This is PG related do to the Podesta email that was leaked to Wikileaks is the origin of the investigation. And this email has been pointed out many times before on this forum.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/23561
Notice something that @DarkMath pointed out earlier in a post i made. That In the email chain the mail from Kathryn Tate "The realtor didn't add in the "pizza related" when she emailed Susan Sandler. The realtor just said she'd found a handkerchief. Susan Sandler added the "pizza-related" herself in the email she sent to John Podesta." That is the truth, she describe it´s as a..
" Susan & Herb
I just came from checking the Field house and I have a square cloth handkerchief (white w/ black)
that was left on the kitchen island. Happy to send it via the mail if you let me know where I should send it.
I also meant to inquire yesterday about the pillows you purchased.
I can send them as well, if you let me know where they are in the house.
Safe travels to all Kate"
- square cloth handkerchief (white w/ black).
So why did Susan Sandler change that to..
"..The realtor found a handkerchief (I think it has a map that seems pizza-related. Is it yorus?" ??
view the rest of the comments →
Are_we__sure ago
This is only strange if you think all communication with the realtor A. Was captured by email. B. Was captured by this particular email thread.
I think the evidence is very strong that ALL COMMUNICATION WAS NOT captured in this email thread. Why do I think that? Because the realtor's email is about two things
2 matters much more to Susan Sandler because they are her pillows and she just purchased them, so obviously she wants them. Also note there is a 5 hour gap between the realtor's email and Sandler's email to Podesta.
I think it's quite clear during that 5 hours, she communicated with the realtor about getting her pillows back. My assumption it's was a phone call and she asked more about the handkerchief.
You can find lots of maps with food on them. It's pretty common thing for a Map of Italy. You can find lots of stock images like these. Podesta visited Italy pretty often.
http://imgur.com/a/b19LV
http://imgur.com/a/JPxlg
http://imgur.com/a/ZoZoj
The other thing to note about Susan Sandler's odd phrasing is she describing a handkerchief that she is not looking at and probably has never seen. And she has a specific audience. There's no reason it needs to make sense to us because we are not her audience, it only has to trigger recognition in the Podestas.
Applying Occam's Razor to these emails, cuts away a lot of nonsense.
rickman ago
But the realtor would be describing the handkerchief to her over the phone in order to find out who it belongs to. Lets focus on Sandlers words in the email.
She thinks?! She's just spoken to the realtor on the phone who has the handkerchief. Why can't the realtor determine whether or not the handkerchief has a map on it? It would be fairly obvious. She also says it seems pizza related. Seems? Pizza is pretty easy to identify, whether its by slice or as a whole pizza. Why is the realtor having such a hard time figuring out what's on this handkerchief that it would even leave Susan Sandler unsure of what was on it?
Sandlers words makes it sound like she's going from memory and possibly trying to be discreet. Its very nudge nudge, wink wink." I think. It seems." It's almost like she's warning Podesta
ThaliaC ago
I agree with your analysis... plus why anyone would bother chasing down the owner of a lost handerkchief left at a party is bizarre - surely they (the elite) have better things to do with their time
Are_we_sure ago
From this point on, you are using argument from lack of imagination and also assuming facts not in evidence. Argument from lack of imagination is a way of narrowing the options to guide the argument to your conclusion. I think other quite reasonable options exist.
Not in evidence. How do you know she sent the email right after the call? We don't.
It seems clear that she does. To my reading, it's the what type of map it is that's oddly phrased and in question. But to answer your question, without seeing the graphic, we don't know WHAT it looks like.
Again you are assuming something not in evidence. Did she have a hard time. Possibly. Also possible is she just didn't explain it well. Again, Susan's main concern is most likely the pillows. Another possibility is she explained it hours earlier and by the time of the emails Susan Sandler is hazy about it. If she never saw thing in the first place and only had it described to her, it's reasonable she has gives a hazy description of it.
I think this is a giant assumption of facts not evidence and it's influenced/primed by the unproven assertion that these folks are speaking in code.
Shillaxe ago
Me thinks you doeth protest too much.Your actually making it sound like a legal case & your trying to defend John Podesta, correct me if im wrong.
Shillaxe ago
I think even the William of Ockham would agree ,that its simpler to assume its PG related, I can't believe someone shilling for John Podesta.
Are_we_sure ago
Only if you don't understand how to wield his razor.
He would have cut your assumption to ribbons. I don't know how you think it's simpler to make up a fake, non-existent code and then substitute that code into this email. They only way that is simpler is if you want to get away from the truth and make this email mean something else.
Judgejewdy ago
Who tf gives a toss about what Occam thinks? You act like it's some universal truth. If we used your logic no code would ever be broken (or, apparently, even exist).
Are_we_sure ago
Of course, Occam applies here. You are concerned about the truth, you actually have to show there is a code before you try to break that code. Otherwise you end up far, far away from the truth.
Shillaxe ago
Keep covering for Podesta.
ThaliaC ago
Are we sure always on the handkerchief threads...