Filmpolice | 3532 points | Nov 18 2016 22:28:53

SPREAD THIS LIKE WILDFIRE! This meme is 100% fact, undisputed regarding Podesta and child abduction/abuse.

https://i.sli.mg/Chk4Af

permalink

LeNouvelHomme | 1171 points | Nov 19 2016 02:58:29

"100% fact, undisputed "

Vs.

"Where the Podestas are believed to travel"

Do you know what undisputed means? Or fact? Or 100%?

permalink

question_pizza | 404 points | Nov 19 2016 03:06:36

100% of the sub doesn't know what 100% is.

permalink

MarkusLane | 77 points | Nov 19 2016 05:39:03

I can factually 100% confirm this

permalink

DJ_MAXX_BLAXX | 38 points | Nov 19 2016 13:52:47

[BALEETED] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^0.217237532

ANTI CUCK SCRIPT

permalink

CTRsuperserial | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 17:02:53

You rang?

permalink

DJ_MAXX_BLAXX | -1 points | Nov 19 2016 17:07:39

Oh my GOD get out of my face you pedo defender. You literally have the blood of innocent children on your hands!

permalink

BigPhatWalrus | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 17:43:56

literally.

Words confuse you don't they?

permalink

DJ_MAXX_BLAXX | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 18:06:51

Reddit formatting confuses you 😂

permalink

Thatsmahdood | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 08:16:07

fight on, brother. these things are like computer viruses!

permalink

octodo | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 17:41:21

"We're being called out on our bullshit and gross misunderstanding of what the word fact means, must be paid shills"

I want to live in your world.

permalink

tridentgum | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 17:46:10

This person doesn't seem to 100% buy my ridiculous conspiracy theory...

Must be paid for, obviously my retarded conspiracy theory is correct and everybody in politics is a pedophile and lizard.

permalink

Filmpolice | 34 points | Nov 19 2016 21:36:05

Let's go through each fact then, for the benefit of people reading. Sticking only to facts, no assumptions or conjectures. Go ahead and tell us which item below you feel is not a fact, and why.

  • It is a fact that Podesta's assistant sent an email on his behalf on May 4, 2007. Here is the actual email: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/9364

  • It is a fact that emails from John Podesta himself are missing leading up to May 4, 2007: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/?q=&mfrom=&mto=&title=&notitle=&date_from=2006-11-01&date_to=2007-05-04&nofrom=&noto=&count=50&sort=6#searchresult

  • It is a fact that Madeiline McCann went missing on May 3, 2007: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/16/madeleine-mccann-latest-are-police-any-closer-to-knowing-the-tru/

  • It is a fact that the Podestas look very much like the police sketches: https://i.sli.mg/OGaXaM

  • It is a fact that the police sketches show a mole above T. Podesta's eyebrow and that T. Podesta indeed has a mole above his eyebrow: https://i.sli.mg/OGaXaM

  • It is a fact that Tony Podesta collects imagery from Biljana Djurdjevic: http://archive.is/JgiQk#selection-1205.0-1207.1

  • It is a fact that BilJana Djurdjevic's imagery depicts abducted and abused minors: https://i.sli.mg/CO6j0G

  • It is a fact that Tony Podesta has an "arch of hysteria" sculpture in his home: https://archive.fo/vddrO#selection-3905.217-3905.230

  • It is a fact that the sculpture resembles a victim abducted and killed by Jeffrey Dahmer: https://i.sli.mg/jiPRGc

  • It is a fact that people in Tony Podesta's home were horrified when they found photos in his bedroom from K. Grannan who does naked teenagers: https://archive.fo/vddrO#selection-3905.217-3905.230

  • It is a fact that Tony Podesta was found to have stuffed animals near his bed despite being in his 70s and having no children of his own: https://issuu.com/washingtonlife/docs/wl0615_inside_homes/3 and close up: https://i.sli.mg/RZ8nxV

  • It is a fact that Tony Podesta has been friends with Dennis Hastert for many years and still keeps in touch with him: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/48488

  • It is a fact that Dennis Hastert molested multiple children: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/09/us/dennis-hastert-molested-at-least-four-boys-prosecutors-say.html

Now, all of the above is factual -- 100% :) -- and links have been provided for you to verify it as such. So if you want to say none of it's true, then the onus is on you to tell readers why you think the information contained in said links is forged or otherwise wrong. Downvoting or counter-asserting without argument is not a valid answer. You will have to address the actual details.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

HydraCarbon | 8 points | Nov 20 2016 15:10:11

The only disputable fact here is that the one about the mole on Tony Podesta's sketch. It is disputable because those sketches can't be of two brothers because they are renderings of two people's accounts of one person.

But that's not the point. The point is we have no reason to connect any single one of these points to any of the others.

permalink

calep | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 09:59:47

What about the claim that he was caught with a picture of the Dahmer victim?

permalink

convie | 1 points | Nov 21 2016 23:07:45

It is a fact that the sculpture resembles a victim abducted and killed by Jeffrey Dahmer

That's entirely subjective and also irrelevant.

permalink

MikoSqz | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 15:13:47

Fact: This sub doesn't know what a fact is.

permalink

_ElrondHubbard | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 15:50:54

Just got here, I assume this is a troll sub, like all those circle jerk sub's I don't understand

permalink

Thatsmahdood | 3 points | Nov 20 2016 08:15:20

god I love usernames that let me know someone pays you to be here.

u/pizza(anything) is a paedophile.

yourdood told you first.

permalink

ramal_kcirdnek | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 07:20:17

It's all an act. They're good at not breaking character, but even they don't believe any of this shit. They're just trying to make other, stupider people believe it.

permalink

Filmpolice | 136 points | Nov 19 2016 08:37:13

Podesta was gaining info on Portugese politics via subscription. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/41384

The Podestas confirmed traveling there. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/23724

Podesta is tied to Murdoch and Freud (villa in Portugal) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/25/hacked-emails-reveal-plan-to-counter-rupert-murdochs-climate-denial

The Podesta Group does consulting work for Tyco which has three facility and office locations in Portugal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podesta_Group

Podestas were associates with the Ambassador to Portugal, E. Bagley. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/24177

Too much to fit inside a summary meme. But it is telling that you chose to focus on terminology and dodged all of the substantive material. You are honestly going to maintain that the Podestas have never stepped foot in Portugal? LOL

permalink

ExeterMegaladon | 183 points | Nov 19 2016 08:51:01

This sub and your post history are one of the most disturbing and pathetic things I've ever seen on the internet.

It's a combination of cringe and legitimate revulsion at your activity.

I've seen some fucked up things on the internet in my day, but this entire charade of a subreddit makes my skin crawl the most.

You know you're lying. You know you're grasping at straws. Is it mental illness? Is it an easy out so that you don't have to engage in meaningful political discourse? Is it trolling? I just don't understand. It's simultaneously maddening and frightening.

permalink

Filmpolice | 138 points | Nov 19 2016 08:58:22

You provided exactly zero substantive argumentation.

permalink

ExeterMegaladon | 52 points | Nov 19 2016 09:07:43

Like I said, it's fairly obvious you're either a troll, are attempting very amateurish disinformation or suffer from mental illness paired with delusions of grandeur and paranoid delusions.

I'm not sure which one it is, but it's a fool's errand to argue with either possibility.

If anyone reading this does suffer from mental illness, this isn't meant to be an insult.

I hope this person seeks help if he's legitimate.

permalink

Filmpolice | 119 points | Nov 19 2016 11:13:04

Non-argument.

permalink

CANT_STUMP__ | 68 points | Nov 19 2016 13:56:29

...but attacking the person is so much easier than attacking the arguments!!! ;\^)

permalink

WarBloodXyo | 26 points | Nov 19 2016 17:37:52

The fact so many people I see here are so quick to personally insult the people who created this "pointless and ridiculous theory" makes me think they are angry that something they love is being revealed to the public and that they are hastily trying to protect their pride.

permalink

theghostmachine | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 07:56:34

Or they're just not so quick to jump to extraordinary conclusions based on shitty circumstantial evidence.

permalink

WarBloodXyo | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 17:33:42

Yeah they could be as you said.

But no, they don't take the time to argue seriously, without joking or memeing or personally insulting the person who posted "evidence". <If they do this as an argument to anything they lose all credibility.

I'm not taking a side here. Just saying.

permalink

CTRsuperserial | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 16:59:43

There is no argument, just a web of "connections" and circumstantial nonsense.

permalink

[deleted] | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 14:01:48

[removed]

permalink

Nex201 | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 15:05:20

Please refrain from insulting users.

permalink

[deleted] | -1 points | Nov 19 2016 17:25:02

B-b-but muh free speech! You claim to have proof of someone being a pedophile... but instead it's just accusation upon accusation. Where I'm from this is called defamation and will maybe get you in jail. So please, while you people destroy other people's lives since you want to find a way to get your frustration out of your system or whatever, stop making me sound like the prick. Because frankly, I am not.

permalink

The-Juggernaut | 44 points | Nov 19 2016 15:00:32

Suffer from mental illness and delusions of grandeur?????

I think YOU do. You come in here trying to squelch any new information and dismiss lots of sketchy evidence almost immediately. People should be suspicious of you. You're wrong

permalink

Baine1 | 41 points | Nov 19 2016 13:31:36

"[–]ExeterMegaladon 2 points 13 hours ago

[...] Just curious. I have a journalism degree and just found out I'm out of a job at the end of the month, might look into it."

geez, I wonder why you are out of a job with this kind of attitude :)

permalink

SorryImChad | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 15:39:33

Yes attack the person because that somehow makes facts less true. I don't even sub here and it's still easy to und r stand his argument, while every part of your argument is "I'm gonna make fun of you for your post history and call you a liar". You sound like you were bred from CTR.

permalink

NeckbeardChic | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 17:49:06

That was exactly what u/ExerterMegaladon did, pay attention.

permalink

SorryImChad | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 17:50:01

I did pay attention. I was adding to the fact.

permalink

Baine1 | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 22:41:14

Yeah, well then I hope the irony is not lost on you, when you tell me that doesnt make facts less true. He did not bring any facts, all he did was asking Filmpolice if he was mentally ill, without giving any arguments.

So I gave him a bit of his own medicine. I did not call him a liar, I told him that someone with a journalism degree should probably change his attitude and work with facts instead of insults.

permalink

across32 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 15:33:35

Back to school!

permalink

The-Juggernaut | 8 points | Nov 19 2016 15:00:31

Suffer from mental illness and delusions of grandeur?????

I think YOU do. You come in here trying to squelch any new information and dismiss lots of sketchy evidence almost immediately. People should be suspicious of you. You're wrong

permalink

The-Juggernaut | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 15:00:31

Suffer from mental illness and delusions of grandeur?????

I think YOU do. You come in here trying to squelch any new information and dismiss lots of sketchy evidence almost immediately. People should be suspicious of you. You're wrong

permalink

cluetime1 | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 15:30:47

TLDR MAH FEELS, no actual evidence or arguments.

permalink

goldtoofhustla | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 17:15:26

Wow what a well written, meaningless response

permalink

Peace-Prosperity | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 18:06:12

Projecting much?

permalink

Plockthegoos | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 18:14:31

Wow this trick is as Old as the book goes. When someone calls me a pedophile, My defence is that they are mentally ill. No, Pedophiles are sick. Get the f out of here.

permalink

Correct_The_Record16 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 18:56:46

WHAT ABOUT ALL THE ART WORK OF THE CHILDREN

Ive never, ever, seen any art like that.

For Podesta to get all that pedo art, it wasn 'an accident' but clearly thats his fetish and he search specifically for all of it.

So my argument is based on this artwork alone, this warrants a full FBI investigation, IMO. If he is innocent, the FBI will tell us.

permalink

thebiggestandniggest | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 16:59:34

MODS

permalink

ned_harriman | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 20:01:26

Done. What vapid spouting. And talk about an upvote brigade!

permalink

Auntfanny | 34 points | Nov 19 2016 12:46:56

There are incorrect statements in your post. Particular about the UK Police knowing who abducted Madeleine McCann but international law getting in the way.

The Police named the person as Jose Carlos de Silva, who worked for the resort and has zero links to Podesta. The reason for the interference is because he and his accomplices (a gang of thieves) had already been questioned and British Police have no fresh evidence that they would need to be able to question them again.

permalink

WingTune0 | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 14:09:33

If it's any consolation, the guy has a 5-month old reddit account, which is right around the same time CTR gained a large foothold on reddit, so it's probably another idiot trying to detract from the truth. I mesn for fucks sake, we have video evidence of children screaming for help in the comet ping pong building.

permalink

orochi107 | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:40:00

what video?

permalink

Demonites | 42 points | Nov 19 2016 09:47:51

Can you actually defend yourself or attack the evidence or just cry how this is wrong?

permalink

marcushe | 34 points | Nov 19 2016 13:06:59

Its the same response as 9/11 truthing - you can provide all the evidence in the world, but if it's too outlandish / taboo the human mind just rejects it no matter how true it is.

permalink

CTRsuperserial | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 17:00:29

Jet fuel can't melt steel memes.

permalink

CANT_STUMP__ | 28 points | Nov 19 2016 13:50:42

GET THE FUCK AWAY FROM HERE HILLDRONES! SHOO! SHOO!

THIS THREAD HAS 40% DOWNVOTES WHICH ONLY SHOWS THE HILLDRONES HAVEN'T ACCEPTED DEFEAT

permalink

DJ_MAXX_BLAXX | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 13:51:46

[BALEETED] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^0.219112446

ANTI CUCK SCRIPT

permalink

Thatsmahdood | 0 points | Nov 20 2016 08:01:15

this is a copy paste comment from above, with different username...

permalink

DJ_MAXX_BLAXX | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 08:22:56

this is a copy paste comment from above, with different username...

permalink

Phatbasshole | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 18:10:33

Don't listen to this shill, he got on another account and posted the exact same thing down below. Gtfo stop trying to cover for your child rapist pals

permalink

Middle_Ground_Man | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 18:18:12

I agree with you. This whole thing is just absurd. I hate Hillary and Podesta and I wouldn't be surprised one bit if he was involved in shit like this, but I won't believe it until there is actual proof. This is purely circumstantial and just conjecture from one person with a kickstarter link at the end. I mean come on....

This is so ridiculous. This is the problem right here. People believe shit without a shred of concrete evidence. I don't know how anyone can defend this mob mentality. As you stated above this is just grasping at straws. Why make this post? Why spread bullshit? This isn't "awareness," he is just an asshole willing to destroy someone without proof.

I was with Wikileaks every step of the way this election. I think Podesta is a scumbag, but our system is supposed to be based on using concrete evidence for proof of guilt. Not a single bit of this is proof. They are just looking for attention for their bullshit crusade.

