At this point Alex Jones followers are either morons or white supremacists

[DirtyD]

umm, snopes is a partisan outlet.

According to who? Factcheck.org is non-partisan, has called out individuals from both parties for half-truths and false statements, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. They had this to say about snopes:

Q: Is Snopes.com run by “very Democratic” proprietors? Did they lie to discredit a State Farm insurance agent who attacked Obama?

A: A chain e-mail that “exposed” Snopes contains falsehoods. And in fact, the site is run by someone who has no political party affiliation and his non-voting Canadian wife. A State Farm spokeswoman confirms what they reported about the Obama-baiting agent.

The e-mail goes on: “Then it has been learned the Mikkelson’s are very Democratic (party) and extremely liberal,” adding: “There has been much criticism lately over the internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson’s liberalism revealing itself in their website findings.” The author cites no evidence and no sources for either of these propositions.

We asked David. He told us that Barbara is a Canadian citizen, and as such isn’t allowed to vote here or contribute money to U.S. candidates. As for him, “My sole involvement in politics is on Election Day to go out and vote. I’ve never joined a party, worked for a campaign or donated money to a candidate.”

“You’d be hard-pressed to find two more apolitical people,” David Mikkelson said. We checked online to see if he had given money to any federal candidates, and nothing turned up. Mikkelson even faxed us a copy of his voter registration form. He asked us not to post an image of it here, but we can confirm that it shows he declined to state a party affiliation when he registered last year, and also that when he registered in 2000 he did so as a Republican.

Snopes.com

 

[AndroidHero]

According to who? Factcheck.org is non-partisan, has called out individuals from both parties for half-truths and false statements, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. They had this to say about snopes:





Snopes.com

Watch out he will call you a pedo because you don't believe in this pizzagate nonsense.

Alt-right like him love #alternativefacts.

 

[Maschine_Man]

Angry because I called what you are an alt-right, there is nothing worse than posters like you I have more respect for CACtain Planet and the other #Trumpset who are open with their support of Trump than cowards like you who defend Trump at every turn then claim they are not Trump supporter.

No matter who much you deny it you are an alt-right pos and you believing this Pizzagate nonsense that originated from "fourchaan" is further proof of that.

are we talking about pizza gate or Trump??

fukkbois like you can't stay on topic and loved to change it up

 

[Maschine_Man]

According to who? Factcheck.org is non-partisan, has called out individuals from both parties for half-truths and false statements, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. They had this to say about snopes:





Snopes.com

Fact-Checking Snopes: Website's Political 'Fact-Checker' Is Just A Liberal Blogger

Recently, however, the site has tried to pose as a political fact-checker. But Snopes’ “fact-checking” looks more like playing defense for prominent Democrats like Hillary Clinton and it’s political “fact-checker” describes herself as a liberal and has called Republicans “regressive” and afraid of “female agency.”

Snopes’ main political fact-checker is a writer named Kim Lacapria. Before writing for Snopes, Lacapria wrote for Inquisitr, a blog that — oddly enough — is known for publishing fake quotes and even downright hoaxes as much as anything else.

While at Inquisitr, the future “fact-checker” consistently displayed clear partisanship (RELATED: Snopes Caught Lying About Lack Of American Flags At Democratic Convention)

She described herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal. She trashed the Tea Party as “teahadists.” She called Bill Clinton “one of our greatest” presidents. She claimed that conservatives only criticized Lena Dunham’s comparison of voting to sex because they “fear female agency.”

She once wrote: “Like many GOP ideas about the poor, the panic about using food stamps for alcohol, pornography or guns seems to have been cut from whole cloth–or more likely, the ideas many have about the fantasy of poverty.” (A simple fact-check would show that food stamp fraud does occur and costs taxpayers tens of millions.)

Lacapria even accused the Bush administration of being “at least guilty of criminal negligience” in the September 11 attacks. (The future “fact-checker” offered no evidence to support her accusation.)

Her columns apparently failed to impress her readership, oftentimes failing to get more than 10-20 shares.

After blogging the Inquisitr, Lacapria joined Snopes, where she regularly plays defense for her fellow liberals.

She wrote a “fact check” article about Jimmy Carter’s unilateral ban of Iranian nationals from entering the country that looks more like an opinion column arguing against Donald Trump’s proposed Muslim ban.

