Pizzagate Part Deux: The Trouble With Open-Source Research, & The Media Go to War

When I published my initial coverage of Pizzagate in November outlining Pizzagate’s origins and some of its verifiable discoveries, the investigation was just taking off. Since then, things have developed a great deal — and not all for the better. Interest in the research has exploded, causing a noticeable deterrioration in the overall quality of posts, leads, and comments in the forum where the bulk of the investigation is now taking place. Sensationalistic claims with no evidence, claims with irrelevant “evidence,” conspiratorial assertions provided without basis, an increase in racist and anti-semitic posts, and other distracting, irrelevant, or hostile nonsense have been pushing down posts by people who had been uncovering genuinely compelling connections and leads.

This is to be expected when from the massive increase in participation on a platform that provides an open forum where anyone can contribute. There is fear amongst many researchers that anti-semitic, racist, or violent posts will be cherry-picked by media outlets to “prove” that the research has been the work of hateful alt-righters, when in fact these represent a very small minority, and are guaranteed to happen on a platform that allows anyone to join and post. As a solution, pockets of serious researchers are discussing alternative closed platforms where they can focus and work, and then post findings on the public forums when something seemingly significant is uncovered. I believe for the research to remain effective, this kind of move will be critical going forward.

The “Fake News” Meme & Silencing Alternative Viewpoints

Fears have also been aroused due to the recent gunman incident at Comet Ping Pong. Researchers fear that someone will be physically attacked, and the blame will be placed on them under the guise of the “fake news” meme. Even a cursory examination into the discussions shows a wide and emphatic rejection of violence, anti-semitism, doxxing,  and other forms of hate and harassment.

When someone does post something advocating violence or hatred, it is usually followed by strings of replies denouncing that person and their views. However, it wouldn’t stop media outlets from reporting on it as if it were widespread. Nor would it stop their readers from believing it, as the average news consumer typically accepts the headlines in front of them at face value without researching more deeply — especially if the information reinforces an existing belief.

As I’ve reported, articles “debunking” Pizzagate have universally made false claims about the theories, such as the lie that researchers have concluded that Comet Ping Pong is the “headquarters” of a pedophile ring “led by Hillary Clinton” for the Democratic party. Debunking articles generally also focus on some of the crazier-sounding theories being floated, while avoiding those that are more difficult to immediately explain away.

An example of what has to be intentionally misleading coverage in New York Times’ latest attempted debunking shows a well-circulated photo of Obama playing Ping Pong with a boy in the White House. The photo had resurfaced during the Pizzagate investigation with, since it is the Internet, a number of people making sensationalistic and/or incorrect claims about its “connections” to Pizzagate. By displaying it on a video where the uploader had added the caption “OBAMA AT COMET PING PONG,” the New York Times’ readers will now assume that this photo had a substantial impact on the conclusions of the researchers.


The silly screengrab, clearly taken in the White House, that the NYT used to manipulate readers into believing that Pizzagate research is based on universally absurd evidence

They also cherry-pick research that the researchers themselves have debunked, giving the implication that these debunked aspects form the bulk of the evidence. Other ideas they cite are believed by only a minority of people involved in the research.

The main overall thesis of Pizzagate is that pedophilia is extremely widespread and endemic to the global political power structure on all sides of the left/right spectrum, just as Hollywood has been accused of being a hotspot for pedophilic activities as well.

Also, as with Hollywood, researchers believe that those involved are using their power to source children and to cover up their crimes. The over-arching argument at this point is that the number of coincidences defies easy explanation and that with this much smoke, there may very well be fire as well. There are many other theories being floated and more radical ideas being explored, but the central argument is simple. This is far from the impression you will get from media outlets denouncing the research.

Due to recent news coverage expanding upon the “Russian hackers” meme in a child pornography context, along with a slew of articles misrepresenting Pizzagate, there are two major concerns. One is that the collective consciosness is being set up to deny Pizzagate even in the event of a major research breakthrough. For the other concern, enter H.R. 9393.

