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 →
[–] andycow 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I think it's circumstantial evidence that people have gathered. Julian Assange's associate who met with the leaker mentioned he was a bernie bro. Seth had access to the database and people are speculating he worked with someone else. The theory right now is he lowered the firewall and his partner hacked the files. I still need to read more but that's my understanding at the moment.
[–] Are_we__sure 2 points -1 points 1 point (+1|-2) ago (edited ago)
The lowered the firewall bit is wrong and I think almost deceptively so.
The reason I say deceptive is if you remember the incident it involved access to the voter information, no the DNC emails and when this happened it was because of a bug in the software, not because the firewall was turned off. The DNC does not create the software. A third party company called NGP VAN does. The issue was both campaign gather voter data that is highly useful is identifying a Clinton voter from a Sanders voter. Both campaigns also have access to previously gather DNC data. During the primaries Clinton team is not supposed to see the data gather by the Sanders team and vice versa. The software has a filter that prevents this. They did a software update where this filter wasn't working and they fixed with within two hours. Then the looked at the logs and the logs showed that the Sanders data guy went and started exporing list after list of state data
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/12/18/merged_document.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGP_VAN
So nothing about this involved emails. Nothing about this involved a lowered firewall.
They also seem to think Seth Rich recommended the guy who exploited this bug to steal Clinton's data to the Sanders team, but that seems wrong to me. Rich was not the National Director of Data, he was in a lower position. He dealt with data, but the language used almost certainly points to an older, more senior member.
What's your source on this?