Similarly, Lacapria — in another “fact check” article — argued Hillary Clinton hadn’t included Benghazi at all in her infamous “we didn’t lose a single person in Libya” gaffe. Lacapria claimed Clinton only meant to refer to the 2011 invasion of Libya (but not the 2012 Benghazi attack) but offered little fact-based evidence to support her claim.

After the Orlando terror attack, Lacapria claimed that just because Omar Mateen was a registered Democrat with an active voter registration status didn’t mean he was actually a Democrat. Her “fact check” argued that he might “have chosen a random political affiliation when he initially registered.”

Lacapria even tried to contradict the former Facebook workers who admitted that Facebook regularly censors conservative news, dismissing the news as “rumors.”

In that “fact check” article, Lacapria argued that “Facebook Trending’s blacklisting of ‘junk topics’ was not only not a scandalous development, but to be expected following the social network’s crackdown on fake news sites.” The opinion-heavy article was mockingly titled: The Algorithm Is Gonna Get You.

Lacapria again played defense for Clinton in a fact check article when she claimed: “Outrage over an expensive Armani jacket worn by Hillary Clinton was peppered with inaccurate details.”

One of the “inaccurate details” cited by Lacapria was that, “The cost of men’s suits worn by fellow politicians didn’t appear in the article for contrast.” She also argued the speech Clinton gave while wearing the $12,495 jacket, which discussed “raising wages and reducing inequality,” wasn’t actually about income inequality.

Read more: Fact-Checking Snopes: Website's Political 'Fact-Checker' Is Just A Liberal Blogger

 

[AndroidHero]

are we talking about pizza gate or Trump??

fukkbois like you can't stay on topic and loved to change it up

And who you think came up with this pizzagate conspiracy? It originated from Trump supporters at "fourchaan" and alt-right fakkits at r/The_Donald helped spread it too.

You can Google idiot.

 

[Maschine_Man]

If you don't believe reply all then snopes also debunked it:




FALSE: Comet Ping Pong Pizzeria Home to Child Abuse Ring Led by Hillary Clinton

And before you start crafting another sombrero of tinfoil that snopes is part of this vast liberal conspiracy you should know the following about the site's owners:



Snopes.com

regardless, Pizzagate isn't exclusive to the DNC. the whole pedophile problem is not exclusive to one party.
the problem is bigger than that and all sides are guilty of it.


but again, step away from "pizza gate" for a second. Comet Ping Pong or whatever, ppl can debate that all day.

Ppl can't debate that there is a pedophile problem within the government and with other rich and powerful ppl...around the world.

 

[Maschine_Man]

And who you think came up with this pizzagate conspiracy? It originated from Trump supporters at "fourchaan" and alt-right fakkits at r/The_Donald helped spread it too.

You can Google idiot.

Podesta



like I said, I don't give a fukk about Trump or hillary or DNC or RNC, or any of that shyt.

you wanna talk about pedophiles and fukked up shyt then lets do that. but to dismiss it cuz your side was caught is fukkin pathetic.

 

[greenygreen]

And who you think came up with this pizzagate conspiracy? It originated from Trump supporters at "fourchaan" and alt-right fakkits at r/The_Donald helped spread it too.

You can Google idiot.

Nope it came pedostas emails, until you explain what his coded language in those emails means, you ain't debunk shyt, so tell me what he's talking about when he refers to pizza and hot dogs.

You won't answer this question

 

[AndroidHero]

Podesta

You dumb fakkit who took out talks about pizza in podesta emails and turned it into a whole pedophilia ring conspiracy?

To be precise the person who first mentioned it was a Trump supporting white supremacist, he first tweeted about and then "fourchaan" took it much further and spread it online.

Politifact: How Pizzagate went from fake news to a real problem

"Pizzagate's origins

The conspiracy theory spread through viral emails, discussion threads and social media in the weeks leading up to Election Day.

The rumor first began after WikiLeaks released Clinton campaign manager John Podesta’s emails.

Users at the online forum ***** noticed Podesta corresponded with Comet Ping Pong pizzeria owner James Alefantis, discussing a potential Clinton fundraiser.

Buzzfeed reported that the idea of a pedophilia ring masterminded by Clinton and her allies started with an Oct. 30 tweet by a reputed white supremacist Twitter account that in turn cited a Facebook user’s status:

Rumors stirring in the NYPD that Huma's emails point to a pedophila ring and @HillaryClinton is at the center. #GoHillary #PodestaEmails23pic.twitter.com/gkEH5oL269

— David Goldberg (@DavidGoldbergNY) October 30, 2016
From there, various conspiracy theory and fake news sites began spinning out versions of the elaborate but unproven story. (A popular Reddit post detailing the theory has since been removed.)"