You ever read about the Salem Witch trials? It is people like this who propagate that mindless bullshit. They are willing to spread baseless conjecture without proof to destroy someone THEY think did something, when there is no real evidence.

permalink

nzchippie | 65 points | Nov 19 2016 10:54:56

I can't believe your actually getting down votes when you provide links for all your claims and dismissive comments that don't attempt to disprove or add to the discussion get up votes.. wtf is happening to reddit.

permalink

Filmpolice | 67 points | Nov 19 2016 11:14:31

My sentiments exactly.

permalink

nzchippie | 22 points | Nov 19 2016 11:31:36

Well I appreciate your post. I hope something comes of all this. Shame on the people trying to pass this off as a right wing conspiracy theory. Liberals don't want child abusers getting away with this sick shit either.

permalink

CANT_STUMP__ | 8 points | Nov 19 2016 13:49:21

Hilldrones will be hilldrones.

See, this thread is 40% downvoted.

permalink

wurrboutit | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 15:51:27

wtf is happening to reddit.

There are multiple bot account armies fighting to influence you.

permalink

OccamsSharpWhatever | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 23:06:19

Because you still have to fill out too many blank dots to actually call this evidence of anything other than the podesta brothers being in portugal at a certain time. It doens't actually prove anything.

I for one would love to see this unravel in an actual courtroom, but i have yet to see any of the online evidence that would actually go anywhere in court

permalink

nzchippie | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:22:03

Yea but that's one piece. The Instagram posts,the strange art work, the convicted pedophiles for friends, the cheese pizza emails that are obviously not about normal pizza. I'm not saying I'm certain he is responsible for the abduction of Madeleine. But what we know for a fact is very strange and he and his brother should be investigated not defended.

permalink

OccamsSharpWhatever | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:50:32

the cheese pizza emails that are obviously not about normal pizza

Probably not, but there is a HUGE leap from "not normal pizza" to "elite circle of pedophile satanists"

and he and his brother should be investigated not defended.

Exactly they should be investigated instead of being flung around the internet wrapped in a bunch of conjecture, but i don't see why the whole thing about assuming peoples innocence until they actually have been convicted of a crime isn't the case with these guys.

permalink

nzchippie | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:27:22

Not only that, these pizza places have pedophile symbolism everywhere. I'm not saying convict them now. But would that kind of art work appeal to you? It's all very strange and I find it mind blowing that people are writing this off as crazy or trying to discourage people from looking for more information. It makes me more suspicious.

permalink

OccamsSharpWhatever | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 00:43:54

Well i'm not well versed in pedophile symbolism, so i can't really tell which of it is fake or not. But have you ever thought about how someone could be making up "facts" about pedophile symbolism to fit with the story?

permalink

nzchippie | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 01:25:41

I thought the symbols for comparison were from the FBI website. And I think an open source investigation is a good thing. What I've seen doesn't look like tin foil hat flat earth conspiracy like mainstream media make it out to be. I just want people to keep the discussion going and if it leads to the FBI seeking emails prior to Madeleine being abducted and leads to something then great. If not then it's only a corner of reddit looking through actual leaked information. I'm not spending my time going through emails but I'm glad there are people more enthused than I am that will.

permalink

OccamsSharpWhatever | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 21:27:47

I thought the symbols for comparison were from the FBI website

Since when are the fbi considered trustworhty /s

I just want people to keep the discussion going and if it leads to the FBI seeking emails prior to Madeleine being abducted and leads to something then great. If not then it's only a corner of reddit looking through actual leaked information.

And that truly is a noble cause, cheers to you people. In no way was i trying to discourage anyone from informing themselves and others. On the contrary, but just don't forget that even suspected pedophiles have legal rights.

When people make up their minds about whether or not someone is a pedophile on the basis of a meme, you could get worried that its turning into a witchhunt.

All the accusations of satanism doesn't really help anyone. The only one thats a confirmed occultist (not satanist though) is Marina Abramovic, but noone is accusing her of being a pedophile, or how?

I personaly think pizzagate was set in motion by the democrats. It's their punishment for Podesta not winning the election for Hillary. It will set a hell of an example for coming campaign leaders. "Loose, and we'll sell you to the social media as a satanist pedophile" theres just no coming back from accusations like that whether they are true or not.

permalink

nzchippie | 1 points | Nov 21 2016 06:20:15

I think the chances of the Democrats going after one of their own is about as probable as the satanism story flowing from Alex Jones with tears in his eyes. I tell people to look at the subreddit to see what they make of these emails discussing 6,9,11 children in the pool for our entertainment.. that seems real fucking weird. I hope if there is anything to it people keep an open mind to it and see where it goes. Shouldn't matter if your a Democrat or a Republican. The election is over, propaganda from the russians or wiki leaks shouldn't fly. BTW I was told at work today that 20 wiki leaks emails have been proven to be fake regarding hillary confirming isis is backed by the Saudi governmen.. Anyone heard that confirmed?

permalink

Shitmybad | 29 points | Nov 19 2016 12:26:23

All this 'evidence' proves is that they have been to Portugal before... it is worthless. That weird stuff about child abuse photos is pure conjecture. Teddy's by the bed without having kids is completely normal, my girlfriend has a bunch and we don't have kids. That link there about being tied to Murdoch says nothing of the sort, it actually implies the opposite.

I just don't understand how you can come to any sort of conclusion here. I didn't even know who Podesta is before this post, but 5 minutes of googling shows you to be completely wrong.

permalink

29snnc29 | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 13:25:31

Because Google doesn't censor search results......

permalink

Noble_Ox | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 21:19:39

Did you know that the photo fit of the two suspects are two different types of image for one man, there is no 'two' men.?

permalink

galact1c | 9 points | Nov 19 2016 14:16:44

They certainly hope you only do 5 minutes of googling, also why dont you rationalize their strange coded emails, also im sure "handkerchief with a pizza related map" is a real item and totally not codeword for something insidious. I could go on, but really all this guy would need to do for most of these people to leave him alone is explain this handkerchief.

Just remember they want to have enough plausible deniability surrounding them that most people will only look into it for 5 minutes tops before they shy away and blue pill.

permalink

tridentgum | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 17:47:30

my girlfriend has a bunch and we don't have kids

Careful, this sub is so retarded they'll think you're a pedophile for this.

permalink

LeNouvelHomme | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 14:15:24

"nology and dodged all of the substantive material. You are honestly going to maintain that the Podestas have never stepped foot in Portugal?"

Again, putting words in my mouth. Literally all I wanted to point out is that words matter and the words made the argument sound weak.

permalink

MALCOLMxTUCKER | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 14:53:09

Aren't these also the Wikileaks with incorrect hashes? Last I heard most of the recent leaks were in question due to mismatched hashes?

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:20:57

Yeah but they dont know/dont care. Assange is still missing too.

permalink

mollyinmysystem | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 14:55:17

Well, in the first guys defense, it does not look undisputed to someone who knows NOTHING about this with that terminology. But the second guy needs to make a legitimate argument or shut the hell up

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:15:57

You do know that that photo fit is two different types of image of the same suspect, not two different men. You should do some independent research, you accuse liberals of believing the too easily and here you are doing the same.

permalink

Bizzibodi | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 05:56:45

Podesta was gaining info on Portugese politics via subscription.

So thats what the CIA Stratfor was calling the "whole ball of wax" in the Global intelligence Files. They were possibly selling subscriptions to updates on politics around the world.

Anthony Podesta Was Subscribed to CIA information...

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/13/1318076_bawl-of-whacks-.html

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/28/28237_wbow-before-i-do-anything-.html

Look at the attached file names;

114322_wax_ball_2010-04-13.csv

Also search "anthony podesta wax"

permalink

posttruthman | 44 points | Nov 19 2016 09:30:36

Don't you understand? It's about what he feels is a fact!

permalink

Plmnkoijbvhi | 35 points | Nov 19 2016 09:14:12

Every time I see a podesta/Portugal connection being made I cringe A little bit more inside. This Portugal thing is one of the weakest strawman is being propped up to discredit the thing as a whole

permalink

MALCOLMxTUCKER | 13 points | Nov 19 2016 14:51:58

Almost all of this is circumstantial evidence. Things were "spotted" without context, the entire argument for Podesta's abducting McCann is based on thinly linked conspiracy theories.

I don't like Podesta or Hilary, but you take things to this degree of absurdity and you weaken/cheapen all legitimate arguments.

permalink

LeNouvelHomme | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 14:58:39

I agree, and as pointed out, the language used suggests to me they KNOW these links are tenuous at best.

permalink

Emergencyegret | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 14:56:15

:/ this election really brought out some pretty crazy stuff.

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:09:43

Let's go through each fact then, for the benefit of people reading. No assumptions or conjectures, just sticking only to facts. And you can tell us, with precision, which part you think is not factual, and why.

Now, if you are going to say none of these things are true, despite all being publicly verifiable, then the onus is on you to explain what specific information in the links above is false, and why. Downvoting everything or counter-asserting without argument that "it's not true" is a non-answer.

It is justified for people to ask for an explanation of the cumulative set of facts above. Whether the explanation is that it is all a matter of total coincidence or whether the explanation is that the Podestas are involved in child abduction is a determination that readers are able to make on their own.

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:31:13

Let's go through each fact then, for the benefit of people reading. Sticking only to facts, no assumptions or conjectures. Go ahead and tell us which item below you feel is not a fact, and why.

Now, all of the above is factual -- 100% :) -- and links have been provided for you to verify it as such. So if you want to say none of it's true, then the onus is on you to tell readers why you think the information contained in said links is forged or otherwise wrong. Downvoting or counter-asserting without argument is not a valid answer. You will have to address the actual details.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

KingWolfei | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 22:07:51

did travel there though....

permalink

LeNouvelHomme | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 00:45:02

Wow, super convincing argument you've got there.

permalink

KingWolfei | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 01:00:38

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/23724

Ok, fine it was just Mae Podesta. Just one Podesta. Might be a preferred vacation for the family, but that is pure speculation.

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 01:47:27

Let's get into each fact then, and discuss the details. Please specify which of the following is not a fact, and why not.

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 01:52:28

Let's get into each fact then and discuss the details. Please explain which of the following is not correct, and why. All sources hyperlinked. These alone do not prove guilt or innocence, they are simply pieces of data that can be verified. That is all that is being claimed for now.

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podestas' being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

It is important to note, again, that we are just collecting data here. Nobody is saying that having stuffed animals or being friends with a pedophile makes a person guilty of anything. All that is being claimed is that this is a set of facts.

permalink

criticalthinker615 | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 05:52:05

1075 upvotes. What is this shit? Do you guys noy realize we have figured out all of your tells? It doesn't matter that "you have the technology " Kek has reconciled with YHWH!! Satan Is finished!! It has been foretold by the gets. His will be done!!! The occult belongs to KEK now!!! Rejoice in his lulz

permalink

Filmpolice | -16 points | Nov 19 2016 04:22:14

The emails confirm the Podestas travel to Portugal.

I guess you will say Wikileaks is comprised of Russian hackers now.

Of course.

permalink

LeNouvelHomme | 208 points | Nov 19 2016 04:54:08

Don't put words in my mouth.

All I said is that if you claim your post is 100% indisputable fact, your post shouldn't include any wording that suggests any level of supposition or assumption.

permalink

Pantomchap | 1 points | Nov 21 2016 07:54:07

k

permalink

StarNukes | 68 points | Nov 19 2016 05:15:49

Travelling to Portugal doesn't mean they were even there at the same time. Do we have info about where the Podesta were at the time?

permalink

Ironyandsatire | -2 points | Nov 19 2016 06:00:55

You are attacking this without doing any research, while making fun of this guy's research... it may be wrong, but your arguments are both pointless and invalid against it.

If this is even remotely true, it deserves to be investigated, not laughed at.

permalink

StarNukes | 55 points | Nov 19 2016 06:17:01

Yeah it definitely needs to be looked into. Saying that these things are 100% undisputed facts is very misleading.

permalink

Ironyandsatire | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 06:25:43

Agreed, I always take these things with a grain of salt and let other people do the research. You never know...

permalink

[deleted] | 26 points | Nov 19 2016 06:37:54

You may need to re-read the post you're replying to, starnukes isn't attacking anyone and in fact, is very reasonably asking " Do we have info about where the Podesta were at the time?"

Calm down dude

permalink

Ironyandsatire | -4 points | Nov 19 2016 08:02:13

Rofl, I'm not attacking anyone. And I find it hilarious I was at +14 and now I'm -15 all within like an hour. Wtf?

permalink

kerrykingsbaldhead | 11 points | Nov 19 2016 08:13:31

You believe it without researching it yourself so... what now?

permalink

Ironyandsatire | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 08:15:40

What the fuck do I believe, please tell me.

permalink

kerrykingsbaldhead | 11 points | Nov 19 2016 08:28:00

That this potential satanic cannibal pedophile ring needs to be investigated further because you read a meme.

permalink

Ironyandsatire | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 08:31:34

I'm keeping an open mind, it's not just a meme. But I'm done arguing with ignorant assholes, so blocked.

permalink

moparornocar | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 14:05:03

pretty sure you can only block someone that sends PM's, not comments

permalink

kerrykingsbaldhead | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 18:00:53

Can you hear me now?

permalink

TheJollyLlama875 | 9 points | Nov 19 2016 09:14:08

Portugal is 35k sq mi, though. That's like saying "a child went missing in South Carolina and a person went to South Carolina." There's no evidence that they were ever even near each other. Everything else is incredibly circumstantial.

permalink

theSvenandI | 55 points | Nov 19 2016 05:45:47

Dude... I'm sorry I have to be the one to tell you this, but-- lots of people visit Portugal.

permalink

303uru | 44 points | Nov 19 2016 07:00:18

I've been know to live in the United States of America and people get abducted in the US all the time, therefore I must be the abductor. You're an idiot.

permalink

madisonrebel | 24 points | Nov 19 2016 06:58:05

Dude, you've been pushing this dumb shit for weeks now. I am firmly of the opinion that you are a shill at this point, because you have repeatedly dodged and refused to engage or counter my point about the sketches being of a single person.

permalink

[deleted] | 10 points | Nov 19 2016 04:51:01

[removed]

permalink

BisonBob | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 08:21:43

Ahoy!

permalink

big_grizmatik | -1 points | Nov 19 2016 06:16:19

Matt?

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:22:42

He, I've been to Portugal in '07, maybe I did it...

permalink

adudeinla | -1 points | Nov 19 2016 06:23:03

lol

permalink

PardonMyTooting | 607 points | Nov 19 2016 03:09:33

This meme is literally the opposite of 100% fact and undisputed.

permalink

kristiansands | 62 points | Nov 19 2016 08:59:39

Careful. You will 100% be accused of being a pedophile soon.

permalink

themanbat | 14 points | Nov 19 2016 09:14:16

Can you really say that with 100% certainty?

permalink

Filmpolice | 41 points | Nov 19 2016 08:52:31

Over 200 upvotes on a comment that contributes exactly nothing.

