914
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2024
914 points (97.2% liked)
politics
18888 readers
3765 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'll take this opportunity to plug a tiny podcast that I stumbled onto called "Some Dare Call it Conspiracy". It's hosted by two English guys that were hard-core conspiracy theorists for 15 years.
They now discuss, debunk and interview people around the conspiracy life. It's really fascinating to learn about Pizzagate, Chemtrails, Hunter Biden's Laptop and Jeffery Epstein from very knowledgeable people but in an environment of debunking.
Their latest episode is an interview with Rob Jacobson, a former staffer for Alex Jones that worked for him for 12 years. Jacobson ended up testifying against Jones in the Sandy Hook trial. The episode is on their Patreon at the moment but will roll out to the general public in a few days. Fascinating stuff and Jones is every bit as shady as one expects.
I'm a huge Knowledge Fight fan. And your recommendation sounds right up my alley.
KF is a podcast done "the dollop style" with the broadcasts of Alex Jones, both modern and years old episodes. Dan Freissen has listened to 1000s of hours infowars, has read None Dare Call It a Conspiracy (which is why the recommendation perked my ears), has read Protocols of the Elders of Zion, "you name it".
He shows how AJ's Globalizist conspiracy is just a reskinning of old antisemitic writings.
Dan was flown to Texas to help the lawyers of the Sandy Hook defamation trial. I can't say enough about how much I respect him.
Btw, by "the dollop style", I mean comedian Dan Friessen tells his findings to comedian Jordan Holmes who is naïve on the topic.
Edit: Knowledge Fight has zero ads. Never has. No paywalls. They have no interest in sensationalizing. It feels very honest.
I'll link the episode most inline with this article. #602 with Sandy Hook lead counsel Mark Bankston.
It seems like you folks like Behind the Bastards. They've been guests a few times. Here's one Part One: How The Rich Ate Christianity
Edit: I wanted to clarify the relevance of #602. That came out in 2021, right after the default judgement was issued in Texas. I believe the lawyers never gave interviews until that ruling. I listened back. It's a neat little time capsule. Just skip ahead until you hear Mark Bankston speak if it's your first taste.
I'm a policy wonk!
This, Q Anon Anonymous and Behind the Bastards were my favorite podcasts for a while.
QAA is absolutely brilliant reporting. Liv Agar's ep on superfascism was so great that I had to listen to it three times to make sure I absorbed everything. The interview with Marcus Gilroy-Ware, in which the author makes the case that we live in a fake democracy, was similarly mind-expanding. I tried to listen to Liv's personal podcast, but she's too smart for me. It required more active-listening that I want when enjoying a podcast rather than being relaxing. Big brained af.
Sadly I haven't listened in around 4 years now, I should get back into it. I was relatively early though as I remember talking to friends/family about this crazy thing called q Anon before there was any news coverage.
I'm getting info-dumped by a pizzagater elsewhere in this thread in case you want to join the fun. I bet you're better equipped.
Oh, haven't heard of it. I'll check it out. The Some Dare guys are pretty informal and raw, but they seem like guys you'd want to have a pint with if you met them in the UK. One if them is a rapper and the other is a death metal guy but they're both pretty smart.
They talk about that actually. About how they think to get really deep into conspiracy theories it helps to be a creative type because you kind of have to be to get so far up everything's butt and see such tenuous connections everywhere.
I'm very excited. Thank you. KF plus British accents sounds so fucking good to me.
Can you link directly to the pizzagate one. I've never heard a good debunk beyond "there is no basement so nothing is true".
The short answer is no. I can't think of when tried a pizzagate debunking. (They are going on 900 episodes.) I do distinctly remember an early episode when they analyze an undercover Periscope video inside Comet Ping Pong.
For a hopefully longer, but slower, answer, I made a thread asking the small community on lemmy.world.
I don't believe Pizzagate was ever bunked, or debunked. The problem is that there are so many claims made that a rigorous debunk is difficult and time consuming.
The best attempt was NY Times that covered some details but cherry picked the claims it could debunk and completely ignored others.
Rolling Stones made a feeble effort spending most of the article on how the story spread, not it's veracity.
