It certainly doesn't hurt to take a good look at things like this, but I just think it's generally best to hold off on the wild speculation if we're A) taking Pizzagate seriously, and B) trying to get others to take Pizzagate seriously.
The title of the post here definitely qualifies as "wild speculation," IMO.
I agree, the title is misleading because it sensationally sets up that there will actually be evidence, and then the actual content is no more than pure speculation.
view the rest of the comments →
AdVict0riam ago
How do we know the two things are related? I see no hard evidence of a link here.
redberries ago
You're right, there's no hard evidence but the timing just seems to explain why the articles were getting deleted.
It's from the "global news department", too.
I'm assuming they fired the journalists who know too much, with the excuse of "cost cutting".
AdVict0riam ago
It certainly doesn't hurt to take a good look at things like this, but I just think it's generally best to hold off on the wild speculation if we're A) taking Pizzagate seriously, and B) trying to get others to take Pizzagate seriously.
The title of the post here definitely qualifies as "wild speculation," IMO.
JeremiahSinclair ago
I agree, the title is misleading because it sensationally sets up that there will actually be evidence, and then the actual content is no more than pure speculation.