Wow, I'm surprised you went through all those. I think it should be kept in mind that this is almost a comprehensive list of all the emails I've seen cited as suspicious and most importantly that the podesta emails are in the 10s of thousands.
I think that the "kids are the entertainment" one should at least be a lot lower if not completely removed. I wrote a comment about it:
Maybe you haven't really come across it but saying "the kids are the entertainment" or something like that is actually a common phrase. I was so sure of that I pulled these links from doing a word-for-word search for these search terms: "the kids will be the entertainment" and "the kids are the entertainment".
If you Ctrl-F "entertainment" for each of those links you will find it used in almost the exact same way the podesta email uses it. The pizzagate interpretation still could be right but I think the fact that it really is a common phrase makes it very unlikely.
Edit: Also the Dominos emails are all by the same person, Herb Sandler, who has a daughter Susan. I commented about the "dominos" emails using an email sent by Susan:
How would you interpret this email ? Is it a coincidence that dominoes is a game that comes in sets ? Would you refer to bdsm as a 'game' and that you would like to 'get a set'? Also there is no evidence for 'dominoes' being a code word for anything sexual or pedophilia related before pizzagate. Also this email was sent by a Susan from the Sandler center and a quick Google search shows that herb Sandler has a daughter Susan. So isn't the most likely explanation that they all played dominoes one night and they all just share that interest.
thanks, thought provoking. looking over the links ... by number
"entertainment" is a typo. the kids will be entertained for hours
"entertainment" is a typo, The kids will be entertained with face paint
skipping youtube link ...
my kids are the entertainment for us - different context, not the same IMHO.
With this party the kids ARE the entertainment! - different context. this is a kid party, with adults watching, i would have to assume.
my kids are the entertainment - like the other one. different context. this is family oriented.
My kids are the entertainment - again.
the kids are the entertainment - christmas recital with lots of kids and parents mingling. a family context.
sorry, didn't follow the youtube link.
I have to disagree, this is not how the podesta email used it. In this case, the kids were there specially (brought by uber), were the only kids (no other kids mentioned), their ages were listed explicitly, for an adult party where somebody was going to announce candidacy for some senate position, and the kids were there for the entertainment of the adults, in the pool. Given the temperature, it's unlikely they'd be wandering around. no facepaint, games, no other kids, no families except for the pseudo grandmother.
Good point about "the kids are the entertainment", but I think the context is all important. When "the kids are the entertainment", it's a jolly family show with parents present, and the kids are the entertainment for their own parents. In this podesta email, the kids were uber'd in for an "affair" with a bunch of adults frolicking in a heated pool. I think Jimmy Saville would be right at home.
Add to this all the adults the email went out to, and none of them thought it was weird having kids for entertainment, but one person did respond with "I've never had an affair, so I pass the Walter Jones test." which has got to be a sexual reference.
I thought Susan was the wife. no, it's pretty clear she's the daughter. Somebody else has tied the handkerchief email to the dominos emails. the handkerchief was left behind after a game of dominos it would seem. it just gets creepier. Sandler is connected to the dominos, but so are a lot of others. dominos certainly appears to be code for something, along with the pizza-related map.
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1481145 - info about dominos, and the connection to the handkerchief. this person did a deeper search than i did, and found domino emails related by time, subject matter, and people involved.
It took me probably about 5 minutes to compile that list and like I said I found those links through a word-for-word search because I was so sure that the phrase is common. I'm very confident I could find even more links but I think through all those there I've shown that to talk about kids as "the entertainment" is actually very common. You've brushed off a lot of those links I think without really thinking much.
different context. this is family oriented
How do you know the other party isn't family oriented. I would say that that is jumping to conclusions with no evidence.
the kids were there specially (brought by uber),
I'm really surprised you would say this. Here's the quote from the email:
Bonnie will be Uber Service
This is not how uber works, you don't know the name of your uber driver days ahead of time. Also is it a coincidence that in the 15 or so people included in that email conversation that there is a Bonnie Levin-work cc'd. A criticism I've heard over and over of pizzagate people is that they have no sense of humor or normal casual speech. Although I'm sure you do, for some reason you interpret everything literally in this case.
