blobster

Interview with Lorraiine Kelly and McCanns in 2012.....check all those swirls out on set!! https://youtu.be/UwZDjnhtKqU

moonlaundry

Some facts.

The e-fits are real, verified. McCanns publicized this kidnapping making it the most famous missing child case ever. McCanns befriended Freud after he reached out to them, because of the publicity. Podesta whereabouts that day are not clear, however, his email is nearly empty and was handled by his assistant, and she messages Herb Sandler. Podesta was in D.C. on May 2.

Anything you try to squeeze in between these facts is going to be uncertain, unverified. Please correct me if I'm wrong or am missing an important detail.

PizzaGateDiscovery

Who knows. Maybe one person saw one Podesta and the other saw the other Podesta. They could have been together, but far enough apart from each other that depending on where the witnesses were, each witnesses could have seen a different brother. The sketches definitely look like the Podestas.

Reminds me of the Timothy McVeigh sketch and the second man sketch. (Oklahoma City bombing case) One was identical to McVeigh. Then we were told the second sketch of a second man was wrong. There was no second man.

Zimque

Her homemade pork rinds are fabulous.

Atatarkus

Madeleine was conceived in vitro but her siblings were not, every chance maddie was made to order in a test tube for Soros. I shudder to think what happened to her, I don't know what's worse, that we're wrong and she was stolen by a creepy weirdo and subsequently raped, murdered and disposed of... or she's kept caged like a lab rat supplying blood to Soros and eventually organs until he needs an organ she can't live without. If the latter is the case she's probably not the only child with his genes in the same situation. Uuggghhh

charmeuse

What normal parents would leave tiny, helpless children asleep alone in a hotel room in a foreign country while they went out to drink and eat dinner? Answer: None. Only abnormal parents who had a specific motive for doing so. The logical answer to this mystery is that the parents allowed the abduction to occur.

ActivistAngel

WHY DO I NEVER SEE THE PICTURE AT THE END OF THIS BLOG?? I'm sorry I don't know how to grab it and post, just go here and scroll down. Podesta playing cards with a girl whose hands are ziptied... http://www.thechancegeorgeblog.com/single-post/2016/11/30/The-War-Between-People-Who-Are-Having-Sex-With-Children-Against-Those-Who-Dont

Piscina

Yes, she is very weird looking, with that shock of grey hair. I've noticed that these people kind of 'grow' into their personalities. They all become nasty-looking, old ugly people eg Clinton, Soros, Podesta. Whenever I see their faces I think of how a child would feel seeing their faces at night time. Scary.

keepthefaith

Small population of 200=Inbreds

Xpol

Also remember who Clement Freud grandfather was. Nome other than signujd frued.

What was he into...how the mind works, and sexuality, you could call him the father of modern psychology.

IF this is something involves genetics having Clem be involved instead of just some random rich guy adds more credibility to the gene theory.

The pax gene is also connected to the third eye, the pineal gland. We know the elite love things to do with the pineal gland. And you know who else liked the pineal gland? Sigmund Freud

micha_

Source for the police claim?

southartful

Hear that noise? Its the sound of the noose tightening on these fuckers 😊

keepthefaith

yes please.

remedy4reality

The Occam's Razor argument that explains the varied sketches of one suspect in the McCann abduction is thus:

A) The POLICE are lying . The varied efit renderings are of TWO different men, not one. Those men are both Tony and John Podesta.

B) During the abduction in an effort to sow confusion in case they were seen, Madeline was handed off relay style by the Podestas, while brought to what many suspect is Freud's nearby residence.

AreWeSure

That's not an Occam's Razor argument at all. You are supposed to find an answer that fits the facts, your "relay style" handoff is just making shit up.

Throughout this whole investigation, people have been acting like if they act like screenwriters and fleshing out the known facts with wildy imaginative speculation, and acting like that is legitimate and it's not. So many people have been making a movie in their heads and pretending that makes them detectives.

If the cops are lying, then what about the witnesses who were the basis for the Efits sketches? Are they lying too? Or did they just ignore how the police characterized the evidence they provided to police. Do you think they really said it was two men between 60 and 80 years old? and when the cops said one man between 20-40, they were just like, OK, we'll go with that?

remedy4reality

Making shit up? Fuck you @arewesure . Occam's razor is the most likely explanation for an event and it absolutely applies to my post and this investigation. Of course they both carried Madeline, that neatly explains the varied efit descriptions. And of course the police are lying. Why is this investigation dead and there are no new leads? Because the criminals are known and are being protected.

