Let's see them. He sent a lot of tweets. Scrolling through them takes a long time -- he retweeted every tweet that mentioned his name. Which are the relevant ones?
In some from 2012 he's hinting about the $850,000 David Brock gave to Alefantis, presumably to cover something up. But if Alefantis was deeply involved in a pedophile ring, wouldn't he have as much or more to lose than Brock? How could he use that against Brock without doing serious damage to himself?
Obviously, there was something David Brock didn't want publicized. But if it really was some massive sex trade operation that involved the Clintons and Alefantis threatened to reveal it, wouldn't Alefantis be dead by now? More likely, the Internet has built a massive mythology around a kernel of actual truth.
Well, your post is very interesting - one of the best tonight. This may be very big or very small. So let’s see how it plays out. I just don’t want freepers to feel uncomfortable talking about this. I was going to suggest a ping list for people who are following this story. That would exclude people who worry than poor John Podesta is getting smeared unjustly - as he, of course, smears and destroys others...