Opinion – Seth Rich, Frivolous Lawsuits, CNN, and NPR

Published late last night (9/18/2017) on the PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) website happened to be more court filings in the Wheeler v. Twenty-First Century Fox, Inc. et al case. It was the defendants turn to respond to the allegations brought forth by Rod Wheeler, and I thought it was an entertaining read. Here is my brief insight into what I read, and opinion on the coverage of the suit.


Both defendants, Twenty-First Century Fox and Ed Butowsky, filed motions to dismiss for various legal reasons that are not all too exciting (court venue, legal statutes, etc.).

Once past the statutory reasons for dismissal, there was a definite trend. The defendants’ response was largely the plaintiff’s own words. For every Rod Wheeler claim, there was a Rod Wheeler quote to a different media outlet rebutting his own claim. Rod Wheeler’s main basis is that he was misquoted by Fox News’ Malia Zimmerman, however on multiple occasions he went elsewhere with the same, or generally the same, quotes. It’s easy for the defense to write a response when your elsewhere on record saying the same thing. The different venues where Rod Wheeler went to repeat the same claims he claimed he didn’t say included Crowdsource the Truth, Lou Dobbs Tonight, and Fox 5 DC. He never backed off his claims of Seth Rich possibly being in communication with Wikileaks.

Also cited in the defendants’ response included the omitted section of Rod Wheeler’s report regarding his meeting with Detective Della-Camera. There is always a second side to a story, and this certainly is not an exception

“The Complaint, however, omits Wheeler’s conclusions from his April 25, 2017 meeting with Detective Della-Camera. In a report provided to Zimmerman on the meeting, Wheeler concluded that the meeting with Detective Della-Camera was fruitful because the Detective could not rule out that someone from the DNC was not responsible for Rich’s death, could not definitively say that Seth Rich had not received payments from Wikileaks prior to his murder, and would not disclose details about email correspondence found on Rich’s computer.”

This is one of the most intriguing sections of the lawsuit and something that needs to be thoroughly considered. As of April 25 of this year the detective assigned to the case could not rule out the DNC or Wikileaks in the investigation of Seth Rich’s murder.


Where does CNN and NPR fit in?
These two news media outlets were giddy the day the original complaint was filed and immediately covered it as if it was the whole truth. However, now these two media outlets have a chance to come back and cover the other side of the story which is highly unlikely. They have a chance to let the public know a few of the only statements that the Metro D.C. Police Department and Detective Della-Camera has made since Seth’s death on July 10, 2016. They have a chance to correct the record and let America and their followers know that there isn’t evidence to discredit any claim that Seth was in contact with Wikileaks or that his death could’ve been coinciding with his employment at the Democratic National Committee. Now is their chance to accurately cover this legal case and not double down on Rod Wheeler’s complaint.

All of the times Rod Wheeler repeated his claims were available to CNN and NPR before they wrote their original articles at the beginning of August with just a little bit of research before publication. They could’ve easily found the inconsistencies in Rod Wheeler’s legal complaint and how he continuously repeated the claims he said were false quotes.

With the little information from the D.C. Police Department that is public, there is without a doubt more concrete evidence that has come from the police department that you cannot count out the Wikileaks leak being Seth and the death being connected to his involvement at the Democratic National Committee.

That leaves us with the question, will CNN and NPR stop attacking those who are searching for the answer, when they can’t logically refute the claims they seek to discredit?

Advertisements