At personal risk to my measly upvoats, I'd like to throw this out there. A little meta for the investigation.

I'm a big fan of Cracked. While some of their stuff isn't always accurate, they always try to provide sources. It's moved a bit away from the humor/education theme it had and is now more education/little bit of agenda/humor, in that order.

Anyway, a new article from today might be of interest: http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-2433-i-cant-stop-living-with-addiction-to-child-porn.html

Why is this relevant? It isn't. At least not 100%. But I've been meaning to bring up what's mentioned in the introduction of that article: the definition of pedophilia.

Now, this investigation is bad. Bad meaning the implications. And I do not excuse a single person who is involved in these tragic events or implicated in it, or even possibly tied to it.

However: if we're going to be taken seriously, not only do we need to stop with the tunnel vision on just Alefantis (I don't mean this to say take your eyes off him), we also need to get our vocabularies in order.

A pedophile is someone sexually attracted to children. A child molester is someone who molests those children.

Now, I know it seems like it doesn't matter, but it does. Does anyone remember the Flickr account investigation a few weeks ago? The biggest one I remember is Robert Casio Robinson. He had pictures, not sexual ones, of children, yet he had a predatory personality that could be identified from his comments on his photos. He even took unwanted photos of women with similarly crude comments and titles. This man was at least a pedophile, but no proof of molestation. I'm not excusing him, but as far as we know he's just attracted to the little girls he took photos of. (I'd still like to seen him behind bars just for being a creep, though)

What we're actually looking for in pizzagate, besides justice for trafficking, are child molesters.

Why am I bothering to mention this? We come across as more serious and can focus more on the right demographic if we know the difference between these things.

A pedophile is innocent until they do something wrong. Many (supposedly) never harm a child.

And the man in the article I linked was, well, he was caught redistributing child porn. He was innocent until he did something to further the problem.

And then we have the Podestas, Alefantis, possibly the Clintons themselves, and everyone else implicated here: they are child molesters. They are the targets. The wrong doers.

If you made it this far, thanks. I'm just trying to add a little order to the chaos this verse can become sometimes.

Tl;dr omg op is a shill and a pedo and rabble rabble rabble

Alternative tl;dr: There's a difference between child molesters and pedophiles. It'll help to hunt the right witches.