In the body of the thread a posted on c/knowledgefight, I bring up that I didn't care about pizzagate because there really no damages. No victims coming forward. No suspicious activity. Nothing.
The only thing interesting about pizzagate is how strongly people can hold on to beliefs with zero backing. I'm sure 99% of posts about pizzagate are LARPing really. (I think the same of Flat Earth. At least, way back when.) But we know how seriously some people belief it.
In fact, I'd go as far as to say, the fact there is no evidence backing it up is precisely why this stuff is so dangerous. If some one is mentally unsteady enough to accept any reason to hate their enemies, they are probably pretty dangerous to be around already. Now use a massive media operation so that person need no other source of news. He (sorry to be sexist, but I'm going to stick with "he" for the easily influenced viewer's pronoun) knows he's right. He hears nothing but that he is right. However, out in the dangerous part of the world, no one cares about this. It's so fucking easy to dismiss this stuff. Why would anyone believe it?
This feels like persecution, gaslighting, and like "they" are all in on it. That's fucking powder-keg as we saw in this matter.
I'll take a listen to the podcast, but I think you are right in that it's only tangentially relevant. Although it's existence shows the topic won't die easily.
Such a bad argument. Are you expecting an abused kid to file a police report? Look at Epstein's Virginia Giuffre who is now 40! At least the guardian's of the kids in the Instagram photos should have been questioned.
There was enough to send 4chan and reddit into a frenzy. I think you mean that there was no definitive proof.
I thought the most interesting thing was how hard the pushback was. Pizza owners on the news, 10 min features on Colbert, NYT and Rolling Stone articles, banning of subreddits and censoring of search results. Try to find the steemit article I linked above. There was a well organised PR campaign against "nothing".
I suspect some of the conclusions being drawn from highly circumstantial evidence were too close to the truth for some influential people's comfort.
Initially all politicians were suspected (e.g. Hastert is republican). It turned into a right wing topic after qanon stoked the fires.
True. On the other hand, vigilantism occurs when the police say they've investigated but actually haven't. (Sorry impossible to back this statement in 2024. If you doubt me, find some official DC police reports unrelated to the gunman attack)
It happened in Belgium, UK, France, Portugal etc. People there cared. Why not also in the US?
Podesta and Alefantis have certainly been persecuted by the Internet. And probably still are being 8 years later. Their no comment policy certainly backfired.
While I don't find it particularly endearing that you are trying to dunk on a guy that is admittedly not engaged in the topic, I'll bite
Personally, I think we should move the conversation there since posting here feels like you're trying to get more eyeballs on this stuff. I find this stuff dangerous, and it's usually best discussed in a more focused group.
I don't recall calling the episode tangentially relevant. It contains the best evidence I've heard for Pizzagate.
I'll be honest, I have no idea what that last sentence ("Although...") is supposed to mean. These things won't die easily because there is nothing that will ever stop people like Alex Jones screaming that Democrats drink baby blood. People believe him, and are loud about it. The fact that an idea shows no signs of dying out is not going to get me to believe it. (I'm a Taurus, after all.)
Bad argument? At least engage with it. You ask me to look to Epstein's Virginia Giuffre. Who as you know, was a victim who came forward. This is the kind of evidence I'm asking for.
Please, and I mean it, please I want to see it, show me any pundit that "bunks" pizzagate talking-points that also said anything about Epstein before Giuffre's public assertions.
There are no victims in pizzagate. What are you doing bringing Epstein into this? He was brought down by victims coming forward. The lack of evidence is no reason to point fingers.
Oh lordy. Was I dismissive of things that sent 4chan and reddit into a frenzy? I'm sorry. That must sting a bit. That is your best evidence so far.
We're both just stating our opinions here. But I thought the pushback was perfectly inline. How else do you reach the kind of people who believe things based whatever they hear from pundits claiming to have secret knowledge?
That's very vague and spooky. Does it have a meaning?
Wow. Bold of you to bring up another known pedophile. His downfall was the FBI seeing suspicious cash withdrawls. So who was that money going to? That's right, a verified victim of molestation by Denny Hastert. You known, one of the (sorry to call them) characters I'd like to see in this pizzagate accusation. You only get to call Hastert a pedophile because a victim came forward.