H.R. 9393

There is a palpable fear in the air that censorship of alternative news outlets, blogs, and even discussion forums might be underway on the pretense that “fake news hurts real people.” This fits with the “Russian hackers” meme that has been pushed since the Trump/Clinton election season, and in fact times up perfectly with a section added to the 2017 Intelligence Authorization Act, or H.R. 6393,  a bill that funds intelligences activities. 2017’s bill delegates funding to:

“counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence … carried out in  coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly.”

The section lists forms of possible ‘Russian influence’ as:

  • Establishment or funding of a front group.
  • Covert broadcasting.
  • Media manipulation.
  • Disinformation and forgeries.
  • Funding agents of influence.
  • Incitement and offensive counterintelligence.
  • Assassinations.
  • Terrorist acts.

No standard is provided by which intelligence agencies have to prove that Russian influence is involved, calling into question how the law could be abused to stifle free speech. What constitutes “media manipulation,” and how must it be connected to Russia to be prosecutable?

Julian Assange denies Russian involvement in recent Wikileaks releases, a claim corroborated, in the case of a DNC leaks by a UK-based diplomat. Though they could be lying, there has been little  evidence presented for the accusation other than claims from anonymous US government sources and a debunked Washington Post article (more on that later).

“Fake News Hurts Real People”

It should be mentioned that fake news does hurt real people, but when compared to falsehoods pushed by corporate media outlets, damage caused by alternative media suddenly appears laughably minimal. Repeating claims from anonymous government sources as “facts” is not journalism; it’s effectively no different than being a mouthpiece for the State. Far too often, journalists allow themselves to become parrots for unnamed diplomats, bureaucrats, and cronies, and the result is often deadly. See below for examples when major American and international news media:

-Repeated, uncritically, the lie that WMDs were in Iraq, justifying the Iraq War — helping gain public consensus for a conflict that has killed about 70,000 civilians and a quarter of a million people in total. This tragic journalistic failure is reported in detail in former New York Times reporter Michael Massing’s book Now They Tell Us

Lied that Spain sunk the USS Maine, sparking the Spanish-American War, just to sell newspapers

-Collectively have (at minimum) hundreds of CIA assets and agents working both as reporters and in management positions, according to Watergate journalist Carl Bernstein in his report “CIA and the Media

Uncritically repeated claims from a teenager, supported by members of Congress with no verification and who gave only her first name, when she lied that babies in Kuwait were torn from their hospital incubators by Saddam’s henchmen, generating public support for the first Gulf War that generated thousands of deaths. The teenager ended up being the daughter of a diplomat and her lie was concocted by a PR firm hired by Kuwaitis to artificially drum up support for a US invasion

-Eagerly publish grisly footage and reports of ISIS behadings while remaining conspicuously uncritical in comparison of US ally Saudi Arabia, which publicly beheads someone every two or three days, stones people to death for crimes from atheism to adultery, and punishes rape victims

-Have been caught feeding debate questions to Presidential candidates before the event and giving veto power to politicians over what to include in articles

Lied to protect legendary pedophile Jimmy Savile

-Based their assessment of the veracity of a highly-publicized list of “Fake News” websites almost entirely on the unverified claims of ProporNot, a newly-formed and anonymous group of unknown people providing no evidence or methodology whatsoever for their conclusions. The Washington Post is now facing a lawsuit for their article, published two days after H.R.6393 was passed. After heavy criticism they issued an Editor’s Note claiming that they did not intend to lead credence to the claims, despite that being the entire premise of the piece

-Have been caught faking smaller events that did not result in wars or deaths, but display a blatant disregard for basic journalistic ethics. One recent example is an incident in which ABC news staged a fake “crime scene” by tying yellow Sheriff’s Department tape between two off-camera mic stands, providing a more dramatic backdrop for an otherwise drab interview shot. While CNN reported on this gaffe, they have also been caught doing extremely similar trickery. Photo from the ABC segment below:


