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 →
[–] 8_billion_eaters 0 points 9 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago
Re: All those people that were granted immunity from prosecution in the HRC email scandal by the top investigators of the (presumably corrupt) FBI never turned over any (as far as we know) incriminating evidence against Hillary and the DNC.
Question: Is that immunity from prosecution still valid?
[–] LostandFound 0 points 7 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago
Immunity deals are generally given on the basis that the individual has provided a full and transparent account of all events. If it can be demonstrated that someone given immunity lied or was knowingly not fully transparent then they blow their deal.
Also note that the immunity deal given would be specific to that investigation most of which as I understand were given in relation to the HRC server, so crimes outside of that are still fair game.
[–] dooob 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago
Considering how dirty they are, even if the immunity is valid, they have rooms full of skeletons.
[–] GoodGodKirk [S] 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
Not if everyone who issued them are fired.
[–] 8_billion_eaters 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Seems like it would be a "sticky" legal battle to indict any of them. (Like the mid-level tech that set up her illegal server).
[–] Lordbananafist 3 points -3 points 0 points (+0|-3) ago
hahahaha you're a funny guy
[–] Blacksmith21 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I'm guessing there is a piece of USC that may invalidate immunity under certain conditions, i.e. treason.