the only kids (no other kids mentioned)
There's no proof that there were no other kids at the party just because no others are mentioned.
an adult party
I think you are seeing the email through a particular lens instead of being impartial and that really comes across in your word choices. Your note for the link is particularly egregious:
Luzzatto kids in pool for adult enjoyment
-
where somebody was going to announce candidacy for some senate position
You're not talking about this line are you?:
Thanks for remembering me, as I was planning to use the farm as the backdrop to announce my candidacy for speaker of the house.
Is there any other evidence that someone was announcing their candidacy at this party? Because this is clearly a joke. If you look up the man who sent it the only thing I come across is a man who was an aide for a senator. This person would obviously have to be a congressman first before speaker and they would be well known. Also, if he was announcing his candidacy for any position wouldn't that mean it was a big public event? Would that person nonchallantly mention it in an email before they've even announced? I wish people here would be critical about their own positions before asserting them as fact. In my comment you can see that I even suggest that there is a possibility that the pizzagate people could be right about the interpretation of the email, I try and see all sides. Some of these things fall down with the most simple questions.
no facepaint, games, no other kids, no families
How do you know this?
When "the kids are the entertainment", it's a jolly family show with parents present, and the kids are the entertainment for their own parents.
That is not how the phrase is used in those links I sent. In one of them it's used sarcastically like "they're a hand full" and in a few of them it is used in the sense that kids are just fun to watch and be around. The youtube link comes to mind for that.
I just wish people on here would use occams razor. Think of the most mundane, simple explanation first and that will most likely be the truth. What in your mind are the kids there to do? She mentions the kids in an offhand way. She first mentions the heated pool and swimming as the most notable and then the kids as an extra detail. If this really were apart of some debaucherous sex ring wouldn't there be more detail? about maybe security and more detail about what's expected? what are the rules, what exactly will be happening here? But I don't know maybe this is a common thing for them. But if it were common wouldn't we see it mentioned more often in the emails? There are a decades worth of emails and only this one comment about kids being in the pool as 'entertainment'. If they were all really expected to implicitly understand what that means why don't we see it anywhere else? Maybe they usually arrange these things through texts? or different emails?
There are so many questions and gaps that would need to be addressed before you reached your conclusion. The simplest explanation (and so the most likely) is definitely the mundane detail that there will be kids playing in a pool.
the only time i see kids as entertainment is in family context, and it's pretty clear. usually face paint and bouncy castles are mentioned. To me none of your links match the context. Most if not all of your links are advertisements for some family friendly activity, not a private party. In this podesta email we have specific kids for entertainment, their names and ages are listed, their situation is specified (in the pool for sure).
The only reply that isn't just an rrsp, is one from someone looking forward to the "affair". presumably with the luzzatto kids.
Uber - ok, a bit better. Is this Bonnie Levin any relation to the Luzzatto kids? Doesn't look like it. So, still a designated driver, of no particular relation to the kids.
Family friendly parties alway talk about what the kids will be doing. and it's not entertaining the adults, that's for sure. This private party is of a different sort entirely. if there are other kids there I'm sure they'll be better off not seen and not heard. Anyways, I don't think it's critical that no other kids be there. The key thing is the luzzatto kids, and what they are there for.
I'm sorry that you think that my byline "Luzzatto kids in pool for adult enjoyment" is more egregious than what's being done to the Luzzatto kids.
As for speaker of the house, I don't think he was serious either, but it sets context for the party. Poor Drew was left off the last invite, so he was glad he got in this time, and made light of it.