Faith in traditional media outlets is at an all-time low. With repeated incidents such as those listed above, and the kind of absurdity illustrated  by the image below, no one should be particularly surprised:


The Comet Ping Pong Gunman Incident

Researchers are greatly suspicious of Comet Ping Pong gunman Edgar Maddison Welch, and I believe the suspicion is not entirely without merit. Although many have brought up that he is a small-time film actor, and his IMDB page lists a film Something About Pizza where he is credited as playing “gunman,” IMDB pages can be edited by the public, raising the possibility that a troll could have inserted the information.

Either way, his credit has now been removed, so whether it has been removed to hide his participation or because it was false to begin with, we won’t ever know. The IMDB page for the film, before both it and Welch’s IMBD pages were edited to remove references to Welch’s involvement, is below:


According to his homepage, Welch’s father also owns a small film production company called Forever Young Productions, was executive director of a charity focused on child abduction and abuse, and has done work for state and federal law enforcement that included involvement in undercover operations. These tidbits have led to further speculation. Because of the production company and IDMB page, some overzealous bloggers have claimed indisputable proof that Welch is a “crisis actor” — someone hired to participate in staged events. Of course, they are far from being indisputable “proof” of any such thing, but are still very much worth noting.

Much more compelling, however, is the fact that the day before the gunman incident, a researcher monitoring Washington, DC traffic cameras on this website posted that they had noticed something odd. A northwest-facing camera pointed toward Comet Ping Pong had been rotated to point in a new direction. Though the front of the pizza parlor is just out of its direct view in the original position, it shows the corner of Connecticut and Nebraska Avenues.

The day after the camera was moved to face away from Comet Ping Pong, the gunman incident occurred. This coincidence seems possible, but remarkably, the day after the gunman incident, the camera had been rotated back to its original position. Here is the original angle, with the front of Comet Ping Pong located off-camera to the immediate left:


And here is what it displayed when it was rotated what appears to be approximately 90 degrees, the day before the gunman incident, only to be returned back to its original position again the day after:


I don’t know how often the direction of traffic cameras is changed, or for what reasons, but it seems odd that this particular camera would be rotated the day before the incident and then returned to its original position the day after. At the very least it strikes me as rather wasteful of municipal resources, as it isn’t clear what purpose this would serve, especially given that about 50% of the camera’s view was blocked when it was rotated. It is possible the camera is adjusted according to which areas have the highest traffic at different times of day, but regardless of the time of day that I visit the site personally, the camera appears to be in the same northwest-facing position.

The Timestamp Anomalies

Articles about the gunman incident that began appearing online were time-stamped showing publication before the incident actually occurred. Could articles have already been readied, and a publishing mistake caused them to go live prematurely? Or can this be caused by some time of timestamp glitch?


When one integrates the fact that the US government has considered shocking, bona-fide false flag schemes such as the now-declassified Operation Northwoods  as part of its regular playbook, operations to discredit Pizzagate — including those where real injuries or deaths occur — suddenly become entirely plausible. Researchers have repeatedly posted warnings that a more serious incident committed by an alleged proponent of Pizzagate could be the next big move to effectively shut down the investigation, and perhaps even justify the censorship of alternative discussion in general.

The Mysterious Case of the Disappearing Norway Incident

On November 20th, when awareness of Pizzagate was growing but was still nowhere near its current level, news agency AP published an article about arrests made in connection with a pedophile ring in Norway. The ring included politicians, lawyers, and police, and included the rape of infants and people offering their own children for sexual purposes.

The story was republished in outlets including The New York Times, ABC, and The Washington Post. These newspapers, along with countless others, subscribe to the AP newswire, allowing them to re-post AP’s content. Several weeks later, after interest in Pizzagate had picked up enormously, researchers discovered when attempting to reference the articles that, in addition to others such as the Los Angeles Times, all three of these major outlets had removed them from their websites:


From my brief stint working for a newspaper, I am aware of two primary reasons for an article to be removed. One is because of factual errors, in which case the standard practice is to just issue a correction notice and fix the factual errors. It is very rare for an article to be so riddled with falsehoods that it is retracted entirely, and these cases are often highly publicized, such as in the case of the Rolling Stone rape article and the Stephen Glass scandal at The New Republic.

