Office of Information Policy.’
Six months later, he said, “they’re still refusing to release anything.”
The letter from the DOJ to Clevenger said: “The records you seek are located in a Privacy Act system of records that, in accordance with regulations promulgated by the attorney general, is exempt from the access provisions of the Privacy Act … We have processed your request under the Freedom of Information Act and are making all records required to be released, or considered appropriate for release as a matter of discretion, available to you.
“The letter is a [X] full denial.”
The letter, which provides a list of options for appeal, was signed by Kevin Krebs, assistant director in the Freedom of Information and Privacy office.
Clevenger pointed out: “I have already filed suit against the FBI and DOJ to force the agencies to release records (DOJ’s answer to the lawsuit is due next Thursday), and I am not particularly surprised by the response thus far. For one thing, the Freedom of Information Act grants broad exemptions for records pertaining to law enforcement and prosecution.”
But he said even those exemptions have limits and “not everything should be protected by FOIA.”
For example, he said he expects to show that the FBI already lied by claiming “it has no records related to Seth Rich.”
“My sources tell me that the FBI assisted D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department in hacking some of Mr. Rich’s electronic devices, yet the FBI has refused to even search for records at its Washington Field Office, where the records would be kept. Why does it matter whether the FBI was involved? Because the FBI usually does not investigate a ‘botched street robbery,’ as DC officials have described the incident.”
WND reported last fall when Clevenger started his hunt for the Rich records.
After his FOIA request for records or correspondence about the murder or its investigation was rejected, the DOJ at that time told the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Washington, D.C., to hunt for records.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office originally put off Clevenger’s FOIA request, demanding he submit a death certificate to prove that Rich was dead.
“Since you have not furnished a release, death certificate, or public justification for release, the release of records concerning a third party would result in an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy and would be in violation of the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C.§ 552a,” the office said.
But Clevenger appealed. And Sean R. O’Neil, the chief of administrative appeals at DOJ’s Office of Information Policy, directed the executive office for U.S. attorneys to search for and produce any records covered in Clevenger’s FOIA request.
“You appealed from the action of the Executive Officer for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) on your Freedom of Information Act request for access to records located in the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia concerning Seth Conrad Rich,” O’Neil wrote in a letter to Clevenger.
“After carefully considering your appeal, and as a result of discussions between EOUSA personnel and this office, I am remanding your request to EOUSA for a search for responsive records. If EOUSA locates releasable records, it will send them to you directly, subject to applicable fees,” the letter continues.
As WND has reported, Rich, 27, the DNC’s voter expansion data director, had accepted a position with Democratic Party nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign just before his death.
On July 10, 2016, he was fatally shot in the back in Washington, D.C., near his apartment in an affluent neighborhood. Rich had been working for the DNC at a time when emails from the organization were provided to WikiLeaks for publication.
The Metropolitan Police Department and Washington Mayor Muriel Bowers insist Rich was randomly killed during a “botched robbery.” But others are doubtful because he was found with his wallet, credit cards and other valuables.
Clevenger said at the time the effort to hide information about the Rich investigation prompted him to cull information from the government about the mysterious murder.
“I don’t really have a strong opinion about exactly what happened to Rich, but it just seemed there was so much of an effort to conceal information – that alone made me suspicious,” he told WND at the time. “I’m a former reporter, a former cop – deputy sheriff in Texas – and currently a lawyer. Any time somebody hides information, that makes me suspicious.
“I understand in an investigative murder there is evidence that, for strategic reasons, you want to keep under wraps,” he continued. “But in this case, there’s just a lot of questions that could be answered – a coroner’s report, basic information. The rigid official narrative, that it was a robbery and that’s that – no further discussion – that’s suspicious.”
Washington-based lawyer and lobbyist Jack Burkman has organized the Profiling Project, a Washington, D.C.-based team of forensic psychology graduate students and instructors, to find Rich’s killers. In addition, he has launched a nationwide TV campaign pleading for the public’s help in cracking the Rich case.
Burkman, who claimed police insistence on withholding the most basic information pertaining to Rich’s murder is suspicious, also filed a lawsuit against Washington’s Metropolitan Police Department. He is demanding the release of Rich’s medical examiner’s report, autopsy documents and ballistics reports, which are typically made public during murder investigations.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has hinted that Rich, and not Russian agents, may have been the source of the Democratic National Committee emails he published online.
