Have you ever heard of the Clinton death count?
It sounds silly, doesn't it? On it's face it's rather absurd.
Surely people don't get away with murder often. The list of alleged Clinton victims is super long. Way too long for someone to get away with it all.
And that was the case a decade ago when I first saw a book about the Clinton body count. I never read that book, but the description intrigued me:
In Part Three of the Clinton trilogy-The Murder Volume-an overwhelming amount of evidence is provided proving that the 110+ people who've died under mysterious circumstances-all tied in some way, shape, or form to the Clintons-far surpasses any chance of it merely being coincidence. The odds of such a phenomenon occurring naturally are, in fact, so minuscule that alternative explanations become necessary.
Now being a man of average means, I cannot get to the bottom of that mystery. I assume that I would read this book and say - hey, if nobody is lying, then this is really interesting.
But then I would assure myself. Tell myself the most comforting thing to believe for my own sanity:
"Probably somebody is lying."
And then I would get on with my life. Because who wants to carry around knowledge of murder and injustice with them all day?
Did the Clintons murder someone? Maybe. But who cares? Not like I can do anything about it.
That's lazy, isn't it? But it's the mode of operation for most people. It's natural.
That’s why, when we go through the stages of grief, denial is the first step. It’s a defense mechanism.
We resist information that shakes our worldview. We also avoid conclusions that demand a response.
In other words, we are conditioned to shrug off negative information. And only by knowing that is our tendency can we ever hope to overcome it.
By overcoming this instinct we become smarter. This is not an instinct based on superior logic. It is a protection mechanism. And protection mechanisms don’t get us any closer to the truth.
But nevertheless, I indulged my assumption that everything was rosy. I didn’t have time for the Clinton death count. One can only be so woke.
I have successfully been able to shrug off the Clinton death count for many years. At age 32, all of the significant events happened before my time anyway.
I have even managed to avoid getting sucked in to speculation about the DNC process server who mysteriously died before he could testify concerning the DNC’s "insufficient service of process" allegation specifically involving him.
But then I hit a crossroads. Something happened that I just couldn’t ignore.
Julian Assange slipped up. He unveiled a source. And it was none other than Seth Rich.
Now this, in itself, is debatable. Assange did not directly say that Seth Rich was his source. But he hinted that he was. Boy did he hint.
In a future article, I will tease out the reasons that Assange may have said what he said regarding Seth Rich,and why this was impactful to me. But suffice it to say that Assange's words here and elsewhere has made me take a good long look at Seth Rich.
And not many have done that. Which is strange because it’s not like the events surrounding Seth Rich’s death are unremarkable. The man was shot in the back twice while walking on the sidewalk. He was alive when found and spoke with the police, but no body cam footage has been released. The prevailing theory is robbery, which is strange when nothing is stolen and the shots were fired from behind Seth.
The mainstream news usually eats this stuff up, but for some reason they've chosen to sit this one out. They are not only denying coverage of this mysterious death, but attacking anyone who does try to cover it.
The Seth Rich case has caused me to begin to pay closer attention when these Clinton related deaths happen. And this past year I’ve noticed something: it’s happening a lot.
People are dying. Dying unusually. Dying suddenly. And those people are connected to the Clintons.
Most recently a fascinating incidence involving a millionaire suffocating himself alone and a suicide note with this written in all caps: NO FOUL PLAY WHATSOEVER
I’m not kidding.
And now I’m seeing hardened attorneys breaking down on camera because of the mounting body count:
I just saw a former congresswoman post this on Facebook, and I’m not so sure she’s wrong:
Which brings me to this: the Seth Rich Mortality Probability Calculator. Some brilliant fellow has run the numbers and asked - just how unusual is this, really?
It looks at 10 homicides that happened in the last 15 months (2016-2017) and does math to determine how suspicious it is - comparing it to the death rate you'd expect from that same period of time.
If I understood the study right, the odds came out to 1 in 814 million that these deaths would be unrelated - the result of mere chance.
Was his math good? Beats me. Maybe one of you can check the numbers and leave a comment below with your conclusions.
Give it a look and tell me what you think.
Also, do you guys think Seth Rich’s murder will ever be solved?