We could really do with a little help from the gay community in confirming these codes and symbols after all it’s they who are being demonised by all this.

Gay men used handkerchiefs in their back pocket to display their preferences at dance clubs and bathhouses. They are quite passé at this point. If you go into a gay club these days you won't see anyone with a handerkerchief. The main reason they were used was to indicate a guy's preference for being the "top" (left back pocket) or the "bottom" (right back pocket). You can probably figure out what that means on your own.

The various colours were added later. A good amount of the colouring scheme was probably never used apart from being part of a joke in some drag queen's musical number.

Let's get to the point of the handkerchief code. The point of the handerkerchief was so you could display your preference to potential partners in a discreet, but open, way.

The two key points there being "display" and "to potential partners". If we assume Podesta was wearing or otherwise displaying the "pizza" handkerchief, if it was the same reason it would be to display his preferences to his potential partners. Exactly which potential partners would he want to notice his handkerchief? Even if he wants to signal to other people at the party that he's a pedo there's not much of a point? Is the party a mix of pedos and non-pedos? Does he not know if the other people are pedos?

So even though it does seem to be a code for something , I don't think it is related at all to the gay handkerchief code. It doesn't fit at all with the way that code is/was used.

Remember that they do not spell it "dominoes". They spell it "dominos". I think this is an important distinction.

Susan must have spoken with Kate before messaging John to get a better description

She "must have" huh?

So the theory you are proposing is that:

1. Kate sent out an email saying that she had found a handkerchief left behind at a house.

2. Susan felt so strongly about the importance of a possible lost handkerchief, that she broke away from the email chain and sent private communications to Kate to get a better description of this handkerchief.

3. Then Susan returned to the email chain to forward it to Podesta and with no explanation whatsoever, explains that somehow she came to think it had a pizza-related map on it.

4. Instead of just keeping on with the email chain already in progress to ask such a question and then forwarding the response to Podesta, or forwarding a photo of this apparently very important handkerchief to Podesta so he could just look at it for himself.

I'll at least give you credit in that this is the best debunking attempt I have seen so far for the theory of code being used in that email, although the theory for debunking it is even more of a stretch than the code theory itself.

I don't understand the question in the posting title.

The handkerchief issue is a simple one: John Podesta will clear it up by giving a description/drawing of it, or a link to another one if it's a purchased hanky. In the meantime, it's perfectly normal to speculate, since he keeps choosing to withhold this clarifying information.

I think the point was that the ritual abuse art of podestas favorite artist showed a kerchef laying under a child rape scene, so people assumed this.

Not likely. Writing down directions to a pizza place? With I-phones & GPS?

And would you refer to it as a "pizza-related handkerchief?"

There has been a huge amount of discussion about the handkerchief and its pizza related map which is very odd language, on very many other threads. I'm sure you'll be able to find them using the search tool on the right, just to let you know. Did you find any thing else on the Sandlers that is suspicious?