Trump is mentioned over 38,000 times in the Epstein files, more than anyone by far. He was listed on Epstein's flight log no less than eight times. Even Epstein's personal pilot testified to these facts.

The pilot who testified to flying Donald Trump on Jeffrey Epstein's private plane was Lawrence Paul Visoski Jr.

Records indicate that Donald Trump flew on Epstein's private jet at least eight times in the 1990s.

Coincidental?

Only for the cognitively dissonant!

I'm going to remind everyone of what your sick pedophilic "dear leader" said about his good ole buddy Epstein again: "I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." Donald Trump, published in New York Magazine on October 28, 2002, during a phone interview.

Source citation: the article "Jeffrey Epstein: International Moneyman of Mystery," published by New York Magazine on October 28, 2002. https://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/n_7912/

28 women have publicly accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct (ranging from unwanted kissing/groping and harassment to sexual assault or rape) dating back to the 1970s/1980s, according to compilations from Wikipedia (as of late 2024/2025 reporting), Business Insider, Axios, and other mainstream outlets. Counts vary slightly by source and criteria (e.g., public named accusations vs. broader claims).

Of course, to the cult of Trump, all of these victims are lying, and oh no, we have a "witch hunt" in the making. A common brainwashing catchphrase that Trump conditioned his cult followers with. One of many, might I add.

📌 In 2023, a New York civil jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse (and defamation) of writer E. Jean Carroll related to an alleged 1990s incident in a department store dressing room. It awarded her $5 million (she has received payment of roughly $5.6 million, including interest after appeals). A related 2024 defamation verdict awarded her an additional $83.3 million (still subject to appeals as of mid-2026 reporting).

📌 Other lawsuits (e.g., by Summer Zervos, Alva Johnson, or the anonymous “Katie Johnson”/Jane Doe claim involving alleged underage rape with Epstein) are particularly sick and twisted. During the course of this savage sexual attack, Plaintiff Johnson loudly pleaded with Defendant Trump to 'please wear a condom.' Defendant Trump responded by violently striking Plaintiff Johnson in the face with his open hand and screaming that 'he would do whatever he wanted' as he refused to wear protection. After achieving sexual orgasm, Defendant Donald J. Trump put his suit back on, and when Plaintiff Katie Johnson, in tears, asked Defendant Trump what would happen if he had impregnated her, he threw her $200 out of his wallet and said, "get a fucking abortion."

Source citations: court docket numbers. The docket number for the California case is 5 16 cv 00797 DMG KS, and for the New York case, it's 1 16 cv 04642 RA.

Katie Johnson is still in hiding after numerous death threats by the cult of Trump and still remains in hiding to this very day. It's these same types of individuals like https://substack.com/@xtrology that will further victimize women who have already been traumatized beyond comprehension, and that among many reasons is why I vehemently hate Trump supporters.

📌 Ivana Trump’s 1989/1990 divorce deposition allegation of a “violent assault”/rape was later clarified/withdrawn by her in the criminal sense and tied to their divorce settlement (which included confidentiality terms).

Other out-of-court settlements related to sexual misconduct allegations: Documented cases are limited and often tied to broader disputes rather than pure admissions of sexual misconduct liability:

📌 Jill Harth (1990s): She filed a 1997 lawsuit alleging sexual harassment, groping, and attempted rape. It was withdrawn as a condition of settling a related business/contract dispute involving her then-partner’s company. Reporting describes a confidential/six-figure settlement (around or somewhat over $100,000 in some accounts) primarily tied to the business claim, with Harth’s sexual misconduct suit dropped as part of the deal. She has continued to stand by her account.

📌 Ivana Trump: Their 1990 divorce settlement included confidentiality provisions after the assault allegation in deposition papers. This was a marital/divorce resolution, not a standalone sexual-assault victim payout.

I could write a book on this subject, and I'll continue to track down leads until this sick bastard is finally hung.

The vast majority can clearly see that sick SOB for what he is, even if you degenerate cultists can't, "honey!"

And there's an army of us that won't stop until his ass is nailed to the wall and convicted, executed...

And then his multitudes of victims will finally have their justice.

Sarah Kellen just testified before Congress about her years inside Jeffrey Epstein's inner circle, and what she revealed has shaken Hollywood to its core.

.

The moment Sarah started naming names, the silencing machine activated.

"I was 21 years old, far from where I grew up, stuck on an island in the middle of nowhere with no college degree, no family, no friends, no money, and nowhere to live."

Sarah Kellen

This isn't one incident.

Let's back up.

Three weeks ago, the House Oversight Committee did something they hadn't done before.

They brought in Sarah Kellen for a closed-door interview—four hours, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle. And what she revealed has people in Hollywood panicking. You've heard the name Sarah Kellen in connection with Jeffrey Epstein, but most people don't understand her role. She wasn't just any employee.

She was allegedly one of Epstein's right-hand women operating alongside Ghislaine Maxwell at the very center of his operation. And for decades, she stayed silent, until now.

The House Oversight Committee chairman said something during a break that tells you everything you need to know.

"After months of unpaid labor, he instructed me to draw him a bath on his island, then ordered me to undress and get in with him, and he said, The job is yours. Now you just have to keep it."

Sarah Kellen

Why does that matter?

Because Sarah Kellen was about to say things Congress had never heard before. Here's what most people don't realize about Sarah's story. She wasn't born into this world.

She didn't grow up grooming for the Epstein network. She was recruited, slowly, methodically, into it.

And understanding that process is crucial, because it's the same process being used against victims to silence them today. this, she gave us three names of people that were involved in.

These were new names for us. Think about that: no safety net, no support system, isolated, desperate. The legal documents describe what happened next, but Sarah's own words paint the picture more clearly than any court filing ever could.

"Who do I pound it to?

The 200 richest people in the room, or the 200 million people watching at home who aren't winning awards, who aren't millionaires, Let that sink in. Months of work, no paycheck. Then the quid pro quo, sexual coercion as the price of employment."

Sarah Kellen

And once she crossed that line, once she became complicit through abuse, the control mechanisms changed. She wasn't just a victim anymore. She was now trapped.

The FBI files are explicit about what happened next. Sarah didn't just show up for work. According to investigative reports, she became the person who would contact the girls, multiple girls, repeatedly.

She would arrange the appointments, she would prepare the rooms, she would set up the massage tables and the oils. She was the facilitator.

The question becomes, was she a victim who was coerced into helping or was she something darker?

The answer, according to legal documents, appears to be both. And that's exactly where the silencing begins. Here's the thing that matters most. Sarah lived through this for 20 years.

The FBI tracked her, they recorded her phone calls, they documented her arranging victim after victim, and nobody did anything—not until decades later, when she finally agreed to testify.

When she sat down with Congress, she revealed something critical. She started naming names, real names, people who've never been publicly connected to Epstein before. Ellen threatened Wendy on air.

The moment where Ellen makes it clear that there's a dark side and Wendy realizes she's been warned. This is where the story connects, because Sarah Kellen's testimony didn't happen in a vacuum. It was part of a larger pattern of whistleblowers, victims, and people trying to expose Hollywood's secrets.

And every single one of them experienced the same thing: systematic silencing. Let's be clear about what silencing means. It's not just legal threats. It's not just intimidation. It's a coordinated apparatus designed to discredit, institutionalize, and neutralize anyone who threatens to expose the network.

We know this because we've seen it happen to multiple people, and they all follow the same playbook. First, let's talk about Ellen DeGeneres. On the surface, Ellen presented herself as a different kind of talk show host: daytime television, relatable, funny.

But there's a pattern in the Epstein files and in the testimonies of people who worked with her. When anyone got close to exposing something uncomfortable, Ellen's response was aggressive. There's a documented moment where Wendy Williams, another talk show host with a history of speaking truth to power, tried to call out Ellen's dark side on Ellen's own show, and Ellen, live on camera, threatened her.

18 years, 19 years on TV doesn't change your life. It exposes you for the person that you really are. That wasn't a joke, that was a warning, and everyone watching knew it. But Ellen's role in this network goes deeper than threatening talk show hosts.

According to multiple sources and the Epstein files themselves, Ellen was connected to people in that inner circle—not directly accused of crimes, but connected in ways that matter when you're trying to understand how the silencing apparatus works.

Ellen cultivated an image, a brand, and that brand was built on being nice, being harmless, being different from the mean people in Hollywood. But the moment someone threatened that image, the moment someone tried to expose what was really happening behind closed doors, that niceness disappeared.

We saw this pattern repeat over and over, and it's all connected to one fundamental truth: the people at the top of Hollywood's hierarchy are protecting each other.

Here's what the legal documents tell us. When Sarah Kellen was being tracked by federal authorities, when there were discussions about whether to charge her with crimes related to sex trafficking, something happened: those discussions stopped.

And suddenly, instead of facing prosecution, she was given a kind of immunity.

Why?

Because the deal that Epstein made—the non-prosecution agreement from 2007—protected not just Epstein, but everyone around him, including Sarah Kellen, including others. It was a get-out-of-jail-free card signed in secret that kept the entire network safe.

But that safety was contingent on one thing: silence. Nobody could talk, nobody could expose, nobody could name names without risking everything. And when someone did try to talk, when someone like Wendy Williams decided to use her platform to speak the truth, the machine kicked in.

