The extent to which the Clintons undergo the "conspiracy" treatment is almost comical. There are entire galaxies of blogs and sites dedicated to teasing out symbolism from the most mundane of details. See: pizzagate.
You mean like when Hillary Clinton repeatedly invoked the existence of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" against her and Bill back in the 90's? Yes, that was comical.
Anyway, pizzagate is a well known hoax. Does that somehow cancel out all the other conspiracies that surround the Clintons? Logically it does not but most people are only thinking at a 3rd grade level so it's a great distraction.
Where there's smoke, there's fire and there's plenty of evidence to support the Clintons selling nuclear secrets to China, smuggling drugs with the CIA at Mena Airport and of course the infamous "body count".
Is it? I haven't found any solid debunking of the really weird aspects (handkerchief email). The wikipedia article lists [1] and [2] as citations for the word "debunked", but both don't really offer any compelling argument except the general preposterousness of the crazy 4chan talk. But there are no alternative, plausible explanations for the weird, code-like language of some of the emails.
Please point me to better debunkings if you know or can find out.
Yes, it is. Tons of media outlets have investigated it and found nothing. Even if they had found some tiny sliver of evidence—which they didn't—it wouldn't prove that there was a conspiracy, because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
There's infinitely more reason to believe the Steele dossier is true than Pizzagate, but at the moment we have to assume it is false too, because the evidence just hasn't shown up.
> But there are no alternative, plausible explanations for the weird, code-like language of some of the emails.
Maybe, just maybe, when John Podesta talked about pizza, he was actually talking about pizza.
