Accused software pirate and internet entrepreneur, Kim
Dotcom, has released a statement claiming that he communicated with murdered DNC
staffer, Seth Rich. Dotcom posted the statement on his
website.
According to Dotcom’s account, he met Rich online, when a
person with the handle, “Panda,” contacted him about starting a US branch of
Dotcom’s Internet Party in 2014. Dotcom claims that Panda was actually Seth Rich,
but does not explain how he learned Panda’s identity. Dotcom does not say if he
ever met Panda or Rich in person.
Dotcom said that the referred to what he had learned from
Panda when discussed WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, in a 2015 interview
with Bloomberg
(shorter clip here).
When asked about a tweet in which he said that he would be “Hillary’s worst nightmare
in 2016,” Dotcom answered, “Well, I have to say it’s probably more Julian. But
I’m aware of some of the things that are going to be roadblocks for her.” When
pressed, Dotcom denied that he knew specifically what Assange had planned.
In the statement, Dotcom declined to give further details,
saying “my full statement should be provided to the authorities and I am
prepared to do that so that there can be a full investigation.” Dotcom asked
for “a guarantee from Special Counsel Mueller, on behalf of the United States,
of safe passage from New Zealand to the United States and back” if he is
required to come to the US to present his evidence. Dotcom is currently
fighting extradition from New Zealand to the US, where he faces charges of money
laundering, racketeering and wire fraud.
The family of Seth Rich rejected Dotcom’s claims and pointed
out that he had provided no evidence to substantiate his claims. “The Rich
family is tired of having to respond to accusations,” a spokesman for the
family said in a statement.
“The burden of proof is on Mr. Dotcom to either prove he has evidence or face
the consequences of damaging Seth’s good name and creating more emotional
hardship on a grieving family. The family is not going to entertain his
ridiculous, manipulative and completely non-credible statements.”
Originally published
on The Resurgent
No comments:
Post a Comment