Now, let's talk about Ricky Gervais, because Ricky did something that Hollywood never forgives. He told the truth five times between 2010 and 2020. Ricky hosted the Golden Globe Awards, and each time he used that platform to go after the people in the room: the producers, the directors, the executives, the people who benefited from the system.

But in 2020, Ricky did something different: he named names, he connected dots, and most importantly, he said the word that everyone in that room was terrified to hear.

He said, "Epstein." Did he mention meeting Wendy's son backstage and Wendy's expression changing to show recognition of threat?

Ricky was making a choice. He was saying, "I'm not here to protect you, I'm here to tell the truth."

"You could binge-watch the entire first season of After Life instead of watching this show. That's a show about a man who wants to kill himself because his wife dies of cancer and it's still more fun than this. Spoiler alert, season two is on the way, so in the end he obviously didn't kill himself. Just like Jeffrey Epstein."

Ricky Gervais

(Audience groans and murmurs)

"Shut up. I know he's your friend, but I don't care."

Ricky Gervais

Boss level 10,000%

And when he started connecting those powerful people to Epstein, something happened that nobody expected: the room went silent, not the friendly kind of silence, the terrified kind, the kind that happens when people realize they're being called out on camera in front of millions of viewers.

And you know what happened after that?

Ricky was banned from hosting the Golden Globes again. He's never been invited back. The message was clear: if you use your platform to expose the network, you will be punished. Five years later, the Department of Justice released the Epstein files, and everything Ricky said that night proved to be true: the flight logs, the emails, the connections between major studios, production houses, Trump and Epstein himself—all of it was real. But by then, Ricky had already paid the price for telling the truth.

He was silenced through institutional retaliation: banned, blacklisted in practical terms. And the message was sent to everyone else: don't do what Ricky did, don't name names, don't connect the dots, or else.

But Ricky's silencing was subtle compared to what happened to Wendy Williams, because Wendy didn't just threaten the network; she tried to protect people in it, and when she did, they came after her with everything they had. Wendy Williams has a long history of speaking truth on air.

She's done it for decades.

When she was on the radio, she talked about things that nobody else would touch. She exposed predators, she called out the hypocrisy of the entertainment industry, she made powerful people uncomfortable. And then one day, everything changed.

Wendy was at the height of her career, the Wendy Williams show was a daytime television juggernaut, she had a loyal audience, she had a voice, and she used that voice to do something dangerous: she started exposing abuse in the music industry.

Specifically, she talked about what was happening to young men in hip-hop and R&B, she talked about predators, she talked about parents who sacrificed their children for opportunities, she called out the system. Clearly, uh, they are lying to me when they say I am I can go out and and do what I want to do. That statement was about more than just Ellen.

That was about the entire industry, the fakeness, the duality, the way people present one face in public and another behind closed doors. And the people she was exposing, they knew exactly who she was talking about. Diddy, who Wendy had exposed and criticized on air, went on her show, and while the cameras were rolling, he did something that looked like casual conversation, but was absolutely a threat. really turns my stomach.

That's Dorothy Grannard's feeling, whose daughter, Carolyn, was recruited by Epstein when she was only 14 years old. Do you understand what just happened? He didn't say anything explicitly threatening, but he made sure she knew that he had a connection to her son.

He was sending a message, and Wendy got it. You could see it in her face, the shift, the recognition that he was letting her know he had leverage. That's how the silencing network works: not with a lawsuit, not with open threats, with subtle reminders of what's at stake—your family, your safety, your reputation.

But that wasn't the end for Wendy, that was just the beginning. Years later, Wendy started experiencing health problems, cognitive issues, she said. She was placed into a conservatorship. Legally, a guardian was appointed to make decisions for her, she was institutionalized, medicated, and isolated.

The official diagnosis: frontotemporal dementia, a serious neurological condition that would make her incapable of taking care of herself. But here's the problem: recent medical evaluations ordered by Wendy's own legal team found something different: she doesn't have the disease, she never did.

The diagnosis was apparently false. He knew everyone in the fashion industry, academics, finance, government, powerful world leaders, dictators, and everyone in between. Think about that: a woman who spent her career speaking truth, a woman who exposed predators and abusers, a woman who threatened powerful people, and suddenly she's diagnosed with a disease she doesn't have, institutionalized, drugged, cut off from the outside world.

Is that a coincidence, or is it the most sophisticated silencing tactic of all, using the mental health system itself as a weapon? Because here's the thing about a conservatorship: it's legal, it's official, it looks legitimate. The people running it can claim they're helping, they can claim they're protecting her, but the effect is the same: she's silenced, she can't speak, she can't threaten the network, she can't tell her story.

And everyone watching knows that if you get too close to the truth, if you threaten too many powerful people, the same thing could happen to you. Now, let's connect what we've learned, because these aren't separate incidents. They're part of the same apparatus. Sarah Kellen agrees to testify about Epstein.

She starts naming names—new names, people who've never been publicly exposed. The moment her testimony becomes public, the network goes into defensive mode. Ellen DeGeneres, who has connections to people in that network, uses her platform to threaten Wendy Williams, a woman known for exposing abuse. Ricky Gervais, at the Golden Globes, connects the dots and names Epstein in front of everyone.

He's immediately blacklisted. The message is sent. Wendy Williams, who's been exposing abuse and predators in her industry, suddenly finds herself institutionalized with a fake diagnosis. Sidelined by the mental health system. These are coordinated responses—not conspiracy in the traditional sense, but a shared understanding among powerful people about how to protect themselves. They see one person getting too close to the truth, and they activate the playbook.

Here's what the playbook looks like.

Step one: delegitimize. Question the person's credibility: Is she mentally unstable? Is she exaggerating? Is she attention-seeking?

Step two: isolate. Cut them off from their platform, don't invite them back, don't hire them, make it clear that speaking out has professional consequences.

Step three: institutionalize. If the person has any vulnerabilities—mental health issues, addiction, family problems—use those as leverage to get them formally diagnosed with something more serious than they actually have, get them into a system where their voice is controlled.

Step four: discredit. Once they're isolated and institutionalized, everything they say becomes suspect: she's mentally ill, she's in a conservatorship, she's not trustworthy. It's brilliant in its brutality, and it works because it operates within legal frameworks.

It looks legitimate, it appears to be about helping people, but the effect is total silencing. The FBI documents we've seen reveal something else crucial: Sarah Kellen's phone was tracked, her movements were monitored, there were silent hits placed on her travel to flag her every movement.

Law enforcement knew about her for years, but nothing happened—no charges, no prosecution. Why? Because the non-prosecution agreement protected her, and that same agreement protected the entire network.

So when Sarah finally agreed to testify, when she agreed to break the silence that had protected everyone for decades, she became a threat.

And the silencing network activated.

Here's what we need to understand: this isn't about Sarah Kellen, it's not even primarily about Ellen DeGeneres or Wendy Williams or Ricky Gervais, though they're all part of the story. This is about how power works in Hollywood, and more broadly, how institutions protect themselves when threatened.

When you have a system built on abuse, on the exploitation of vulnerable people, the only way to keep that system running is through control: control over information, control over who gets to speak and who doesn't, control over the institutions that might otherwise investigate or expose what's happening.

The Epstein network wasn't just about one man; it was about a system of powerful people who all benefited from his activity, some directly, some indirectly, some just by knowing about it and saying nothing.

And when that system was threatened, when people like Sarah Kellen and Ricky Gervais and Wendy Williams tried to expose it, the network responded the way networks always do: by protecting itself. But here's what's different now: the Epstein files are public.

Five years have passed since Ricky Gervais named names at the Golden Globes, and every prediction he made has been proven true. The documents don't lie, the emails don't lie, the flight logs don't lie.

Ellen DeGeneres is no longer on television; she moved to the UK, sold her California properties, and disappeared from public life.

Is that a coincidence, or is it someone who knows the net is closing in?

Casey Wasserman, a major Hollywood talent agent with suggestive emails in the Epstein files, just sold his entire agency and stepped down from his position.

Why?

Because the exposure is happening, the names are coming out, the connections are being made. Wendy Williams is fighting her conservatorship, she's trying to get back her voice, and the more she speaks, the more people understand what happened to her—that she was silenced not because she was mentally ill, but because she was a threat.

Sarah Kellen testified, she named names, and whether or not we see the full consequences immediately, that testimony is on record. It's part of the official government investigation. It can't be unsaid, it can't be hidden.

The silencing network is real, and it's powerful, but it can only work if people stay silent. The moment someone speaks, the moment someone names the names and makes the connections, the illusion starts to crack.

So why does this matter right now?

Why are we talking about this in 2026?

Because Sarah Kellen's testimony is still being processed. The House Oversight Committee said they'd release the transcript.

They said the world would see the names she revealed. That hasn't fully happened yet.

There are still redactions, there are still negotiations, there are still people trying to keep certain details hidden. But the pressure is building, more documents are coming out, more emails are being released, more people are starting to ask questions, and most importantly, the pattern is becoming impossible to deny: whistleblower after whistleblower, victim after victim, people who tried to expose the truth and suddenly found themselves facing institutional retaliation, conservatorships, mental health diagnoses that don't match the medical evidence, professional blacklisting, threats against their families.