Another possible reason would be because it was deemed to not be newsworthy, but this is very rare. One can fairly safely assume neither of these apply to the AP article about the Norwegian pedophilia ring, which can still be found on the AP’s website and elsewhere. The question, then, is why did editors see it fit to scrub the article?

Articles from newswire services can come with certain licensing limitations, so it’s very concievable that an article would disappear from a third-party outlet once the term of the license had expired. However, since other news outlets are still carrying the identical AP story, this explanation seems unlikely as well.

Perhaps these news outlets thought it could appear damaging to their credibility to run stories claiming Pizzagate is nothing but an insane conspiracy theory, all alongside an article outlining exactly the kind of activities that the Pizzagate research has attempted to expose.

Troll Wars

Researchers have spotted a suspicious trend where the same comments denouncing Pizzagate appear, verbatim, in multiple places. I have noticed this personally when a commenter left an explanation for one of the Podesta emails on one of my Pizzagate articles that I later saw repeated, word-for-word, on two other websites. The following screen-grab shows another such example:


For the record, anyone who has been following the research directly from the beginning knows that Pizzagate is not a “troll job” or “hoax” conceived by tricksters on 4Chan or elsewhere. Whether or not you believe that Pizzagate is true, it originated from a genuine and accidental discovery.

Here’s another example from Twitter. Keep in mind that these aren’t re-tweets, they’re multiple accounts posting the exact same cut-and-pasted message. One of the accounts posted the same Tweet twice on two different days:


What Comes Next

This summary of the corporate media’s War on Pizzagate is not comprehensive, but outlines the main talking points. Stay tuned, as even with the deterriorating situation on the research platform, there have been more interesting connections uncovered. I will outline these in a new article to be released soon.


Linked sources, in order of appearance:



  1. Thanks for the update. I have been following the pizza gate saga fairly closely and I hadn’t heard the ant-Semitic angle yet. I’ve heard some outlandish conclusions but nothing of an ethnic nature. Curious as to where have you seen that connection?

    1. Just very occasional posts or replies in the research forum blaming “the Jews.” Pretty standard Internet anti-semitism type stuff.

      1. Got it. Thanks for the reply.

  2. Still awaiting actual victims, which are a hallmark of, you know, crimes.

    1. Surely you know that victims of sexual crimes are more likely NOT to report the crime to police, than to report it? Now imagine that you’re a child who has been raped by a well-respected Washington DC bigwig and his/her equally respected and implrtant buddies. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out how someone would be too terrified to come forward.

      Here’s an example for you. How often do you hear from victims of international human traffickers, which are a well-documented phenomenon? Extremely rarely. To deny that those trafficking victims exist is doing them a shameful disservice, and would provide no meaningful counter-argument whatsoever as to the existence of the victims, which is what you’ve done here.

      Have a little more compassion than that, friend, or at least try harder with your counter-arguments instead of focusing your energy on being snarky. You’re asking an utterly traumatized group that feels they have no voice to just show up and tell the world about horrific things that were done by them to people who are potentially internationally respected figures, and citing your perceived lack of them coming forward as evidence they don’t exist. Frankly, they deserve better.

      1. Arthur Miller · ·

        “Surely you know that victims of sexual crimes are more likely NOT to report the crime to police, than to report it?”

        So the fact that there are no known victims (of any crime at all) is in itself a form of evidence? That’s a pretty exotic idea.

        What about the victims’ families, parents, grandparents, guardians, friends, carers, social workers, teachers? Why has not one single voice made one single allegation concerning one single offence that might have occurred at any time since Comet Ping Pong opened?

