rigorousintuition.ca

tapitsbo » 14 Nov 2016 21:22 wrote:Someone suggested his name was a pseudonym for "j'aime les enfants"

Interesting that you sound so certain about what you just said slomo

Freitag » Mon Nov 14, 2016 3:28 am wrote:https://twitter.com/i/moments/795452870745354240

FourthBase » Tue Nov 15, 2016 6:04 am wrote:"Paranoia seems to us an absolute patriotic duty at the moment and Rigorous Intuition is like the incredibly symbolically twisted and bizarre dream you wake up from to realize that the scenario thrown up from the unconscious is actually the expression of some very simple truth you had been desperate to avoid facing." - Theresa Duncan, who once wrote a blog post titled The Trouble with Anna Gaskell.

Today's Washington Post has a really.... uh... odd Roxanne-Roberts-type article by "Galleries" critic Jessica Dawson about "Tony and Heather Podesta [being] a Study in Power Collecting."

"But the Podestas' stock of artists know well the benefits of securing such politically connected patronage. Uniquely capable of advocating for their artists using the lobbying skills of their day jobs, Tony and Heather can secure access, lend advice and connect artists to curators and coveted museum shows. It's backing more valuable, at times, than dollars.

...To keep themselves in pictures, Tony and Heather jet to art fairs and biennials from Sao Paolo to San Sebastian -- often just for the weekend. Theirs is a life led breathlessly, moving from airport to dinner party. The art is an extravagance that occasionally gives Heather pause.

... During last year's Venice Biennale, they threw parties night after night, renting out their favorite restaurant and packing it with artists and a gallerist or two. Here in Washington, they've hosted art parties with Patricia Puccini, Cathy de Monchaux, Anna Gaskell, Frank Thiel, Annee Olofsson, Nikki Lee and others. Curators from the Hirshhorn Museum and Corcoran Gallery of Art, top Washington collectors and the city's best dealers regularly show up. Podesta parties are where connections are made."
So that's where those Hirshhorn and Corcoran curators are hanging out!

Anyway... inside the Style section, Jessica then delivers a surprisingly bland[ish] review of Avish Khebrehzadeh's show at Conner Contemporary Art, calling it "sweet and bracingly sentimental" with a weird tie-in to her Podesta article.

The review left me thoroughly confused. I've seen this show and to me it simply reflects the sudden discovery by the upper crust "high art" world of world-class artists that can actually draw.

Curators and critics here seem to be still trying to catch up to the fact that drawing is hot!

Burnt Hill » 13 Nov 2016 18:12 wrote:Hey, who here wouldn't want to "crack this horrific case wide open"?
Can we explore one small aspect of the case as presented?
This should be an opportunity to strengthen your case, or at least shed a weakness.
What is so sinister about the blog Evies Crib?
Being a friend of John Podesta is enough to accuse Evie's mother of exploiting her children?

FourthBase » Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:31 pm wrote:

Burnt Hill » 13 Nov 2016 18:12 wrote:Hey, who here wouldn't want to "crack this horrific case wide open"?
Can we explore one small aspect of the case as presented?
This should be an opportunity to strengthen your case, or at least shed a weakness.
What is so sinister about the blog Evies Crib?
Being a friend of John Podesta is enough to accuse Evie's mother of exploiting her children?

Ah. This is supposedly what I failed to discuss.

1) Did you read about the Luzzattos?

2) Did you see the first sentence in the blog header, "Evelyn is growing up, soon she will be the Queen of the entire US of A, right now, for a limited time only, you can spend some time with her online, raw and uncut"? Sure, silly, in a vacuum. But yes, if you are intimately connected with John Podesta, then using words that bring to mind a Girls Gone Wild tape is going to raise an eyebrow. Granted, it is pretty much at the very bottom of the list in terms of suspicious things you'd find in a Pizzagate data dump. How about you pick higher-hanging fruit, if you are going to be playing the role of Devil's Advocate.

Burnt Hill » 15 Nov 2016 20:51 wrote:

FourthBase » Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:31 pm wrote:

Burnt Hill » 13 Nov 2016 18:12 wrote:Hey, who here wouldn't want to "crack this horrific case wide open"?
Can we explore one small aspect of the case as presented?
This should be an opportunity to strengthen your case, or at least shed a weakness.
What is so sinister about the blog Evies Crib?
Being a friend of John Podesta is enough to accuse Evie's mother of exploiting her children?

Ah. This is supposedly what I failed to discuss.

1) Did you read about the Luzzattos?

2) Did you see the first sentence in the blog header, "Evelyn is growing up, soon she will be the Queen of the entire US of A, right now, for a limited time only, you can spend some time with her online, raw and uncut"? Sure, silly, in a vacuum. But yes, if you are intimately connected with John Podesta, then using words that bring to mind a Girls Gone Wild tape is going to raise an eyebrow. Granted, it is pretty much at the very bottom of the list in terms of suspicious things you'd find in a Pizzagate data dump. How about you pick higher-hanging fruit, if you are going to be playing the role of Devil's Advocate.

Higher hanging fruit? It is the second item in the Pizza Gate Primer.

I am not playing Devils Advocate.
I am trying to eliminate spurious info so it doesn't get included in any conclusions drawn.
Is Evie's Crib an exploitive site? Have those children been exploited?
More so than culture in general is exploitive?
I get it. Its all "suggestive" of something "horribly" wrong.
But I need to deal with real human beings, are these some of the the children being exploited?
Is that not the suggestion, that they are?

tapitsbo » Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:26 am wrote:https://dcpizzagate.wordpress.com/

and this is fever swamp professional distraction disinfo that has nothing today with classic RI type topics, whatsoever

Burnt Hill » 16 Nov 2016 15:51 wrote:

tapitsbo » Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:26 am wrote:https://dcpizzagate.wordpress.com/

and this is fever swamp professional distraction disinfo that has nothing today with classic RI type topics, whatsoever

Here tapitsbo provided the link to the "Primer".

To which Fourth Base replied - "It's all real. It's all true. All of it. Everything."

But somehow FB doesn't know what Primer I am referring to?

And I can "do better" than asking if those kids at Evie's Crib were actually exploited?

Is that not exactly what does matter, rather than potential allusions to possible pedophilia?

And imagined inferences to "Girls Gone Wild"?

Burnt Hill » 16 Nov 2016 16:45 wrote:Raw and Uncut leaves a lot of echoes, you've heard what you are biased to hear.
So I get a 1-5% discount after one question, but I still don't know whether you think those kids were exploited?
Like probably a few others here, in real life I am a mandated reporter. If I even suspect abuse, I have to report it.
I take the same approach here. I have to ask the questions.
The smiley was not a jab at you.
It was me staring at the abysmal feelings I encounter.