And qanon stoking fires is another conspiracy point I will simply not engage with. Qanon is too unfounded for me.
I live in America. That investigation went as far as it could before violating the rights of a private business owner. Your parry here truly shows how dangerous this is.
I'm sorry. I was being metaphorical here. When I said "out in the dangerous part of the world", I was speaking for the POV of the fictional infowarrior. By the dangerous part of the world, I simply meant reality. Where people do not engage with these fear-mongers who actually proclaim that Democrats drink the blood of babies. Reality is where these baseless ideas and beliefs make one feel isolated. This is last I will engage here as I feel I'm being quoted out of context.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. It sounds like you are bragging about making peoples lives miserable based on nothing.
I'm indifferent. Not trying to grab eyeballs, just trying to find different angles on the topic. Anyone who claims it was debunked is interesting because they may have more knowledge than I (i.e. you and you podcasts). Post a thread and I'll follow.
We are discussing 8 year old emails and Instagram posts. Not planning an insurrection.
The link I clicked quickly through was making fun of some Alex Jones contributors ordering pizza.
Agreed. My point was that continued claims of debunking don't reduce interest in the subject.
Only as a middle aged woman. Kids in the Instagram photos would now barely be over 10. You can't use their silence as evidence.
I'm showing that sex trafficked people don't often come forward. In Epstein's case it took 20+ years.
Sorry. Not a claim or a point I'm defending.
We have photos of some from Instagram.
No, the. Best evidence is the steemit summary above. That made a LOT of people suspicious.
The conspiracy crowd were not the target audience. You certainly don't go through Colbert. It was pure Streisand effect.
It was my attempt at explaining the massive national media campaign supporting a pizza shop owner against apparently ridiculous allegations. Protesting too much.
Because he was republican and mentioned in friendly terms by Podesta. I'm dismissing the "right wing" tag that gets attached to pizzagate. Often via Qanon.
I think that is fair. Qanon came later. It should be separate but people often confuse the two.
No. There was no investigation (sorry, no supporting evidence). "Private business owner" has nothing to do with suggestive Instagram posts involving children.
Ah. So you aren't saying this couldn't happen. Just that you'd ignore anyone who pointed out if it was happening.
Why introduce "drink the blood of babies. "? Irrelevant hyperbole adds nothing.
Sorry, not my goal. Just trying to make reading easier. Misquoting is pointless here.
I've had no interaction with either.
You mentioned persecution and they have both been on the receiving end. However, if they had been investigated by law enforcement, or publicly addressed their accusations then there would be no persecution (or at least much less).
I assume you are in the debunked camp. Can I ask what makes you so sure there was nothing suspicious happening?
You said you'd listen to the podcast. I'm going to hold you to it. It's a comedy show. And pizzagate is ridiculous. But you offered to argue their points. "they're mean to my friends" isn't going to cut it.
The best evidence for your claim is that link? Please read the FIRST paragraph and let's discuss the reading level of The Emperor's New Clothes.
I've read it pretty deeply now. You better start connecting some dots. There is too much secret sourcing.
I'm not even sure what "claims of debunking" you even mean. What even are the claims of pizzagate? That the emails are boring, but if you squint, you can pretend it's a conspiracy. It's the least interesting thing I've heard. What's to engage with? There are no bodies. No victims. The crimes alleged must have victims. What court is going to convict anybody on these charges with no victims? Have the jury squint at instagram pics? Please give your argument some grounding.
I am not afraid of a lack of victims. The existence of victims would blow this wide open.
Please tell me of a historical case (aka in reality) where a pedo ring was busted with no known victims.
Depends which particular claim you are talking about.
Hillary locking up kids in a basement ... ridiculous. This strawman was invented to be debunked.
A pizza restaurant owner with an unhealthy interest in kids ... not ridiculous.
It means the claimer is 100% sure that a particular theory is false.
Flat Earth - debunked
Political figures discuss illegal topics over email using codewords - could be true
Pizza owner distributes CP from his restaurant website.
The Podestas talk in code over email.