They really must not like this particular information getting out.

permalink

BoldF1nger | 109 points | Nov 19 2016 10:47:25

It's not information - it's conjecture based on loose assumptions.

permalink

DraxTheLover | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 22:56:23

"Everything's fine normies, keep watching TV"

permalink

MALCOLMxTUCKER | 42 points | Nov 19 2016 14:55:22

You mean 400+ upvotes for a post that points out how misleading and inaccurate the OP's title is?

Yep, contributes nothing.

permalink

fucking_weebs | 18 points | Nov 19 2016 15:37:04

"Calling me out for a shit misleading title? Must be a shill!!!!"

permalink

PardonMyTooting | 13 points | Nov 19 2016 14:51:43

This headline represents everything that was wrong with the past election cycle and "fake news" in general. Some of the elements in your meme may be true, but other parts are conjecture and assumptions at best, falsehoods purposely presented as facts at worst. What you've presented is a jumbled list of things that leads a reader to the narrative of your choosing.

If you want to present evidence for review and create meaningful dialogue, these fantastical headlines and all caps "screams" do you a disservice. You're immediately discrediting your argument.

permalink

Bitch_Nasty_The_3rd | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 13:23:27

To be fair upvotes don't count for much if anything.

permalink

MaxNanasy | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 13:55:56

They affect the default comment ordering and imply how much support each comment has

permalink

shut_up_faggot | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 13:48:17

Pathetic

permalink

yourbiodaddy | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 15:21:52

You are a crazy person.

permalink

tridentgum | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 17:49:00

Years of air, food, and water wasted on an idiot like you.

Sad!

permalink

Arcadian_ | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 17:11:42

Look, a lot of this info is really good, I'll give you that. This is first post I've looked at on this sub, and I'm getting convinced.

But you can't go around claiming that suspicions are fact. Claiming something to be 100% factual and true when it's mostly conjecture inspired by facts feels like click bait, and instantly discredits you.

You're doing good work, just present with a little less panic, and take a more level headed approach next time. People like reason, not propaganda.

Keep going though dude. People are turned off on this post, but there IS substance here.

permalink

King_Of_Regret | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:55:12

Ever look up delusions of grandeur and a persecution complex? Fascinating stuff. Really good reading to do regarding those things

permalink

GIGANTIC_ARAB_DICK | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 18:56:40

524 now

permalink

OccamsSharpWhatever | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 23:15:17

They really must not like this particular information getting out

So when people upvote pizzagate related stuff we can assume that they don't want that info out either or how does that work?

permalink

Filmpolice | -12 points | Nov 19 2016 04:22:59

All sources are linked for anyone to verify, shill. http://livingresistance.com/2016/11/18/podestas-involved-mccanns-abduction-factual-analysis/

permalink

Kerbalized | 77 points | Nov 19 2016 04:57:45

Wikipedia is a wonderful starting platform. It's great for getting general overview and figuring out in what directions to start working, but it is probably the least reliable source you can use. Biased sources are easy to spot, but don't assume because it's presented as an encyclopedia entry that the writer wasn't biased or had any knowledge about the subject.
Start trying to get real sources and verification
First place, Wikipedia will tell you the sketches are two descriptions of one person.
Second, you should recognize that any source referencing Wikipedia has not put in the effort. Additionally, it weakens your credibility by citing that source.

permalink

IGotEm | -5 points | Nov 19 2016 07:42:40

You are so wrong about Wikipedia. You sound like a 60 year old that's never used it. Wikipedia is highly reliable, especially in the sciences. Published journals don't even cover the scope of info I obtain from Wikipedia.

permalink

Preacher_1893 | 17 points | Nov 19 2016 07:57:12

That's like CNN is one and only source of news and their camera won't work if you point at the false things.

permalink

IGotEm | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 16:24:34

How mentally challenged are you? CNN is one source. Wikipedia is composed of hundreds of sources.

permalink

spider2544 | 14 points | Nov 19 2016 08:05:31

This isnt a science or math article its ramblings and conspiracy theories. Without evidence and i mean HARD evidence not bullshit like "hey i heard they traveled to that country" bullshit no one outside of conspiracy circles will bite. Real hard work needs to be done to find proof and that wont be done on Wikipedia.

permalink

kerrykingsbaldhead | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 08:15:00

R/iamverysmart

permalink

billytheid | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 11:27:04

It's not reliable because its reviews are unreliable; there is a very good reason for excluding Wikipedia as an academic source

permalink

Preacher_1893 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 07:57:21

That's like CNN is one and only source of news and their camera won't work if you point at the false things.

permalink

PardonMyTooting | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 14:58:56

"Fact 2 (F2) Official police sketches look very much like the Podesta brothers."

This is the textbook definition of an opinion. I didn't even have to scroll down that far to find the first issue with this "source."

Also, people who disagree with you are not immediately "shills."

permalink

madisonrebel | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 08:48:45

Some have responded that the sketches are only representations of one person. This is false. Initially reports indicated just one suspect, but it has grown to as many as six. As confirmed by the BBC.

The number of suspects changing does not change the fact that the sketches were of the same person. You have not yet provided a single shred of evidence to suggest that the sketches were of two different men. And quite frankly, I think you created that stupid site since you parrot it verbatim.

permalink

pizzasafety | 366 points | Nov 19 2016 04:45:27

The sculpture has nothing to do with Jeffrey Dahmer, it's by Louise Bourgeois, a very famous sculptor https://remedianetwork.net/2014/06/23/the-arch-of-hysteria/

permalink

_troll_fucker | 246 points | Nov 19 2016 05:39:33

It's almost like facts don't matter.

permalink

Tsorovar | 120 points | Nov 19 2016 06:49:04

Didn't you read the title? This is $100% factual.

permalink

otio2014 | 23 points | Nov 19 2016 07:35:06

Didn't you get the memo? We are post-Trust now.

permalink

xMrCleanx | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 16:21:05

We Trump now.

permalink

xMrCleanx | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 16:21:08

We Trump now.

permalink

ChrisHarperMercer | 62 points | Nov 19 2016 07:38:41

But he has a stuffed animal in his bedroom!!!! /s

But seriously, that's the only factual thing in this picture and it's not an indicator of anything.

permalink

madisonrebel | 25 points | Nov 19 2016 08:44:07

Not to mention the statue in question doesn't match the Dahmer photo they keep showing.

permalink

MadDingersYo | 15 points | Nov 19 2016 12:53:53

/u/filmpolice where you at on this?

permalink

ChrispySC | 19 points | Nov 19 2016 14:13:03

N-non-argument!! AD HOMINEM!!!!!

permalink

csbphoto | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 13:34:21

I hate that Katy Grannon is described as a "photographer".

permalink

DraxTheLover | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 22:58:56

Pizzasafety said: "It's nothing, Spirit Cooking is normal."

Got it.

permalink

pizzasafety | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 02:09:59

Spirit cooking is a Marina Abramovich performance art thing. It is not normal. Marina Abramovich is very famous for being weird!

It is not out of the ordinary for performance art though. Performance art is weird! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptP3LZaQUbI

permalink

Thatsmahdood | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 08:12:08

Still creepy as shit. The link you posted makes it even less likable. I

permalink

mirglof | 279 points | Nov 19 2016 05:03:05

This is the weakest dumbest shit I have seen.

permalink

ghostboytt | 129 points | Nov 19 2016 07:01:03

You must not visit the_Donald very often.

permalink

Iamabioticgod | 11 points | Nov 19 2016 15:00:56

the_donald here, am ashamed of this idiocy

permalink

tridentgum | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 17:49:46

You are the idiot he's talking about.

permalink

darcechoes | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 20:02:19

We won tho haha

permalink

abnerjames | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 08:51:16

I've seen far less go a whole lot farther.

Regardless if it's real or made up, it doesn't look good.

permalink

PsyonixOne | 3 points | Nov 20 2016 02:40:50

I'm so glad other people are in these threads calling this shit out. It's a crazy level of manipulation going in here. Is this how Nazis are made ?

permalink

onceaday73 | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 12:30:36

Dedicating your life to minecraft is worse.

permalink

a-big-fat-meatball | 228 points | Nov 19 2016 05:26:14

What in the actual fuck is wrong with you idiots? Is this one big troll circle jerk or are you actually this retarded? Jesus fucking wept.

permalink

Master_Builder | 78 points | Nov 19 2016 07:26:58

Wake up brother/s

But for real though I don't know if there are thousand's of these people or they're very loud but every week is a new alt right subreddit. And then when you disagree they call you a CTR shill.

permalink

fraustnaut | 30 points | Nov 19 2016 08:11:29

The reasons there are so many new subs is because the new algorithm stops subs spamming /r/all. So you get around that by spreading your shit everywhere.

permalink

Imbillpardy | 14 points | Nov 19 2016 08:38:15

And bots. Don't forget bots.

permalink

TheJollyLlama875 | 47 points | Nov 19 2016 09:16:36

Didn't you hear? We're not supposed to insult them anymore, or else they vote for Trump again.

permalink

drdelius | 15 points | Nov 19 2016 09:49:18

What, voting twice wasn't enough the first time?

permalink

onceaday73 | 16 points | Nov 19 2016 12:40:36

Your entire comment history is that of a 12 year old calling everyone "white trash retarded idiots"

permalink

hellshot8 | 21 points | Nov 19 2016 14:12:20

And even he can see through this garbage

permalink

MiniLurkette | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 17:43:55

Noice internet high five

permalink

[deleted] | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 13:54:07

[removed]

permalink

Nex201 | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 15:07:20

Please refrain from insulting users.

permalink

mollyinmysystem | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 15:20:55

WHY DO PEOPLE HAVE TO VOICE THEIR THOUGHTS THAT ABSOLUTELY NO ONE CARES ABOUT. Find evidence that refutes the given information or shut the fuck up. This little comment thread is a circle jerk

permalink

moreblueforlessgreen | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 16:58:35

Yep, keep trying to discredit those who are WORKING TOWARDS ENDING A POTENTIAL CHILD ABUSE RING. Cool.

permalink

Filmpolice | 189 points | Nov 18 2016 22:29:57

Again here is the link which provides all sources for people to verify everything is fact. http://livingresistance.com/2016/11/18/podestas-involved-mccanns-abduction-factual-analysis/

permalink

campbellsouup | 149 points | Nov 19 2016 03:47:36

I thought I read that the police pictures were 2 different individual's depictions of the same person?

permalink

Kerbalized | 144 points | Nov 19 2016 04:45:20

You're correct. Go to the wiki page referenced, the section titled Thursday or something. Smith Sighting. The photos are reconstructions from a husband and wife of one individual.
If nothing else, this is a good reminder that witness reconstructions of faces are really poor... try to describe how the last person you saw waiting to cross the street. That's what many people trying to help attempt to do.

permalink

mariner929 | 20 points | Nov 19 2016 03:53:55

Obviously wrong. They have completely opposite characteristics and not similar in any way.

permalink

Kerbalized | 63 points | Nov 19 2016 04:47:28

It's a husband and wife description of one person from the previous night. Read the wiki page in the post. Witness reconstructions are notoriously unreliable...

permalink

stophboy7 | 30 points | Nov 19 2016 05:09:51

Or there were two people and the husband saw one and the wife saw one and they thought they saw the same guy but it was two different guys...

permalink

DicklePill | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 18:10:40

Nah dude, too many leaps, just a coincidence.. /s

permalink

Monononoke | -1 points | Nov 19 2016 05:11:24

Okay but you're assuming that the husband and wife weren't involved. Maybe they chose to describe the conflicting appearances of the brothers that they let rape their daughter, to try to throw off the search; only, years later, to lead us right to the actual culprits.

permalink

IBetThisIsTakenToo | 48 points | Nov 19 2016 05:35:44

Brilliant. They were in on it, but instead of: A) describing any random other person B) making up a person C) saying the person wore a mask D) saying they didn't see anyone

They instead describe the actual two culprits, but try to hide it by saying it's actually one person. Amazing deduction.

permalink

Dick_n_a_Box | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 07:22:34

We did it!

permalink

KingFinnyPoo | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 07:52:31

Thought we were told not to take Wikipedia as a serious source? But everyone's quoting it in this "its a single person character description". I struggle to see how a husband and wife could differ so greatly in description of a single man. I mean ones clearly fat and the other skinny.

permalink

Dick_n_a_Box | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 08:01:18

The wife dug him, the husband was jealous. But I really don't know anything about this case.

permalink

tridentgum | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 17:51:49

Thought we were told not to take Wikipedia as a serious source?

That is correctly, only memes are credible sources and if you're not grasping at straws the entire time you're doing it wrong.

permalink

PewPewLaserPewPew | 34 points | Nov 19 2016 04:00:14

I dunno they look like brothers or something

permalink

mariner929 | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 04:24:26

Yes but they have completely different features so the argument doesnt work.

permalink

Monononoke | 19 points | Nov 19 2016 05:12:55

Two different people describing the same person? Or two different people describing two different people? How can you be sure they were describing the same person? If there were two people involved maybe they were describing two people?

permalink

madisonrebel | 25 points | Nov 19 2016 08:43:19

Verified two pictures of same person: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/16/madeleine-mccann-latest-are-police-any-closer-to-knowing-the-tru/

Mary and Martin Smith, from Ireland, told police they saw a man carrying a child matching Madeleine’s description at around 10pm on Rua da Escola Primaria, 500 yards from the McCanns’ apartment. He was heading towards the beach, did not look like a tourist and did not seem comfortable carrying the child, they said.

Their evidence was compelling, but it was only in October 2013 that two e-fit images of the man, compiled by police from descriptions given by Mr and Mrs Smith, were released by Scotland Yard to coincide with a BBC Crimewatch reconstruction of Madeleine’s disappearance. He remains a suspect.

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:33:14

And when Mr Smith saw Gerry McCann for the first time he was sure it was him.

permalink

nourishing_peaches | 15 points | Nov 19 2016 10:35:46

also as if they'd go and physically kidnap a girl themselves. how ridiculous. i assume if they were going to kidnap a kid they'd probably get someone else to do it

permalink

Correct_The_Record16 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 19:16:17

Although conjecture, the safest way to not get snitched on, would be to do the crime yourself.

Imagine trying to pay someone to kidnap a kid - impossible, its the worst crime in the world. Most criminals would turn you in.

permalink

nourishing_peaches | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 20:42:05

There are already criminals who do this. Child trafficking is a thing.

permalink

madisonrebel | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 08:42:33

They are: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/16/madeleine-mccann-latest-are-police-any-closer-to-knowing-the-tru/

Mary and Martin Smith, from Ireland, told police they saw a man carrying a child matching Madeleine’s description at around 10pm on Rua da Escola Primaria, 500 yards from the McCanns’ apartment. He was heading towards the beach, did not look like a tourist and did not seem comfortable carrying the child, they said.

