Sidebar

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

NONE of you has done the amount of independent research I have done into possible connections between significant people in the democrat party and pedophiles.
In other words you are obsessed with this subject. Reading lunatic websites is not research.

The mainstream media has not reported on the issue in an unbiased or comprehensive way. The media found aspects of the pizzagate story that were clearly false or extremely unlikely and shot those down. It then used the false parts to shoot down the entire story even though there is some legitimate evidence and some that remains unexplained or ignored.
Isn't there a principle in the law about a preponderance of evidence? If most of the evidence is clearly false or extremely unlikely, the chances are the story is false.

I did enough independent research to be able to shoot down one piece of wikileaks evidence that no one else explained by finding a reference to it in the Washington Post from many years ago that explained what it meant.
Why don't you share that with us?

Just for starters, Jeffry Epstein is a convicted pedophile and had a close relationship with the Clintons and others in Hollywood.
Epstein pled guilty and was sentenced in 2008. At which point the Clintons had already ended their relationship with him. Clinton's trips on Epstein's plane took place in the early 2000's.

Laura Silsby was trafficking kids out of Haiti and Bill and Hillary Clinton intervened to help her.
Laura Silsby, and nine other whack jobs from two Baptist churches in Idaho went to Haiti to "rescue" child victims of the earthquake. Unbelievably, the thought it would be OK to take any random children regardless of whether they had living parents or not.

Their purpose in doing so was to take them back to an orphanage which Silsby was starting and eventually to have them adopted. These people were really stupid, but there is no evidence that they were engaged in child sex trafficking.

Why did Bill and Hillary Clinton get involved? Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State at the time and Bill Clinton was influential in Haiti because of the humanitarian work he had done in previous disasters. There was no other connection between the Clinton's and Laura Silsby beyond some email she had sent them soliciting donations.


There is Anthony Weiner and Bob Menendez.


There's a wikileaks email that suggests under-aged children were brought to a party for "entertainment" and evidence the supplier was a whack job woman with a suspicious web site that has since gone private.
Then show us this email and just how it suggests all of this.

There's a verified statement by law enforcement that "cheese pizza" is in fact used by pedophiles as code for child porn.
And Cheese Pizza is also used by people as code for ordering cheese pizza.

That's not even getting into some of the more speculative stuff related to comments by Andrew Breitbart and his Acorn work, that there were legitimate instagram photos that suggest "unhealthy" sexual interests, a video that suggested tolerance of such behavior, or other unexplained wikileaks emails that suggest a non literal interpretation.

In that one paragraph you use the word speculative once and the word suggest three times. Allow me to speculate that you are way to susceptible to suggestion,

If you want to know the truth, just ignore the media and go to primary sources. Some of the overall story is false. Some is speculation and likely to be wrong or a misunderstanding. But some of it is 100% accurate and verifiable.
I also am a great believer in primary sources. But when the primary sources are interpreted in such a bizarre way, not so much.

In my opinion, it is extremely likely that members of the democrat party knowingly have political and/or personal relationships with people that are pedophiles. They must simply look the other way - most likely because these people contribute a lot of money to the party or because some of them consider it just another lifestyle choice that should be normalized and with nothing immoral about it.

Democrats are no more or no less likely to be pedophiles than are Republicans, but Democrats are much less likely to make unfounded accusations for political gain.