Let me guess you are going to say politifact like snopes is partisan website , yet you didn't have a problem posting an article from right-wing site like dailycaller.

 

[DirtyD]

Fact-Checking Snopes: Website's Political 'Fact-Checker' Is Just A Liberal Blogger

Recently, however, the site has tried to pose as a political fact-checker. But Snopes’ “fact-checking” looks more like playing defense for prominent Democrats like Hillary Clinton and it’s political “fact-checker” describes herself as a liberal and has called Republicans “regressive” and afraid of “female agency.”

Snopes’ main political fact-checker is a writer named Kim Lacapria. Before writing for Snopes, Lacapria wrote for Inquisitr, a blog that — oddly enough — is known for publishing fake quotes and even downright hoaxes as much as anything else.

While at Inquisitr, the future “fact-checker” consistently displayed clear partisanship (RELATED: Snopes Caught Lying About Lack Of American Flags At Democratic Convention)

She described herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal. She trashed the Tea Party as “teahadists.” She called Bill Clinton “one of our greatest” presidents. She claimed that conservatives only criticized Lena Dunham’s comparison of voting to sex because they “fear female agency.”

She once wrote: “Like many GOP ideas about the poor, the panic about using food stamps for alcohol, pornography or guns seems to have been cut from whole cloth–or more likely, the ideas many have about the fantasy of poverty.” (A simple fact-check would show that food stamp fraud does occur and costs taxpayers tens of millions.)

Lacapria even accused the Bush administration of being “at least guilty of criminal negligience” in the September 11 attacks. (The future “fact-checker” offered no evidence to support her accusation.)

Her columns apparently failed to impress her readership, oftentimes failing to get more than 10-20 shares.

After blogging the Inquisitr, Lacapria joined Snopes, where she regularly plays defense for her fellow liberals.

She wrote a “fact check” article about Jimmy Carter’s unilateral ban of Iranian nationals from entering the country that looks more like an opinion column arguing against Donald Trump’s proposed Muslim ban.

Similarly, Lacapria — in another “fact check” article — argued Hillary Clinton hadn’t included Benghazi at all in her infamous “we didn’t lose a single person in Libya” gaffe. Lacapria claimed Clinton only meant to refer to the 2011 invasion of Libya (but not the 2012 Benghazi attack) but offered little fact-based evidence to support her claim.

After the Orlando terror attack, Lacapria claimed that just because Omar Mateen was a registered Democrat with an active voter registration status didn’t mean he was actually a Democrat. Her “fact check” argued that he might “have chosen a random political affiliation when he initially registered.”

Lacapria even tried to contradict the former Facebook workers who admitted that Facebook regularly censors conservative news, dismissing the news as “rumors.”

In that “fact check” article, Lacapria argued that “Facebook Trending’s blacklisting of ‘junk topics’ was not only not a scandalous development, but to be expected following the social network’s crackdown on fake news sites.” The opinion-heavy article was mockingly titled: The Algorithm Is Gonna Get You.

Lacapria again played defense for Clinton in a fact check article when she claimed: “Outrage over an expensive Armani jacket worn by Hillary Clinton was peppered with inaccurate details.”

One of the “inaccurate details” cited by Lacapria was that, “The cost of men’s suits worn by fellow politicians didn’t appear in the article for contrast.” She also argued the speech Clinton gave while wearing the $12,495 jacket, which discussed “raising wages and reducing inequality,” wasn’t actually about income inequality.

Read more: Fact-Checking Snopes: Website's Political 'Fact-Checker' Is Just A Liberal Blogger

So you say that snopes is biased and then use the daily caller, which was founded by Fox News talking head, Tucker Carlson and is extremely conservative as proof, what sense does that make? Beyond its founder, however, it's not as if the dailycaller is practicing objective journalism 101 it clearly has a slant as can be seen here:

Early on, in March 2010, the Caller delivered a scoop that had promise and impact: sources said Michael Steele, then chair of the Republican National Committee, considered using party funds to buy a private plane. More sensationally, filings showed Steele authorized a $1,946.25 payment for an evening at a bondage-themed nightclub.

