You have even less evidence for this position than CrowdStrike does for their position. You are doing the exact thing you accuse others of doing.
-Crowdstrike said it's likely someone internally hacked the server
-Seth Rich was in the position and time to do so and had a direct grudge against the DNC
-He was murdered almost around the exact same time the server was hacked in a wealthy area with no history of something like that ever happening.
You can come to other conclusions. I've come to mine. It's not certain of course, but it's the most likely with the information I have now. If you think it's more likely he was randomly murdered, that's possible but it's not the most likely.
You can come to any conclusion you'd like. Just like I can point out your obvious hypocrisy. You demand far more evidence from others than you present for your own stance. The Mueller Report and Senate Intelligence Report each investigated this allegation and found it to be non-credible [1].
Mueller Report:
"Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s final report said WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange had made statements “designed to obscure” the source of the DNC leaks and of having “implied falsely” that Rich was his source."
Senate Intelligence Report:
"One narrative from Assange involved a conspiracy theory that Seth Rich, a DNC staffer killed in a botched robbery, was the source of the DNC email leak and had been murdered in response. On August 9, Assange gave an interview on Dutch television implying that Rich was the source of the DNC emails, and that day WikiLeaks announced that it would be issuing a reward for information about Rich’s murder. In a subsequent interview, Assange commented about the WikiLeaks interest in the Rich case as concerning “someone who’s potentially connected to our publication.”
The bipartisan Senate report was unequivocal about the factual basis for this theory: “The Committee found that no credible evidence supports this narrative.”"
[1] https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/senate-i...