      2. I didn’t say that a lack of victims coming forward = evidence that something is going on. I said a lack of victims coming forward doesn’t qualify as evidence that something ISN’T.

  3. Not to quibble – though I suppose I am quibbling – but if the camera at the SW corner of Connecticut & Nebraska shows Connecticut Avenue on the right when it is pointing north (which it does), and it were turned to point south, then Connecticut Avenue would no longer appear on the right of the picture, but rather, on the left. Just as if you were standing there and turned your head from pointing north to pointing south. The mystery photo also shows a street on the right. So either: 1) the photo provided by this “investigator” is fake; or 2) the camera in the second photo is pointing west (the only other direction where the street would remain on the right), which is also away from Comet and no more and no less likely to capture anything sinister that may have been planned for the next day.

    I am confident however that the “investigation” will simply adjust the conspiracy to fit this inconvenient fact. Let’s see how long it takes.

    1. Thanks for your comment, I’ll have to take another review of the positioning and see what I conclude. The photos are most certainly not fake, as I had reviewed the traffic cams personally.

      However, your end note suggests you haven’t been following the research discussions at all, or you would see that many ideas being floated have been debunked within the community itself, which is aiming to separate fact from fiction as best they can in an open-source forum where literally anyone with an Internet connection can contribute all kinds of nonsense to the discussions.

      You clearly assume that everyone involved shares a predetermined view and are then seeking “evidence” to fit their pre-set conclusions. Ironically, this appears to be your own approach — decide that it’s all fake FIRST, then find evidence that supports that viewpoint, rather than looking critically and assessing each piece on its own merits, or lack thereof. It helps to be less snarky when one is also trying to be critical, as it devalues the argument being made and is an indicator of the arguer holding a pre-determined viewpoint.

    2. To me, it looks like it checks out. The problem was a lack of specificity on my part. The initial image the camera is pointed northwest rather than directly north, and was not rotated a full 180 degrees as I indicated. My fault — thanks for point that out, I’ll edit the article to improve the accuracy there.

  4. Yes, I double checked too. The original camera points northwest (I say “north” but Conn. Ave angles NW), and the second angle is SW on Nebraska (my shorthand: west – they both angle). When oriented normally the entrance to Comet is about 90° to the right of the camera, not really close to the camera view. Maybe if the camera were pointed NE along Nebraska it would pick it up on the side, but otherwise not.

  5. Hm. It’s your blog of course so you can delete my comments whenever you like, but it’d be polite, and a good bit less misleading if you were to leave something in its place like “Comment deleted by moderator”.

    Don’t you agree?

    1. I trashed your previous comment without ever approving it to begin with because it repeated claims you’ve already made, along with the asusmption that no researcher (other than the gunman, who I wouldn’t count as a “researcher” even in a basic sense) have been to Comet Ping Pong; a conclusion I’m not sure what research, if any, you did to confirm.

      Aside from that, since it only re-hashed points from your previous comments, I deemed it unhelpful for the discussion. Your previous comments, though snarky, at least contained legitimate ideas and some thoughtful critiques despite their pompous tone. I have made clear elsewhere that comments deemed to be intellectually unproductive will not be published.

  6. Any researcher who’d been to Comet Ping Pong would say so. Why not? In the end it’s all about shoe leather and seeing for yourself. When no one says they’ve been there, it’s like the Holmes story about the dog that didn’t bark. The silence is more telling than the noise.

    As for the balance of my comments seeming repetitive – well, it runs both ways I guess. All I can say is, again, that the physical, factual evidence gives no indication of a pedophile ring in this place, and any one who has been to the place 15 or 20 times, as have I, as have hundreds (thousands?) of local residents, is sufficiently well-informed to reject these notions out of hand.