This is what silencing looks like when you have institutional power, and understanding it is crucial because it teaches us to recognize when it's happening to other people, to other whistleblowers, to other people who threaten powerful systems.

The Epstein network may be centered on one man, but the silencing apparatus that protects it—that's still active, that's still operational, and it's ready to deploy against anyone who gets too close to the truth.

Sarah Kellen testified, she named names, and now we wait to see if her voice, finally raised after decades of silence, will actually change anything, or if it will be silenced again. But here's what's different this time: she's not alone, Ricky spoke, Wendy spoke, the victims spoke, the documents were released, and millions of people now know the truth.

Silence dies in the light. That's the story, not of one abuse, not of one abuser, but of a silencing machine and the people brave enough to break it.

Thanks for reading.

This story is still developing; keep an eye out for the congressional transcript releas

Dissociation is an 'escape route' from unbearable traumatic events, a tendency to deny or suppress traumas and their effects, as well as the emotions stemming from them. The traumatic reality is not fully grasped nor processed but has disruptive effects on the lives of individuals subjected to traumatic events. What amplifies the power and role of traumatic events in the lives of individuals is parental involvement.

There is a specific type of trauma that can only come from those whom the child instinctually is designed to trust. This, again, amplifies the traumatic effects, fragmenting the mind or causing the child to dissociate from the traumatic event.

The 'controller' or the 'programmer' then begins the process of forming the 'alter' or alternate personality.

A warning to the reader: from this point forward, we will get into a common process practiced by many generations of occult families.

Let me clarify the term 'occult' here in the context that will be used for the remainder of this series.

This term isn't meant to convey the worship of any sort of Satanic or demonic entity; rather, I am gleaning more from the traditional understanding.

Occult: the word comes from the Latin 'occultus,' which means 'hidden,' 'concealed,' or 'secret.' Therefore, in this context, we will refer to the occult or occultic as things done in secret or that are hidden from the public, by groups or organizations of people.

Severe, repetitive childhood trauma can lead the mind to use dissociation as a vital defense mechanism, helping a person survive overwhelming pain.

As a result of this fragmentation, the mind may create distinct identity states or alters to compartmentalize experiences and manage different contexts or memories.

Individuals in highly dissociative states may experience gaps in memory and reduced access to integrative cognitive reasoning, which can create vulnerabilities to manipulation, emotional exploitation, or undue influence from others.

At what age do traumatic events begin to occur to be the most effective in creating an "alter"?

Early childhood, typically before ages 5–9 (most often starting before 5–6 years), is when a child is considered most susceptible to developing Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) from severe, chronic trauma.

Severe, repetitive trauma (especially interpersonal trauma such as physical/sexual abuse, emotional abuse/neglect, or other overwhelming experiences involving caregivers) that begins in very early childhood is strongly linked to DID. Many patients report the onset of abuse before age 5, with averages often in the preschool years (around 3–6) and ongoing trauma lasting for years.

Identity formation and integrative capacity are highly malleable in early childhood. A unified sense of self is still developing; overwhelming trauma can prevent integration of experiences, memories, emotions, and self-states, leading to dissociative parts (alters) as a survival mechanism.

After roughly ages 6–9, developmental changes typically produce a more coherent self, so the same extreme trauma is more likely to result in other trauma-related or complex dissociative presentations rather than classic DID.

Sidran and related clinical summaries note that as many as 99% of people with dissociative disorders have histories of repetitive, overwhelming trauma at a sensitive developmental stage (usually before age 9).

Preschool years are highlighted as particularly vulnerable because abuse rates are high during this time, and early onset correlates with higher dissociation.

Research on how the brain grows and develops shows that severe trauma very early in life (especially in the first 3 to 6 years) can change the physical structure or shape of certain parts of the brain.

These brain differences are linked to dissociative symptoms — the kinds of problems seen in conditions like DID, such as feeling disconnected from yourself, memory gaps, or having separate identity states.

In other words: Trauma that occurs while the brain is still rapidly building itself in those earliest years appears to leave lasting marks on brain structure that relate to dissociation later on.

Again, this is about to get disturbing. Reader discretion is advised.

The process

To get into this, we're going to focus on the Kibby Linga story and give her personal account of being a Satanic Ritual abuse survivor. Though again, we're specifically focusing on the creation of the alter aspect. This will contain a lot of the systematic abuse that's used as a catalyst to fracture the psyche.

One further note, the vast majority of these individuals either never recover from these traumas and end up spending the rest of their lives in psychiatric care, or they didn't live through the experience to tell their stories.

I may seem mythological in my approach to this article and emotionally detached, but this is a mechanism that I had to develop to be able to continue my research and expose these evil deeds that are occurring right under our noses every single day.

I myself, because of the things that I've seen in conducting my research, the majority I'll never speak on, have had to go through trauma therapy, thus my adaptation of the emotionally detached approach.

So, I see this as a necessary work of love and exposure of darkness.

It's only by bringing this darkness into the light of day that healing and truth may come. With that being said, let's continue.

The Kibby Linga story...

Kibbi was born into a satanic cult led by her mother. Her family hid behind the cover of religion and would use inversions of religion as an excuse to perpetuate abuse.

As a child she says she was forced to watch and partake in human sacrifices, as well as incest.

Kibbi told herself as a child that she would one day get away, be an artist, and expose her mother - and after years of being silenced, that is exactly what she is doing.

Here's Kibby Linga

"I only experienced the rituals from age 0 to 9. During that time, actually, I was pretty conscious. I was a pretty strong kid.

My DID did not "dissociative identity disorder" and did not develop during that time.

That actually came at age 13 when I started my denial journey. I'm a satanic ritual abuse survivor and as a result have developed dissociative identity disorder.

And that was part of the manipulation tactics done to me from my mother, who gave me the idea to split. But growing up, I knew it was wrong. I could tell that my mom was following darkness when there was light or beauty that she was just not following and that she was doing evil because she was hurting humans and humans have feelings and this is my child brain.

So growing up, I knew what she was doing was wrong because she was hurting people with feelings and that would be wrong because I have feelings and I don't deserve to be hurt. But then I didn't know what it was, right?

I didn't know it was satanic ritual abuse.

Like growing up, I thought my family was the only family in the whole wide world who did this. And then even the first six months of my recovery, I didn't know what satanic ritual abuse was. I still thought my family was the only one in the world. And then I learned like what my type of abuse was, and then I met other survivors and related so much and actually the more and more my journey continues, the more, I hate to say this, how common I realize it is because I'm meeting so many more survivors.

Yeah, so I can't tell you exactly what my mom believed because I can't get inside her head, but she used the Catholic church, so growing up we were part of the Catholic church.

She went, she was a really good Catholic. Even after that, she was just really good on the outside.

(Note:A satanic black mass is a magical ceremony and inversion or parody of the Catholic mass for the purpose of mocking God and worshipping the devil.)

But she used the Catholic church and then also with her rationalizations for her behavior. Like she liked to pretend like she had a higher position, particularly Jesus.

Jesus was used against me the most. I have a huge Jesus trigger, I don't know if you know.

So she said she was basically like the modern-day Jesus and that was why she was doing this to all these children was to wash away sins, because she had power like that.

She was saying she's sacrificing these people for God. From ages 0 to 9 when the rituals were happening and ending, I was like I have two sisters. I'm in the middle.

We're close in age and I was the one who was like, "This is wrong. This is wrong, wrong, wrong."

My older sister was always on my um side. My younger sister was on my side until age 5, 6, 7, 8. I witnessed her going to denial.

(Note: Children will disassociate on their own, and this is when the denial stage begins. It takes different amounts of trauma depending on the person for this to occur. This is the fracturing of the psyche, but it takes a learned programmer to then develop the "alter" during this fractured state. A child during this denial phase will cling to the person to whom they're closest, even if it's the individual who is subjecting them to the abuse or trauma. This perhaps is the most disturbing aspect of trauma survivors, is that they have no one else to cling to accept for the abuser themselves.)

And so I knew. Oh, yeah. I knew. My mom did not like me. She would lock me in a cage at night because she would say I was brainwashing my sisters.

And you know, sometimes I wonder if I didn't see rituals because I was in that cage. Like I wonder if she hid me from some rituals because I was so against what she was doing.

I argued with her all the time. I think she had me as a daughter and was like, I don't like She didn't like me.

We mutually did not like each other. We just didn't.

I was very proud of my child self. Even my years in denial, I'm proud of, and I think my higher power has had my back. But then she did get me and she manipulated me from age 9 to 13. She took us out of the Catholic church and said we're no longer religious.

We're not spiritual, put us in public school, and put us in every extracurricular activity. I can't even tell you how much I've all done with the extracurricular activities. And then she became the good mom, girl scout leader. Like the mom who shows up at volleyball and takes all the pictures and everyone loves.

So she had a great public persona, meanwhile brainwashing us that never happened. And slowly I fell in love with my mom because I was in so much denial. And I often say this, but I feel like denial is a form of insanity. It only got worse for me and by the time I was 30, I thought I loved my mom.

A serial killer.

(Note: an experienced programmer or controller, uses these exact methods and this is very similar to the way someone is "Stockholmed" or becomes a victim of "Stockholm Syndrome."

