Pizzagate Subverse Network
/v/AskPizzagate – Pizzagate-related questions
/v/pizzagatewhatever – anything Pizzagate-related
/v/PizzagateMemes – Pizzagate memes
/v/pizzagatemods – meta concerns and Pizzagate moderation discussion
For Newcomers
Submission Rules
See also "subverse best practices"
Policy on linking dangerous research
1: Relevance: Posts must be directly relevant to investigation of Pizzagate: the sexual/physical abuse and/or murder of children by elites, child trafficking organized by elites, and/or cover-up of these activities and/or the protection/assistance provided to the people who engage in said activities. See definition of Pizzagate and examples of relevant posts.
2: Empiricism: EACH factual claim that is not common knowledge must be sourced with a link. If you ask a question: Explain what led to your question and provide sources. If you present opinion/argument, connect your dots and provide sources for them. Avoid baseless speculation. ALL posts must include at least one link.
3: Clarity: All titles must adequately describe post content and must establish direct relevance to pizzagate. EACH link in your post must include a description of content and how the link relates to the post (except when markup is used to embed links in the specific text they support).
4: Meta submissions and general discussion submissions without sources will be removed. Please submit indirectly relevant posts to /v/pizzagatewhatever and unsourced questions to /v/AskPizzagate. Sourced activism / publicity posts and memes are allowed. Posts about the subverse itself go to /v/pizzagatemods.
5: You must label NSFW posts (“Not safe for work”; for example gore, nudity etc.) as such when submitting.
6: No Link Posts -- Only editable submissions made with the "Discuss" button are allowed. "Link" submissions have been banned by the community for the reasons described here. Link posts will be immediately removed.
Adspam, illegal content, and personal info about Voat subscribers will be removed, and the offender will be banned.
Moderator Rules and Removal Explanations
Submission Removal Log
WARNING! Due to the nature of this investigation, clicking some links could result in opening incriminating material. Always practice common sense before clicking links, and make sure you're browsing safely.
Use archive.is to archive sources.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Spuddlebuns 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago (edited ago)
Again, taken by itself, it could easily be dismissed as "nothing." But, when taken in context with the accumulating pile of "nothings," SOMETHING seems to be amiss. You are working far too hard to dismiss a piece of the puzzle as not showing the entire picture. But that is how a jigsaw puzzle, and as corollary, #pizzagate and similar investigations work. You also seem to be trying very hard to pigeon-hole people into roles YOU think we are serving. I am not the investigator, not by a long shot. And, I would venture, neither are a majority of the people who are asking questions about the evidence being presented to us. As intelligent people (for the most part,) we do not blindly accept what is put before us on "teh Internets," so we question, and we DISCUSS. But along come the "thought police," who try very hard to dismiss the things we question as "nothing to see here, move along," and "you need HARD evidence, etc. etc."
No one is trying to convince you of anything, bub. But if you cannot make a fairly simple connection of dots in order to come to the conclusion that something does not seem right here, I personally don't care. I DO care, though that you are expending so much energy to dismiss out of hand any particular piece of the puzzle you don't seem to agree with. It is just the ONE piece of the puzzle you don't like, or are you attempting to use this to dismiss the entire situation, by 'debunking' each piece, one by one???
If this is "...literally nothing. 100% in my mind. No Doubt," is YOUR opinion, fine. More power to you. But why are you so fixate on attempting to get everyone else to dismiss it likewise? Whatever "proof" you think needs to be displayed may or may not already be there for other people. YOU may need further convincing. So be it. That does not imply that you are the "proof sheriff," nor that your disbelief need be so vehement in an effort to discredit any piece of information, no matter how trivial, JUST because YOU do not believe...
Also, what "rulebook" are you reading that describes oh-so-clearly "how this whole thing works?" I'd like to order a copy...