"no facepaint, games" ... what? It's like we're reading different emails. There might be facepaint and games, but not the kid friendly kind, more the eyes wide shut kind. Certainly, none of that was mentioned, but you can't assume by it's absence of mention in the email that it's a given that the simple presence of the luzzatto kids means there will be kid friendly facepaint and games.
it's "so you'll have some further entertainment." not "the kids are the entertainment" or "my kids are the entertainment for us". The latter two are about kids having fun, and that this creates happiness for all who watch. The first one I get an entirely different sense from, like the kids are toys that the invitees will be playing with. The invitees are in charge of the fun, not the kids. That's the sense I get.
I think in this case, occams razor leads to the unacceptable conclusion, not the easy one you're pointing to.
Mentioned are, the pool and swimming in the pool, what's going to be in the pool (the kids for sure), the temperature (where woolies I guess), and some patio table. The kids appear to be a star attraction, I wouldn't say it was an offhand way. She's far to specific, like she was listing the menu, except she doesn't list the menu, only where the "dine al fresco" will be served.
This is not a conclusion. There is no video. We are stumbling in the dark and gathering out the outlines from what we can touch. This email looks wrong to me. The kids should not be in the pool for adult enjoyment. Why does nobody else on the email thread see this as other than an opportunity for themselves? Why are these kids being trotted out like this, not only at the pool, but also online with that evie's crib, "Evelyn is growing up, soon she will be the Queen of the entire US of A, right now, for a limited time only, you can spend some time with her online, raw and uncut. Take advantage of this now, as in the future she will have the power of life and death over you." Now, i think the probability is that spending time refers to going to that blog and looking it up and down, not something seedy. But, blog author Mr T appears to be not direct family, but a cousin of some sort. The claim that it's some sort of window shopping thing is not ruled out.
If I have a conclusion here, it is this. The null hypothesis we must try to disprove is that the pedosta emails indicate actionable pedophilia. My conclusion is that the null hypothesis is NOT ruled out. It has not been disproven, and we must as moral beings continue to investigate. What I'm saying about this email, and certain other podesta emails is not something that will convict in anything but the public eye. I do believe it is sufficient to warrant investigation. The police should be on this like a wet t-shirt. so to speak.
The next steps would be
take it to the real world.
find victims willing to testify. find witnesses. The police should do this, or willing professionals. If volunteers do this, there must be great care.
find hard concrete evidence. We have a lot of names, and even phone numbers. Surely somebody on the periphery can be contacted in a non-intrusive gentle way and their input sought. Again, the police should do this. At the least, willing professionals.
the evidence i've seen is circumstantial, not probative. So far, the cover-up is by far the biggest thing convincing me something is in this. Rubber has to hit the road, and this time we need to get all the way to the end. No more franklin coverup, no more conspiracy of silence.
I'd love to know what's in that anthony weiner laptop folder called "life insurance".
view the rest of the comments →
JUNOAK ago
Wow, I'm surprised you went through all those. I think it should be kept in mind that this is almost a comprehensive list of all the emails I've seen cited as suspicious and most importantly that the podesta emails are in the 10s of thousands.
I think that the "kids are the entertainment" one should at least be a lot lower if not completely removed. I wrote a comment about it:
Edit: Also the Dominos emails are all by the same person, Herb Sandler, who has a daughter Susan. I commented about the "dominos" emails using an email sent by Susan:
deadly_nightshade ago
thanks, thought provoking. looking over the links ... by number
"entertainment" is a typo. the kids will be entertained for hours
"entertainment" is a typo, The kids will be entertained with face paint
skipping youtube link ...
my kids are the entertainment for us - different context, not the same IMHO.
With this party the kids ARE the entertainment! - different context. this is a kid party, with adults watching, i would have to assume.
my kids are the entertainment - like the other one. different context. this is family oriented.
My kids are the entertainment - again.
the kids are the entertainment - christmas recital with lots of kids and parents mingling. a family context.
sorry, didn't follow the youtube link.
I have to disagree, this is not how the podesta email used it. In this case, the kids were there specially (brought by uber), were the only kids (no other kids mentioned), their ages were listed explicitly, for an adult party where somebody was going to announce candidacy for some senate position, and the kids were there for the entertainment of the adults, in the pool. Given the temperature, it's unlikely they'd be wandering around. no facepaint, games, no other kids, no families except for the pseudo grandmother.