Side note: You're a real piece of shit and have accumulated the most negative points of anyone on this sub. You are the one making a movie in your addled little mind. Nobody likes you. You're a scumbag apologist for pedophiles and you're going to rot in hell. FUCK YOU JOHN PODESTA !!

AreWeSure

Occam's Razor IS NOT how can I line things up so that they agree with my previously held beliefs.

Here's how Occam's Razor is applied.
If the UK, police are lying and want to cover this up, why release these sketches at all in 2013? How does this align with known facts?

And the known facts are in 2013, the UK police completely changed the timeline and understanding of what happened that night and asked people to look at these newly released efits and come forward with information about this suspect. How does these known facts square with police want a cover up. A coverup would want less attention on the case, why would refocus attention on something they were covering up? Why redo the investigation and cross check cell phone records and change the previous timeline of the case if they want to protect the men in those sketches? They could have simply done nothing. That would be a lot easier.

remedy4reality

You're rationalizing your own held beliefs, you fucking pile of shit.

WHY DO THE TWO EFITS LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THE PODESTA'S, YOU DUMB FUCK?

Answer: BECAUSE IT IS THE PODESTAS !! THAT IS OCCAM'S RAZOR, YOU RHETORICAL RETARD.

cky_stew

Occams razor here would be they look like someone who resembles the podesta's. You know they resemble Jerry McCann too right? A much more plausible theory.

This is much more likely than high profile politicians personally committing the most high profile abduction in the last 20 years - and the police are lying about the mugshots they put out themselves to give everyone a hint about it.

remedy4reality

Occam's razor would NOT allow for the extremely long odds of TWO men that look EXACTLY like the Podestas being in SAME location where they have friends and are known to frequent. It would not allow for John Podesta's emails being wiped clean on the day McCann disappeared. It would not allow for the Madeline's eye anomaly being of great interest to Soros and his paid underlings, the Podestas. Good God, this is like teaching an infant to play poker.

cky_stew

You're making quite a few assumptions there though. The one with the fewest is Occams Razor - by definition.

Also source on the podestas being known to frequent that spot? News to me. Also source on JP's emails being wiped on that day? I thought there were loads of days where he didn't respond/have emails done. What makes you think it was wiped?

Just trying to get all the info, no need to be rude.

remedy4reality

here you go... you passive aggressive shitbag, steeped in arrogance and ignorance. Look at the Wikileaks email... Look at Podesta's email account date. Now, shut the fuck up. http://truthfeed.com/breaking-bombshell-multiple-reports-tie-clintons-podesta-brothers-to-child-abduction-case/34348/

cky_stew

That article is wrong. JP's first email was before that . Also this isn't proof of anything being wiped.

JP visiting Portugal 7 years after the abduction is not the same as being "known to frequent".

Stop sensationalising shit. It takes away from what little credibility you have, especially when you type like an angry teenager.

remedy4reality

Have you seen the video of John yet? Let me guess, it's not him torturing that child.

It could be anyone, right? Christ, you're acting like the guys god damn attorney.

Just why are you ganging this post with @arewesure , the biggest shilling piece of shit on this sub?

cky_stew

Like I said, I'm just trying to get the facts straight for my own knowledge.

Asking simple questions just triggered you into repeatedly insulting me, comparing me to a shill, comparing me to a pedos lawyer. No wonder nobody takes pizzagate seriously when they come here and see you typing in caps at me like a maniac, just for asking questions about your sources. Seriously dude, grow up.

remedy4reality

oh look... not a single submission to this sub from you.

And here you are, the self anointed expert. lol

cky_stew

So what's your point? I'm a shill and a pedo apologist because I have zero submissions? How does that invalidate my legitimate questions? Please explain? I think you'r just pissed off because I called you out on your bullshit (which you still haven't directly addressed lolol).

Stop acting like a fucking child and address my points or just carry on accusing me of shilling for asking fucking questions about your assertions, which you couldn't even prove .

I expect you'll do the latter, in which case this will be the last you hear from me in this thread - Don't have the time to keep going around in circles with your defeated ass otherwise.

remedy4reality

shut the fuck up you piece of shit / get the fuck out here

remedy4reality

Stow that passive aggressive shit. I'm on to you. I have not an ounce of respect for pedo apologists/enablers and I don't give a fuck what you think.