Their evidence was compelling, but it was only in October 2013 that two e-fit images of the man, compiled by police from descriptions given by Mr and Mrs Smith, were released by Scotland Yard to coincide with a BBC Crimewatch reconstruction of Madeleine’s disappearance. He remains a suspect.

permalink

Shitmybad | 56 points | Nov 19 2016 08:22:17

This is the weakest conspiracy bullshit I've ever seen, and holy fuck it's disrespectful to Madeleine Mccann.

permalink

inspectortr | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 10:01:01

That's right. I don't care a fuck about politicians, but you should have some respect to that child.

permalink

spaniel_rage | 41 points | Nov 19 2016 06:30:32

Your link merely provides "proof" that Podesta was traveling (actually you didn't; you inferred that from his assistant answering an email, which does not necessarily imply that) not that he was in Portugal.

The world is a big place, you know?

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 08:55:43

To be fair, it does not specify where he was. It simply notes that he was not tending to his emails.

Taken in isolation the fact is unremarkable, but as part of a cumulative case with the other relevant facts it starts to take on significance.

permalink

rabblerabble2000 | 13 points | Nov 19 2016 13:16:54

I hate to burst your bubble, but in most of these conclusions, you're reaching. It looks like you're approaching this with an answer in mind and trying desperately to make the pieces fit the answer you want to believe is true. That's really bad investigation and does more harm to the answer you want than good.

permalink

Gumpt | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 14:16:02

That's a pretty heavy climb down from 100% fact

permalink

GovernmentCheese23 | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 14:15:41

No no no no. You are establishing a gigantic link chain to a largely unfounded belief. If the links of the chain are incredibly weak (even just one) the whole thing falls apart. The problem is that you are finding incredibly weak evidence but believe that he is already the criminal so you are exclusively interpreting the evidence to try and corroborate your claim

permalink

Delfishie | 131 points | Nov 19 2016 05:31:32

Is this satire?

permalink

Master_Builder | 105 points | Nov 19 2016 07:15:04

No it's the alt right.

permalink

blameglues | 35 points | Nov 19 2016 08:25:02

I'm skeptical as well but how is this the alt Right? These people are independently investigating a case that has nothing to do with politics.

permalink

sinfultrigonometry | 37 points | Nov 19 2016 09:26:28

OP posts in the_donald and whines about CTR attacking his post.

He's alt right.

permalink

Royalflush0 | 22 points | Nov 19 2016 08:35:50

The "case" is independent from politics but the people "investigating" are mostly alt-right

permalink

blameglues | 11 points | Nov 19 2016 08:38:37

Says who?

permalink

AsamiWithPrep | 10 points | Nov 19 2016 09:21:58

The polls

permalink

Axiomkun | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 20:15:47

Which ones?

permalink

AsamiWithPrep | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:17:06

Most of them... All of them?

permalink

thrownawayzs | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 10:13:21

I'm not alt right, but couldn't it just be merely coincidental that this garbage subreddit and the Donald have crossover?

permalink

Hostivit | 14 points | Nov 19 2016 11:59:06

Alt-right is a non-existent thing. Just like with anonymous you can lump whoever you want into that drawer. Before Clinton's speech that basically reinvented the term, you couldn't hear anything about the so called "alt-right" on T_D or 4chan... Clinton invented it as a brand to discredit Trump's supporters (not that they need much help with that). Journalists write as if 4chan was a part of the alt-right movement... they don't realize 4chan (pol and b) is made of different people fucking around, larpers, tards, neets, trolls, conspiracy enthusiasts, fake neonazis, real neonazis, proxy players, all on one board. You can't apply logical thinking on it.

This pizza thing is based on a few real suspicious circumstances about Podesta, however various conspiratards from the whole political spectrum saw an opportunity and latched onto it and laced it with layers upon layers of made up bullshit (see OP).

permalink

octodo | 23 points | Nov 19 2016 13:44:59

/r/altright - a community for 6 years

Check their storm fronty discord channel if you're short on memes about Jews.

/r/thenewright is considerably less racist but equally shit with their sources and are parroting completely discredited stories like 3 million illegal immigrants voting Clinton (source: a single tweet) . It's a very real movement. Clinton latched onto making fun of alt right but she did it fairly late in the cycle, that shit has been running for a while, both on reddit and the similar sentiments on /Pol/.

permalink

mrparsnip | 8 points | Nov 19 2016 09:13:27

There's a pretty clear anti-Clinton agenda here.

OP posted this to the_Donald as well for Christ's sake.

permalink

MikoSqz | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 15:17:34

The only reason anyone would believe nonsense like this is because they'll believe anything that's negative towards The Horrible Bogeyman in their head. In this case, their bogeyman is anyone associated with the Clintons.

permalink

AnonIDIOTA | 104 points | Nov 18 2016 23:23:59

Solid posts like these and others with good INFORMATION are having problems being upvoted to the main page. Most of the interesting posts in new/rising never make it.

permalink

TheCrimsonCorndog | 195 points | Nov 19 2016 02:02:04

The Madeline McCann bit is 100% false and undermines the credibility of the entire thing. You guys need to be extremely vigilant about shit like this.

Those two drawings are of the same suspect. Before you say "Source?", read the Wikipedia article. This isn't obscure information I had to go digging for.

permalink

CryBerry | 130 points | Nov 19 2016 02:57:43

Also "caught" with an image is silly. The fucking sculpture is hanging from their ceiling.

permalink

tomdarch | 38 points | Nov 19 2016 06:47:31

undermines the credibility of the entire thing.

The credibility of pizzagate ? No, there was no credibility from the get go. But throwing in the McCann thing pushes the whole absurd, preposterous thing into the "not really even trying to keep the joke plausible" realm.

permalink

AnonIDIOTA | 16 points | Nov 19 2016 02:21:47

There is so much more evidence than just the two drawings.

permalink

Teh_Slayur | 33 points | Nov 19 2016 02:51:17

Other than the drawings, the only things we have verified as of yet is the wiped emails, and a possible connection through accused pedophile Sir Clement Freud who owns the villa 1/3 a mile away where the McCanns stayed to "escape the media."

Edit: And the drawings of the suspect(s) look like them.

permalink

Filmpolice | 21 points | Nov 19 2016 04:16:47

Don't forget the friendship with pedophile Dennis Hastert, the obsession with imagery depicting child abduction and abuse, the odd stuffed animals near the bed.

There are other oddities, like the fact that they have a large underground facility beneath their home -- which they say is for "art" -- but those were left out because they are more speculative in nature.

Based on the known facts alone, there is strong inductive and abductive evidence for people to be rational in concluding the Podestas were involved.

permalink

spaniel_rage | 45 points | Nov 19 2016 06:13:33

Fortunately ones taste in art or fluffy animals is not an indictable offence.

permalink

rabblerabble2000 | 8 points | Nov 19 2016 13:19:15

Give it time. I'm sure we can get there once we really get the witch hunts started.

permalink

moreblueforlessgreen | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 17:00:57

Yeah, keep trying to justify paedophilia.

permalink

rabblerabble2000 | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 23:20:58

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm doing...good call.

permalink

snapbakboii | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 18:08:13

it just doesnt look good you know man. at some point there is too many coincidences. We need some more juicy info to fuck these guys up.

permalink

verbruetheet | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 18:11:14

uh yeah, a "large underground facility" which they apparently routinely give strangers guided tours of

permalink

Teh_Slayur | -4 points | Nov 19 2016 04:25:02

I know there is other evidence against them. I personally believe them to be guilty. I was talking specifically about the possible McCann connection.

permalink

pizzasafety | 25 points | Nov 19 2016 04:46:39

...there's no dead or raped children that we know about though. Which seems kind of important?

permalink

Imbillpardy | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 08:42:07

Shhhh... "evidence".

permalink

Teh_Slayur | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 14:26:13

So you're saying because we don't have dead bodies, this whole investigation is unfounded?

permalink

pizzasafety | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 17:19:00

No, I'm saying because there's no evidence a child was molested or harmed at the restaurant. There's also no accounts of children missing in DC. That's where the comparison to the accounts of satanic ritual abuse in the 1980s seem fully on point. Here's a good book by Carl Sagan about it. https://www.amazon.com/Demon-Haunted-World-Science-Candle-Dark/dp/0345409469

permalink

Reason-and-rhyme | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 03:12:47

downvotes for urging verification, classic

permalink

TheCrimsonCorndog | 11 points | Nov 19 2016 04:51:49

I know, but it doesn't change the fact that those two drawings aren't the Podesta brothers.

permalink

grlldcheese87 | 11 points | Nov 19 2016 02:16:35

Is this seriously the best disinfo you have left?

Jesus Christ.

permalink

Ammop | 60 points | Nov 19 2016 02:54:17

I just checked wikipedia, and he's right that it's supposed to be a single suspect:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann#Smith_sighting

The man was mid-30s, 5 ft 7 in – 5 ft 9 in (1.75–1.80 m), slim-to-normal build, with short brown hair, wearing cream or beige trousers. He did not look like a tourist, according to the Smiths, and had seemed uncomfortable carrying the child.

permalink

gregmasta | 33 points | Nov 19 2016 05:15:04

Here's an article from the Guardian about the two sketches of the single man (via Wikipedia): https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/14/british-detectives-efits-madeleine-mccann-suspect

Also the "source" OP linked says

"Some have responded that the sketches are only representations of one person. This is false. Initially reports indicated just one suspect, but it has grown to as many as six. As confirmed by the BBC ."

This is false. If the author had bothered to actually read the article he himself linked he would see that the article says that they are different sketches of the same, single person.

Photo caption says for the two images:

Sighted at 22:00 carrying girl

Different image of man sighted at 22:00

permalink

ThePizzaAccount | 13 points | Nov 19 2016 04:52:14

That can be edited by anyone. And the article was last edited 25 days ago. By someone who has since had their account banned for using multiple accounts.

That's not suspect.

permalink

Ammop | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 14:23:52

I don't know shit about this case, only what I've read because of this post, but if the narrative you're advancing is that it's two suspects, then you're going to need to provide additional evidence.

permalink

ThePizzaAccount | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 14:44:03

As /u/gregmasta has pointed out in the comment just above mine. The article that this person is trying to use as hard evidence states that this claim of it being one person is false. He links the article used for this source in Wikipedia. Therefore the proof refuting this claim that it's two different people has been proven inaccurate.

If you can provide me information from a source that isnt biased where it states it's one person then we can have a discussion.

Edit: link to article so you can read it for yourself instead of taking Wikipedia at face value.

permalink

Ammop | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 19:40:04

I just read that article. They don't state anywhere that anyone saw two suspects. There were two different sightings at two different times of men carrying children. One was ruled out, as it was determined to be someone else carrying his child to a room. The second sighting, the Smith sighting, is still unexplained and deemed credible.

Heres another article, where they describe those two pictures as two different e-fits of the same person, but from two different witnesses, mr and mrs smith:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/16/madeleine-mccann-latest-are-police-any-closer-to-knowing-the-tru/

Maybe you can point to where anyone has suggested there could be two suspects, because it doesn't seem credible.

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:46:00

You linked the fathers blog. When the man that made the photo fit you all have faith in saw Gerry McCann he was sure it was him. Plus the cadaver dogs reaction at three different points, plus the dna evidence all point to the parents. Two different detective companies hired by the parents came to the conclusion it was them.

permalink

jyjjy | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 11:34:12

Did the banned person actually edit that information? If not why are you bringing it up?

permalink

ThePizzaAccount | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 12:29:51

It doesn't say what the last edit was or when that section was edited (regardless the post above me proved that they cited the source incorrectly if you actually read it, so there's that) my point was that a Wikipedia page doesn't prove or disprove a damn thing. That was the only form of evidence offered (which again was incorrect information)

permalink

jyjjy | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 16:02:25

I haven't looked and won't waste my time. That isn't how Wikipedia works. All edits are logged with what was changed and by whom.

permalink

ThePizzaAccount | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 16:22:32

Hah. Ok.

permalink

ThePizzaAccount | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 16:31:09

Regardless the article it cited says there were two people. I linked the article in another comment in this thread, I'd link it but I'm not going to waste my time with you.

permalink

jyjjy | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 16:43:08

It does not. You are misreading the semi-confusing caption, and purposefully so obviously to mislead others.

For anyone truly confused there are 6 pictures in two rows of three. The caption gives two lists, one for each row, in which each picture is identified with descriptions separated by a semicolon. The two sketches in question are the first in each row as are their associated descriptions which indicates they are different sketches of one person identified only by the time they were seen and where.

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:41:15

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/14/british-detectives-efits-madeleine-mccann-suspect

permalink

grlldcheese87 | 9 points | Nov 19 2016 04:45:59

The guy carrying the kid was found and deemed unrelated according to 4chan digging.

They verified the pajamas and everything. Check 8pol they should have it in the links.

permalink

captnyoss | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 12:23:18

This conspiracy goes much deeper!

5'7" to 5'9" is 170cm to 175cm, not 175cm to 180cm.

I suspect that the whole metric system was set up by paedophiles to keep the world under control of their secret ruler.

permalink

redrover511 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 03:14:05

The actual abductor may have been alone. These two refreshed images released years later are clearly pointing the finger at the two responsible - because they are/were untouchable.

permalink

grlldcheese87 | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 04:46:46

Yes. There was much fuckery surrounding this case.

permalink

PixelBot | 16 points | Nov 19 2016 02:25:44

I like you grlldcheese. But I do have a hunch he might be legit. I think it's just his honest opinion on this one.

Crimson, I'd love to hear more, I'm an open audience, and am genuinely curious. I did some research too, and most of these sources are verified and fairly legit - yes there are SOME unknowns, but there seems to be more truth here than fiction - that's my interpretation.

I'd love to hear your thoughts, thank you.

permalink

grlldcheese87 | 9 points | Nov 19 2016 04:55:45

This got delved into deeply on chans. I don't keep the screens. Ask them and they will tell you everything on 8pol.

The one person story exists. There is a definite account of 2 ppl describing the same person. The Tony-lookalike cannot be described as thin.

It was a separate person from the guy carrying the kid. That guy was found and cleared. The matching pajamas included.

Later reports indicated multiple suspects, more connected to a local group of thieves, and reports of problems due to multiple countries jurisdictions. The Portuguese claimed they couldn't go after their suspects.

It was easily enough confusion and story changing from both the Portuguese and British authorities to make the conclusion that the pictures were not necessarily of the same people. Up to 4 sketches exist. At one point, the UK authorities thought the parents were complicit but they claimed it was retaliation for their persistence.

We are rehashing here. And I'm done.

permalink

PixelBot | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 04:59:52

Yep, I think you're right. It's definitely legit enough so far!

