I think one tactic perhaps, out there in MSM land, is to ask people to point you to the debunking, say things like 'Oh yeah it sounded way too crazy to be real, so what was the explanation in the end? Do you have a link to the research that showed how it was fake?' Act like you're on their 'side' in the MSM bubble, but like any reasonable person, just asking for the info on what the real explanation was for the paedo symbols at the restaurants, especially as one was owned by someone who works in that area so should've known, what was the innocent explanation for why Hillary got involved with Laura Silsby and appointed a human trafficker as her lawyer, what did that pizza-related map turn out to be in the end, how did Obama manage to spend $65k on hotdogs flown from Chicago, was that real, which party was it for, what kind of diamond encrusted hotdogs were they? And on and on with all the things that need an good plausible explanation for the whole thing to be debunked and deemed fake.

Then when they say 'oh, I don't know, I haven't seen any of that' you say 'that's weird, neither have I. I looked everywhere but haven't found the actual report/article that debunked all the claims. Surely they did actually look into it and make 100% sure it was all nonsense before saying it was fake?! I mean, this is about little kids. It's an insane theory but you can't let that mean you dismiss it without at least checking, after all remember all that stuff that happened with Catholic priests, and Jimmy Savile in the UK and stuff - that was insane but turned out to be true! I feel a bit weirded out now. I'd feel better seeing that they actually debunked it, instead of just declaring it fake and calling that declaration a debunking, wouldn't you?"

I'm thinking that might be a way to get people thinking about it more critically, and realise 'oh yeah, I never actually saw what the specific claims were or what the real innocent explanation was, I haven't seen the debunking, I just sort of assumed it had been done because everyone said so.'

It would also be good to ask reporters about this as well, in a totally non-confrontational, innocent way - 'hey, i can't seem to find the pizza gate debunking article that includes all the explanations for the emails/codes/logos etc that they based their insane theories on.Do you know where to find it, or did you write one, do you know what the explanations were? Am wanting to develop a protocol to post on my blog for how to debunk conspiracy theories and fake news, and thought the debunking of pizza gate would be topical and a good example! Thanks!' Or something like that. Keep getting people to admit to you and therefore to themselves and everyone else that they haven't actually debunked anything, that no good explanation has been provided for all these horrible child-abuse-related connections and coincidences.

What do you think, could this work as a tactic?