Good point about "the kids are the entertainment", but I think the context is all important. When "the kids are the entertainment", it's a jolly family show with parents present, and the kids are the entertainment for their own parents. In this podesta email, the kids were uber'd in for an "affair" with a bunch of adults frolicking in a heated pool. I think Jimmy Saville would be right at home.
Add to this all the adults the email went out to, and none of them thought it was weird having kids for entertainment, but one person did respond with "I've never had an affair, so I pass the Walter Jones test." which has got to be a sexual reference.
I thought Susan was the wife. no, it's pretty clear she's the daughter. Somebody else has tied the handkerchief email to the dominos emails. the handkerchief was left behind after a game of dominos it would seem. it just gets creepier. Sandler is connected to the dominos, but so are a lot of others. dominos certainly appears to be code for something, along with the pizza-related map.
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1481145 - info about dominos, and the connection to the handkerchief. this person did a deeper search than i did, and found domino emails related by time, subject matter, and people involved.
JUNOAK ago
It took me probably about 5 minutes to compile that list and like I said I found those links through a word-for-word search because I was so sure that the phrase is common. I'm very confident I could find even more links but I think through all those there I've shown that to talk about kids as "the entertainment" is actually very common. You've brushed off a lot of those links I think without really thinking much.
How do you know the other party isn't family oriented. I would say that that is jumping to conclusions with no evidence.
I'm really surprised you would say this. Here's the quote from the email:
This is not how uber works, you don't know the name of your uber driver days ahead of time. Also is it a coincidence that in the 15 or so people included in that email conversation that there is a Bonnie Levin-work cc'd. A criticism I've heard over and over of pizzagate people is that they have no sense of humor or normal casual speech. Although I'm sure you do, for some reason you interpret everything literally in this case.
There's no proof that there were no other kids at the party just because no others are mentioned.
I think you are seeing the email through a particular lens instead of being impartial and that really comes across in your word choices. Your note for the link is particularly egregious:
-
You're not talking about this line are you?:
Is there any other evidence that someone was announcing their candidacy at this party? Because this is clearly a joke. If you look up the man who sent it the only thing I come across is a man who was an aide for a senator. This person would obviously have to be a congressman first before speaker and they would be well known. Also, if he was announcing his candidacy for any position wouldn't that mean it was a big public event? Would that person nonchallantly mention it in an email before they've even announced? I wish people here would be critical about their own positions before asserting them as fact. In my comment you can see that I even suggest that there is a possibility that the pizzagate people could be right about the interpretation of the email, I try and see all sides. Some of these things fall down with the most simple questions.
How do you know this?
That is not how the phrase is used in those links I sent. In one of them it's used sarcastically like "they're a hand full" and in a few of them it is used in the sense that kids are just fun to watch and be around. The youtube link comes to mind for that.
I just wish people on here would use occams razor. Think of the most mundane, simple explanation first and that will most likely be the truth. What in your mind are the kids there to do? She mentions the kids in an offhand way. She first mentions the heated pool and swimming as the most notable and then the kids as an extra detail. If this really were apart of some debaucherous sex ring wouldn't there be more detail? about maybe security and more detail about what's expected? what are the rules, what exactly will be happening here? But I don't know maybe this is a common thing for them. But if it were common wouldn't we see it mentioned more often in the emails? There are a decades worth of emails and only this one comment about kids being in the pool as 'entertainment'. If they were all really expected to implicitly understand what that means why don't we see it anywhere else? Maybe they usually arrange these things through texts? or different emails?
There are so many questions and gaps that would need to be addressed before you reached your conclusion. The simplest explanation (and so the most likely) is definitely the mundane detail that there will be kids playing in a pool.
deadly_nightshade ago
the only time i see kids as entertainment is in family context, and it's pretty clear. usually face paint and bouncy castles are mentioned. To me none of your links match the context. Most if not all of your links are advertisements for some family friendly activity, not a private party. In this podesta email we have specific kids for entertainment, their names and ages are listed, their situation is specified (in the pool for sure).