Appreciate your time, thank you for your efforts, keep it up.

permalink

PixelBot | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 01:33:44

https://www.reddit.com/r/WhereIsAssange/comments/5dvr9m/we_have_been_infiltrated_by_jtrig_on_reddit_art/

permalink

PixelBot | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 02:42:22

Crimson, I'd love to hear more, I'm an open audience, and am genuinely curious. I did some research too, and most of these sources are verified and fairly legit - yes there are SOME unknowns, but there seems to be more truth here than fiction - that's my interpretation. I'd love to hear your thoughts, thank you.

permalink

Filmpolice | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 04:13:44

All information provided was 100% true and publicly verifiable.

The police initially said it was 'possible' that the sketches might refer to one suspect, not that it is 'certain.'

In light of new evidence, the most recent news is that there are as many as six suspects, including the two conveyed in the sketches.

permalink

StarNukes | 18 points | Nov 19 2016 05:11:20

Do you have a source for the 6 person thing?

permalink

TheCrimsonCorndog | 55 points | Nov 19 2016 05:28:10

I'm gonna wager a guess he doesn't have sources for almost any of this.

The entire post is subjective interpretation of facts:

  • The possession of stuffed animals does not make somebody a pedophile.

  • "Mingling with students" when you're a teenager doesn't make you a pedophile.

  • The fact that the Podesta brothers haven't officially responded to these allegations does not prove or disprove their involvement.

  • The fact that Wikileaks doesn't have any Podesta emails older than May 2007 does not mean those emails were wiped.

permalink

secretary-bird | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 08:46:45

http://findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html

permalink

TheCrimsonCorndog | 11 points | Nov 19 2016 05:15:51

If this is indeed publicly verifiable, you should probably include sources.

"Guests were horrified when they saw photos of undressed teens in his bedroom."

Were they? When did this happen?

permalink

CherokeeInfidel | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 07:32:59

Folks attending a house tour in the Lake Barcroft neighborhood in Falls Church earlier this year got an eyeful when they walked into a bedroom at the Podesta residence hung with multiple color pictures by Katy Grannan, a photographer known for documentary-style pictures of naked teenagers in their parents' suburban homes.

"They were horrified," Heather recalls, a grin spreading across her face.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43480-2004Sep22_3.html

permalink

imightbewrongwhateve | 8 points | Nov 19 2016 14:16:40

See the issue is when this is presented as fact, and then the actual article just says 'he has photographs from Katy Grannan in his house and bedroom' vs "Guests were horrified when they saw photos of undressed teens in his bedroom."

Nearly everything related to this dumb conspiracy is like this. A small thing taken out of context, then twisted as misleading as possible, and then the defense is that there is this 'mountain' of evidence.

Like he has teddy bears on his bed? The fact that is even brought up is retarded, but then its like 'oh but think of all the other evidence then it doesn't seem silly'.

Or that when the bar wanted to stay open till 2 am, it was linked that the zoning official or whatever said he thought the bar had connection to 'rape and murder', then you look at the article, and the official says that he thinks having bars open till 2 am contributes to the rapes and murders in other parts of town, which is a completely different thing to say than something specific about the pizza place.

I'm all for a good scandal but this is just the weakest conspiracy i've ever seen.

permalink

CherokeeInfidel | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 07:08:00

The actual article says, quoting Heather podesta "They [i.e. 'the guests'] were horrified." It's a fact that Heather Podesta is quoted as saying that the art of naked teenagers prominently displayed horrified her guests. I simply posted a source where one was requested.

permalink

imightbewrongwhateve | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 08:32:57

It is not a fact, unless you can provide a different source. All I see is these statements:

  1. They have artwork from Katy Grannan in their bedroom.

  2. Katy Grannan has at some point taken photos of teenagers with shirts off etc. -- keeping in mind she has a LOT of work

  3. 'Guests were horrified' -- in the context of being horrified by the artwork displayed in the house.

So lets review the original statement, proposed as 100% fact: "Guests were horrified when they saw photos of undressed teens in his bedroom." -- specifically, where does it say guests were horrified when they saw photos of undressed teens in his bedroom

permalink

CherokeeInfidel | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 18:29:28

It does in fact say that. You can try to spin it as not saying that all day long, you're lying. You know you're lying. Bye.

permalink

Okatis | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:58:54

The last image about the news headline of McCann's alleged kidnappers being known by police but not being able to be named is also from 2014 . The image states it's a recent police finding however this 2016 article sourcing The Sun has updated details where the suspects are all named.

British police now believe that one of the gang members, Jose Carlos de Silva, who worked for the resort where the McCann’s family were staying, was involved, reports The Sun.

De Silva, 30, who transported tourists around the Mark Warner resort, is believed to have been working with a 16-year-old youth and two other men.

The two men were identified as Ricardo Rodrigues, 24, and Paulo Ribeiro, 53.

The teen later told police he became involved in the gang because he was desperate for money to buy a sports car.

permalink

TheFlashFrame | -1 points | Nov 19 2016 03:49:14

Shit... I didn't know that.

permalink

TheCrimsonCorndog | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 05:12:26

Not your fault. This whole thing has gotten way out of hand. We probably could have nailed some pedophiles, but nobody is doing their homework anymore. It's just a big stupid meme now.

permalink

TheFlashFrame | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 06:04:10

That's because we never approached it scientifically.

EDIT: on the other hand, it doesn't help that the 30,000 most incriminating emails were deleted by Hillary's staff...

permalink

Axana | 14 points | Nov 19 2016 02:28:23

Lurkers, you can contribute to the cause by regularly visiting the New tab and upvoting the quality posts. This will help stop the shills from burying useful information.

permalink

mystic314 | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 01:07:48

Just up voted!

permalink

TheCrimsonCorndog | 94 points | Nov 19 2016 01:58:16

You need to remove the bit regarding Madeline McCann. Those two drawings are of the same individual, as reported by one eyewitness who only claimed to have seen one person.

permalink

Thank_mr_obama | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 03:10:43

Why do the two drawings look so distinctly different then?

permalink

Lord_Guardian | 54 points | Nov 19 2016 03:27:14

Because it's bullshit.

permalink

Thank_mr_obama | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 03:36:42

Right. But I would still prefer a explanation as to why people keep saying this while quoting fucking Wikipedia

permalink

Imbillpardy | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 08:43:30

Well... there's a reason Wikipedia isn't allowed on your college essay as a source.

permalink

Noble_Ox | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:56:32

Two people giving descriptions of one person. If anything it shows how unreliable eye witnesses can be.

permalink

pVom | 29 points | Nov 19 2016 06:23:04

If you research composite images you realise how retarded it is that we still use these things at all. They are so rarely correct, yet they can be used as evidence.

http://burneylawfirm.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/composite_sketches.png

They're notorious for confirmation bias

permalink

TheCrimsonCorndog | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 05:10:37

Sorry, I should have been more clear. They aren't drawings per-se, they're composite images generated by a computer program called "E-Fit".

If you look closely, the eyes/eyebrows, nose, and mouth are almost exactly the same. The only big differences are the skin tone, jaw structure, and hair. It makes sense that these features would be more variable, since the witness saw this person in the dark.

Here's the original news story from when these pictures were released.

permalink

Aaberg123 | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 08:01:03

Because eyewitness testimony is so incredibly unreliable.

permalink

Demonites | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 09:59:14

Uhhhh they are deffintly different and police recently said they know who did it, but cant arrest them.because international law. Did you even see the pictures?

permalink

mypasswordisdumb | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 23:18:29

The original article where that picture comes from says that it is a police sketch of the abductor. Single person. Not abductors. The fact that they look a little different is two different takes on the same description.

You guys want this shit to be true so bad that you're actually perpetuating lies.

permalink

Filmpolice | -2 points | Nov 19 2016 04:21:23

Corndog, that is false and outdated information.

permalink

Chanz | 30 points | Nov 19 2016 05:16:07

ITT: OP being a jackass.

permalink

madisonrebel | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 08:46:29

No, it isn't: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/16/madeleine-mccann-latest-are-police-any-closer-to-knowing-the-tru/

Mary and Martin Smith, from Ireland, told police they saw a man carrying a child matching Madeleine’s description at around 10pm on Rua da Escola Primaria, 500 yards from the McCanns’ apartment. He was heading towards the beach, did not look like a tourist and did not seem comfortable carrying the child, they said.

Their evidence was compelling, but it was only in October 2013 that two e-fit images of the man, compiled by police from descriptions given by Mr and Mrs Smith, were released by Scotland Yard to coincide with a BBC Crimewatch reconstruction of Madeleine’s disappearance. He remains a suspect.

I'm just going to keep posting this until you get your head out of your ass and provide any citation or evidence that the drawings are of two different people. To date, you have not, despite my requesting that publicly of you multiple times. In my estimation, it's because you're a shill trying to distract and mislead us with your bullshit.

permalink

mypasswordisdumb | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 23:20:14

Fucking respond to this , OP.

Otherwise you're just perpetuating lies.

permalink

madisonrebel | 68 points | Nov 19 2016 06:57:00

Claiming this meme is 100% fact means the whole thing is compromised, because the police sketches cited in Point #5 were two pictures of the same man. I've posted this about a dozen times. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/16/madeleine-mccann-latest-are-police-any-closer-to-knowing-the-tru/

Mary and Martin Smith, from Ireland, told police they saw a man carrying a child matching Madeleine’s description at around 10pm on Rua da Escola Primaria, 500 yards from the McCanns’ apartment. He was heading towards the beach, did not look like a tourist and did not seem comfortable carrying the child, they said.

Their evidence was compelling, but it was only in October 2013 that two e-fit images of the man, compiled by police from descriptions given by Mr and Mrs Smith, were released by Scotland Yard to coincide with a BBC Crimewatch reconstruction of Madeleine’s disappearance. He remains a suspect.

So far, no one on this subreddit has managed to supply any link to dispute this fact. I know the sketches are uncanny, but both Podestas cannot be a single suspect.

permalink

Giggles_McFelllatio | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 12:32:58

Also, the claim that the (presumed- but even if true, it makes no sense) fact Podesta deleted his emails before McCann went missing- Somehow he knew ahead of time the McCanns would (a) eat out (b) leave Maddie in the hotel, and (c) not hire a sitter?

All indications are the McCann case was either the parents, or a crime of opportunity- planning days ahead doesn't make sense.

The whole 'undisputed' (lol) list/meme/theory is 100% conjecture, (again, even assuming the specific claims are true- even though it's almost all unsourced info).

permalink

fairly_common_pepe | 63 points | Nov 19 2016 01:10:12

Michael Jackson was arrested and charged because he had artistic nudes from the 1800s through the 1930s.

Why does Podesta get to have this kiddy porn and get away with it?

permalink

chickyrogue | 49 points | Nov 19 2016 03:13:20

because hes with HER

permalink

DopeandDiamonds | 32 points | Nov 19 2016 03:20:39

Interestingly, the paintings you speak of were of nude adults. He had numerous large books that contained photos of paintings from all over the world. The pictures of nude children that you speak of is a book called "A Boy: A Photographic Essay" from 1964. You can buy it on Amazon. His copy was found to have an inscription to him from a fan. A gift sealed the deal for his charges. Podesta is actively seeking it out but that is totally fine. It's fucked up.

permalink

FieryXJoe | 24 points | Nov 19 2016 04:03:12

Well there was a victim accusing him of molesting him, whereas there isn't with podesta, to be fair.

permalink

fairly_common_pepe | 20 points | Nov 19 2016 04:14:27

Oh yeah, you mean the son of the guy who killed himself over the guilt over trying to fuck MJ with a fake molestation claim?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_Chandler#Accusations_against_Michael_Jackson_and_settlement

permalink

FieryXJoe | 16 points | Nov 19 2016 04:16:51

I know it was bullshit, but still, it was just a piece of evidence in a case, they didn't find the book and then say "oh shit this dude must be raping kids"

permalink

smoothturbo | 62 points | Nov 19 2016 03:41:35

stupidity has no bounds apparently.

permalink

corneredstone | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 16:20:42

I can tell by your comment

permalink

smoothturbo | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 18:04:58

well we live in the age of Idiocracy, racist complete morons at every turn.

permalink

socksproxyz | 50 points | Nov 19 2016 04:39:08

The picture of the girl is not who you say she is, that girl is called Peggy who was kidnapped in Germany over a decade ago. So much for 100% fact? Not saying your shit is wrong but if you can't even verify the source of pictures then your "100% fact" PDF loses all credibility.

permalink

LawsCoolStudent | 32 points | Nov 19 2016 05:58:24

Listen, I think this is a very jumbled and sloppy conspiracy theory as well, but you're wrong. I checked. Here is an article likening the disappearance of Peggy to that of Madeleine McCann, but the image used is that of Madeleine.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1393769/girl-who-went-missing-from-school-15-years-ago-is-discovered-in-forest-just-nine-miles-from-her-home/

If you don't believe me, just reverse image search the picture.

All that being said: Are we really going off that, because a sculpture that Podesta openly displays in his home looks like one position that Jeffrey Dahmer put his victim him and took a picture, it's any sort of 'proof' that Podesta kidnapped a little girl in Portugal (where he's "known to travel", like millions of others)? There is nothing concrete here... It's just random observations put together to create a fantastic claim.

permalink

Donahue2 | 38 points | Nov 19 2016 06:01:00

What in the fuck is this subreddit?

permalink

spaniel_rage | 54 points | Nov 19 2016 06:20:56

A bunch of kooks convinced Hilary Clinton is part of a Satan worshipping pedophile ring, all based on a pizza shop logo that they think looks like a pedo symbol, and on a bunch of leaked email exchanges and Instagram posts that they think look "suspicious".

Not a shred of evidence, but don't let that stop them.

It's like watching a video on r/wtf: its grotesque but somehow I just can't look away.

permalink

bryznasty2dot0 | 16 points | Nov 19 2016 10:22:47

There is a lot more to it than just this stupid infographic. https://np.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5b1qtf/comet_ping_pong_pizzagate_summary/

I will fully admit It's all coincidences, but there are a LOT of them.

As for the satanist thing - tony podesta attended this style of event, and it was inferred that John Podesta has done so in the past.

Satanist? maybe not, but it does have a ton of occult properties. Oh, its also crazy as fuck.

I'm not usually a conspiracy person, and despite some of the fake stuff people post here - there is a pretty good case showing that something is going on here. A few coincidences are expected, but this many is absurd.

permalink

mypasswordisdumb | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 23:25:53

I will fully admit It's all coincidences, but there are a LOT of them.

Agreed. and whenever you start looking to confirm a narrative, its often easy to make connections which, in reality, don't exist.