Nobody ( the media ) takes PG seriously because it's a massive cover-up, you dumb fuck.

remedy4reality

You don't have the facts, you jerk. You are full of nothing but questions and yet, you pretend to have all the answers. I am making no assumptions. Have you been following this investigation? Do you realize there is PRIMA FACIE evidence to bring in the Podestas for questioning, right now? Yet, here you are, defending them. FUCK YOU.

cky_stew

Yeah I have been following pizzagate since before it was even called that.

I always question everything, it's healthy to do so.

Now, are you going to answer my questions or just say "FUCK YOU" and run away?

remedy4reality

Look at the link, you fuckwad.

Look at the email about the trip to Portugal.

I've run out of patience with you. You have been following? Is that right? Then why don't you know this information and why are you putting your opinion over the KNOWN FACTS?

cky_stew

Like I put in my other reply, what you were saying is not "KNOWN FACTS" - you are just exaggerating upon loose links to create bullshit claims to stand your assertions upon.

I'm all for investigating these pedo fucks - but please stop acting like a complete dick in response to me just asking questions. There is nothing wrong with that. You just seem to have gotten super angry with me because I proved you to be making shit up.

Atatarkus

A while back someone on here theorized that maybe the efits were put out purposefully in protest by the police because they knew exactly what happened but couldn't do anything about it. I'd prefer that to be the case but unfortunately there are too many examples of police in the UK telling porkies and, as you say, occams razor.

concernedaboutitall

They are divorced and it was apparently messy.

Chatman

Here is a politically neutral non-reddit link.

GenghisSean

Thank you!

Jackiestbird52

Of all the children throughout the world abducted WHY did this make national news? What was different about her abduction ?

keepthefaith

Parental ties to the Elite.

FreeThem

Corruption is infectious

nitro169

Where was weiner during all this?

Xpol

Good question. There is a sketch of a man who looks like Weiner who is involved with the case.

Also follow up Gislaine Maxwell, who links to Epstein.

From what I've seen before Anthony Weiner, the Podesta Brothers, Maxwell, Clem Freud, and the McCanns were all involved in this plot.

Here's the link to what I'm referring to https://powerglobal.us/2016/11/08/weiner-podesta-maxwell-child-abduction-cover-up-madeleine-mccann-witnesses-described-clintons-senior-staff-and-associates/

keepthefaith

Been discussed a million times on here before.

Freemasonsrus

Giving an upvote bc I'd love to see this case resolved, but I'm not convinced parents are involved.

keepthefaith

Of course they were involved, for f sucks.

Kate McCann screamed "they've taken her" (witnessed by hundreds) upon realizing Maddie was missing.

The_Kuru

If they were at Freud's house, then I think Freud arranged to have the girl abducted while they were there and had a witness story in place that would implicate the Podestas which would ensure that the investigation would never go sniffing around Freud's house because they'd have to bury it.

They would have put themselves in a horrible position to be used if they were there, but easy to fall into that trap. I like my narrative better than the Podestas snatching a girl from a house and lateraling her back and forth ( both were witnessed with the girl? ). That's too comical a caper to imagine.

But the spawn of a psychiatric genius with government knowledge plotting a perfect crime? That actually satisfies Occam's Razor more than the Podestas ( both of them! ) grabbing and running off with a little girl.

keepthefaith

They went to Freuds house weeks after the kidnapping. They were having dinner at their hotel when Maddie was taken.

Try to get your facts straight.

quantokitty

More disinfo. They're covering for someone. If they were such big proponents of getting to the truth, why'd they let Freud bugger little kids for so long? A$$holes. You know, this could be very well entwined in what's about to be released. This is muddying the waters by controlling the narrative.

Truthseeker3000

Yup. She's a heartless satanist to the core. Have u read about her involvement in the heart association and her group? Check out pics on google she loves to flash her illuminati hand symbolism like a big shot. Vile sick bitch. Shares a bed with a pedophile with teddy bears on the nightstand. No children of her own either. Wonder why? She's been around the butchers block before no doubt. Wonder how many brains she's eaten and blood she's drank. Kuru anyone?

