interesting, so he tried to run from a gun,,,,I never believed that to be an option,,,

sad that his family lost him so young though,,for sure

bruised knuckles should mean he tried to fight as well... maybe they shot him in the back after the fight was over, while he was on the ground... seems that would be more consistent with a hit than a attempted robbery...

yes, I understand that

I am saying it would seem a risk after fighting someone with a gun to merely run from them,, It seems like the presence of a gun would justify a fight to incapacitation,,,,but that could also be the gunners excuse for shooting you if you cannot incapacitate him in time,,,

naw,they all dood themselves in!
Shot themselves in the Back,back of the Head,etc!
Usually just days before having to testify!
Could understand it happening once,but during the Life of the Clinton-Mob it was a common Occurrence.

I agree on that one.

Those deaths? Pure coincidence...

Still zero evidence presented to support the allegations here.

I'll tell your queen killary you're still active on her behalf...

Killary, queen of the lost.

Still no such person, and since you clearly (again) made assumptions instead of just reading what I wrote, I didn't show support for anyone.

I stated again, that there is no evidence to support the rather wild claims being made here.

No evidence is no evidence.

no, they all DIED, as we all will do

not even close to all 'shot themselves in the back of the head', most were not 'testifying' about anything,, but the list of anyone with even a passing associations who dies at all will continue to make the list of conspiracists

considering their extensive history in politics and civil service, the passing associations must be like a porn tape for the potential hard on of a conspiracist,,,

circumstance can be evidence... and there's a lot of it...

There is zero CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence either.

There is only ENTIRELY IMAGINARY evidence.

http://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/

A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack
Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system.
By Patrick LawrenceTwitter
August 9, 2017

It is now a year since the Democratic National Committee’s mail system was compromised—a year since events in the spring and early summer of 2016 were identified as remote hacks and, in short order, attributed to Russians acting in behalf of Donald Trump. A great edifice has been erected during this time. President Trump, members of his family, and numerous people around him stand accused of various corruptions and extensive collusion with Russians. Half a dozen simultaneous investigations proceed into these matters. Last week news broke that Special Counsel Robert Mueller had convened a grand jury, which issued its first subpoenas on August 3. Allegations of treason are common; prominent political figures and many media cultivate a case for impeachment.

The president’s ability to conduct foreign policy, notably but not only with regard to Russia, is now crippled. Forced into a corner and having no choice, Trump just signed legislation imposing severe new sanctions on Russia and European companies working with it on pipeline projects vital to Russia’s energy sector. Striking this close to the core of another nation’s economy is customarily considered an act of war, we must not forget. In retaliation, Moscow has announced that the United States must cut its embassy staff by roughly two-thirds. All sides agree that relations between the United States and Russia are now as fragile as they were during some of the Cold War’s worst moments. To suggest that military conflict between two nuclear powers inches ever closer can no longer be dismissed as hyperbole.

All this was set in motion when the DNC’s mail server was first violated in the spring of 2016 and by subsequent assertions that Russians were behind that “hack” and another such operation, also described as a Russian hack, on July 5. These are the foundation stones of the edifice just outlined. The evolution of public discourse in the year since is worthy of scholarly study: Possibilities became allegations, and these became probabilities. Then the probabilities turned into certainties, and these evolved into what are now taken to be established truths. By my reckoning, it required a few days to a few weeks to advance from each of these stages to the next. This was accomplished via the indefensibly corrupt manipulations of language repeated incessantly in our leading media.

We are urged to accept the word of institutions and senior officials with long records of deception.

Lost in a year that often appeared to veer into our peculiarly American kind of hysteria is the absence of any credible evidence of what happened last year and who was responsible for it. It is tiresome to note, but none has been made available. Instead, we are urged to accept the word of institutions and senior officials with long records of deception. These officials profess “high confidence” in their “assessment” as to what happened in the spring and summer of last year—this standing as their authoritative judgment. Few have noticed since these evasive terms first appeared that an assessment is an opinion, nothing more, and to express high confidence is an upside-down way of admitting the absence of certain knowledge. This is how officials avoid putting their names on the assertions we are so strongly urged to accept—as the record shows many of them have done.

We come now to a moment of great gravity.

There has been a long effort to counter the official narrative we now call “Russiagate.” This effort has so far focused on the key events noted above, leaving numerous others still to be addressed. Until recently, researchers undertaking this work faced critical shortcomings, and these are to be explained. But they have achieved significant new momentum in the past several weeks, and what they have done now yields very consequential fruit. Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year. Their work is intricate and continues at a kinetic pace as we speak. But its certain results so far are two, simply stated, and freighted with implications:

There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. This casts serious doubt on the initial “hack,” as alleged, that led to the very consequential publication of a large store of documents on WikiLeaks last summer.
(more at the link)
If you have lost The Nation,you are in Sheep-Dip indeed!

yep,they all have killed themselves just for the Heck of it!
Nothing to see here,move on!

they did not 'all' kill themselves

they all died, we all will too, I wonder if someone will put a conspiracy together that we all had damning information on mingle that we were 'about to disclose' and so they arranged our deaths,,,,

that many people ALL connected somehow to mingle, dying? Couldn't be a coincidence.

there would have to be a common denominator...is killary on mingle?

the common denominator is being human

all of them eventually die,,,,