If somebody could comb through every email I ever sent and look closely at every association with people I've ever had. Who knows what plausible conspiracy they could come up with. And this is how every conspiracy theory works. The sky is the limit.

permalink

Vacster | 37 points | Nov 19 2016 06:46:42

Lol Oh, wait. This isn't a joke??

permalink

Leftovertaters | 28 points | Nov 19 2016 06:55:40

Reddit trump supporters and conspiracy nuts are the worst type of people.

permalink

GoldenKaiser | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 09:21:42

Reddit has become a place where fact/reality/truth literally mean the exact opposite of what they used to mean. It's all about feelings and stupid conspiracy theories. I hope this place goes under, like digg did, and then we all migrate to the new Reddit while the alt-intellectuals crawl back into some other shithole

permalink

drdelius | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 09:56:27

They're only here because we are. There are only two ways to grow your movement, and I doubt they're doing a lot of fucking.

permalink

onceaday73 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 12:55:41

All these stupid wikileaks are lies by the russians! /s

Wikileaks, Edward Snowden, has uncovered a lot of things that would have been dismissed as conspiracy nut posts. That's why it's actually possible there are pedo rings within the most powerful and wealthy. (note: there always has been)

I think most people actually investigating this can clearly see where OP's logic is flawed.

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 22:09:36

The hash keys for wikileaks have been wrong for the past few leaks, plus with Assange missing and the staff dying of I wouldn't put any faith in them lately. Seems someone took a page out of the Clinton handbook.

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 22:07:17

I finished my sociology degree a few years too early, I'd have loved to research this for a thesis. Strange days.

permalink

onceaday73 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 12:52:26

No, that would be pedophiles which is why people (non-trump, non-conspiracy nut) are upvoting this for no reason.

permalink

WhizWit21 | 35 points | Nov 18 2016 23:44:13

The most damning evidence is that the whole world knows we are talking about this and not one of the accused has come out and denied any of it.

permalink

the1who_ringsthebell | 81 points | Nov 19 2016 04:21:22

I would wager that the overwhelming majority of people in this country have never heard about any of this.

permalink

aalabrash | 54 points | Nov 19 2016 04:06:23

Because it's not worth their time

permalink

BAZllNGA | 34 points | Nov 19 2016 06:55:58

I've never heard of any of this until this garbage hit my front page.

If any of you are actually serious and believe any of this horsecrap this, you need to take a good hard look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself "where did I go wrong?"

permalink

Numendil | 22 points | Nov 19 2016 07:48:03

Reacting to it would imply there was anything worth reacting to.

permalink

AsamiWithPrep | 19 points | Nov 19 2016 09:33:33

You are everything in this list - list of mental disorders.

If you don't reply denying each and every one of them individually, it's very damning evidence that all of them apply to you. If you do deny them, I'll probably come up with some other reason why they're still true.

permalink

Phatbasshole | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 18:17:44

That's not a real argument, that's name calling. You obviously haven't read anything about this subject and you have no idea what you're talking about so why don't you gtfo and go read up on it before coming on here and calling people mentally ill?

permalink

AsamiWithPrep | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 21:33:44

It's not just name calling (though I'll admit it's partially that), it's also pointing out the silliness of his particular argument. Why should somebody have to deny each and everything that anybody says? If a public figure acknowledges every wild claim made against them, the number of wild claims is going to increase to an annoying point (and acknowledging a ridiculous claim can be perceived by the public as give it legitimacy, or give news stations reason to cover it, even if the best evidence is that his email conversations are quirky).

Also, isn't it kind of un-American to say that somebody exercising their 5^th amendment right is wrong for doing so?

Edit - also, who made you the pc police, getting triggered on the behalf of somebody I called mentally ill?

permalink

WhizWit21 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 11:00:59

Except no one read all of my emails and came to the conclusion that any of that applies to me.

permalink

AsamiWithPrep | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 11:09:45

I don't have to read all of your reddit comments to come to the conclusion that some of that applies to you.

permalink

Wehavecrashed | 8 points | Nov 19 2016 10:40:25

Most people in America don't even know who Podesta is let alone a conspiracy about him. Don't have such an incredibly high opinion of your own importance.

permalink

Phatbasshole | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 18:15:29

I think they don't want to even acknowledge it, because that would be validating the claims in a way. They also think people are so dumb that they can just cover all this up (hence all the fake news articles saying this has been debunked that popped up last night).

permalink

[deleted] | -14 points | Nov 19 2016 01:56:45

[deleted]

permalink

WhizWit21 | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 01:58:13

So this is all just circumstantial to you? And what do you mean you people? People who want justice?

permalink

donttellmymomwhatido | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 03:02:33

A lot of it is circumstantial yes. I do think it's interesting though and I'm still here reading and learning, for whatever that's worth.

permalink

qmn | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 02:11:35

🙄

permalink

kewlslice | 34 points | Nov 19 2016 05:51:00

This is a joke sub, right? Cause you're really grasping for straws.

permalink

sleuth_bear | 33 points | Nov 19 2016 00:19:52

of all things i have seen on this subreddit this this is the most disturbing of them all.

permalink

CapAm91 | 30 points | Nov 19 2016 06:27:39

Everything about this, from the overly sensationalist title, to the complete lack of credible sources. And wild jumps in conclusions and logic. And How have we come to the point where we can't have any form of disagreement without being a paid shill. Nobody has ever paid me $1 to browse the internet, but it sure would be nice. (Do they hire Canadians?, where do I apply?)

permalink

bryznasty2dot0 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 10:25:54

https://www.reddit.com/r/pizzagate/comments/5dpalh/spread_this_like_wildfire_this_meme_is_100_fact/da6tp2r/

Read the whole story before you make up your mind.

And I agree that shill is thrown around way too much.

permalink

CapAm91 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 20:03:34

I have read the story, I personally see nothing but wild leaps in logic and desperate stretches to try and prove flat earth level nonsense.

permalink

moreblueforlessgreen | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 17:05:00

So why do you keep trying to discredit an investigation in pedos?

permalink

CapAm91 | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 20:02:11

I am not "trying to discredit an investigation into pedos?" because you are not investigators, you are redditors, and i dont need to discredit anything because you have no proof of them being pedos in the first place.

You could make anyone seem like anything you want by using flawed logic and baseless accusations.

permalink

kbock | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 18:30:16

It discredits itself. Its terribly researched and presented.

permalink

Leftovertaters | 30 points | Nov 19 2016 06:54:20

Hahaha omg you losers actually have a fucking subreddit dedicated to this ???

permalink

drdelius | 8 points | Nov 19 2016 09:54:15

I would laugh with you, but apparently 47% of the electorate ate shit like this up for a year straight and then voted Donald. Doesn't seem as funny, in context.

permalink

DJ_MAXX_BLAXX | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 14:06:58

[BALEETED] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^0.071752308

ANTI CUCK SCRIPT

permalink

Leftovertaters | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 16:12:49

Meme magic is some powerful shit

permalink

archnihilist | 28 points | Nov 19 2016 01:57:04

The judge described Hastert as a 'serial child molester'

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/04/27/ex-speaker-dennis-hastert-faces-sentencing-chicago/83584440/

Clement Freud has a home 1/3 of a mile away.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/police-warned-link-between-predatory-8194041

We definitely have is son in the leaks.

Matthew Freud matthew@freud.com

When you search Clement Freud, you get this email...

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/35259

Is he in the attachments? I don't know why I get that search result, yet.

permalink

BlacknOrangeZ | 11 points | Nov 19 2016 02:29:13

The ethics attachment contains a reference to Sigmund Freud, and separately mentions a guy named Bob Clement. I'm guessing this is why.

permalink

auraslip | 26 points | Nov 19 2016 05:36:51

I think this post is made by CTR shills trying to delegitimize the alt-right.

Because it's hilarious.

permalink

shrakner | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 05:50:53

That would make a lot of sense actually. Though they seem to do fine on their own usually.

permalink

alderinn | 26 points | Nov 19 2016 07:34:11

What is this dogshit?

permalink

probablyuntrue | 24 points | Nov 19 2016 07:13:25

Oh shit I went to Portugal last summer, am I a part of this too?

permalink

kristiansands | 11 points | Nov 19 2016 09:26:10

Yes. Admit it. Where's the Girl ? In which pizza place ? Murderer. 🙄

permalink

Filmpolice | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 11:58:20

That is an important point to make. Each fact considered in isolation is rather insignificant. A lot of people delete emails, a lot of people have stuffed animals, and it would be inane to accuse them of anything.

But when each fact adds up to a cumulative case, then an explanation is needed.

In other words, when an old childless man has stuffed animals by his bed AND he is friends with a pedophile AND he matches police sketches in a child abduction case AND he collects imagery of abducted children (etc.) then it is more difficult to suppose that it is all a sheer coincidence.

permalink

Smoda | 17 points | Nov 19 2016 10:49:50

This post reads like the rantings of a mentally disturbed person. Is this post satire? Is this entire sub satire?

permalink

Filmpolice | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:55:38

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

Filmpolice | 16 points | Nov 19 2016 02:12:27

This is getting SWARMED with downvotes, it's like they're sending hundreds of people here to snuff it out.

Burn in hell CTR.

permalink

Xperimentx90 | 115 points | Nov 19 2016 04:37:33

I downvoted you for the sensationalist title and lack of verified evidence. I have no connection to CTR. Welcome to the real world, where not everyone who disagrees with your views is being paid for it.

permalink

ADHDAleksis | 49 points | Nov 19 2016 05:01:43

To be fair I downvoted this but I wish I was getting paid by someone... that'd be nice.

permalink

uncommonpanda | 45 points | Nov 19 2016 05:25:58

Some people regularly visit r/All and check things out. I was curious about this post, but it's more crazy ass Alex Jones bullshit. You haven't linked to a single reputable source yet. I mean, I can make a website and just say anything, doesn't make it true. The funniest part about all this, is that if there really was this massive global conspiracy about the Podestas and the Clintons wouldn't she have stolen/rigged the election? But here we are with President Trump. The MO doesn't make sense to me, I don't get it...

permalink

pizza-pudding | 41 points | Nov 19 2016 02:31:38

may be a stupid question, but where do you see downvotes?

permalink

Stealthjing | 84 points | Nov 19 2016 02:35:15

In his mind.

permalink

pizza-pudding | 18 points | Nov 19 2016 03:03:20

I've been on reddit for years and have never understood where people see downvotes viewing on pc or phone. I see people comment about downvotes all of the time though.

permalink

amcma | 11 points | Nov 19 2016 03:40:04

Back in the day you could actually see how many up votes and down votes you had, not just the score. I can't remember why they got rid of it

permalink

FoxxyRin | 9 points | Nov 19 2016 03:45:13

When you make a post it says "XX% upvoted" on the side, which you can compare to the actual score you see. http://i.imgur.com/LfONLOB.png?1

permalink

IceDagger316 | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 05:41:40

RES.

Currently, as I type this, OP's post has received 1,328 upvotes out of 2,885 votes. 73% of the people upvoted.

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 22:17:33

I'm on to you, you have pizza in your name, I'm calling PEDOOO.

permalink

jokersleuth | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 04:43:25

I guess the ctr Boogeyman isn't gone yet. Thry just need a quick way to shut down a discussion or argument when they have no other response.

permalink

AFSundevil | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 03:13:33

If you view the post on PC you can see % upvoted. If the overall score is like 6000 and it's 70% upvoted you know it's got 70% upvoted and 30% down votes. Then it's pretty easy math to figure out the total numbers.

permalink

pizza-pudding | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 03:18:31

you see upvote % on individual posts inside a thread?

permalink

AFSundevil | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 03:23:53

Not on comments, just on the actual OP. Maybe on some comments there visible. Maybe with an extension. It's been a while since I used a desktop for Reddit. But definitely on the OP you can see %

permalink

Filmpolice | -3 points | Nov 19 2016 04:19:58

By observing the count, then refreshing, and observing the count again. It was decreasing aggressively every few seconds.

It has slowed down now.

permalink

dampierp | 37 points | Nov 19 2016 06:29:01

That's because you used a circle-jerky title and made it to /r/all, and then people outside of your little echo chamber saw it, noticed all the bullshit guestimating you used to accuse someone of pedophilia and child abduction, and downvoted this for being incendiary nonsense. But sure, keep telling yourself there's an equally shadowy conspiracy of pedophilic pizza places all designed around downvoting your posts.

permalink

ImTinyRickAMA | 35 points | Nov 19 2016 07:23:06

Bro very little of this is 100% undisputed fact. People are disagreeing with you for being an idiot, not because we are CTR shills. You can't say "SJWs need to learn how to Internet, free speech is the pinnacle of society" and then be unable to handle people down voting your post. There is one standard, free speech is good. It's not "free speech is good for only those who agree with me"

permalink

bartink | 33 points | Nov 19 2016 04:38:52

CTR is still active after she conceded?

permalink

RocketSixtyNine | 38 points | Nov 19 2016 07:29:36

CTR will always be active to these guys as long as people disagree with them.

permalink

alderinn | 30 points | Nov 19 2016 07:35:53

I downvoted because I passed it on r/all and it was weak as shit

permalink

SadDragon00 | 24 points | Nov 19 2016 06:15:00

Burn in hell CTR.

Top fucking kek

permalink

kerrykingsbaldhead | 16 points | Nov 19 2016 08:23:26

You're getting swarmed with downvotes because your bullshit got upvoted to the top where the people with common fucking sense reside.

permalink

Bipolar_Dude | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 14:37:01

You're crazy, and I am familiar with crazy

permalink

MikoSqz | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 15:21:44

When you post crazy, nonsensical bullshit, it gets downvotes as soon as sane people who recognize bullshit see it. And if you're the bad kind of crazy, your instinctive response is obviously going to be OH MY GOD IT MUST BE THE SHILLS SENT BY THE LIZARD PEOPLE

permalink

chickyrogue | -3 points | Nov 19 2016 03:15:21

All rat fuckers be gone!!!

CTR fuck off

TY for giving me this chance to reiterate

permalink

aalabrash | 48 points | Nov 19 2016 04:05:27

you are so fucking stupid

permalink

chickyrogue | -5 points | Nov 19 2016 04:06:23

you are not very nice!

rat fucker yourself

permalink

aalabrash | 31 points | Nov 19 2016 04:07:04

yeah ok

permalink

chickyrogue | -1 points | Nov 19 2016 04:08:10

TY lets not be stoopid peace out

permalink

IAreSpatz | 16 points | Nov 19 2016 08:18:19

OMG!! He has stuffed animals AND travels to Portugal?! HOW THE FUCK ISN'T HE IN JAIL?!?!?! ^/s

permalink

moreblueforlessgreen | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 17:06:46

Are you that dumb? You really don't get all of the connections

permalink

IAreSpatz | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 17:33:46

I know that I'm not that interested in whatever this is. I also know that makes me un-biased. I know this isn't 100% facts.

Is it proven that they were in Portugal at the time of the abduction? Otherwise this whole list consists of a man that has a weird painting, stuffed animals and is a friend of someone that sexually assaulted people.

permalink

PixelBot | 15 points | Nov 19 2016 00:25:30

Great job on this! If you made it, it's absolutely excellent.