SluggishJ

I may have something on those teddy bears, but it doesn't make it any less mysterious. Some of the emails including the handkerchief were regarding Martha's Vineyard. Well, at Martha's Vineyard, they have a Teddy Bear house where they fill the house with teddy bears, all sizes, and take photos of children there. I wonder if tony or whomever took a souvenir?

remedy4reality

they are divorced now.. everything you said was spot on

Truthseeker3000

Yes, u are right they are divorced but I've always wondered WHY? What made her want a divorce? I mean, surely he's not having any affairs with other grown women!! Imagine what she's seen him do and what she really knows. Repent u sick twisted bitch, before it eats u alive...

Blacksmith21

The sketches are all easily verifiable through Daily Mail, BBC, and other UK media outlets. The "sketch of 1 person" theory is probably just a red herring. That's like saying sketches of a dachshund and a bulldog look the same.

AreWeSure

The UK police when they released the sketches were quite clear about them.

The sketch was of the same man as remembered by two different people and that man was 20-40 years old. What's your reasoning for Red Herring?

Blacksmith21

So NSW, or whatever policing powers that be, would never do something to bog down the investigation? I'm just saying there was pressure to release the efits, and pressure to keep a lid on it. The "happy medium" was saying it was 2 drawings of the same individual. Those two look nothing akin to the same person, anatomically speaking. Hell, they may not even have the same father. Who knows with these people.

hir0ce1ine

The efit was of one man running towards the sea with a child. When the McCanns got back to England, Gerry was holding one of his twins the same way the Smith family saw the man running towards the sea.

The only other witness was a friend of the McCannns and her story was rubbish. She changed it multiple times and accused two people of being the abductor despite not seeing their face.

matheasysolutions

the 1 person theory is a complete fabrication ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIzjickYpEA) )

cky_stew

TL:DW? - How was it fabricated?

Description says:

The details left out include the fact that the Smith family witnesses to the supposed abductor of Madeleine McCann, which were Martin Smith, his son Peter Smith, and daughter Aoife all clearly stated that they had no idea how the man looked like and could not recognize who the man was, or what his face looked like, even if they were given a photograph of him! Not only that but the efits were suppressed from the public for 6 YEARS and first released during a BBC Crimewatch TV program in which the investigator Any Redwoord URGED the public to find the man. Thus it is clear that the efits could NOT have been realistically be produced at all!

And:

This also means that the Podestas could not have been the kidnapper, but this doesn't take the Podestas off the hook either.

Did you even watch the video? That description makes it seem that it believes the 1 person stuff.

Am I missing something here? Please point me to exactly where the 1 person theory is proven fabrication - I thought it was fact due to media reports, and have been repeating it so.

matheasysolutions

I made that video.... I should've worded my above comment correctly. The efits were almost certainly a fabrication. The efits clearly look like two people made from two different computer programs, and just so happen to look like the Podestas (including the mole on Tony's forehead).

Thus saying the suspect was "one person" is the same as saying there were "10 people", i.e. none of it matters. The efits were almost certainly fabricated and look like two people (i.e. Podestas).

I explain this more in Part 7 ( https://youtu.be/GdNLuXMer8Y) ) and you can see the full series here: https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1593888

cky_stew

Thanks. I still don't see how it's debunked that the drawing is of more than one person though, which part of the video is it?

matheasysolutions

Thanks for asking. As explained in my last comment, I should have worded my first comment differently. The two efits are themselves debunked, as to being almost certainly fabricated. The Smith family had no idea how the man's face looked like and couldn't recognize him in a photograph (please watch from 18:51 of this video https://youtu.be/EIzjickYpEA?t=18m51s) ), and the efits were released 6 years after the supposed disappearance, and created by private investigators the McCanns hired...

So what we have is two fake efits. They are supposed to describe "one suspect" but it clear that these efits were fake. Thus it is up to us to make our own judgments. The efits look like two people, on two different computer programs, and look like the Podestas (including the mole on Tony's forehead).

cky_stew

Thanks for the clarification dude.

OhRutherfordBehave

(It wouldn't)

RockStrong

I read in the reddit comments that the two sketches were of one man. I have seen this comment before. As it was reported the sketches were created with the help of two different witnesses and the two sketches look nothing alike, they are obviously not of one man. Two sketches. Two men. Both look like portraits not guesses. If the sketches are legit, they are evidence of a cover up imo. Why hasn't anyone been able to say the sketches aren't real? Because perhaps they are?

AreWeSure

Have you not looked at this case other than what pizzagaters said about it? https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/14/british-detectives-efits-madeleine-mccann-suspect

The face of A SUSPECT in the investigation of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann has been released to the public by detectives.