Instagram was used to joke about child abuse.
You are 100% sure there are no victims?
Child services have interviewed the guardian's of the girl taped to a table?
It is impossible that these people were discussing abusing kids?
To debunk a theory, that is what is needed.
OK, this is never claimed. Investigations by law enforcement to find the required level of evidence to present to a court were never conducted. Why not?
Any where images are traded. Victims are unknown but unfortunately exist.
They interviewed a child that was taped to a table, huh?
You have made NO claims whatsoever. You asked what I thought. I said it was nothing. All you've said is everything that I say is wrong. I have no idea what you think pizzagate is.
So now that you FINALLY made a claim. Let's talk about the girl taped to a table. Does this girl have a name? A picture. Please post the instagram of this poor child taped to a table. I bet the picture will send chills though all the spines of those that see it. POST THE PICTURE! Or I will. You certainly have provided me evidence of a child taped to a table. Can do you have a picture where she isn't smiling?
Was she interviewed by the FBI? Is that your big, scary evidence? The thing that should open my eyes. Please provide evidence of this child that was taped to table. That's a pretty BIG claim. Do you have a picture? I mean, I have one that you showed me. It had a warning above it how disturbing the picture is. Would you post so everyone can see how scary it is?
All you've said about pizzagate, is that I don't know what pizzagate is. Is it that a child was taped to a table?
No. Not that I'm aware of. Do you have more information?
Are you certain it is nothing or is it probably nothing. If the former then I would like to know why.
Yes. The question of interest is, do child services know her name?
It's in the steemit summary linked above.
So it's not abuse if they enjoy it? Heard of normalisation?
I don't think I've said anything of the sort. You seem quite knowledgeable. However, if you are certain it has been debunked then you must be an expert.
Since knock_knock is too demure to show graphic content here, I will share the photo. These are the words above the photo in the document
spoiler
THIS is the "most widely referenced" picture of all the pizzagate allegations. THIS is why it's like pulling teeth to get a pizzagater to make ONE real claim. The emperor has no clothes. They are so proud of a mountain of nothing.
There is no one who is credibility alleged to have explicit material of this child. It is at this point where I am expected to appear to ask for this material. This could be a crime. Be careful. Look how fast this reply was locked-and-loaded.
If you think that question is void now due to that retort, you are mistaken. Anyone reading along can see the photo now. You really should have tried to get ahead of that. I bet no one was picturing masking tape with the picture you created in words.
I have showed the only evidence provided that this child exists. Are there alleged to be other materials of this child that are objectionable? Is this a victim?
"You can't use their silence as evidence." What? They sound exactly like nonexistent victims. There must be a difference between real victims and nonexistent victims. Silence is clearly not a good measurement. Are there any other methods to look for them?
I know this isn't a claim. It's a point worth discussing. There are people in our society whose job is gain the trust of people by showing integrity. They are called journalists. A journalist knows that if a reader catches the whiff of dishonesty, they lose that reader permanently.
So a journalist with a long, track-able career is who is best equipped to make such sensitive accusations. This is usually how rings would get busted. So who is putting their career on the line for this? Is Mike Cernovich the point-person on these matters? These accusations are dangerous. Your dismal of that is sickening, but I'll come back to that later.
This is the worst framing of epistemology I've seen. You are quite literally turning every argument in a "confidence game". Surely you see that the world can't function like that.
But I will give you this, you finally connected the dots in a way that I see how pizzagate is real.
We've had too many exchanges before I finally can see what pizzagate actually is.
Pizzagate: The believe that real world damage can be caused simply by never admitting any harmless explanations regardless of plausibility.
The fucked up thing here, is that with this formulation, Pizzagate is true.
1.) The only thing that little girl's guardians did was upload a photo of the aftermath of child's play.
2.) Now, 4chan enters the scene. 4chan and reddit simply make up ANYTHING they want to accuse these people of. Consequence free. There is no journalist in the loop. There are no stakes. You get federal authorities to harass strangers. And you are proud of it.
3.) THEN this visit is now "evidence". You keep pointing to police action, like it's suspicious, but 4chan did that shit. I don't know who you are fooling, but it isn't me.