The only reply that isn't just an rrsp, is one from someone looking forward to the "affair". presumably with the luzzatto kids.
Uber - ok, a bit better. Is this Bonnie Levin any relation to the Luzzatto kids? Doesn't look like it. So, still a designated driver, of no particular relation to the kids.
Family friendly parties alway talk about what the kids will be doing. and it's not entertaining the adults, that's for sure. This private party is of a different sort entirely. if there are other kids there I'm sure they'll be better off not seen and not heard. Anyways, I don't think it's critical that no other kids be there. The key thing is the luzzatto kids, and what they are there for.
I'm sorry that you think that my byline "Luzzatto kids in pool for adult enjoyment" is more egregious than what's being done to the Luzzatto kids.
As for speaker of the house, I don't think he was serious either, but it sets context for the party. Poor Drew was left off the last invite, so he was glad he got in this time, and made light of it.
"no facepaint, games" ... what? It's like we're reading different emails. There might be facepaint and games, but not the kid friendly kind, more the eyes wide shut kind. Certainly, none of that was mentioned, but you can't assume by it's absence of mention in the email that it's a given that the simple presence of the luzzatto kids means there will be kid friendly facepaint and games.
it's "so you'll have some further entertainment." not "the kids are the entertainment" or "my kids are the entertainment for us". The latter two are about kids having fun, and that this creates happiness for all who watch. The first one I get an entirely different sense from, like the kids are toys that the invitees will be playing with. The invitees are in charge of the fun, not the kids. That's the sense I get.
I think in this case, occams razor leads to the unacceptable conclusion, not the easy one you're pointing to.
Mentioned are, the pool and swimming in the pool, what's going to be in the pool (the kids for sure), the temperature (where woolies I guess), and some patio table. The kids appear to be a star attraction, I wouldn't say it was an offhand way. She's far to specific, like she was listing the menu, except she doesn't list the menu, only where the "dine al fresco" will be served.
This is not a conclusion. There is no video. We are stumbling in the dark and gathering out the outlines from what we can touch. This email looks wrong to me. The kids should not be in the pool for adult enjoyment. Why does nobody else on the email thread see this as other than an opportunity for themselves? Why are these kids being trotted out like this, not only at the pool, but also online with that evie's crib, "Evelyn is growing up, soon she will be the Queen of the entire US of A, right now, for a limited time only, you can spend some time with her online, raw and uncut. Take advantage of this now, as in the future she will have the power of life and death over you." Now, i think the probability is that spending time refers to going to that blog and looking it up and down, not something seedy. But, blog author Mr T appears to be not direct family, but a cousin of some sort. The claim that it's some sort of window shopping thing is not ruled out.
If I have a conclusion here, it is this. The null hypothesis we must try to disprove is that the pedosta emails indicate actionable pedophilia. My conclusion is that the null hypothesis is NOT ruled out. It has not been disproven, and we must as moral beings continue to investigate. What I'm saying about this email, and certain other podesta emails is not something that will convict in anything but the public eye. I do believe it is sufficient to warrant investigation. The police should be on this like a wet t-shirt. so to speak.
The next steps would be
take it to the real world.
find victims willing to testify. find witnesses. The police should do this, or willing professionals. If volunteers do this, there must be great care.
find hard concrete evidence. We have a lot of names, and even phone numbers. Surely somebody on the periphery can be contacted in a non-intrusive gentle way and their input sought. Again, the police should do this. At the least, willing professionals.
the evidence i've seen is circumstantial, not probative. So far, the cover-up is by far the biggest thing convincing me something is in this. Rubber has to hit the road, and this time we need to get all the way to the end. No more franklin coverup, no more conspiracy of silence.
I'd love to know what's in that anthony weiner laptop folder called "life insurance".
FriesischShipping ago
Save it for the trial.