When Skeptics Confront on The Podesta Dominos on Cheese or Pasta. ROUGH DRAFT/FIRST POST - be easy on me, ok ? (pizzagate)

submitted ago by Dejure

In the following wikileaks email release, https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/50332,

Herb Sandler messaged John & Mary Podesta,

"I think you should give notice when changing strategies which have been long in place. I immediately realized something was different by the shape of the box and I contemplated who would be sending me something in the square shaped box. Lo and behold, instead of pasta and wonderful sauces, it was a lovely, tempting assortment of cheeses, Yummy. I am awaiting the return of my children and grandchildren from their holiday travels so that we can demolish them. Thank you so much. I hope you and your gang are well. I miss you both Best wishes fro a merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Herb

Ps. Do you think I'll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?"

(b) The second sentence states,

" I immediately realized something was different by the shape of the box and I contemplated who would be sending me something in the square shaped box. "

(1) So evidently the strategy was using an unusual type of box other than the standard square box, (A) agree (B) Disagree (C) not sure

(2) Since the identity of the sender could not be instantly known by the shape of the box, Sandler had to "contemplate" who sent it. Evidently, contemplation is a more serious "mulling over" than a mere 'guess the mystery sender" scenarion . con·tem·plate ˈkän(t)əmˌplāt/ verb look thoughtfully for a long time at. "he sat on the carpet contemplating his image in the mirrors" synonyms: look at, view, regard, examine, inspect, observe, survey, study, scrutinize, scan, stare at, gaze at, eye "she contemplated her image in the mirror" think about. "the results of a trade war are too horrifying to contemplate" synonyms: think about, ponder, reflect on, consider, mull over, muse on, dwell on, deliberate over, meditate on, ruminate on, chew over, brood on/about, turn over in one's mind;

(A) Agree (B) Disagree, will provide a reason (C) Not sure

(3) Sandler also had to seriously consider who sent it, because no "contemplation" would be required if the Podesta's names & address info was on the box, as what most people do when sending a package in case something goes wrong in transit and needs to be returned. (A) Agree (B) DIsagree (C) Not sure

(4) If some one were to send an illegal product of some sort such as ch!ld P-rn pictures or drugs, and they didn't want to get caught, they would (A) Definitely not put their return address info on the box (B) Put their name & address on the box in case it needed to be returned due to a logistical discrepancy so they'd still get their precious cargo back.

(5) If there were a known anonymous or pseudonymous transaction between sender & receiver of illegal goods being sent through the mail , and the BOTH the sender AND receiver wanted to know who sent what , a box with a shape other than the normal square shape would be a good identifier. (A) agree (B) Disagree, ill give reasons (C)Not sure

(c) 3rd sentence, " Lo and behold, instead of pasta and wonderful sauces, it was a lovely, tempting assortment of cheeses,"

Okay, a surface reading of the first two sentences could be that Herb was being sarcastic and using hyperbole calling something as simple as sending a package of a holiday cheese sampler by calling it a "strategy," and having to "contemplate" instead of simply "guess" the surprise sender, and perhaps John always sent a box with a special kind of pasta and a variety of "wonderful sauces"

(1) However an assortment of pasta sauces, including the pasta would make for somewhat of a large box. in the 2nd sentence, Sandler is talking about the SHAPE of the box being different in strategy rather than the SIZE of the box. (a) agreed (b) disagree, will explain (c)not sure

(2) Do you think this email details a rich power broker year after year (long held) sending another rich power broker pasta and different sauces in an unusually shaped box every year as a tradition , with the receiver being taken off guard by a different box than the usual and having to seriously mull over who could have sent it, then being elated ("yummy") about a LOVELY & TEMPTING assortment of cheeses? (A) Yes (B) No (C) Unsure

(3) Would people send & want to receive illegal goods in a box with nothing to shield it from being discovered? (A) Absolutely (B) No (C) Maybe

(4) In order to disguise the illegal goods being mailed, would hiding them in a package of holiday food items be an effective "strategy" ? (A) Yes (B)No (C) not sure

(5) With Christmas time being the busiest time of the year for the courier industry , would sending illegal goods be a good "strategy" since the package would be the proverbial "needle in a haystack"? (A) Yes (B)No (C) not sure

(6) Could Sandler have received illegal goods plus a holiday food item in the package, and been using a code of some sort, plus really describing his gratitude the holiday cheese sampler? (A) Yes (B)No (C) Maybe

(7) When someone refers to something or someone else as "lovely & tempting", the connotation usually refers, more of ten than not to (a) something sexual (b) something culinary

(8) Have you referred or ever heard someone refer to food items as "lovely & tempting" ? (a) Yes (b) no

(d) (1) 4th sentence reads, "Ps. Do you think I'll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?"

(a) This sentence describes an act that sounds like total nonsense, and would have to be code in order to make more sense (b) This sentence makes sense. Playing Dominos on cheese and pasta does sound strange, but maybe Sandler & Podesta really do that. They are not using code at all. (c) Not sure, they might be using code.