    1. They ARE saying so, which again, leads me to believe you haven’t looked at the research for yourself, preferring to make assumptions based on…I’m not sure what, exactly. Comet Ping Pong is also a sidebar in the research, it merely started out there because of revelations in the original Wikileaks emails that spawned all of this. No one believes it’s the “headquarters” of anything. But frankly, I don’t want to keep explaining to you why your assumptions are bogus if you are going to continually make them despite not taking the time to look directly at what researchers are actually saying and doing.

  7. […] Source: Pizzagate Part Deux: The Trouble With Open-Source Research, & The Media Go to War […]

  8. As someone who has worked at a treatment center that handled victimized children, I will say that your comments to jervis are spot on. I would like to add this to your point: children abused by parents or guardians are so conflicted that they will refuse to testify against said guardian even when such testimony might improve their situation.

    1. Thanks for your comment, Mitch, and for your work — I imagine it can be very emotionally taxing.

  9. Jonathan Mills · · Reply

    First of all, I’d like to compliment you on your Pizzagate articles, which I’ve found both informative and well-written. I appreciate that you are open-minded without being overly credulous, as some on this issue are.

    I’m wondering if there are other writers out there who are doing similar work to yours, ie aggregating and sifting through the results of the research? It’s painful and time-consuming to trawl through endless reddit/voat threads, especially when a lot of it (to me) seems like bunk.

    Kind regards, and keep up the good work. I await your next article with interest.

    1. Thanks very much for your nice comment. Honestly, I haven’t been able to find anyone else who is covering this topic with a similar approach to mine, nor with the same level of discretion regarding inlcuding only those details that are substantiated by solid, compelling findings. I began following the research from the very beginning, and knew due to the nature of the topic that this kind of coverage would be very hard to find, so I jumped on it. And yes, a lot of it is bunk and very difficult and time-consuming to sift through. Other stuff seems potentially legitimate at first but is debunked by further research, and other stuff still is totally unsubstantiated or irrelevant nonsense; hard to avoid when anyone with a web connection has discovered they can contribute their opinions and ideas. It was easier in the beginning when the group was smaller and there was a higher concentration of serious, dedicated, and intelligent researchers, now diluted by the the masses discovering that they can all chime in.

      Either way, I’m going to continue covering the worthwhile developments as best I can, and am thrilled you find my articles helpful. I will be posting more coverage regarding the latest developments within a few weeks and look forward to having you back to the site.

  10. Vivianvolta · · Reply

    Very thorough! Very methodical. I appreciate your meticulous research and have gleaned a basic understanding of what is “pizzagate” through your site. Since discovered I have advertised your address on live stream Trump thankyou tour and on trending sites with, “pizzagate totally debunked” to encourage even naysayers to get a true knowledge of pizzagate. I know “You can lead a horse…”but even an idiot would think twice about ignoring the truth after reading your research. Thank You for your tedious work I know it’s nothing compared to your efforts but I hope I help.

    1. Thanks so much for your comment. Your sharing of the article(s) is extremely appreciated, more than you know!

  11. Evelyn Pringle · · Reply

    Fantastic article – you are really up to speed on this topic. Thank you so much for the great article. I am sharing on Twitter and FB.

    1. Thanks for your comment, and double-thanks for sharing it around! Another update is in the works regarding new discoveris that I think you’ll find very interesting. Stay tuned!

  12. Keep up the good work Ace of Swords. The money powers can and have made a huge onslaught on the internet to confuse, discredit, and make people forget pizzagate, but it did have its day and some researchers (David Seaman’s youtube channel for one) are not letting it die an easy planned death.

    1. Thank you! And yes, I found David Seaman’s experience having videos removed from Youtube for alleged terms of use violations, disputed by a third-party lawyer, especially disturbing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Liberty Blitzkrieg

The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion. - Albert Camus

Hidden Forces

"It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong." - Voltaire


"It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong." - Voltaire

Touch Stone Connect

News & Views (Independent Media!) ****************************REMINDER***************************** Please Donate - There are NO Subscription Fees and NO Advertisements Free and Independent Media Under NO Politician's or Business's Control

%d bloggers like this: