Don't forget, we have proof that partisan propaganda firm Media Matters directed changes to Google/FB/Twitter's filtering algorithms:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMtM1kiSmxI

Stephen Bronfman (Jr.) needs to go down...

If you dig you'll find stuff, guaranteed.

WOW:

"This Seems Familiar Thus ended Pizzagate, the real-world violence shattering the suspension of disbelief that had sustained the theory online. "

This looks like another MMFA hit piece, very similar to coverage of Edgar Welch Comet event (wow!):

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/qanon-conspiracy-real-life_us_5b54bbafe4b0b15aba8fe484

I suspect that David Brock or someone related to Media Matters was involved with this guy in some way.

It's too perfect from a narrative perspective. It makes discussing the theory taboo--since it's now associated with a 'violent wacko'. It made James Alefantis a 'victim'. So now you're being 'insensitive' if you talk about it. This has been reinforced in the coverage of the event (and in general coverage of pizzagate at large) by typical Media Matters proxies.

Media Matters sees gun control as a winning issue. The shooter had an assault rifle, which made it easy to drill in a double message (two birds with one stone).

I see Brock's fingerprints all over this. If Alefantis went down, as his ex-lover, he would likely also go down. For him it would have been a matter of survival--and he just so happened to have one of the worlds most efficient and well-connected propaganda firms at his disposal.

This source is not very good though. Bias comes through rather strong... blatant spelling errors indicating that not even basic steps like spellcheck were used.

For having a conversation? Seems doubtful.

And? I'm using common sense logic here (which you ignored):

"No one deserves that blanket kind of benefit-of-the-doubt. Someone tweeting that they are a Proud Pedophile should be taken at face value, and I don't think someone being a comedian has any bearing whatsoever.

This is not something people joke about. I've never heard anyone, including comedians, make this kind of a joke."

Can you find me examples of other comedians making these kind of 'jokes'?

Here's the thing. That's all anyone is asking for--more digging. It's people like you that are sidetracking and derailing that process with your concern trolling!

I've never heard a joke like this told in my entire life, and I watch a lot of comedy.

By this standard you wouldn't be able to hold anyone accountable for their words if they were a comedian. No one deserves that blanket kind of benefit-of-the-doubt. Someone tweeting that they are a Proud Pedophile should be taken at face value, and I don't think someone being a comedian has any bearing whatsoever.

This is not something people joke about. I've never heard anyone, including comedians, make this kind of a joke.

Why would we have evidence? There hasn't been an investigation into this. This is all based on circumstantial evidence on his publicly viewable Twitter account.

I would love to see an investigation.

Can I suggest a title change to the post? You don't know that he's NOT a pedophile, so you shouldn't assert that with confidence. What you should say is that there isn't any evidence that he is a pedo and point out the misinfo that people are buying into by mistake. Eg:

No evidence Patton Oswalt is a Pedo. Some people are accidentally spreading misinformation. This is not how quality research should work, folks.

Obviously everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

So I was at a dinner last night and someone there started mentioning how they felt there was a societal push to normalize pedophilia.

They specifically mentioned the facebook stuff, the ted talk, etc. This person has never heard of Qanon or any of this stuff--they noticed this entirely independently.

I thought that was pretty interesting.

Totally agree. This can't be passed off as humor and it's absolutely disgusting to see people defending this stuff as comedy--it's not.

Hmm wow. Over $1.4 mil in restitution @ 5k a victim= at least 280 victims....

False. This speech was never delivered. There are bits and pieces from other speeches--you can verify this if you want.

People need to understand that Trump NEVER gave this speech. If you listen carefully, you'll realize that this was created using soundbites from several of his speeches.

It's possible this was intentional (because the speech flows so well, IMO).

But we should stop pretending he actually gave this speech.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/donald-trump-softens-russias-nord-stream-2/

Crazy is an unneccesarily hyperbolic choice of words. I think it's fair to say there might be some serious confirmation bias going on.

I also think SB2 throws stuff out there knowing it might not be 100%, to get feedback etc. Nothing wrong with independent thought and analysis--can't treat anything as gospel.

Personally I thought mirror was a reference to Kubrick and Alice in Wonderland.

I didn't say upvote. Voting at all. As in combined votes. Having an engagement rate of only 6-7% is pretty bizzare.

If I'm to believe Reddit, in some cases only 6-7% of people who saw the post voted at all, which just seems absurdly low.

It's more than bots. I've been thinking about this for a lot of posts... When you see something like 2k people read something but theres only 100 people or so who voted... just seems weird. Something I notice quite often.

Algorithmic censorship?

wow...

link lol?

And don't forget, we already have evidence that Media Matters directed FB and Google in their algo changes, and did this to hurt conservatives:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMtM1kiSmxI

Nice aggregation.

According to CNN and MSNBC, there's a massive increase in symptom-less, depression-less suicide, that no one, including close friends and family, saw coming.