(2) SInce boys & girls are self evidently & indisputably different, and if there is such thing as pedophile code words, would they use two different terms to denote the opposite sexes ? (A) Yes (B) No, i will explain why not (C)Maybe

(3) If this sentence is code for something, does it qualify the usages of the words , "cheese" & "pasta" as code as well ? (A) Yes (B) No, i will explain (C) Maybe

(4)If he is using the code as displayed by Anonymous, the sentence would read, "Do you think I'll do better with bondage on little girls than on little boys?" Without implying that he is really saying that, and just looking at it as a sentence, does that event make more sense as an action that people do in contrast to actually playing the game dominos on say a block of cheeese or on a plate of pasta ? (A) Yes (B) No, playing an actual game of dominos on cheese and/or pasta makes alot more sense (C) Not sure If all Podesta sent was a surprise christmas care package of cheeses in a different box instead of "the usual" pasta & sauces year in & year out, why couldn't Sandler have said something to the effect of, "Hey John, different box than usual over the years. Although i really love the pasta & sauces, these cheeses are great. Kinda had to guess who sent it, but when i saw who sent it, I knew it was going to be great"

Would you call a simple scenario like that "a change in strategy, and then having to "contemplate" the sender ?

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

AreWeSure ago

Hi,

This whole search for odd language in a giant pile of emails is called anomaly hunting. It's a known cognitive glitch and a way of fooling ourselves. Anomaly hunting is large aspect of conspiracy theories. Rather than focus on the mass of evidence you focus on the small odd things that are hard to explain to introduce doubt.

We are all prone to conspiratorial thinking because we share these cognitive glitches. You actually need to train yourself to think more logically, because these glitches are often snap instinctive judgements.

So when the Podesta email were released, people scoured over them lookied for anomalies like the email above. I can infer that they are talking about a strategy for Christmas presents, but I can't know because I am not them and I don't know how they have talked before. For example, do you know how Herb Sandler normally talks? Do you have any sort of baseline? People who study deception and body language say you can't just say someone is lying because they are fidgeting. How do you know this person doesn't normally just fidget all day long? You have to observe the person and establish a baseline and then you have a better sense if they are off their baseline or not.

If all you know is that email you think Herb Sandler and Podesta only talk in "food code" that probably means you are looking at this through a pizzagate lens and haven't read all the emails between the two men. There are dozens. They are more likely to be talking about income inequality or climate change than dominoes.

Another bit of "food code" people misunderstood is pasta with walnut sauce. This totally sounds weird to Americans. In fact, it's a well known dish from the same region where Pesto comes from and where Podesta's Italian grandfather is from. Look up Salsa di noci. 30 years ago, most Americans didn't know about pesto. They would have thought pasta with basil sauce was weird too. Pesto also contains nuts.

In addition to anomaly hunting you are engaging in a logical fallacy called argument from incredulity in this quoted example. Because it doesn't make sense to you, doesn't mean it's not perfectly understandable to other including two old friends.

Not sure If all Podesta sent was a surprise christmas care package of cheeses in a different box instead of "the usual" pasta & sauces year in & year out, why couldn't Sandler have said something to the effect of, "Hey John, different box than usual over the years. Although i really love the pasta & sauces, these cheeses are great. Kinda had to guess who sent it, but when i saw who sent it, I knew it was going to be great"

I read the letters not to mean they are playing on a plate of pasta or a block of cheese. I read it to mean they are playing dominoes with a stomach full of cheese or a stomach full of pasta. Pasta and other high carb food is known to make people sleepy.

Here's an article on anomaly hunting and a guy who made a weird personal protest on the day JFK was shot. People thought he was signalling the shooters. http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/anomaly-hunting-and-the-umbrella-man/

I hate the formatting on voat too. You might have better luck making your answers into a numbered list

Cheers.

DarkMath ago

"Rather than focus on the mass of evidence you focus on the small odd things that are hard to explain"....Oh I absolutely agree.

Take Edgar Welch for example. Most shallow minded cognitively impaired PizzaGate conspiracy theorists see the bullet hole in Comet Ping Pong's computer and immediately get suspicious. What knuckle draggers!

These rubes seem to think it's too big of a coincidence for a bullet fired randomly would end of up hitting a computer system that may have hosted the now infamous highly secured download page because after all when has anyone ever downloaded a pizza.

Only a complete moron coud doubt Edgar Welch would even have fired an assault rifle indoors because old Edgar said he went to Comet Ping Pong TO SAVE CHILDREN. Does everyone see how utterly retarded it is to question the likelihood a man looking for children hidden inside Comet Ping Pong would discharge his assault rifle? Hitting something roughly the size of a child hiding in a closet is impossible. So thank you for being so rational. Coinkydinks happen more often than you think you deplorable shitlords.

And great job AreWeSure. Keep up the good work! Thanks for keeping it real my brother. Thanks for always being there as the lone voice of reason in this god forsaken sordid shit show that is PizzaGate.

AreWeSure ago

You are doing what lawyers call assuming facts not in evidence.

end of up hitting a computer system that may have hosted the now infamous highly secured download page

Rereading I do see the "may have."