Stockholm Syndrome refers to a paradoxical psychological response in which some victims of prolonged captivity, hostage-taking, or severe ongoing abuse develop positive feelings, loyalty, or even protectiveness toward their abuser or captor, sometimes at the expense of their own safety or of authorities trying to help them.

Origin of the term

The name comes from a 1973 bank robbery and hostage crisis in Stockholm, Sweden. After several days, some hostages resisted rescue efforts and later expressed sympathy for the robbers. Similar patterns have been observed in other high-control situations (kidnappings, cults, certain domestic-abuse dynamics, and POW cases).

Core features commonly described

📌Positive emotional bond or identification with the abuser/captor.

📌Negative feelings toward rescuers, police, or outsiders who try to intervene.

📌Perception that the abuser is somehow benevolent or that survival depends on the abuser’s goodwill.

📌Difficulty leaving the situation even when opportunity exists

📌Minimization or rationalization of the abuse

These responses are understood as adaptive survival strategies under extreme threat, not as evidence that the victim “likes” the abuse.

How the dynamic of control and attachment develops (psychological mechanisms)

Researchers and clinicians describe the process as arising from a combination of factors rather than a deliberate step-by-step “method” taught to abusers:

1. Life-threatening power imbalance

The victim’s survival is (or appears to be) entirely in the hands of the other person. Small acts of non-killing or non-severe harm can be interpreted as mercy.

2. Isolation and dependency

Cut off from external support, information, and alternative perspectives, the victim’s world shrinks to the abuser’s presence and rules. Basic needs (food, rest, safety signals) become contingent on the abuser.

3. Intermittent reinforcement / trauma bonding

Alternating periods of threat/abuse with periods of relative kindness, attention, or relief create a powerful intermittent-reward pattern. This is the same learning principle that makes gambling or certain addictive cycles highly compelling. The victim begins to focus on the “good” moments and hope for their return.

4. Cognitive dissonance and meaning-making

To reduce the unbearable contradiction between “this person is hurting me” and “I must stay alive / attached,” the mind may reframe the abuser as protective, misunderstood, or the only source of safety. Self-blame (“I must have deserved it”) can also appear as a way to restore a sense of control.

5. Identification with the aggressor

In some accounts, the victim partially adopts the abuser’s perspective or values as a psychological defense, reducing the sense of pure helplessness.

These processes are automatic survival responses under prolonged, inescapable threat. They are not evidence that the victim freely chooses the relationship or that the abuse is mutual.

This series, in itself, is triggering for me, and I suspect it will be for the reader. If not at this point, it will be when the abuse becomes substantially more graphic in detail. I may take a few days in between segments, depending on how well I'm doing with the writing of this material.

Thanks for your patience and understanding.

Next time, we will delve deeper into Kibby Linga's story and discuss how her mother's abuse evolved from inflicting trauma to developing her method of programming.

If you know someone that is currently experiencing abuse of any kind here's some resources. "If you see something, say something."

Reach out, you maybe the difference in saving someone's life.

If you or someone you know is a survivor of severe trauma, sexual abuse, or ritualistic abuse, confidential, trauma-informed support is available 24/7 through several major crisis networks.

Immediate Crisis & Support Hotlines (U.S.)

* National Sexual Assault Hotline (RAINN)

* Phone: 1-800-656-4673

* Web Chat: [online.rainn.org](https://online.rainn.org)

* Details: Free, confidential support available

24/7 for survivors of sexual trauma and abuse.

* The National Domestic Violence Hotline

* Phone: 1-800-799-7233 (SAFE)

* Text: Text "START" to 88788

* Web Chat: [thehotline.org](https://www.thehotline.org)

* Details: Offers confidential crisis intervention, safety planning, and resources.

* Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline (For adults and youth addressing childhood trauma)

* Phone or Text: 1-800-422-4453

* Web Chat: childhelphotline.org

* Details: Dedicated hotline providing crisis intervention, information, and referrals in multiple languages.

* 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline

* Phone or Text: Dial 988

* Web Chat: 988lifeline.org

* Details: Free, confidential emotional support

This morning, a newly obtained police report reveals new details about the shocking death of star actress Hayden Panettiere and who investigators say was with her when she died. According to police, Panettiere's on-and-off-again boyfriend Brian Hickerson and his brother Zach were also there at this South Carolina apartment complex when Panettiere suffered a cardiac arrest, and they say the brothers called 911.

"They have a cardiac arrest; CPR is in progress."

Police say EMS attempted to perform life-saving measures for an extended period before they declared the time of death. They say the boyfriend's brother Zach was very emotional while EMS was working on Hayden; Brian did not become emotional until EMS declared her officially deceased.

Afterward, they say Brian showed officers the bag of medication Hayden was currently taking. Police say they found no indications of foul play or suspicious circumstances, and the preliminary autopsy found no signs of trauma, with her cause of death still pending.

Panettiere's mother is speaking out in a new interview, saying that the person in her life whom we've been trying to get rid of for quite some time was with her at her death, and that was Brian Hickerson. The couple did have a tumultuous history that included domestic violence.

"The abuse, the fact that I allowed this person not only into my life, but for how long I put up with it," said Hayden Panettiere.

She chronicled that alleged abuse in her memoir released months ago, including Hickerson being charged with multiple counts of felony abuse.

"Brian pleaded no contest, but I knew that with what I was telling the police, he was sure to be found guilty. It ate at me, but I had to do what was right in the eyes of the law. Tell that to my heart, though. Despite all he'd done to me, I still loved Brian for who I believed he was," said Hayden Panettiere.

Hickerson served 45 days in jail and recently said he had regrets, but mentioned they were still friends. "I went into such a dark place, man. Drugs, alcohol, pills. Good God Almighty."

Police have reiterated they found nothing suspicious at the scene of Hayden's death. Her mother calls her daughter an amazingly talented person, but adds, "I think young people who grow up in the entertainment industry, it is a struggle."

Panettiere talked openly in her memoir about the lifelong scars that came with becoming famous at such a young age and her struggles with addiction and postpartum depression.

From walking into a teen dressing room to joking about his obligation to sleep with contestants, Trump's a storied pageant creep.

"Well, I’ll tell you the funniest is that I’ll go backstage before a show, and everyone’s getting dressed, and ready and everything else, and you know, no men are anywhere, and I’m allowed to go in because I’m the owner of the pageant and therefore I’m inspecting it.

You know, I’m inspecting because I want to make sure that everything is good.

You know, the dresses. 'Is everyone okay?' You know, they’re standing there with no clothes. 'Is everybody okay?' And you see these incredible looking women, and so, I sort of get away with things like that."

The audio came from an April 2005 appearance by Donald Trump on The Howard Stern Show. During the interview, Trump discussed walking backstage into the dressing rooms while contestants were changing at the Miss Teen USA.

(Note Girls as young as 14 years old compete in the Miss Teen USA pageant)

Source citation: https://www.businessinsider.com/miss-teen-usa

Excerpts from a Rolling Stone article. Its contents and timeline align with widely reported investigations detailing Donald Trump's ownership of the Miss Universe Organization (which included Miss Universe, Miss USA, and Miss Teen USA from 1996 to 2015).

Source citation: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/a-timeline-of-donald-trumps-creepiness-while-he-owned-miss-universe-191860/

Key accounts, timelines, and controversies highlighted across those reports include:

* Unannounced Dressing Room Visits: Multiple former contestants—including Miss Teen USA, Miss USA, and Miss Universe participants—came forward to state that Trump routinely walked into the dressing rooms while contestants were changing, noting that many teenagers and young women were left partially or fully unclothed with no time to cover up.

* The Howard Stern Admissions: Trump’s own remarks on programs like The Howard Stern Show provided corroboration for these drops-ins, where he joked about using his status as the owner to "inspect" the dressing rooms and check on contestants while they were changing.

* The Alicia Machado Controversy (1996–1997): Shortly after purchasing the organization in 1996, Trump publicly criticized the newly crowned Miss Universe, Alicia Machado, for gaining weight. He famously labeled her "Miss Piggy" and "Miss Housekeeping" and compelled her to work out in front of a pack of reporters at a Manhattan gym.

* Contestant Inspections and Objectification: Former competitors, such as Miss North Carolina 2006 Samantha Holvey, described feeling treated "like meat" during pageants, noting that Trump would line up or inspect contestants from head to toe.

In the early 90s, Donald Trump judged the world’s biggest modelling competition - since hit by allegations of abuse. This is how the people who were there remember it

On 1 September 1991, a large private yacht cruised towards the Statue of Liberty. It was a clear, breezy evening, and from the upper deck of the Spirit of New York, a golden sunset could be seen glinting off the Manhattan skyline. Downstairs, a party was in flow. Scores of teenage girls in evening dresses and miniskirts, some as young as 14, danced under disco lights. It could have been a high school prom, were it not for the crowd of older men surrounding them.

As the evening wore on, some of the men – many old enough to be the girls’ fathers, or even grandfathers – joined them on the dancefloor, pressing themselves against the girls. One balding man in a suit wrapped his arms around two young models, leering into a film camera that was documenting the evening: “Can you get some beautiful women around me, please?”

The party aboard the Spirit of New York was one of several events that Donald Trump, then 45, attended with a group of 58 aspiring young models that September. They had travelled from around the world to compete in Elite’s Look of the Year competition, an annual event that had been running since 1983 and was already credited with launching the careers of Cindy Crawford, Helena Christensen and Stephanie Seymour. At stake was a life-changing prize: a $150,000 contract with the world’s then leading modelling agency, Elite Model Management, run by John Casablancas.