We need to keep working on this.

Vote bots will try to suppress this, it's been happening a lot, especially today, it looks like we have a new batch of bots in last 24 hours (my observation)

permalink

Deliberated | 17 points | Nov 19 2016 11:08:18

I think it's just sane people downvoting this absolute mess of a subreddit.

permalink

TheBlueBlaze | 14 points | Nov 19 2016 08:22:13

I just don't understand how anybody could believe this is real. I never really looked into conspiracy theories much, and just wrote them off as a funny distraction from real issues. But holy shit, if this is what all conspiracy theories are like, I don't think I'll ever be able to take them seriously. I apologize to 9/11 truthers. Your theory is Watergate compared to this bullshit.

This "theory" takes so many things that have no correlation to one another, or could be coincidental, and jumps to such wild conclusions with them that it's baffling. This is a true-blue example of someone starting with a statement (i.e. Podesta is a pedophile) and working backwards to find enough things that could be construed as evidence. Half of these "facts" have at least one major flaw in them that would have them thrown out in any court case. Give me a weeks' time and any public figure, and I could "prove" something similar.

Was there nothing else of substance in the Podesta emails that this was the closest thing to an accusation that could be mustered?

Addenda: (1) Could we please stop with creating so many subreddits with barely differing content to fuck with the algorithm? I don't want to constantly read about how Trump is going to be the best president ever and Hillary and her cronies are going to bring about the End Of Days. (2) No I am not being paid by anybody to say this. I would've voted for Bernie, but begrudgingly voted Hillary. (3) Could we stop adding "-gate" to every single fucking conspiracy theory? Watergate was only called that when there was concrete evidence and Nixon was already found guilty. Adding it to the end doesn't make it any more legitimate, and only serves to make people who want to believe think it's more legitimate.

permalink

onceaday73 | 9 points | Nov 19 2016 13:33:43

First off, pedo rings are real. The media is going to attempt to dismiss all things negative possibly related to Clinton just like they did to Wikileaks blaming it on alt-right Trump supporters and Russia. This investigation is separate from politics. No one likes pedophiles. FBI has busted many but even they have their limits when some criminals are out of reach.

You should really just read their pizzagate summaries (on the right sidebar) which has the stronger "evidence" laid out before you write up your post. OP's image is terrible and showcased the weakest links of all the things I've seen here. My personal opinion is that there is something going on but this attention is just compromising the investigation.

permalink

Filmpolice | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:56:29

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

TheBlueBlaze | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 04:39:50

  • Points 1-3 are a classic case of implying causation through correlation. At best, it's a coincidence and is in no way evidence. There is no evidence that he was even in the same country the day her disappearance was reported.

  • While Point 4 does have some merit (only in that the pictures do resemble the Podestas), remember that these are supposed to be two depictions of the same person . Only one man was seen by the Smiths, and those are attempted depictions of that man. Both of these are compiled images from multiple varying testimonies, and yet the two differ so much despite being the same person. This means that those images are an at-best rough guess, and the fact that they vary that much means that there is no real way to know for sure that the images are accurate.

  • As a side note to 4, the suspect in the Smith sighting was described as being in his mid-thirties and "did not look like a tourist". John and Tony Podesta were 58 and 63 respectively on the night she went missing, and would very much be tourists if they were visiting another country.

  • For point 5, please refer to my point 4 rebuttal. But unless the suspect image is mirrored for some reason, the mole is above his right eyebrow, whereas Tony Podesta's mole is above his left.

  • Points 6-10 provide no evidence to anything other than Podesta having admittedly weird taste. Weird taste does not define the person, let alone provide evidence to any crime. Specifically, having a work by an artist does not mean they approve of all of the artist's work. Also, having these spread out as five points when they draw the same point seems like padding the list.

  • The animals in Point 11 could have just been provided to add some detail to the photo. Professional photographers tend to use props to "liven up" a photo. They don't want to have an empty shelf when taking photos of someone's home for aesthetic purposes. Also, what pedophile would be dumb enough to include things they use to lure children in a photoshoot of their own home?

  • Finally, Points 12 and 13 imply that an associate of a pedophile is also a pedophile. Keeping someone as a friend despite accusations against them is common in all circles. Also, the email about keeping in touch with Hastert was made in 2015, whereas new evidence regarding the accusation against him was revealed in 2016. Opinions may have changed since then.

Every single point you have made could be interpreted in multiple ways. But none of the points you have mentioned are solid enough to prove anything. Anyone who thinks any of the points mentioned is concrete proof is simply seeing what they want to see. There is a reason the namesake of this theory isn't included in the evidence: It was ludicrous to consider it evidence in the first place.

permalink

[deleted] | 13 points | Nov 19 2016 05:36:37

[removed]

permalink

onceaday73 | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 12:58:46

Pedo rings are real just FYI

permalink

TARSTHEDOMINO | 13 points | Nov 19 2016 09:57:35

Every person in here viciously attacking anybody who believes in a fraction of this is using methods that are distinctly Scientologist. Specifically how they treat "Suppressive Persons". This is all very fascinating to watch.

permalink

Fake_Unicron | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 15:34:58

What's the tactic called where you accuse everyone who disagrees with you if being a shill? Do you notice any of that happening? Fascinating indeed.

permalink

TARSTHEDOMINO | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 23:05:09

It's mudslinging on both sides. But it does beg the question, we really don't know who is a bot, paid shill, or disinformation spreader anymore. Not even sure what to believe anymore

permalink

Fosba91 | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 05:16:58

How is this a meme?

permalink

SuperFerret3 | 12 points | Nov 19 2016 05:58:35

When there's a post titled "100% fact" it is 100% not fact 100% of the time.

permalink

Wb14245 | 10 points | Nov 19 2016 04:42:42

people would care if you didn't call it fucking pizzagate.

permalink

hhoq | 10 points | Nov 19 2016 09:44:40

ffs. very few facts there.

permalink

Filmpolice | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:55:54

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

hhoq | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 08:09:37

thank you. i think even with these facts accepted it's still gonna be impossible to see anyone prosecuted, it's still all circumstantial no matter how damning the evidence.

permalink

Life_Is_Gr8 | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 02:34:01

Even if international law prevents them from getting them, why can't they just announce that it was them. This is total BS.

permalink

ShampagnePapi | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 03:47:03

What is this law anyway?

Sounds pretty stupid.

permalink

Life_Is_Gr8 | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 03:50:02

Totally agree. Fuck these cucks.

permalink

handclapper | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 02:58:05

No one would spread this meme.

The logo change at "Besta Pizza"

The protected part of comet ping pong's (cppp's) website

Steganography on pictures of children on cppp's website

Social media censorship (Jimmy Comet IG)

The CREDENTIALS of the employees at these pizza places cppp Besta Pizza

Memes relegated to these topics would be more suitable to swaying public perceptions.

Memes featuring pictures of nude children aren't going anywhere..

permalink

Okatis | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 01:04:36

Steganography on pictures of children on cppp's website

Link? The only posts I've seen involving steganography with this have all been shown to be false and have been using images on WikiLeaks.

permalink

the_disco_pimp | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 03:55:13

what is this

permalink

-UtilityBeastEU- | 7 points | Nov 19 2016 15:07:54

OP is a complete moron.

He is in fucking politics, ofc he is not some inbred redneck like you that has never left the country. It is literally his job to work and network with his counterparts around the world.

If you seriously think some american uber pedophile went all the way to portugal to kidnap a no name child you are a fucking idiot. What is so special about madline exept that she was actually killed through the neglect of her parents? Typical brits on holiday, get shitfaced and leave their kids alone so ofc some will go missing.

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:49:54

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

darcechoes | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 20:04:59

Having pictures of children tied up in your home is normal now? Wtf

permalink

TotesMessenger | 6 points | Nov 19 2016 05:23:44

I'm a bot, bleep , bloop . Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^( Info ^/ ^ Contact )

permalink

TimIsColdInMaine | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 02:22:54

What is the general consensus on Madeline Mccann? I feel like half the people think it is viable, half think it is a distraction. Anything more solid revealed yet? Maybe definitive evidence of location that time period? Feels like a big jump to me, but I'm not sure if I am missing something

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 22:26:33

The eye witness when he saw Gerry McCann was sure it was him. Two cadaver dogs indicated three different times, in the apartment, outside the balcony and in the boot of their car. Oh and on a book belonging to the mother ad on Maddys teddybear. There was dna evidence that had a match at 15 places out of 19. Two different private detective companies plus the Portugal police came to the conclusion it was the parents. The seven adults who were present didn't have matching stories.

permalink

User526 | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 07:10:10

Maybe there are a bunch of pedos doing crazy shit. You sure aren't going to find any real evidence through the internet though. Especially not of they are rich with lots of political power. You guys are embarrassing yourselves.

permalink

onceaday73 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 14:03:03

I disagree that people "aren't going to find any real evidence through the internet." Everything is through the internet these days. Criminals are humans too and they post to social media and chat rooms. It sounds like you don't even know where Podesta email leaks are from. Even TOR users can be tracked.

First off, read the summary posts on the right which have the much stronger "evidence" for the investigation. The instagram posts are really unsettling. The video where some employee makes some pedo joke during a performance inside the restaurant is more so. Typically you have conspiracy theories grasping at straws for evidence but there's plenty of evidence this time around. It's hard to think nothing is going on at all. I agree that civilians wouldn't be able to contribute much but this will gain the attention of people who do have the skills to help investigate.

permalink

23eulogy23 | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 07:33:16

Do you think the Podestas would be brazen enough to actually kidnap a kid themselves? (Mccain)..Wouldn't they have people to do that for them? I'm not disputing the likeness. I'm just saying they have alot to lose. They were very stupid to pull that off themselves

permalink

sinfultrigonometry | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 09:17:01

It seems very unlikely that these two could have abducted the girl, since the parents had already killed her.

Also the police sketches are two drawings of the same man, based on seperate descriptions by a husband and wife who saw one man who looked suspicious. There's no way they could represent both brothers.

Lastly the UK police don't know who did it. That's just a fabrication.

permalink

Fellowship_9 | 5 points | Nov 19 2016 15:25:14

So a guy sometimes goes on holiday in a lace where a girl was kidnapped, has art by an artist who also does some rather questionable material, and has toy animals in his bedroom, therefore he's a satanic pedophile?

Also not sure how this is a meme

permalink

flaminghotbutthole | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 00:06:09

This is great! Easy to follow and very compelling.

permalink

ThurstonHowell_theIX | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 01:22:58

I would add the coded emails.

permalink

lavonte_david | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 01:35:23

Great job

permalink

subbookkeepper | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 03:53:45

Only that last one is speculative.

If that really happened, surely someone would have leaked it by now.

permalink

Filmpolice | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 04:24:11

All sources are linked here for anyone to verify: http://livingresistance.com/2016/11/18/podestas-involved-mccanns-abduction-factual-analysis/

permalink

ADHDAleksis | 23 points | Nov 19 2016 05:04:51

Take a basic English class on reputable sources.

permalink

DatBuridansAss | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 13:13:22

If you have artwork openly displayed in your home, or stuffed animals for that matter, can we really say you were "caught" with them?

permalink

Exec99 | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 01:30:35

thats powerful

permalink

pro_spiracy | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 04:01:19

Tony has some vampire looking fangs.

permalink

aniabub | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 05:42:39

That did it. The first time i puked in relation to this.

permalink

iconboy | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 05:49:42

I feel sick

permalink

agentf90 | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 05:59:04

i posted it to /r/conspiracy but they immediately deleted it.

permalink

BAZllNGA | 31 points | Nov 19 2016 06:58:55

You know this post is beyond stupid if even the conspiratards delete it.

permalink

agentf90 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 06:59:30

i believe the mod didn't even look at it, he just say "meme" and deleted it, broke rule 8.

permalink

BAZllNGA | 9 points | Nov 19 2016 07:00:50

I mean is it not a meme? Can anyone of sound mind actually buy this crap?

permalink

agentf90 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 07:04:02

lol. i heard about you guys....always make an appearance when the trail gets hot.

permalink

BAZllNGA | 10 points | Nov 19 2016 07:07:48

yep, official CTR member here. I get 5 dollars every time I cover up this extremely true conspiracy. (((George Soros))) himself pays me in cash and underage hookers

permalink

agentf90 | -1 points | Nov 19 2016 07:08:43

who dude. you're not supposed to name him like that in public. geezus.

permalink

Master_Builder | 4 points | Nov 19 2016 07:14:24

Fuck we've been compromised.

permalink

AsamiWithPrep | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 11:33:43

Rule 8 is no memes. You literally referred to it as a meme in the title.

permalink

agentf90 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 15:54:02

its not my title. it was a crosspost and its not a meme.

permalink

AsamiWithPrep | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:36:26

SPREAD THIS LIKE WILDFIRE! This meme is 100% fact, undisputed regarding Podesta and child abduction/abuse.

This meme is 100% fact

This meme

submitted 16 hours ago by agentf90

Looks like it's your title.

permalink

agentf90 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:59:14

jesus christ. its the suggested title from a cross post. fuckin' a man wtf is the big deal?

permalink

AsamiWithPrep | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 22:01:23

You said it's not your title, but the moment you resubmitted it to another subreddit it became your title. Don't complain about the deletion because you didn't think to alter the suggested title to not break the rules.

permalink

agentf90 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 22:04:44

yeah i get that. but i didn't write it is what i mean. how is this such a hard concept to grasp?

permalink

hhoq | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 09:44:10

conspiritards? you mean people who don't trust "official explanations" of events, and want to discuss alternate possibilities?

permalink

Livingsousvidealoca | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 11:17:34

Nah, the kind of people who think 9/11 was done by bombing the twin towers and hologram projecting images of planes in the sky

permalink

dampierp | 8 points | Nov 19 2016 06:31:58

guess you shoulda posted it to /r/uberultrasecretconspiracy

permalink

agentf90 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 06:34:29

the mod didn't even look just thought it was a meme because it said "meme" in the crosspost. Go ahead and repost it.

permalink

101101101101101000 | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 06:50:34

So gross, notice the kleenex next to the stuffed animals

permalink

Seiferus | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 07:11:49

Can we fix the typo in the word "trophies" before we "SPREAD THIS LIKE WILDFIRE"?

permalink

honorocagan | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 08:36:40

You guys are doing great work,

BUT:

If you limit the politics you'll do better.

Stop linking everything to Clinton.

The plebs you're trying to convert won't go with it.

They're already connected in that way.

Instead, get them emotionally involved, and only after that let them see that the whole thing was controlled by their party.

permalink

BoldF1nger | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 10:45:34

You don't need to go to law school to realize that this shit is the very definition of 'circumstantial' at best. Even if you accept it all as unquestionably factual (which you shouldn't) it still doesn't amount to anything more than a possible line of enquiry.

