[–] CJJacobs 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Um, yea...no.
We need every last scrap of evidence -- circumstantial or otherwise -- because one never knows which tiny spark of info. is going to ignite the entire flame for the case.
People are organizing it as best they can ....if you need info. better organized (I know I do too), may I suggest doing it on your own computer?
Make folders and subfolders to keep track of things. Also, someone has made a pizzagate wiki somewhere....that should be good for something.
Sorry...we need as many leads as possible to keep rolling in. A good researcher knows how to separate the wheat from the chaff and not get distracted by the process. Good luck!
[–] IUsedtoBeAFed 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Who is JA? Where did he come from? What is his background? What is his real name? Start small with known facts.
[–] janedoe77 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Do you really think US courts would take this up? The Supreme Court justice just murdered was a rape and torture pedo (Scalia). I think perhaps thinking internationally, as an open source, sort of a new Nuremburg Trial but overseen by a civil society court, or the ICC if open-source civil society rules would be demanded. I think this is the time to think more creatively because obviously official agencies and courts' and law enforcement hands have been tied. Even if you have all of your evidence, most of it would be thrown out. The 1987 presidio cases threw out most testimony and medical evidence of children with STDs such that only one count of abuse was admitted to. CHeck that San Jose Mercury News piece. The crisis is is that there is NO legal authority or court that they do not control. So I don't know where the "case" would go.
But it need not be GAME OVER. I think people should think more like media people here. Outrage will grow about this internationally if the media pressure is kept up. So, I think FBIanon is right in saying the task here for now is to maybe put this together in a compelling way and circulate it and pressure media to cover it. Maybe have an active media strategy implemented now: a website primer, maps, media contact list, NGO that shit in other words. The Daily Show is dropping this like a hot potato because Alt media has not covered it; they are basking in their fake glory of a fake election upset. I have been reaching out to Alt media but they are really silent as well or faking coverage like Alex Jones, or covering it as just another story. Or covering as a denial and bringing on MI5 agents like Richie Allen. Gossip rags like the Inquirer and the Mirror may print some of this since they already have. The UK is a lynchpin because McCann was a huge media case. There is also a clip that we should use of Trump at the roast the night after the final debate with Clinton -- the ALfred E Smith dinner. One of his jokes (he was actually really good here) was yadda yadda Hillary wrote the book, It Takes a Village; she should know— she's taken plenty." Trump knows and I don't think you can call that circumstantial, not in light of Silsby. But of course Trump frequented sex slave island. These are my ideas on it for now. I am really disgusted by the silence across the political spectrum and the blase attitude by some who have known about SRA but are not using this opportunity to press the issue.
[–] UglyTruth 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
What court room? The civil process doesn't cope well with accusations made against "lawmakers".
At common law the people own the facts, with the original method of resolving disputes being by oath. Oath helpers would assist by swearing to the honesty of those testifying directly to the matter in dispute.
[–] Millennial_Falcon 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
What we need is a smoking gun, because frankly, that's the only way this will get brought down (unless the white hats in government decide to risk an uprising and prosecute it). We need to think like a prosecutor version of Saul from Breaking Bad. We need to get that smoking gun by whatever means. Even if the smoking gun isn't admissible in court, publicizing it would generate enormous public pressure.
[–] ababcb [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I am not sure we need to look for the one and only "smoking gun" but rather all of the smaller smoking guns that could implicate individuals involved in this grand conspiracy.
There's enough information here for people to be taken down one at a time in "isolated" court cases and if enough of them go down the network they are running will become clearer.
[–] stickittotheman ago (edited ago)
Yes... Its all valid data. .. Im sure the FBI has the smoking gun already probably 100x over... everything we are gathering is just more evidence to convict them...and dont underestimate the squealers that will try to save their own asses once it starts unraveling... it will be a beautiful sight to behold. I wouldnt be surprised if some small time rats have already approached the police because they dont want to go down with the rest of them. I dont expect anything to start happenning until Trump is secure in the position. If nothing happens after that, then its time to bring out the pitchforks.
[–] Royce_of_Veason 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
There are 15 types of (presentable) evidence (this is a basic and general resource). Most of what we have is character, circumstancial, and maybe a loose framework of demonstrative. It might not be a bad idea to sort what we have by type and rank them by strength. Any JDs or LLMs in the room?
[–] HomeboyChris 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
We have digital evidence. And analogical evidence that he's lying about a chamber below the building.
[–] Faustian 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
It's going to be a clusterfuck for quite some time, but that's okay, because a civil investigation like this requires people to make whatever connections they can in the hopes that others can make more connections from that information. The more connections made, the more leads that may eventually reveal concrete proof of criminal activity. Limiting that information now suffocates potential leads, imo.
[–] stickittotheman 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Yes... Ive said this in several threads trying to limit the investigation to concrete evidence. Weve gotten this far by playing connect the dots and considering everything they do is "hidden in plain site" this is one gigantic puzzle we are unraveling here. Let the legal team that is going to convict them when they finally start bringing them to trial decide on what is most valid to the case, meanwhile keep digging, this is like panning for gold, you dont throw away the small nuggets. Keep accumulating leads and connecting the dots.
[–] bman0321 ago
Anyone think about sending or sent a concise complete report to Trey Gowdy?