Look Who Was Paid $100K the Day After Staffer Seth Rich was Murdered
Seth Rich’s d***h keeps coming back to haunt DC. Some new records have surfaced that show that the Democrat National Committee (DNC) paid a huge sum totaling $98,849.84 to CrowdStrike. They are an FBI contractor as well as a cybersecurity firm. They were paid this money shortly after Rich was k****d in Washington, DC. That looks awfully coincidental and suspicious if you ask me. It is widely thought that Rich was the source for a great deal of the leaked information that hurt the Democratic Party just before the 2016 presidential election.
Gateway Pundit brought forth the records from the Federal Election Commission that show how and when the DNC paid the money to CrowdStrike. these payments were actually first reported on last September, but they are still not explained.
Seth Rich was only 27 when he died. The authorities posited that a mugger k****d him, but none of the facts add up on the case. I have always thought it was very suspicious and looked more like a set-up hit than a mugging. He worked as the voter expansion data director at the DNC for two years. So, he had access to a lot of information and data. He was working for the DNC when emails went missing and wound up with WikiLeaks, who then published them. At the time, WikiLeaks was adamant that there was no hack and that the emails were leaked to them.
The emails that WikiLeaks wound up with exposed high-ranking DNC officials and how, along with the Clinton team, they went about sabotaging Bernie Sanders’ campaign. They also were rife with racist, anti-gay and sexist slurs they used to refer to their constituents. When you read the emails, it’s obvious that they were manipulating the primary race so that Clinton would be the nominee. All of these games led to Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s resignation as DNC chair.
Ironically, Rich had just accepted a position with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign before he was k****d near his apartment in an affluent Washington, D.C. neighborhood. Right in the middle of the heated campaign, Rich was fatally shot twice in the back. However, his wallet, credit cards, watch and phone were not taken. The Metropolitan Police Department described his m****r as a “botched robbery.” Right… sure it was.
Somehow, this has got to be related to the d***h of attorney Shawn Lucas, 38, who was found d**d in his bathroom on Aug. 2nd, 2016. The very next day, CrowdStrike received a check for $113,645.77 from the DNC. Lucas filed a lawsuit against the DNC in early July of 2016. It alleged that the DNC committed fraud by rigging their primary election in favor of Hillary Clinton. The Office of Chief Medical Examiner of Washington, DC, said in November of 2016 that Lucas’ Aug. 2nd d***h was accidental and was caused by the “combined adverse effects of fentanyl [a synthetic opioid pain medication], cyclobenzaprine [a muscle relaxant], and mitragynine [better known as kraton].” How convenient.
CrowdStrike’s clientele includes Congress, the White House, the State Department, the Democratic National Committee, SONY and Google. Coincidentally, Google, who gave millions of dollars to the Clinton campaign and was under fire during the election for manipulating and suppressing negative search results for Clinton, is one of CrowdStrike’s primary investors.
After the WikiLeaks publication of the DNC and Clinton campaign emails, DNC officials refused to hand over their server to the FBI to undergo a forensic examination. That would have definitively determined whether the server was just breached or actually hacked. One wonders why they would not let the FBI examine the server. There was never a subpoena or a search warrant from the Justice Department on all this. Former FBI Director James Comey said last year that the DNC had denied the bureau’s requests to examine their server. CrowdStrike was the only one who had access to it. They issued a “report” which the FBI accepted as “proof” of whatever it was the Democrats wanted the FBI to think. I have a good idea why the FBI accepted the report. It tidied up another mess left by Hillary.
No one took the deaths of Rich and Lucas seriously except their loved ones and perhaps Sean Hannity who tried to look into it. They are two among 33 people who have died under suspicious circumstances while associated with the Clintons. The d***h toll is getting really long here. Even Slate, which is as leftish as you can get, thinks the whole Rich m****r is highly suspicious. “Why wouldn’t the Democratic National Committee allow the FBI to check their servers during the investigation of the DNC breaches during the 2016 election?” Slate asked. Good question and we may never know.
A real investigation should be done on Seth Rich’s and others’ deaths here. Follow the money and you’ll find those behind these awful killings. And we need to know what the DNC and CrowdStrike are hiding. I suspect all trails will eventually lead back to the DNC and the Clintons.
