Also a redditor had a really good summary of the Silsby thing:

Pizzagate investigators cite this document as proof that "One of the first things the Clintons did when they took over the scene in Haiti was to have Bill get Laura off the hook."

But it's not true according to their own link. The linked document says:

Clinton brokered the release of all the missionaries, except for the group leader, Laura Silsby.

Interesting non-essential side note, if you look at this shameful, monumentally embarrassing tweet from Wikileaks where they link to an early pizzagate thread on the_youknowwho, you can see the original formulation was that "One of the first things Hillary did when she took over the scene in Haiti was get Laura Silsby off the hook..." This has been edited to say "the Clintons" instead of "Hillary" because the linked 46-page document doesn't even mention Hillary's name. And besides, "the Clintons took over the scene?" The outcome for Silsby was determined by a trial with a judge and lawyers and testimony from the parents of the "orphans" and all kinds of neat non-Clinton-y stuff.

So what happened to Silby? Again, from the pizzagaters' own link:

Despite Silsby’s stated intent to take the children over the border to an unauthorized orphanage and her connections to human traffickers such as Torres-Puello, the courts eventually dropped the kidnapping and criminal association charges against her. Silsby was instead convicted under the additional charge of organizing illegal travel, sentenced to time served (3 months and 8 days), and released on May 17, 2010. In the end, her sentence was based on the least polemic charge against her. The pressing issue—whether Silsby intended to deliver the children into trafficking rings or grey adoption markets—was not addressed or resolved. Rather than turning on Silsby’s actions, the decision in her case appeared to turn on the actions of the parents. Judge Bernard Saint-Vil explained that his decision was based on the Haitian parents’ testimony that they had “[given] their kids away voluntarily.” Similarly, defense lawyer Jorge Puello stated that the missionaries “willingly accepted kids they knew were not orphans because the parents said they would starve otherwise.” Another trial attorney for the missionaries, Aviol Fleurant, argued that “[t]he parents’ testimony means no law was broken and ‘we can’t talk any more about trafficking of human beings.’”

More bombshells about the people who were "trafficking in Haitian orphans," from the same document. Pizzagate investigators will never highlight or mention this:

The Americans denied any wrongdoing and said they had been trying to help children left orphaned and destitute by the Haitian earthquake. They said Puello had approached their relatives and church, offering his help. It turned out that the children who were with the U.S. missionaries had living parents, many of whom testified they had voluntarily handed their offspring to the Americans in the hope they would be given an education and a better life.

Pizzagate theorists will point to a lawyer Torres to try to make Silsby and crew look worse, but just read this excerpt from an ICE News Release to put it all into context:

In early 2010, Torres surfaced in the Dominican Republic posing as a lawyer representing American church workers detained in Haiti in the wake of the earthquake in that country. Torres convinced a church that he was Jorge Torres Puello, an international lawyer and president of "Puello Consulting" in the Dominican Republic. Torres obtained a monetary retainer from the families of the detained missionaries and began representing himself to the Haitian court and international media as the attorney/spokesman for them. However, U.S. authorities recognized him as Jorge Torres when media reports showed images of the "alleged" lawyer wearing a suit and carrying a brief case.

An extradition package was prepared and sent to representatives in the Dominican Republic. Torres was arrested, detained and extradited to the United States to face the 2003 alien smuggling charges in Vermont. He pleaded guilty to the charges.

To sum up this Torres business, the dude faked his identity, offered his services (as in HE approached THEM), bamboozled the missionaries, pretended to be their lawyer until he got extradited.

So Bill Clinton was asked to go in and straighten this business out. Hillary Clinton emailed someone for details about the situation. There are so many leaps that have to be made here to get to satanic-pedo-ritual-sex-slavery ring it's not even funny.

And so, after all this, Pizzagate investigators go berserk over this email "where they are literally pricing how much it costs to transport children" but it's just a synopsis of a fucking charity organization. Nothing more, nothing less.

What would convince me? I would say a police investigation that turned up something like the recent one out of Norway

What would convince me that an investigation needed to take place? I think those things usually start with accusations of specific incidents either like sexual harassment claims or specific claims from a witness or general sexual misconduct that may imply something illegal is happening.

Also, about the Alefantis stuff you just listed most of those things don't even involve him. He couldn't explain most of those things away, this is my point about the evidence becoming so thin it becomes impossible to refute. One of my theories about pizzagate is that people who believe it are mostly from rural areas, and I don't mean that to sound at all condescending but the stuff about comet like the shows and things really are just edgy bullshit you would see sometimes if you lived in a city. Like that video of the exchange between the performer and the audience. I guess that could be two pedophiles speaking openly about pedophilia but are people likely to do that? to literally say exactly what illegal activity they're involved in in what looks like a public performance? You know most of the time I wish the pizzagate people would just ask themselves 'do people behave that way?'. If you were conducting a pedophile ring from a house would you literally just spray paint 'kids' on the outside of it? If you had a 'killroom' would you take a picture of it and post it publicly to instagram and then literally call it exactly what it is in a hashtag?

I didn't want to get into a conversation about evidence I just want people to think about if the people are innocent at what point does it end? I think that this will never end because there is nothing that could disprove the vague but intense suspicion it's founded on. I don't really care about public figures like the Podestas but what's happened with Alefantis I think has shown that relatively regular people not in the public eye can be dragged down into this and harassed. JUST BE CAREFUL is my message. If you see a suspicious email call it that and LEAVE IT at that.