Trump was closely involved in Casablancas’s competition. In 1991, he was a headline sponsor, throwing open the Plaza, his lavish, chateau-style hotel overlooking Central Park, transforming it into the main venue and accommodating the young models. He was also one of its 10 judges.

In 1992, Trump hosted the competition again. On a similarly golden evening in early September that year, another group of contestants boarded the Spirit of New York, chartered for another Elite cruise. One of the girls on the boat was Shawna Lee, then a 14-year-old from a small town outside Toronto. She recalls how the contestants were encouraged to parade downstairs, one by one, and dance for Trump, Casablancas and others. Lee, an introverted teenager who loved to draw but hated school, was in New York for the first time. “A woman at the agency was pushing me,” she recalls. “I said to her, ‘I don’t see why me going down the stairs and dancing in front of those two has anything to do with me becoming a model. And she said, ‘No, you look great, take off your blazer and go and do it.’ So I walked down the stairs. I didn’t dance – I blew a kiss at them, spun around and walked away.”

Another contestant, who was 15 at the time, also remembers being asked to walk for Trump, Casablancas and other men on the boat in September 1992. She says an organiser told her that if she refused, she would be excluded from the competition. “I knew in my gut it wasn’t right,” she recalls. “This wasn’t being judged or part of the competition – it was for their entertainment.”

While Elite’s official brochure stated that contestants were aged between 14 and 24, all of those young girls competing in both years, were aged between 14 and 19. Some had come to New York with parents or chaperones in tow; others were alone. Many were away from their families for the first time. For them, the stakes were high, and the pressure to impress the judges great. As Casablancas had warned them at the outset of the competition, in a scene recorded by TV cameras: “You are going to be judged, constantly judged.” (In 1991 and 1992, the Elite contest was filmed for a 60-minute glossy television special, featuring interviews and behind-the-scenes footage, and later screened on Fox – an early foray into reality TV.) Casablancas was a powerful figure in the industry, and to many of the new crop of would-be supermodels, this seemed an opportunity too good to miss.

The Guardian obtained 12 hours of previously unseen, behind-the-scenes footage. The stories we have heard suggest that Casablancas, and some of the men in his orbit, used the contest to engage in sexual relationships with vulnerable young models. Some of these allegations amount to sexual harassment, abuse or exploitation of teenage girls; others are more accurately described as rape.

Journalists have scoured almost every corner of the 45th president’s life, but his friendship with Casablancas, and his involvement in Look of the Year in 1991 and 1992, have been largely overlooked. Yet the competition is more than a footnote in the Donald Trump story. In time, it would prove to be the foundation of his pivot into reality TV. He even married a former Look of the Year contestant: the current first lady, Melania Trump, after being reintroduced to her by Jeffrey Epstein.

When John Casablancas arrived in New York in 1977, aged 35, he quickly caused a stir. Branded “the snatcher” for poaching models from rivals for his Elite Model Management agency, he gained a reputation as a ruthless operator. Handsome and charismatic, the son of a former Balenciaga model and a wealthy Spanish banker, he formed the agency that became Elite in Paris in his late 20s. Within years of setting up shop in New York, Casablancas was generating millions of dollars in revenue each year, and ushering in the era of the supermodel. Glamorous friends flocked to Elite parties in fashionable clubs like Studio 54.

It’s not clear how Casablancas first met Trump but, according to several former models who encountered him during the 1980s, the businessman became a regular at his parties. With the opening of Trump Tower on New York’s Fifth Avenue in 1983, and the acquisition of the Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida in 1985, Trump had gained the reputation of a high-flying playboy in his own right.

In 1987 he published The Art Of The Deal, and a flurry of publicity followed.

(Note: we now know that Trump didn't write a word of this book. The writer Tony Schwartzs, regrets having any hand in doing it. He later stated if he could retitle the book he would now call it the "sociopath." This along with "The Apprentice" helped create his false persona. The directors of the Apprentice, also shared Schwartzs's regret stating "it was like turning the court jester into the king." Jonathan Braun an editor who worked on six seasons of The Apprentice).

Source citation: https://www.newsweek.com/working-trump-was-making-court-jester-king-says-apprentice-producer-1274414

Patty Owen, an Elle and Cosmopolitan cover star, recalls seeing Trump at Elite parties as far back as 1982. “He would always be at the bar. That’s where he would stay and that’s where all the new models would hang out,” she says. “Whenever I saw him, I was always like: why does John have to invite him?” Barbara Pilling, also then an Elite model, told us Trump asked her out for dinner in the summer of 1989 at an industry soiree.

She recalls Trump asking how old she was. “I said 17 and he said, ‘That’s just great – you’re not too old, not too young.’”

Four former Elite models say that in the late 80s or early 90s, when they were teenagers, the agency required them to attend private dinners with Trump, Casablancas and sometimes other men.

One was Shayna Love, an Australian model who was 16 when she came to New York for the first time in the summer of 1991. Recalling a dinner she attended, she says now: “It was presented as our duty as models at the agency. It wasn’t an invitation. It was like, you have to go and do this.”

She says the dinner she attended, at which 10 or 15 models were present, was served at a long table in a private area of an upmarket restaurant. “I was at one end with John, and Trump was up the other end… surrounded by the other teenage girls.”

In the spring of 1991, Trump and Casablancas struck a business deal. Trump would sponsor Look of the Year’s final and host contestants at the Plaza, which would double as the headquarters. At the time, Trump faced significant financial pressures and was close to filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, but it didn’t seem to deter him.

In the newly unearthed, behind-the-scenes footage of Look of the Year 1991, Trump makes a series of appearances alongside Casablancas, whom he describes as “my friend John”. At one point, Casablancas reveals how he and Trump struck their business partnership. “I had prepared for a long meeting with Donald Trump to explain to him why this was going to be a great success,” Casablancas tells the crowd. “In fact, I hadn’t finished my third sentence and he said: ‘I love the idea. Let’s do it.’”

Trump now disputes being friends with Casablancas. The president’s representatives told the Guardian that he denies it “in the strongest possible terms”. Trump, they said, “hardly knew him, spent very little time with him, and knew very little about him”.

Sounds a bit like his claims about Jeffrey Epstein, when at one time he said: I've known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the YOUNGER SIDE. No doubt about it Jeffrey enjoys his social life."

Donald Trump Trump told New York magazine in 2002

Stacy Wilkes had never been anywhere like the New York Plaza when she arrived at Trump’s hotel with another contestant in September 1991. Then 16, she was living in Louisville, Kentucky, with her mother, who was struggling to make ends meet.

The teenager would hold yard sales and mow lawns to make extra cash. “I was just so excited to be in a hotel,” she says. “To go from a poor part of Kentucky to a place like this – I felt like the little kid in Home Alone.” She recalls feeling out of place in a hotel where “everything was gold”.

The teenager had been selected as part of a sprawling international search, overseen by Casablancas, for “new faces”. Many contestants had come through feeder competitions after winning regional heats, or being spotted in malls and hotel lobbies or, in one case, on the beach.

Casablancas had visited Wilkes’ local mall to host an Elite scouting event a year earlier, when she was 15. Her local agent had sent her to meet him, telling her what to wear and how to act. She says: “I was told to put my hair down in front of my face and then, like, whoop it around and look up at him.”

One year later, Wilkes was among those met at the airport by a scrum of photographers, and whisked into limousines – a supermodel welcome. “That was kind of neat,” she recalls.

The contestants assembled beneath crystal chandeliers at the Plaza to meet Casablancas. He told them they would be judged over several days ahead of a gala evening, when the winner would be crowned.

The girls would undergo makeovers and attend photocalls, donning spandex for an exercise routine in front of the Plaza. The behind-the-scenes footage shows Casablancas informing the would-be models that attention would be paid not just to appearance, but to “the way you are, your attitude, your personality, your sense of cooperation”.

At 16, Wilkes was one of the older contestants in Look of the Year. The 1992 Fox documentary reported that the average age was 15, and the film’s interviews make the youth of many contestants plain.

Standing before the judges for the key swimwear round, the aspiring models are asked to tell the panel about themselves. “I sing and love animals,” says one girl, nervously. Another tells the judges: “I like big dogs and chocolate.”

Later, during a photoshoot, a photographer instructs a 15-year-old to show more of her cleavage by pulling her bra lower. “More,” he tells her. “More. More.”

In 1991, there were 10 judges in total, eight of them men, including Trump, Casablancas, the celebrity magician David Copperfield, and the president of Elite’s European division, Gérald Marie.

For the swimwear round, judges including Trump and Casablancas sat at a table in one of the Plaza’s palatial rooms, rating the teenage models. “I felt so uncomfortable, standing there in my bathing suit,” recalls Wilkes. She says that at one stage of the contest the judges said she should lose weight: “It felt like they were ganging up on me.”

The contestant who came third in 1991 was Kate Dillon, then 17. Dillon, who went on to become a successful plus-sized model, says that many of her fellow competitors were “from places that were very poor. I came from a family that had means, so it was something fun to do for a week to get out of school – but a lot of these girls were desperate.”