Rush Limbaugh Bombshell: DNC Hack ‘Had To Be An Inside Job’
The Russia probe is premised on the claim that the Russians hacked the Democratic National Committee’s server during the 2016 election.
But we have never seen any evidence of it because the server was likely deliberately breached by a DNC staffer and never hacked, warns Rush Limbaugh.
“We still don’t know the data that was hacked from the DNC. They haven’t even told us that. They’ve just told us the Russians did it and that CrowdStrike proved it and that’s it. They’ve shown no evidence,” Limbaugh argued. “I’m gonna tell you who I think did hack the Democrat server. In fact, I think we already know. People have just forgotten. It was Democrat National Committee employees. People hired by Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz. It was the Pakistanis, folks. The Pakistanis hacked the Democrat National Committee servers.”
The establishment media has strategically ignored the months-long House IT scandal rocking congressional Democrats. This is even after the FBI’s investigation into the matter became public and Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s top IT aide Imran Awan was arrested trying to flee to Pakistan after wiring almost $300,000 to the country, Limbaugh pointed out.
“If you Google the Awan brothers from Pakistan, you won’t find many stories. It’s being totally ignored. But there were three brothers from Pakistan, and they were hot to trot computer specialists. They were IT stars. Debbie ‘Blabbermouth’ Schultz hired them and put them on the payroll,” he continued. “The story has been completely and totally covered up. It was very embarrassing to the DNC when it happened, and so the Drive-Bys have ignored the story.”
The Awan family are likely the culprits behind the DNC data breach, Limbaugh argued.
“I will not be surprised if it is eventually learned that these guys did it. They’re gone now. They are back in Pakistan. They were fired when it was discovered what they had done. Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz hires them, these kids from Pakistan made off with all kinds of computer data from all over the DNC, and anywhere from 44 to 80 Democrat congresspeople had their data stolen, and in some cases, even the hardware, the computers themselves were stolen.”
The special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election has entered its second year, but the American people are still in the dark about whether the DNC server was actually hacked.
“The important thing is that this investigation, if you really, really want to get back to the starting point was when Democrats said that the Russians hacked their servers. Same time the RNC servers were attacked but unsuccessfully,” he said. “They’ve just told us the Russians did it and that CrowdStrike proved it and that’s it. They’ve shown no evidence…There has yet to be — do not doubt me — there has yet to be any evidence furnished that the Russians did the hacking,” he said. “One of the most telling pieces of information, CrowdStrike was the third-party outfit that the Democrats hired to forensically examine their server. And CrowdStrike is who said that it looked to them like Russia or Guccifer 2.0, some people pretending to be the Russians maybe did it.”
Democrats’ refusal to let the FBI forensically examine any of the network data that would contain digital footprints identifying who came in and hacked data, is an indication that the server was not ever actually hacked, Limbaugh noted.
“Not to be redundant, but the Democrats refused to let the FBI forensically examine any of the network data that would, you know, have digital footprints that would maybe identify who came in and hacked data,” he said. “The hardware was there. Nobody made off with the server, nobody made off with the hardware of the network. It was all there. Just the data had been hacked and stolen. We’ve been told from the get-go the Russians did the hacking, and they did it to help Trump win. And everybody just accepted it.”
It would have been impossible for information from the DNC to have been hacked due to upload and download speeds, Limbaugh explained. Instead, someone with physical access to the network must have copied them in person to a USB drive.
“The maximum transfer speeds can be easily calculated. Well, the transfer speeds that were reported by CrowdStrike are impossible over the internet. If you spend time Googling this and delving into this, you will stumble across this fact. The speed at which the data that was stolen from the server was transferred are speeds that are impossible over the internet,” he said. “The speeds that were reported, the speeds that CrowdStrike reported from data transfer is identical to the speed if you’re writing something to a DVD or a thumb drive over USB. You can copy massive amounts of data very fast over USB to either a DVD or a thumb drive. You can transfer a couple terabytes in not very long. But over the internet, it would take impossibly longer.”
The forensic data is there. The transfer speed data is there. And it simply is not possible over the internet. So what does this mean? It means it had to be an inside job, it had to be somebody with access to the hardware, to the server, to computers, it had to be somebody who could plug in a thumb drive or an optical drive with DVD or what have you, a CD, and write the data that way, because if it’s over the internet, the amount of data we’re talking about here — and we still don’t know specifically what was even hacked.”