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:55:46

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

BoldF1nger | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 02:20:21

Look up the meaning of 'circumstantial'.

permalink

Shitinmybutt | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 13:30:44

For Decades if you wanted to call someone as Insane you'd say "They probably believe that the government is SPYING ON THEM!"

permalink

VarsityPhysicist | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 13:53:56

Can you just keep this on T_D or conspiracy?

permalink

TGiFallen | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 14:11:26

ITT: how to tank your credibility

permalink

beekeeper23 | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 15:28:00

OP, I beg you not to delude yourself like this. People saying that your evidence is weak aren't shills, they're just trying to show you that bad research completely undermines any point you were trying to make. I mean, really, look at some of these sources! Check them yourself, this is really weak!

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:49:38

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

qbz | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 15:43:53

Is this satire or do you think its legit?

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:49:29

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

PsyonixOne | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 16:35:23

100% fiction

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:49:07

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

PsyonixOne | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 02:48:08

Get out and do something positive man. Create art, help someone who needs it. This is just fucking sad to see so many people out so much energy into such a waste Of time.

Is this making you happy ? Do you really believe it? Are you being paid to push this false narrative? It's crazy. And I Love a good conspiracy, but this is just kind of disgusting. When will Reddit shout this shit down.

permalink

thowraway21 | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 17:57:57

Yeeeeaah, I thought there was some truth to the theory. Maybe there is I don't know, but this place is full of crazy alt right shit. Shitposts like this shows the place is just an outer wing of /r/the_donald. Unless the OP is a shill doing next level shillstuff.

permalink

losthours | 3 points | Nov 20 2016 02:32:09

Remember when people"caught" the Boston bombers through extensive internet CSI photo looking at.

permalink

hyperion_scum | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 04:56:51

This is super interesting, thanks for compiling it all together like this.

permalink

ckhk3 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 06:24:13

Regarding the paintings, we're they made just for him, how many copies were made, who else owns them.

permalink

throwawaymade4pizza | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 07:19:39

Is this safe to post about on my personal social media?

permalink

EmmaSarahLucy | 8 points | Nov 19 2016 09:08:01

your personal Twitter with 3 followers and an anime pic as your avatar? yeah I think you're good man

permalink

CogitatorX | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 09:14:34

OP is in need of some psychiatric care and some meds to make the bad thinky pains go away.

permalink

onceaday73 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 14:12:49

Pedo rings are real.

permalink

CogitatorX | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 19:40:49

So are narwhals. Doesn't make any of the paranoid conspiritard garbage OP wants "spread like wildfire" true.

You people are the type that bought into the satanic panic of the 80s.

permalink

cgk999 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 09:20:30

Well, I'll let everything else pass. But what stuffed objects a guy keeps in his bedroom is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS! See, put it in the only language/style you understand.

permalink

A_Humdinger | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 10:51:11

The vote manipulation is real.

permalink

CharmingAdjacent | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 13:13:06

Oh god this is so bad.

I'm going to leave the subject matter completely alone, I'm mostly just horrified at how badly constructed this is.

I have professionally shilled for alcohol, tobacco and PMCs. Folks whose day jobs were insinuations and post-truth. They would be horrified at how clumsy this is.

This makes National Enquirer look like Shakespeare.

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:55:22

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

QueenLorne | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 13:49:28

Couple things really;

1) The point about the statue is misleading. There is no evidence to suggest that it was modeled after Dahmer's victim. In fact, looking at the images, there are tons of differences including placement of the arms and legs. I really don't think this is intended to be modeled after the victim.

2) The images of the Madeline McCann suspect are supposed to be of the same person seen by the Smiths, not two people.

3) The police have said they cannot arrest the perpetrators due to international law, but they also said the kidnappers were Portugese and the Madeline McCann abduction was due to a "bungled burglary".

I'm not trying to dissuade anything, there's obviously enough circumstantial evidence to justify an investigation. However, perpetuating this image as "100% fact" is misleading and does not account for lying by omission.

permalink

ranman1124 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 14:51:43

How many botched burglaries turn into a child abduction?

permalink

QueenLorne | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 15:14:25

Again, that was the theory perpetuated by Scotland Yard. I did not come up with it on my own.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3564019/Madeleine-McCann-kidnapped-botched-burglary-gang-thieves-British-police-quizzed-blocked-questioning-again.html

But crimes like botched burglaries do happen. Quick search on google yields

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/04/police-man-intended-burglary-before-kidnapping-sexually-assaulting-10-year-old.html

http://gephardtdaily.com/local/midvale-kidnapping-carjacking-burglary/

So it does happen.

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:54:44

Thank you for the thoughtful response.

1) What year did Dahmer kill that victim? What year was the sculpture created? Look at the ribcage, as well as the fact that it's beheaded. None of the traditional renditions of the arch of hysteria were beheaded that I know of. This one is beheaded. Dahmer's victim is beheaded. Check the dates. Is it reality imitating art or vice versa? Google and you will see.

2) That the sketches look very much like the Podestas cannot be disputed. There have been other suspects as well. The latest list is here: http://findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html Police did not conclude with certainty that there was just one suspect; far from it, they only tacitly accepted there was one suspect because that's what they were told during preliminary reports. It would be contrary to the spirit of rational inquiry to maintain that preliminary reports have veto power over any forthcoming evidence. If new evidence emerges suggesting that more than one suspect was involved, the original suppositions would be revised.

3) That there are reports of a bungled burglary is logically consistent with the explanations being considered.

permalink

FireSail | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 14:02:59

"Public record" -- I need the exact source bro, this is overly vague

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:50:04

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

PSweetie | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 14:45:11

Didn't know if you guys had seen this. Besta Pizza is owned by Andrew Kline of the Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit of the DOJ [Pizza Parties Exposed] https://steemit.com/wikileaks/@ausbitbank/besta-pizza-is-owned-by-andrew-kline-of-the-human-trafficking-prosecution-unit-of-the-doj-pizza-parties-exposed

permalink

xMrCleanx | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 16:12:24

At first I imagined Tony Podesta would be a scary looking Fat Tony irl carbon copy. But no, he looks like a fucking evil queer, I'd love to bash those tiny teeth to bits with a shovel.

permalink

KlehmM | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 17:53:29

Holy shit people really like saying that pedophilia is a joke

permalink

BahDumTshh | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 17:53:56

ba-dum-tshh

permalink

Bizzibodi | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 18:45:01

According to Wikileaks CIA stratfor leaks Anthony Podesta has a home in Lausanne switzerland and was getting "a whole ball of wax" subscription. w/e the hell that is.

permalink

Filmpolice | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:47:38

Link?

permalink

Bizzibodi | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 22:11:41

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/13/1318076_bawl-of-whacks-.html

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/28/28237_wbow-before-i-do-anything-.html

Look at the attached file names;

114322_wax_ball_2010-04-13.csv

Also search "anthony podesta wax"

Switzerland isnt that far from Portugal either.

permalink

darcechoes | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 20:03:58

Lots of libs defending pedophiles lmfao wtf

permalink

denizen42 | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 20:18:45

Damn you FBI !

Why don't you do your fucking job!

permalink

Filmpolice | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:39:43

Let's go through each fact then, for the benefit of people reading. Sticking only to facts, no assumptions or conjectures. Go ahead and tell us which item below you feel is not a fact, and why.

Now, all of the above is factual -- 100% :) -- and links have been provided for you to verify it as such. So if you want to say none of it's true, then the onus is on you to tell readers why you think the information contained in said links is forged or otherwise wrong. Downvoting or counter-asserting without argument is not a valid answer. You will have to address the actual details.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

thecrimsonlion37 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 09:52:39

I think everyone has their bias on full force here. I highly doubt that any Reddit thread is going to lead to a direct conviction of any person; however, that being said, I think we need to be realistic here and realize that the purpose of uncovering information like this is to lead to proper investigation by those in a position to actually do something.

The police photo/sketch may be one man. It doesn't matter if it is not both Podesta brothers. It still has a striking resemblance to John. He clearly has something to hide with his food code. He also is very suspicious considering his choice of friendships and taste in "art". His absence of e-mails prior to the abduction also does not bode well for him. His campaign team's ties to Comet Ping Pong is also very uncomfortable.

Can information like this ever lead to an arrest. Probably not. However, it can lead to someone with the authority to uncover more to be inspired to take action. I have made up my mind that the Podesta's are likely involved in child trafficking at worst and money laundering at least, but that does not mean he will be convicted. Let's get past the semantics people and come back down to Earth.

[EDITS - spelling and addition of Comet Ping Pong bit]

permalink

JuiceControlTheMedia | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 11:22:43

This highly circumstantial 'evidence' is going to go very far!! This is NOT a huge waste of time!! Keep up the very meaningful work!!

permalink

dcdale9 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 11:47:11

Obama administration is tied to large Islamic terrorist group CAIR whose leader was arrested in June 2016 in Florida for child sex trafficking. Children as young as 10. Obama's DOJ refused to prosecute. Judicial watch has a file and they have sued for the records. The guys name is Ahmed Saleem. Keith Ellison, congressman, is running to head DNC, and he is closely associated with CAIR. Ellison has publicly supported this groups terrorism ideology. More info on One Plaza.com

permalink

dcdale9 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 11:52:00

Ahmad Saleem is part of the American Islamic brotherhood. Correction....he was arrested in 2011 not 2016.

permalink

JoseHerrias | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 13:19:21

The thing that pisses me off about this, besides the fact that this is not 100% fact, is that making brash statements like this can actually deter from a conspiracy that may actually have real credence.

permalink

justjoshingu | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 13:49:54

Fact: bear, beets , battlestar galactica

permalink

KlehmM | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 14:20:21

Well what's the international law saying they're not allowed to identify the kidnappers?

permalink

kealanm1 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 15:28:06

Right track wrong answers I think here

permalink

PizzaHatingBaphomet | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 16:21:40

I feel like the inaccuracies in this "meme" make it a distraction...

permalink

Ash_1008 | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 18:13:32

The 2 e-fits are of one person, not two. So why does everyone think it's of two people?

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:48:44

That the sketches look very much like the Podestas cannot be disputed.

There have been other suspects as well. The latest list is here: http://findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html

Police did not conclude with certainty that there was just one suspect; far from it, they only tacitly accepted there was one suspect because that's what they were told during preliminary reports.

It would be contrary to the spirit of rational inquiry to maintain that preliminary reports have veto power over any forthcoming evidence. If new evidence emerges suggesting that more than one suspect was involved, the original suppositions would be revised.

permalink

AbrahamLeanin | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 19:04:09

You can't use the police sketches. They were supposed to be of the same suspect.

permalink

Filmpolice | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:47:10

That the sketches look very much like the Podestas cannot be disputed.

There have been other suspects as well. The latest list is here: http://findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html

Police did not conclude with certainty that there was just one suspect; far from it, they only tacitly accepted there was one suspect because that's what they were told during preliminary reports.

It would be contrary to the spirit of rational inquiry to maintain that preliminary reports have veto power over any forthcoming evidence. If new evidence emerges suggesting that more than one suspect was involved, the original suppositions would be revised.

permalink

AbrahamLeanin | 0 points | Nov 20 2016 01:09:39

Sure they look like them. Fact is they are two separate artist interpretations of the SAME description. This was concluded before this sub blew up.

permalink

Democradical | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 03:20:07

It's a shame the only way to catch a babyfucker is through photos or catching them in the act while people who's vices are drinking and driving and speeding, which hurt a lot less people objectively, get caught and have their whole lives upended.

Not to advocate for any of the above, it's just that perspective is key when considering the worst people who do the most damage destroy their victims at a young age and leave them empty shell's instead of just killing them. There's near absolutely no way of holding these psycho pieces of shit accountable for turning the world into the economic shithole it currently is.

Babyfucking for the pervert must be what spinach is to Popeye because these pieces of shit sure find a way to get off in nearly all walks of life.

permalink

criticalthinker615 | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 05:48:16

Where there's smoke op....where there's smoke. You'll never convince these bots bruh bruh. .they've been assigned this topic. I think you know why

permalink

criticalthinker615 | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 05:56:42

Remindme! 6 months "Satanfags all dead bc KEK"

permalink

RemindMeBot | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 05:57:06

I will be messaging you on 2017-05-20 05:57:01 UTC to remind you of this link.

CLICK THIS LINK to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.

^(Parent commenter can ) ^(delete this message to hide from others.)


| ^(FAQs) | ^(Custom) | ^(Your Reminders) | ^(Feedback) | ^(Code) | ^(Browser Extensions) |-|-|-|-|-|-|

permalink

mypasswordisdumb | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 23:16:54

That police sketch is of a single person, a single "Abductor" not "Abductors" as you said.

Highly misleading and, contrary to your title, not 100% fact.

You want this shit to be true so bad that you're actually perpetuating lies.

permalink

jarmoksk | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 17:56:34

You had me until the last part. That was 100% bullshit.

permalink

Noble_Ox | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 21:14:44

You do know that that photo fit is two different types of image of the same suspect, not two different men. You should do some independent research, you accuse liberals of believing the too easily and here you are doing the same.

permalink

Filmpolice | 1 points | Nov 19 2016 21:46:03

That the sketches look very much like the Podestas cannot be disputed.

There have been other suspects as well. The latest list is here: http://findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html

Police did not conclude with certainty that there was just one suspect; far from it, they only tacitly accepted there was one suspect because that's what they were told during preliminary reports.

It would be contrary to the spirit of rational inquiry to maintain that preliminary reports have veto power over any forthcoming evidence. If new evidence emerges suggesting that more than one suspect was involved, the original suppositions would be revised.

permalink

Noble_Ox | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 14:47:38

Yeah, theres more than one suspect, but those particular sketches are of one man not two. How hard is that to understand?

permalink

[deleted] | 0 points | Nov 19 2016 21:26:09

[deleted]

permalink

Filmpolice | 2 points | Nov 19 2016 21:42:55

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink

Phinocio | 0 points | Nov 20 2016 09:11:32

I'm 22.

I have ~70 stuffed animals.

Am I a child molester?

permalink

33papers | -1 points | Nov 19 2016 18:14:56

You know, not understanding what 'fact' means does not help your case. It makes you look crazy. Which is a shame as there may be something in all this.

permalink

Filmpolice | 3 points | Nov 19 2016 21:48:18

A fact is a state of affairs which accurately corresponds to reality.

Someone who asserts that none of the above is factual would have to review each link and show specifically why it is false. Simply counter-asserting without argument or downvoting is not a valid response.

Now that we have the cumulative set of facts before us, it is justifiable for people to ask what the explains this set of facts. Whether the facts are best explained as a matter of total coincidence or whether they are best explained as a matter of the Podesta's being involved in child abduction is a determination that readers can make on their own. All we have done is provide verifiable data.

permalink