She recalls various “after-hours” events over the course of the five-day competition. “It was very clear that there were opportunities to go out and party with Donald,” she says. The contestants were led to believe “that if you were nice to certain people, good things will happen to you, and I think that’s why girls were going out”.

Every time we changed, Trump would find a reason to come backstage.

The behind-the-scenes footage seen by the Guardian shows brief snippets of the future president mingling with the Look of the Year models. At an evening reception, he seems to play the role of host, moving regally around the Plaza’s ornate rooms in a suit and tie, talking to VIP guests and contestants.

“How’s the Canadian contestants?” he asks, before moving over to a handful of Canadian would-be models and introducing himself. At another point, he circulates on the top deck of the Spirit of New York as the boat prepares to depart. Wearing a billowing cream blazer, pink open-neck shirt and oversized baseball cap, Trump grins while posing for photographs and chatting to several girls. One tells him she is just finishing school.

Some former contestants recall him being there as they got dressed for events. “Every time we changed, it was like Trump would find a reason to come backstage,” Wilkes says.

A Canadian contestant from 1992 recalls similar incidents. “He’d come by and say, ‘Hey girls, are we ready?’” she says. “I remember thinking, what have I got myself into?”

Trump denies, “in the strongest possible terms”, behaving inappropriately with any Look of the Year contestants. His representatives say he was not aware of any predatory environment at the time.

Others, however, observed a disturbing side to the contest. Ohad Oman, a young reporter for a magazine in Tel Aviv, was sent to cover it in 1991 and 1992.

He attended a number of the after-parties, and remembers seeing girls drinking alcohol. He recalls one particularly debauched party, telling the Guardian: “I saw girls sitting on guys’ laps, and I remember one guy putting his hand down a girl’s top.

I remember thinking they were younger than me, and I was 17 going on 18.” (The legal drinking age is 21 in the US.)

Others who were present recall underage models being served alcohol at the contest. Trump’s representatives say he did not provide alcohol to contestants, or encourage any models, whether below the drinking age or not, to drink alcohol, stressing he “does not drink alcohol and does not encourage others to do so”.

The finale of the 1991 competition was a glittering black-tie gala in the Plaza’s ballroom. Casablancas and supermodel Naomi Campbell presented, as 10 finalists went through a series of costume changes, walking across a stage decorated with columns of sunflowers.

(Note: Naomi Campbell has several mentions in the Epstein Files and has been reported to have been on Epsteins Island. Naomi Campbell’s name appears frequently in recently released Epstein-related documents with 300 mentions in the large 2026 DOJ release, though many are duplicates. She has been listed on Epstein flight logs on multiple occasions reports vary on the exact number; some reference a few flights in the early 2000s, including with others such as Maxwell. Unnamed victims told FBI investigators they saw Campbell at Epstein’s New York mansion (e.g., a dinner) and on his private island (Little St. James). Virginia Giuffre previously stated Epstein introduced her to Campbell.)

Source citations:

https://people.com/naomi-campbell-jeffrey-epstein-access-to-fashion-events-parties-11908306

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/naomi-campbell-jeffrey-epstein-files-b2921510.html

https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/1392810-naomi-campbells-past-social-contact-with-jeffrey-epstein-detailed-in-newly-released-files

Trump sat on the front row alongside a roster of celebrities, his nine-year-old daughter Ivanka perched on his knee.

Ingrid Seynhaeve, an 18-year-old from Belgium, was crowned the winner. As the evening drew to a close, Seynhaeve was surrounded by photographers. Guests filtered out of the ballroom as a party got going in another of the Plaza’s grand rooms. In the newly uncovered footage, a man can be heard off-camera, saying: “Come on, babes. Let’s get some liquor in you.”

In the months before and after the contests, Elite sent several of its teenage models to Milan, New York or Paris on assignments, usually by themselves. Shawna Lee, the 14-year-old from

Leon Black’s defiance and the broader pattern of limited accountability among Epstein’s high-profile associates form a striking illustration of unequal justice.

Black, co-founder and former CEO of Apollo Global Management, has long faced scrutiny over his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. He paid Epstein roughly $158–170 million between 2012 and 2017—after Epstein’s 2008 conviction as a registered sex offender—for purported “estate planning,” tax, and related advisory services. Independent reviews and Senate investigations have questioned whether the sums were justified by the services rendered, especially given that Epstein lacked conventional credentials and that the payments far exceeded what Black paid other professional advisers. Black has maintained the payments were legitimate, denied any knowledge of or involvement in Epstein’s crimes, and stated he never paid Epstein for access to women or engaged in sex trafficking or abuse of underage individuals. He has also faced civil allegations of sexual misconduct (which he has denied); some suits were dismissed or settled, and one remained pending in recent reporting. In 2023 he paid $62.5 million to the U.S. Virgin Islands to resolve potential claims related to Epstein.

In June 2026, during a voluntary closed-door interview with the House Oversight Committee investigating Epstein’s network, Black refused to answer questions about non-disclosure agreements involving women. Committee members described the NDAs as potentially relevant to whether Epstein played any role in their creation, funding, or enforcement. Black walked out of the session. The committee then issued two subpoenas: one compelling production of the NDAs and another requiring him to return for a sworn, videotaped deposition. Black’s counsel characterized the subpoenas as a “premeditated political stunt” and asserted Epstein had no involvement in any such agreements. This episode has been cited as emblematic of an entitled “Epstein class” that resists transparency even under congressional pressure.

Representative Thomas Massie has repeatedly used the House floor to name individuals associated with Epstein and to press for fuller release of remaining government files (reported to number in the millions). Among those he has identified as warranting further investigation are Les Wexner, Glenn Dubin, and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (formerly Prince Andrew), alongside Black and others.

📌Les Wexner, the billionaire retail magnate and one of Epstein’s most significant early patrons, has been named in survivor accounts and appears in certain FBI materials linked to Epstein’s circle. He has denied knowledge of Epstein’s criminal activity and has not faced criminal charges related to the trafficking network.

📌Glenn Dubin, the hedge-fund manager, was named by Virginia Giuffre in civil proceedings as someone to whom Epstein allegedly trafficked her. Dubin has denied wrongdoing and has not been criminally charged in connection with Epstein’s crimes.

📌Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor settled a civil suit brought by Giuffre without admitting liability, was stripped of royal titles and privileges amid the scandal, and has faced ongoing public and official scrutiny (including recent investigative steps in some jurisdictions). He has consistently denied the core allegations of sexual misconduct involving Giuffre and has not been convicted of related U.S. criminal charges.

These men, like Black, have largely avoided criminal prosecution in the United States for any alleged role in Epstein’s sex-trafficking enterprise. Ghislaine Maxwell remains the primary associate convicted and imprisoned; other figures have faced civil settlements, professional consequences, reputational damage, or foreign legal processes, but a systemic pattern of limited criminal accountability for high-status associates persists. Congressional investigators and critics have pointed to NDAs, sealed settlements, incomplete file releases, and institutional caution as factors that continue to shield full public reckoning.

The American public is left with a stark ethical question: If vast wealth, elite connections, and legal firepower can convert even the most damning associations with a convicted sex trafficker into private settlements, stonewalled inquiries, and enduring impunity—while victims and ordinary citizens face a far harsher standard—what does equal justice under law actually mean in practice, and how long will the public tolerate a two-tiered system that protects the powerful at the expense of the vulnerable?

They killed her to silence her and yet we still have no accountability.

Virginia Giuffre (also known as Virginia Roberts) Claims that she died by suicide on April 25, 2025, at age 41 at her farm home in Neergabby, near Perth, Western Australia, are highly suspect, and here's why.

The 2019 statement that she was not suicidal

The main point repeatedly cited in suspicions is a post Giuffre made on X (then Twitter) on December 10, 2019. Responding to a user claiming the FBI would “kill her to protect the ultra rich and well connected,” she wrote:

“I am making it publicly known that in no way, shape or form am I suicidal. I have made this known to my therapist and GP – If something happens to me – for the sake of my family do not let this go away and help me to protect them. Too many evil people want to see me [quieted].”

This post was authentic and widely documented at the time. After her 2025 death it was heavily recirculated (often without the original 2019 date), which fueled online claims of foul play or a staged suicide.

Other sources of suspicion and related statements

Family members:

📌Giuffre’s father, Sky Roberts, publicly rejected the suicide ruling in media interviews, stating variations of “somebody got to her” and insisting she had too much to live for (including her advocacy work and foundation).

📌Attorney comments: Her Australia-based attorney, Karrie Louden, initially made remarks that were interpreted as raising “big question marks” or distinguishing between suicide and “misadventure.”

📌Private conversation reported later: In 2026 reporting, legal analyst and survivors’ advocate Shari Karney described a pre-death conversation in which Giuffre allegedly said she was not suicidal, had children she adored, and was counting on Karney if a report claimed she had died by suicide. Karney said the exchange was encrypted due to Giuffre’s safety concerns.

Virginia Giuffre’s dad and attorney are reportedly questioning how she died.

Giuffre was a vocal and visible accuser of Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew.

She was found dead on her farm outside Perth, Australia over the weekend, less than a month after she made headlines again after posting a picture of herself in a hospital bed saying she had “just days to live.” There are also now reportedly questions about what will happen to the money that Prince Andrew paid her in an out-of-court settlement in 2022.

