CaptnMeowMix | 15 points | Nov 20 2016 00:23:47

The thing is, that if there were such a solid piece of smoking gun evidence, there wouldn't be an investigation anymore, it would be an active prosecution and would likely explode and get exponentially more coverage than this thing already has. In fact, this is so blatantly obvious, that it makes you question why people even keep insisting on asking this.

I mean come on, either you already knew the answer before you even posted this, or you could've easily deduced it without any help. So why do people keep trying to push this question? Everyone investigating already knows the end goal is to get to this kind of evidence, and if we had it, people would be calling it a day and going home. But since we all know that isn't the case, the dig continues. So again, why state the obvious?

Not to mention that r/pizzagate itself has only been a community for 12 days! (just look at the sidebar). Are we seriously that impatient that we expect miracle smoking guns to just fall out of thin air in less than a couple weeks? Come on, be realistic. Finding evidence takes time and effort, and complaining about not having "solid evidence" is about as helpful as complaining that the sky is blue.

Furthermore, all investigative cases start with speculative leads and hypothetical 'evidence'. And having tons of weak circumstantial 'evidence' might not be admissible in court, but a basic understanding of probability will tell you that the more of it you accumulate, the more the odds are in your favor. 'Weak evidence' isn't garbage to be completely dismissed outright, it's a signal that tells you whether you're on the right track. Everything so far isn't enough to convict anybody, but it is enough to justify further investigation. Unless of course, you're suggesting we shouldn't be investigating at all?

Or is this question just a tactic to distract people by getting them to waste their time trying to justify the investigation itself?

permalink

newfoundland_urth | 8 points | Nov 20 2016 00:00:32

Smoking gun, no, obviously -- how would anyone unravel such a complex, powerful cabal in a matter of weeks through google searches, brute force decryption, and guess-work? There is however a huge mountain of circumstantial evidence, past cases, social media accounts, etc. that keep motivating people to continue digging.

I am not sure if you are asking an honest question here, but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Keep in mind that the same allegations surfaced in the UK, turned out to be true, but nothing happened because the public remained largely unaware. We are not going to let that happen here.

permalink

Subseadan | 2 points | Nov 20 2016 00:13:14

Maybe this Tzipi Mazuz on twitter is about to give us this solid info.

permalink

hildass | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:18:55

Yes Solid evidence is really very important. Ive seen a few people say they have found things (lets hope its solid) but I think quite a few are afraid to post too. I am myself am looking hard.

permalink

[deleted] | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:21:50

[deleted]

permalink

ned_harriman | 1 points | Nov 20 2016 01:26:48

Many criminal cases don't have any solid evidence until warrants are subpoenas are issued. 9/11 is a great example: most of the best data was release by the government this year (2016), and it is damning. Many people can't care anymore, they have been traumatized and exhausted by a lack of answers for 15 years. Obviously /r/pizza cannot issue warrants or anything.

There is such a thing as circumstantial evidence. If all criminal evidence consisted of a video of the perp doing the act, court cases would all be quite short.

You question is not really relevant: if you need convincing, look at the evidence. We don't yet have a video of Hillary and Huma abusing little girls. It might not exist. There is a lot of other really good data, more is coming from diggers, and the FBI and NYPD have interesting things as well.

I'm locking the thread as you haven't defined what you mean by "solid". Go read the reddit, read the chans, and make up your own mind. Also you called what we do have so far "silly" which tells me you haven't read very much yet or you are one of hundreds of shills.

permalink

3llenDegenerate | -1 points | Nov 20 2016 00:22:20

I honestly agree - after weeks and weeks of being strapped to my phone reading every post and update about #pizzagate (lol) I have yet to see one piece of real evidence that has made me sit back and think "holy shit this could be legit". While the connections to Haiti and the relationships some of these politicians have with the heads of organizations meant to get rid of these child trafficking rings are very interesting, people have been getting very sloppy with the connections they are making.

I commend the people that are actively investigating this - I just think there has been far too much speculation and it is discrediting the entire story.

I looked at every IG accounts of the people that have liked and commented on the pictures - seem like regular ass people to me.

Company logos? Huge stretch.

Pizza mentions in the emails - meh.

Handkerchief ? Sure sort of suspicious. Does it make sense to assume this type of language is actually pertaining to child trafficking rings? Absolutely not.

If I wanted to make a connection to elephants being crocodiles in disguise - I'd have about as much proof as pizzagate does to child trafficking right now.

permalink