Yet the Caller’s first story on the filings incorrectly implied Steele himself had been behind the velvet rope, in the presence of topless performers simulating lesbian sex. That off note hinted at what was to come: a series of splashy stories that, when examined, produced more skepticism than pick-up, and caused new hecklers to raise their voices. A Caller report accusing National Review of prearranging a glowing editorial for the GOP ignited more headlines about the ensuing intramural scuffle than the supposed scoop itself. A planned exposé suggesting plagiarism in Jane Mayer’s detail-rich New Yorker investigation on the Koch brothers was killed for lack of evidence—a New York Post media column crowed “Smear Disappears.”

Other journalists were quoted completely out of context. In a Caller story about a Journolist discussion on whether Fox News should be censored, Time White House correspondent Michael Scherer was quoted writing “I agree” following a paragraph outlining a suggestion the US needed tougher libel laws. Scherer told Politico that he had actually been agreeing with an e-mail not cited in Strong’s story and was arguing against further media restrictions. (Only later in the original story, far from the “I agree” quote, were Scherer’s true concerns acknowledged.) The Caller updated the story, with no acknowledgment that text had been changed, adding this: “Time’s Scherer, who had seemed to express support for increased regulation at Fox, suddenly appeared to have qualms. ” “Seemed” appears to suggest they couldn’t let the falsehood go.

The Great Right Hype

regardless, Pizzagate isn't exclusive to the DNC. the whole pedophile problem is not exclusive to one party.
the problem is bigger than that and all sides are guilty of it.


but again, step away from "pizza gate" for a second. Comet Ping Pong or whatever, ppl can debate that all day.

Ppl can't debate that there is a pedophile problem within the government and with other rich and powerful ppl...around the world.

Pedophilia is disgusting, but you and I are going to have to agree to disagree about there being any evidence that both political parties engage in child sex trafficking.

 

[Maschine_Man]

You dumb fakkit who took out talks about pizza in podesta emails and turned it into a whole pedophilia ring conspiracy?

To be precise the person who first mentioned it was a Trump supporting white supremacist, he first tweeted about and then "fourchaan" took it much further and spread it online.

Politifact: How Pizzagate went from fake news to a real problem

"Pizzagate's origins

The conspiracy theory spread through viral emails, discussion threads and social media in the weeks leading up to Election Day.

The rumor first began after WikiLeaks released Clinton campaign manager John Podesta’s emails.

Users at the online forum ***** noticed Podesta corresponded with Comet Ping Pong pizzeria owner James Alefantis, discussing a potential Clinton fundraiser.

Buzzfeed reported that the idea of a pedophilia ring masterminded by Clinton and her allies started with an Oct. 30 tweet by a reputed white supremacist Twitter account that in turn cited a Facebook user’s status:

Rumors stirring in the NYPD that Huma's emails point to a pedophila ring and @HillaryClinton is at the center. #GoHillary #PodestaEmails23pic.twitter.com/gkEH5oL269

— David Goldberg (@DavidGoldbergNY) October 30, 2016
From there, various conspiracy theory and fake news sites began spinning out versions of the elaborate but unproven story. (A popular Reddit post detailing the theory has since been removed.)"

Let me guess you are going to say politifact like snopes is partisan website , yet you didn't have a problem posting an article from right-wing site like dailycaller.

CBS Anchor Who Defended Pizzagate Conspiracy Has Shut Down Website, Social Media Accounts

 

[Maschine_Man]

BREAKING: Pizzagate is Back! Ben Swann Disappears - Alex Jones, Joe Rogan Blow The Lid


odd.....

 

[Maschine_Man]

Pedophilia is disgusting, but you and I are going to have to agree to disagree about there being any evidence that both political parties engage in child sex trafficking.

Must be nice to walk around like this all the time....

Prosecutors Weigh Child-Pornography Charges Against Anthony Weiner

More Than 200 Pentagon Employees Were Caught With Child Pornography

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/26/us/dennis-hastert-fast-facts/

Top 10 Democrat Sex Scandals in Congress | Human Events

 

[Maschine_Man]

The Joe Rogan Experience Video/Podcast #911 (2/1/2016)

Pizzagate is from 8:20 - 42:14 (~35 min)

 

[Maschine_Man]

474 Arrested, 28 Sexually Exploited Children Rescued During Statewide Human Trafficking Operation: LASD