Now let’s get to what we know at this point involving Virginia Roberts Giuffre. On April 25th, she was found dead at her home outside Perth, Australia. Giuffre was American, but she moved to Australia in 2020 with her husband. The couple had three children, all teenagers. Giuffre and her husband had been in the middle of a custody dispute at the time of her death. Some members of Giuffre’s family say they aren’t ready to determine how she died. Her dad, who’s named Sky Roberts, told TMZ he wants her death investigated. He points to social media posts like this one that his daughter made in 2019, where she writes: “I am making it publicly known that in no way, shape or form am I suicidal. I have made this known to my therapist and GP. If something happens to me, in the sake of my family, do not let this go away and help me protect them. Too many evil people want to see me quieted.”

Giuffre’s lawyer also spoke to UK media outlet "The Sun" and said, “When I got the call, I was like, ‘Are you joking?’ Because there was no sign that was something she said she was considering.”

To understand what Virginia Giuffre may have been dealing with at the time of her death, you have to go back to the beginning, to understand how so many people learned her name. Giuffre claimed that Jeffrey Epstein trafficked her when she was a minor. She says that she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew three times when she was just seventeen years old. This is the now infamous picture that was included in her lawsuit against the prince. It shows Giuffre and Prince Andrew and convicted trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell smiling at the camera in the background.

Prince Andrew and Giuffre settled out of court in 2022 after she sued Andrew the year prior. Prince Andrew has denied sleeping with Giuffre; in fact, he denied ever meeting her. In a now infamous 2019 interview with the BBC, he said this about Virginia Giuffre when she accused him of having sex with her in 2001 in London.

I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady. None whatsoever.

You don’t remember meeting her?

No.

Giuffre had claimed the prince bought her drinks, and they dined together and danced together at a posh members-only nightclub in London. Prince Andrew said he never spent time with Giuffre, and he claimed the date she claimed that they were together, he was actually with his kids. He went on to say that he didn’t know where the bar was in the nightclub because he says he doesn’t drink. And in what was an infamous moment in that interview, Andrew disputed Giuffre’s phrase description of him profusely sweating. He said this to the BBC in that 2019 interview.

There’s a slight problem with, with, with, with, with the sweating, because, I, I, I—I have a peculiar medical condition, which is that I don’t sweat, or I didn’t sweat at the time.

Giuffre claimed that she met the prince through Ghislaine Maxwell. The former socialite is now a convicted sex offender. Here’s her mugshot from 2022 at the Metropolitan Detention Center in New York. She is currently serving twenty years in prison on five sex trafficking charges related to the now-dead Jeffrey Epstein. He, of course, died in his jail cell in 2019 after he was arrested on federal sex trafficking charges. The medical examiner said he hung himself.

Giuffre told CBS News this in 2020 about Maxwell: “She is a monster. She’s worse than Epstein. She did things even worse than Epstein did.”

In the wake of Giuffre’s allegations and the out-of-court settlement, Prince Andrew resigned from public roles with the royal family in 2020. His mom, Queen Elizabeth, stripped Andrew of his royal and military titles in 2022 before she died later that year.

Now we started to get more of a glimpse into the challenges Virginia Giuffre was having living in Australia on March 30th of this year when she posted this image with a caption saying she had just four days to live. She had bruising all over her face and her chest, and she’s sitting in what appears to be a hospital bed. The caption is a hundred seventy-four words that has brought her story back to the headlines. That caption read, quote: “This year has been the worst year of my life. Worst start to a new year, but I won’t bore anyone with the details, but I think it is important to note that when a school bus driver comes at you driving a hundred ten kilometers as we were slowing for a turn, no matter what your car is made of, it might as well be a tin can. I’ve gone into kidney renal failure, they’ve given me four days to live, transferring me to a specialist hospital in urology. I’m ready to go, just not until I see my babies one last time. But you know what they say about wishes: shit in one hand and wish in the other, I guarantee it’s still going to be shit at the end of the day. Thank you all for being wonderful people of the world and for being a great part of my life. God bless you all. XX Virginia.”

Now after her Instagram post went viral, a family spokesperson issued a statement offering some clarification from Virginia’s end. That statement said, quote: “Virginia thanks everyone for the outpouring of love and support. She is overwhelmed with gratitude. Today she remains in serious condition while receiving medical care. On March 24th, in rural Western Australia, a school bus hit the car in which she was riding. The police were called, but said that there was no one available to come to the scene. They asked if anyone was injured and suggested if they were, they should make their way to the hospital.”

(This is highly suspect)

Australian police told media outlets that no one was reported injured in the crash and the car involved sustained roughly two grand in damage, and the bus driver had reported the incident the next day.

Prince Andrew has yet to make a comment about the death of Virginia Giuffre, but he has had someone in his corner who has repeatedly attacked Virginia on social media. Her name is Victoria Hervey. She’s a model, a socialite, and a former girlfriend of Prince Andrew. Now, when you look at her Instagram, you can see she has a playlist of story posts that attacked Giuffre since that bus crash in March. One of the posts read: “The pain caused by her lies, destroying lives and tearing families apart, all for money, is no small thing. She has a lot to answer for. I call this divine judgment by God. People often say karma has a way of catching up.” And, quote, as Ghislaine Maxwell put it, “Virginia is a fantasist.” Remember, Maxwell’s serving twenty years in prison; she is now a convicted sex offender. But even in death, Hervey continues to post about Virginia Giuffre. She posted this with a headline from an Australian media outlet, and she just writes “Karma.”

Virginia first came forward around 2010, accusing Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell of sex trafficking and that she was a victim of it. She was really one of the faces of the victims who was not afraid to go in front of a camera.

How do you remember Virginia Giuffre?

She’s a hero who has represented victims of sexual abuse for over thirty years. And anytime a victim comes forward and takes on their perpetrator, especially in a public manner in a public lawsuit, that is a courageous thing to do.

That is a very, very difficult thing to do.

And with Virginia, you can up those stakes by a thousand because hers was incredibly, incredibly high profile.

Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew, those were worldwide headlines, and she took them on and she was victorious in the cases.

And she made her name public.

She didn’t use a Jane Doe or an alias, and so everyone knew her identity.

We’ve all seen the infamous photo of Prince Andrew with his arm around her when she was seventeen years old and with Ghislaine Maxwell in the background.

And so what Virginia accomplished in those cases is incredible, and it clearly took a toll on her.

She is a hero to all victims because she came forward and she persevered and she obtained justice in the cases that she brought against these incredibly high-profile figures.

And she wasn’t just a voice, she was a key piece of evidence in some of the cases that were brought forward.

Her testimony was monumental. It was critical to the case. I mean, there was only a few victims that were able to testify and come forward and tell their stories about being sex trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and, in the second case, by Ghislaine Maxwell.

So Virginia’s testimony was crucial to both of those investigations and cases.

And obviously was the centerpiece of the allegations made against Prince Andrew. And so she was incredibly important from an evidentiary standpoint to those investigations and those cases.

We can only hope that her death is vindicated and that these other victims of the heinous crimes finally get some justice.

Never stop talking about the Epstein Files.

Source Citations

House panel subpoenas Leon Black – POLITICO, June 26, 2026

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/06/26/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black-subpoena-congress-00978209

Leon Black paid Epstein approximately $170 million – Forbes / Senate Finance Committee reporting, 2025–2026

https://www.forbes.com/sites/giacomotognini/2025/07/25/how-jeffrey-epstein-got-so-rich/

Thomas Massie names 14 people including Les Wexner, Glenn Dubin, and Prince Andrew – Newsweek, September 1, 2026

https://www.newsweek.com/thomas-massie-names-14-people-he-says-should-be-investigated-over-epstein-12389523

Secret settlements and limited criminal accountability for Epstein associates – POLITICO, June 25, 2026

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/06/25/secret-settlements-jeffrey-epstein-friends-00975274

Here's evidence that Virginia Giuffre said that she wasn't suicidal

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/virginia-giuffre-not-suicidal-in-2019/

This to me is the perfect description of the jew and their nature. I have had extensive dealings with them in debates across many platforms and I've found every word of what Hitler says here in Mein kampf to be categorically true.

Enjoy the Führer's critique of the jew, it's masterful.

The PlainTruth

"At that time I was still naive enough to try to make clear to them the madness of their ideas; in my small circle I talked until my tongue was weary and till my throat was hoarse, and I thought I could succeed in convincing them of the destructiveness of their Marxist doctrine of irrationality; but the result was contrary. It seemed as though the increasing realization of the destructive influence of Social Democratic theories would serve only to strengthen their determination.

The more I argued with them, the more I got to know their dialectics. First they counted on the ignorance of their adversary; then, when there was no way out, they themselves pretended stupidity. If all this was of no avail, they refused to understand or they changed the subject

when driven into a corner; they brought up truisms, but they immediately transferred their acceptance to quite

different subjects, and, if attacked again, they gave way and pretended to know nothing exactly. Wherever one attacked one of these prophets, one's hands seized slimy jelly; it slipped through one's fingers only to collect again in the next moment. If one smote one of them so thoroughly that, with the bystanders watching, he could but agree, and if one thus thought he had advanced at least one step, one was greatly astonished the following day. The Jew did not in the least remember the day before, he continued to talk in the same old strain as if nothing had happened, and if indignantly confronted, he pretended to be astonished and could not remember anything except that his assertions

had already been proved true the day before.