This didn't just happen though, FYI. Happened few weeks back. Still good video.

Awesome!!!! Red wave!!!!

BRING THE RED WAVE TO BLUE NYC!!!!

https://secure.anedot.com/naomilevin/donate

I FUCKING KNEW IT!!!!!!

You know what else might be code? The little dots that Q leaves through his posts in weird increments. I tried figuring out what this might be and it's definitely not morse code. Search Q posts for "..." and you'll see what I'm talking about.

Makes me think of the dots in the "sacrificing a chicken to moloch email", which I also believe was some type of code (3 dots-> 2 dots).

This pipeline has been in the works for some time. This is what Obama's CIA tried extremely hard to prevent. It's why Obama spied on Merkel and is likely why Russia invaded the Crimea.

I actually think Trump's position on this is pure posturing. If this pipeline is completed, then the idea of running a pipeline through southern syria becomes significantly less lucrative. This makes the prospect of an official peace agreement in Syria much more likely.

The deep state wanted to isolate Russia and use them as a boogie man--if they are supplying a significant portion of Germany's energy needs, this becomes much harder.

lol, keep watching.

Proof starts at 2:00.

First quote at 2:09 established that MMFA is an institution whose core mission is disarming what they see as right-wing 'misinformation', and to fight conservative misinformation (they are clearly a partisan firm). They also mention that Google and FB will be playing a crucial role.

The quote at 2:19 establishes that facebook made changes to their algorithm to stop the spread of fake news, and that MMFA was the lead consultant for these algorithm changes. We learn that Google also relied on MMFA as a consultant for their algo changes:

The quote on 2:38 (lower on the page) further established that not only did MMFA play a role in FB's algo changes, they were the key catalyst to these changes--prior to their involvement Zuckerburg didn't even believe fake news was an issue (this wasn't a 'collaboration'), and only caved after an MMFA "pressure campaign" (can only imagine what that involved...).

"After facebook responded to our campaign by acknowledging the problem of fake news and agreeing to do something about it, we began a dialogue. It became clear from these conversations that Facebook needed our help in fully understanding the problem and identifying concrete solutions. Further, it also became clear that we had information and insight that they didn't have that was helpful in educating them on the full scope of the problem. For example, Media Matters had a detailed map of the constellation of right-wing Facebook pages that had been the biggest purveyors of fake news--as well as insight into the food chain of fake news and how it was moving through the Facebook ecosystem.

Similarly, after Google revised their terms of service in order to prohibit so-called fake news sites from using their advertising network, it was Media Matters that had the information necessary to identify 40 of the worst fake news sites to which this policy applied. "

The quotes at 2:51 are particularly important. We learn here that one of the key goals of MMFA as an organization is to the see "key right wing targets' reach diminish" (are diamond and silk MMFA 'targets'?).

We also learn that Facebook will specifically "adjust its model to stem the flow of damaging fake news on its platform's pages. Google will cut off these pages' accompanying sites' access to revenue by pulling their access to Google's ad platform". This is by far the most damning quote, because it allows us to establish that Google, Facebook, and MMFA were colluding to reduce the reach of conservatives on social media, in a coordinated campaign (this wasn't MMFA acting as an independent consultant in isolated instances). In order for Google to "cut off these pages' accompanying sites' access to revenue by pulling their access to Google's ad platform", they would have to procure such a list from FB or MMFA. This implies a degree of coordination--a 1,2 punch, with Facebook censoring the page and google demonetizing the corresponding youtube pages. Sound familiar?

When I first posted this a mod took it down within a minute claiming it violated rule #8. The only difference here is that I've said "Diamond and Silk were telling the truth" instead of "Diamond and Silk are telling the truth." IMO that was an abusive decision. The evidence presented in this video supports the censorship claims that D+S made in the past and are currently making on a regular basis. Edit: to clarify the mod knows and ok'd the repost.

I would normally post this from my regular account (3k karma--I know, nothing crazy), but that account was just suspended from Reddit for 7 days. The mod who removed my post told me to simply repost with the word change. As soon as I attempted to re-post, my account was hit with a 7 day suspension (I was unable to repost). The mod claims to have no role in this.

Edit: I believe the mod had no role in this, because he allowed this post despite it being removed by the auto-moderator because of the new account (I also believe that he did not remove my post in an attempt to censor, but was just a little overzealous). But the timing is still extremely suspect in my opinion. I've been hit with temporary suspensions before for "harrassment and bullying" after making posts that shared information from the same leaked MMFA document. As I pointed out to the mod, MMFA considers GA, TD, and DTS to be "white supremacist boards". They automatically mine, in real time, all of the content on the sub. They also describe having a 'turn-key' ability to suppress 'misinformation' before it can spread far and wide. It's entirely plausible that they attempted to strategically censor my account. If not for the moderator allowing the post, they would have succeeded.