Police have issued two efits that they believe are descriptions of THE SAME MAN, who is now being sought as a priority by the British detectives leading the new McCann inquiry.

Descriptions of the suspect were given to the Portuguese inquiry by two witnesses after Madeleine disappeared. ...... But it is this man in particular whom detectives are very keen on finding. The man was described by the two witnesses as being inside the Ocean Club complex in Praia da Luz area on the evening that Madeleine went missing from the apartment. Redwood will travel to Germany, the Netherlands and Ireland to repeat his appeal as detectives from the British investigation attempt to close in on the man. He was described by the witnesses as white, aged between 20 and 40, with short brown hair, of medium build, medium height and clean shaven. cc @iwokeup

iwokeup

I hear what you are saying, it's just that the description of one man was given by two separate witnesses and the efits, while similar in some ways, appear to be two different people if you look at the noses, jaw structure and hair. So in my opinion the police are mistaken that it is the same person, and they are only guessing it is the same person...

"Police have issued two efits that they believe are descriptions of the same man"

"Descriptions of the suspect were given to the Portuguese inquiry by two witnesses after Madeleine disappeared."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/14/british-detectives-efits-madeleine-mccann-suspect

I will admit though, the liklihood it is the Podestas just seems unlikely, but to be honest there is so much creepy shit I wouldn't be shocked by it if true.

But back to the single suspect theory, it hasn't worked out for the police so far, maybe they should revisit whether it is one person or two separate people each seen by a different witness.

AreWeSure

Your assumption relies on the idea that police sketches always match the subjects and that multiple witnesses describing a person to a sketch artist would result in sketches that match. Unfortunately this is not the case. Eyewitness testimony turns out to be unreliable fairly often and this is repeatable in experiment after experiment. It terms of facial recognition, it depends on the skills of the sketch artists and the tools they have and how well the witnesses can remember a face and describe it accurately. This is a famous image that was produced in a well-known experiment of an Identikit operator putting together profile sketches of four of the most famous people in the world based on photographs of them. Can you recognize any of them? And he had a photo of them right in front of him. http://s3.crackedcdn.com/phpimages/article/3/0/3/92303_v1.jpg

I believe the police are saying it's one man is that multiple witness saw him at the same time http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-24513267 Police say a family saw the man with a blond-haired child of three or four, possibly wearing pyjamas, heading away from the McCanns' holiday apartment.

Xpol

STOP LISTENING TO PEOPLE

use only your five senses. If someone randomly walked up to you and showed you the sketches and said "excuse me do you think this picture shows two different men, or one man during different periods of his life". Honestly what would you say?

I have personally done this to several people , including strangers, they ALL said different people. I then showned them the sketches next to the Podestas and ask if the sketches were of the Podestas and they ALL said yes.

Go with facts, not what people say. Go with your gut. The days of listening to other people for interpretation of fact and pretending that is reality is gone , gone away with the msm.

iwokeup

Those saying the sketches are of one man are providing disinfo

keepthefaith

Sketches are based on testimony of Irish witness who said he only saw ONE man. Is not 'disinfo': its actual info. But sketches are podestas, no doubt. Something bigger at play.

iwokeup

Ok, each witness saw one man (see below), but the efits, while similar are distinctly two different people... looks like they could be brothers but not twins or the same person. Of course it is just my opinion, but the cops haven't solved it with their "one man" theory either

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/14/british-detectives-efits-madeleine-mccann-suspect

"Descriptions of the suspect were given to the Portuguese inquiry by two witnesses after Madeleine disappeared"

Clinker

There was much confusion about this. http://metro.co.uk/2016/04/28/british-cops-know-who-snatched-maddie-5848349/ The police know who took her. They released the sketches but couldn't do anything else because of politics and power. also- this picture shows her eye deformity- which happens to be something that George Soros has also. http://s3-origin-images.politico.com/2015/07/01/150701-george_soros_gty_629.jpg

jenidaninja

ugly repugnant piece of shit

chordwonder

Freud + Podestas

chordwonder

Her parents are innocent, but they don't have to prove innocence. Burden of proof should be on the accuser.

derram

https://archive.is/SBjn4 :

Madeline McCann is trending on Facebook after Portuguese police claim her parents covered up her disappearance. Would be a crying shame if people saw this image. : The_Donald

This has been an automated message.