These three dots are what you connected. You have convinced me it's real. It's scary. It's sick that people would do this.
You can claim it's about protecting kids, but there have been no rescues or even calls for help.
Here's from Wikipedia
Welch was there to liberate victims. Who did he avenge? Who is lucky that Welch was there to listen to the cries of help that 4chan told him exist?
Three bullets are what I'm calling dangerous, sicko. You know what is happening. You know the bullets were real.
You seem very proud that the feds were sent to investigate this. That seems to be a claim of victory. It's disturbing. There was no foundation. You just hate these people. It's unpleasant to say the least. You're proud you can imagine such horrible things happening. You don't even need proof. And you just want the world to hate these people like you do, and based on as flimsy shit as you accept as proof.
I'm done here. Pizzagate sucks. You can come bother me at /c/knowledgefight.
I gave you 3 claims, and you picked your own 4th.
Ah, now I see why you were so weirdly desperate for me to post that particular photo. You had a narrative needing to be fulfilled. Sorry to disappoint.
Yes, and they haven't been acted upon either.
Potentially, yes. How are you imagining this kid "coming forward" to the authorities?
Yep. By photos posted online by their abusers. By having child services interview their guardians.
And should have been handled by the police. They weren't.
No-one claimed this either. Debunkers love to invent strawmen to attack.
Your favourite picture is far from the only suspicious Instagram post/comment
Literally their job. And they point is they weren't doing it.
You are the one defending the guy with a "members only" file share on his website who makes child abuse jokes on Instagram.
This applies equally to debunkers who think "no basement" is proof that pizzagate is false.
I'm not convinced any part of pizzagate is real, but you (and other debunkers) are convinced it is 100% fake. That's what is interesting.
Pizzagate debunkers are just as fervently irrational as the unquestioning gun toting believers.
Would you like me to read one of those 3 claims?
So let's see we're YOU are finding this instagram stuff. Hmm..
Ok, we know where your BEST evidence is. Let's figure out this instagram claim.
Here are the times YOU brought up Instagram:
You talk a lot about instagram for someone who finds the FIRST instagram picture from your GOLDEN source embarrassing. Here, I'll add context. I'll expand the crop. And let see what this fear-mongering document says...
It's the "most widely referenced one". YOU are the one pointing to internet "frenzies" as evidence. An internet frenzy was whipped up about this ONE picture in particular. There are no other pictures related to this child. YOU are claiming the other photos are connected.
Adding more context makes the evidence look WORSE.
Also notice that the simple explanation isn't good enough: "please let me know if there are more". They want another explanation because then "see, they're changing their story". For some reason they want the reader to be suspicious of only ONE explanation. Reality works in a strange way for people who think like this.
Then every pizzagater ever says, "that's why you picked THAT photo. Of course the one my opponent chooses one that makes me look silly. They won't show you the other stuff I sent them. Please read the first paragraph at least, where it says if you don't see EVERYTHING, you'll be too ignorant to know the truth."
They are always saying "look at everything. but don't look at anything."
The only claim I made is that I have seen no proof of illegal activity. There are plenty of times in my life where I have seen proof of illegal activity. It's a pretty common thing to see on the news. I don't see why I should worry about people who have weird tastes in art. I see a lot of mixing pizza, weird art, and sex in that doc, but not kids. I'm worried about one who see that photo as normalization of child abuse. (Here is where that claim of "I'm not claiming THAT photo is what i'm talking about. don't you see how vague i'm being. look at everything" This is 30-Rock's "Homonym Game" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZLkcFns8Ks )
Seeing a girl smiling with masking tape on her arms does NOT look like normalization [i use US spelling]
You are either being very disingenuous here, or you find that image stirring. I do not want to accuse you of anything, but the reason I want a journalist in the loop is because every pizzagater with any sizable voice is WITHOUT FAIL either (a) trying to convince people (including themselves) that SA material of minors is more common than it is or (b) very homophobic.
The document you provided is teeming with homophobia.
I am implementing a new rule. I will not engage with pizzagate arguments with people unless they pledge: "There is a gay person in my life that I love, and they live a meaningful, fulfilling life." That's probably not hard. Honestly, I don't care if you know them personally.
