[tptacek]

Hasn't this Instagram stuff been debunked by the NYT? Whatever you might think of their political leanings, the NYT isn't covering up a pedophilia conspiracy in the service of the campaign manager of a candidate who just lost the election. Why would I trust people who actively cheerlead Putinist fakenews over the NYT's own fact checkers?

[patrickg_zill]

You should look for the archived Instagram pages of his and make up your own mind.

Neither NYT article that I found, directly address what the innocuous meanings of hash tags like #killroom (with pic of enclosed windowless room) and #chickenlover (pic while holding a young boy) are. Like I said, I found this unusual.

[pcwalton]

> You should look for the archived Instagram pages of his and make up your own mind.

No, because the Instagram pictures are faked. Snopes debunked this. http://www.snopes.com/pizzagate-conspiracy/

[trumpSupporter]

Is this faked? http://archive.is/9FN8n

Snopes has not "debunked" anything. Once, the couple who run the Snopes blog were good at investigating urban legends and such. In recent years they have gotten more political and more obvious in their selective coverage to fit an agenda.

Note, I am 100% against harassing the guy and his business, but you cannot deny his instagram had the pictures on it. Does that justify a barrage of internet hate and accusations of criminality? No. But lying about Instagram pictures being faked when they weren't is also not helpful.

More 'fake' instagram posts tied to comet ping pong that make the conspiracy nuts raise their eyebrows:

http://archive.is/jXWrG

http://archive.is/8xQIo

http://archive.is/mKH6M

http://archive.is/dJoiL

http://archive.is/S742A

[NSFW] http://archive.is/S6jzu

http://archive.is/8Bq8e

[pcwalton]

Surprisingly, I'm quite comfortable with my decision to trust the New York Times' investigative reporting team (which is what Snopes links to regarding this Instagram matter) over "archive.is" links created by Reddit and 4chan.

[Nadya]

This is an edited screenshot of your post [0] with my personal user style applied. This is an archive.is link of your post [1]. Feel free to edit or delete this post. The edited screenshot should not and cannot be trusted to be valid. The archive link, on the other hand, can be trusted to have been a 3rd party 'screenshot' of your post at the time the archive was taken.

Unless you are suggesting archive.is is a malicious actor or has any known cases of editing or changing archives made using its service. To my knowledge, there is no evidence or reason to believe either accusation.

The archive.is links are not "created" by 4chan or Reddit users. The links are created by request of the service. It shouldn't matter who requests the service as long as the service is reliable.

If the NYT investigative report team claims the archive.is links are doctored - I'd lose my faith in the NYT's ability to investigate as they have clearly failed in their duty.

[0] http://i.imgur.com/ip7pxSX.png

[1] http://archive.is/7pz3G

[pcwalton]

I regret even giving the slightest impression that the credibility of the insane "pizzagate" theory could be buttressed by the Instagram photos in question, fake or not.

[patrickg_zill]

There's no evidence that archive.is or other archive sites have been hacked, or that they modified what they present as archived pages.

The snopes page doesn't even use simple photoshop methods to show how the images were modified.