I point out things like* You also don't need some false flag operation to move a computer or swap out a hard drive. * I don't call people deplorable shitlords. That's projection.

DarkMath ago

Assuming facts? Like what?

AreWeSure ago

That computer was the web server.

DarkMath ago

I'm glad you brought this up again. It will help me re-explain why you have a tin ear for logic and why I worry you may have a closed head wound. Ready?

Since food is very hard to download over the Interwebs the presence of a highly secure download page suggests Child P*********y given the various Pedophilia symbols at CPP(the owner's instagram avatar is considered the God of Man-Boy Love) and BCAF(bucks are children a pedo wants to have sex with on a camping trip he takes them on). Now while it's true CPP hosting downloadable child porn is by no means a certainty there's enough evidence to warrant further investigation. Certainly after the DC Police lied about investigating CPP one could get even more skeptical.

So here's the question AreWeSure. If that download page WAS for child porn what's the likelihood the CPP web site was hosted remotely in some data center >100 miles away? It wouldn't be very likely right? You could almost guarantee they wouldn't host remotely .......right?

Take your time answering. I'll be here all day.

;-)

AreWeSure ago

Since food is very hard to download over the Interwebs the presence of a highly secure download page suggests Child P*********y

This is such bullshit, tunnel vision conjecture.

If that download page was for CP, why would you have it on the same page as your business? If it wasme I would host it on sfwroweuflasfowiruljfsljfowieureijsflksdjfowierueour.com out of Tajikistan

Is there one case that you know where CP was hosted on the same page as a regular business.

I have never heard "bucks" used that way. I have heard of strapping young bucks and have heard it this definition of it. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/buck 2 a : a male human being : man b : a dashing fellow : dandy

DarkMath ago

I pointed you to the video explaining what a "buck" is in pedo-slang weeks ago. You obviously didn't watch it. You didn't watch it because you will only consider evidence you agree with. That's not good given your name is AreWeSure.

Regarding "tunnel vision conjecture", your argument is no one would host CP on their business's web site. Great. But that's still conjecture. You can't dismiss my "tunnel vision conjecture" with your own.

Finally AreWeSure this is the entire reason we have people like the FBI. They don't run on conjecture, they run on facts. The highly secure download page, the pedo symbols, the bullet into a computer system, the DC Police faking an investigation, that's all reason to investigate. Frankly the last one with the DC Police faking an investigation is almost a guarantee of some sort of cover up. That's exactly what happened with the Franklin scandal and countless other Pedophile scandals. They're often covered up because people in power could be brought down.

So how about you take the high road here AreWeSure. How about you start trying to do the right thing. There's a distinct possibility some really bad shit went down. Stop pretending it didn't.

;-)

AreWeSure ago

The FBI is not involved because it's straight up conjecture any crime has been committed. This is investigation is a long, long way from real evidence that would lead to probable cause. Law enforcement is not investigating because there's nothing to compel to investigation, it's not some grand conspiracy.

Regarding "tunnel vision conjecture", your argument is no one would host CP on their business's web site. Great. But that's still conjecture. You can't dismiss my "tunnel vision conjecture" with your own.

The tunnel vision is you not considering any other possibilities other than child porn. Great claims require great evidence. You have made a great claim. You have not provided any evidence for it or even that you considered anything else. My response was not tunnel vision. It was logical. Hosting illegal material on a server that identifies you is pretty stupid. I am not making the claim, you are. I'm asking why would he do that? Your evidence needs to be compelling enough to overcome logical objections. Could he have done this? Yeah, it will still be stupid, but it's possible. Possibilities are not great evidence.

AreWeSure ago

If you were the police, what would your probable cause be? Can you articulate in that in a way where the a judge would grant a warrant?

Here's what FindLaw says

>Probable Cause to Search

Probable cause to search exists when facts and circumstances known to the officer provide the basis for a reasonable person to believe that a crime was committed at the place to be searched, or that evidence of a crime exists at the location.

Search warrants must specify the place to be searched, as well as items to be seized.

>Probable Cause to Seize Property

Probable cause to seize property exists when facts and circumstances known to the officer would lead a reasonable person to believe that the item is contraband, is stolen, or constitutes evidence of a crime.

When a search warrant is in play, police generally must search only for the items described in the warrant. However, any contraband or evidence of other crimes they come across may, for the most part, be seized as well.

Should evidence prove to have resulted from an illegal search, it becomes subject to the "exclusionary rule" and cannot be used against the defendant in court. After hearing arguments from the prosecuting and defense attorneys, the judge decides whether evidence should be excluded.

>Conclusion

Probable cause refers to the amount and quality of information required to arrest someone, to search or seize private property in many cases, or to charge someone with a crime. Probable cause to arrest, search, or seize property exists when facts and circumstances known to the police officer would lead a reasonable person to believe:

that the person to be arrested has committed a crime; that the place to be searched was the scene of a crime; that the place to be searched contains evidence of a crime; and/or that property to be seized is contraband, stolen, or constitutes evidence of a crime.

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/probable-cause.html