If you can't do that, I'd rather deal with a more serious mind virus.
Because that is where Alefantis posted.
There are more. E.g. wearing a "pizza slut" t-shirt.
Yes. Alefantis commented on most or is connected via his restaurant.
If you want to claim a slamdunk debunk then the simple explanation must be the only explanation, or the suspicious explanation is shown to be impossible.
Your "debunk" falls far short.
You claimed pizzagate is absolute garbage. That it was debunked.
2 dudes on a street correr and a BMW parked nearby is not proof of illegal activity. But it is suspicious. You want the police to check it out.
Dude, you're the one obsessed with this particular photo.
"There is a gay person in my life that I love, and they live a meaningful, fulfilling life." Send your gay strawman away.
Please remove the quotation marks. That's not how words work.
There is a gay person in my life that I love, and they live a meaningful, fulfilling life. I love gays. Great fun.
What I don't like seeing them being irrelevantly dragged into arguments in an attempt to distract and score cheap points.
This has nothing to do with showing that the claims made by pizzagate are impossible.
Cool. There are gay people I love too. Wouldn't change a thing about them.
Sure am. You see someone showed it to me in a document they linked. They called the dossier the best evidence of pizzagate. That dossier has this particular photo. It even said "We might as well start with this picture of a girl taped to a table, which is probably the most widely referenced one." Of course, that " girl taped to a table" was standing on the floor with her arms affixed to a table with masking tape, and not even a lot of tape.
That photo sure stirred up a frenzy. My claim was that anytime anything that is purported to be concrete evidence is investigated, it sure looks like nothing upon inspection. The pizzagater always plays the Homonym Game. "I was talking about a different photo?" Well, I'm talking about this photo.
So if you argue that frenzies show there must be something happening, I will point to THIS picture. Because it is THIS that picture that by itself caused a frenzy. Read the words around the picture. Then read my proposal of the only definition of pizzagate i can agree with
Pizzagate: The believe that real world damage can be caused simply by never admitting any harmless explanations regardless of plausibility.
So 4chan decides to use Pizzagate as a weapon to sick on this shop owner and his friends and family. It fits just fine.
You act like I'm cherry-picking, because you know most people aren't going to check, and the kinds of people that do check don't fall for this shit.
Well, that piece of "evidence" is clearly trash. Anyone trying to sell it to me thinks I'm stupid. Why would I bother?
Do you have a dossier that does NOT include wastes of time?
I love that show. Although I'm admittedly a lapsed fan, I was listening to them on my walks to grad school in 2013 or so.
Incidentally, I love looking for Ross Blocher's name in Pixar credits.
So digging way back in the memory machine, I can even remember hearing Carrie on the inKredulous podcast #014 from 2012. I think that might be when I started listening to her and Ross's show.
That show was from what I consider the glorious lo-fi days of podcasting. I'm not even going to listen back to it to see if it holds up before posting.
Thanks for the recommendation! I'm a huge Behind the Bastards fan, anything in that vein is super fascinating to me.
I love that podcast. I’ve been listening to one that a trucker recommended to me recently. It’s full of inside jokes so it takes a minute to be all in, but it’s really fun. It’s called Timesuck with Dan Cummins. Not every episode is perfect and it’s a bit long, but I love it.
How do you debunk Epstein? He was convicted
Did OP say anything about Epstein's crimes? No. He may be referring to the fact that people think that he didn't kill himself (I don't have a specific opinion on the matter.)
Edit: I just looked up the episode's description: "Welcome to part one of episode 7!! The big question we're asking today.. Did Jeffrey Epstein kill himself?? Everyone has an opinion on this, what's yours?"
Probably meaning the "Epstein Didn't Kill Himself" theory.
Yes, but did he kill himself? It's an interesting discussion, especially from the point of view of conspiracy theorists who literally think shape-shifting lizards are involved.
Ugh, I was so excited for this ... And at about 20 minutes into the first chemtrail episode they say contrails are the exhaust fumes coming out of engines :facepalm:
That doesnt square with the fact that these guys were hard-core conspiracy theorists? 😂😂