Often I was stunned. One did not know what to admire more: their glibness of

tongue or their skill in lying.

I gradually began to hate them."

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

I want to first say that these people are the enemies of every truth seeker on the planet so I'll by no means treat them gently.

I'm going to not address every nonsensical point that he or she has made on my post about the IDF being the most evil army in the world.

His claim: Palestinians/Hamas wanted this war - started this war - raped, murdered, and kidnapped women and children - then continued to rape and murder the kidnapped women.

My rebuttal, what this ignorant fool is either unaware of or is intentionally in denial of are the clear facts around the event on October the 7th, 2023 which is what he's clearly referring to.

There's a lot to unpack here and will take it one step at a time.

1. There's recent evidence being discovered that Benjamin Netanyahu has been founding Hamas through Qatar.

The claim that Benjamin Netanyahu helped fund Hamas through Qatar points to a well-documented policy of allowing millions of dollars in Qatari cash transfers into the Gaza Strip.

The primary evidence, public reporting, and official positions surrounding this issue encompass several key components:

* The Qatari Cash Transfers (2018 Onward): Beginning in 2018, the Israeli government—with Netanyahu’s explicit approval—permitted millions of dollars in Qatari cash (transported in suitcases via Israeli territory) to enter the Gaza Strip. This was done to finance primarily the command structure of Hamas.

* Netanyahu’s Strategic Rationale: Critics, political opponents, and investigative reports (including deep-dive analyses by publications like The New York Times) have reported that Netanyahu viewed the arrangement through a strategic lens. Proponents of this view argue that Netanyahu deliberately maintained a policy of keeping Hamas financially afloat in Gaza to perpetuate the political split between Hamas in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. Israeli intelligence primarily the Mossad feared Yasser Arafat, the Former President of the Palestinian National Authority, was growing to have too much power and influence.

* Intelligence Warnings on Diversion of Funds: Israeli media reports and former security chiefs have stated that Netanyahu was explicitly warned that the Qatari money was being exploited. Former Shin Bet chief Nadav Argaman and the IDF's Military Intelligence Directorate reportedly warned Netanyahu in 2019 and 2020 that Hamas’ military wing, led by Muhammad Deif, was siphoning millions from the inflows or freeing up internal Hamas funds to build up its armed wing. Netanyahu ignored these warnings because he had a future plan for Hamas that indeed was to occur on October the 7th, 2023. After all Netanyahu needed a pretext to flatten Gaza and to finish taking the territory by whatever means necessary. Taking Gaza and then the West Bank is phase one and two in the beginning of the "Greater Israel Project." More on this in a bit.

2. The evidence that the Shin Bet Israelis internal intelligence agency and the IDF had prior knowledge that Hamas was planning an attack on Israel.

* The "Jericho Wall" Battle Plan: Israeli intelligence and security structures possessed a detailed, 40-page Hamas operational blueprint codenamed "Jericho Wall" more than a year prior to October 7. The document accurately outlined a massive cross-border invasion framework, including rocket barrages, drone deployment, fence breaches, and assaults on military bases, but leadership dismissed the likelihood of Hamas executing it. Again Benjamin Netanyahu had prior knowledge and was needing a pretext to destroy Gaza.

So far we have the funding for the attack and prior knowledge that it was going to occur at least a year ahead of time.

* Pre-Dawn Indicators and Night-Of Intelligence: In the hours immediately preceding the assault (starting around 3:30 AM on October 7, 2023), intelligence gatherers and military systems tracked suspicious indicators, including unusual Hamas operational communication patterns and a sudden spike of numerous local Israeli SIM cards connecting inside Gaza.

* The Dispute Over Notification to Leadership: While high-ranking security chiefs and intelligence units have acknowledged major analytical and communication failures, Benjamin Netanyahu and his office have engaged in a bitter public dispute with the defense establishment. Netanyahu has asserted that senior security officials—including then-Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar—possessed indicators that an invasion was likely hours before it happened and that his office's intelligence aides received situational updates during the night, yet intentionally chose not to wake him out of fear that he would mandate a preemptive military alert.

However Benjamin Netanyahu's side of the story is highly unlikely and we will get to this in part 4 of my rebuttal.

3. Israel's border is the most secure border in the world and it's also highly unlikely that Hamas could've crossed it without assistance.

The Israel-Gaza barrier, frequently referred to as the "Iron Wall" or "smart fence," is a multi-layered, multi-billion-dollar fortification system spanning approximately 65 kilometers. Completed in late 2021 at a cost of roughly $1.1 billion, it was engineered to be virtually impenetrable.

The primary components of this defense infrastructure include:

* The Underground Anti-Tunnel Barrier: Built to neutralize Hamas' strategy of digging cross-border strike tunnels, this component consists of a subterranean slurry wall embedded deep into the earth. It is equipped with advanced acoustic, seismic, and electromagnetic sensors designed to detect excavation and movement below the surface.

* The Above-Ground Smart Fence: Standing more than 6 meters high, the steel fence is integrated with an extensive network of hundreds of remote-controlled cameras, ground-movement radars, and optical sensing equipment.

* Remote-Controlled Weapon Stations: The border architecture features automated, remotely operated weapon systems positioned along the barrier, allowing military operators to target threats from secure command rooms without exposing personnel to direct fire.

* Maritime and Buffer Zones: The system incorporates a coastal barrier equipped with detection mechanisms to prevent naval infiltrations, alongside wider monitored buffer zones on the land side.

4. Benjamin Netanyahu's stand down order. Not allowing the IDF to intervene for 6 hrs.

The Claim of an Ordered Delay: Pundits and figures citing internal IDF whistleblowers that the military or air force was explicitly told to wait, for 6 hrs allowing the assault to unfold unchecked to eventually provide Netanyahu with a mandate for an emergency unity government and total war.

Israeli soldier Yotam Sror testified before the Knesset is the unicameral (single-chamber) national parliament and legislative branch of Israel.

This is focusing on accounts from an Israeli soldier regarding military directives during the events of October 7.

Here's the details an account from a soldier in the Golani Brigade's 13th Battalion, who stated that units stationed near the Gaza border received orders around 5:20 AM on October 7 to cancel patrols and hold their positions until 9:00 AM pending a situation assessment.

Here's the direct quote from the IDF soldier

The Israeli soldier's first name is mentioned as Yotam, serving as a soldier in the mortar platoon of the Golani Brigade's 13th Battalion.

An IDF Sergeant named Tamar Ben Yehuda, who was with him, when the events occurred.

Yotam: " For us October the 7th starts before 6:30am. I was a soldier in the mortar platoon of the Golani Brigade's 13th Battalion, and that night myself and Sergeant Tamar Ben Yehuda, may he rest in peace. That night we pulled an all nighter on the Sabbath. You know we in the mortar platoon have time to sleep until the next stand to (IDF soldier relief team). So at 5:20am we were sitting by the radio so that we wouldn't wake the radio operator and my deputy Battalion commander who was also seriously injured and thank God he survived, suddenly gets on the radio with a strange message. All stations, I don't know why and I don't know how, no patrol on the fence, and this was at 5:20am in the morning. All stations are to hold their positions. So in terms of ground forces we don't have anything significant, pending a situation assessment until 9:00am. No vehicle is to approach Burma. We're in rear level staging areas I don't know exactly why. I don't ask to many questions, that's the directive that what we do. All little before it all begins Sergeant Tamar gives us this look like what? And you know were just simple soldiers just combatants, not commanders or officers who can ask questions. It was an order from the deputy Battalion commander, we take orders and don't ask questions."

We received orders from the Golani Brigade's commander to cancel all patrols along the Gaza border, from 5:20am until 9:00am.

* 5:20 AM – Yotam all stations along the Gaza border were told to hold their positions and that no patrols were to be on the fence.

* 6:30 AM – Sirens suddenly sound, marking the beginning of the attack.

* IDF Soldier Yotam's Testimony – A soldier from the mortar platoon of the Golani Brigade's 13th Battalion testifies before a Knesset committee, stating that he and fellow soldiers received orders on October 7 to cancel all patrols along the Gaza border from 5:20 AM until 9:00 AM.

* Standing Down – Soldiers positioned near the border were given directives to stand down and stay in staging areas, preventing them from conducting routine patrols or approaching Burma during that window.

* The Soldier's Realization – Yotam said "that despite being stationed only 200 to 300 meters from the fence, they were given no warning of an active threat beforehand," leading them to question how a breach could occur without frontline units being alerted.

Source citations:

https://www.thecanary.co/skwawkbox/2025/09/25/7-october-israeli-troops/

https://thecradle.co/articles-id/32277

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/israel-hamas-war-gaza-observation-hamas-attack-soldiers-kidnapped-rcna174228

5. The "Hannibal Directive"

Investigations by media outlets such as Haaretz, international bodies like the UN Commission of Inquiry, and subsequent Israeli military disclosures revealed that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) implemented variants of the controversial "Hannibal Directive" (or Hannibal Protocol) during the Hamas-led attacks on October 7, 2023.

Traditionally, the directive was a classified military procedure designed to prevent the capture of Israeli soldiers by enemy forces, utilizing heavy firepower even if it risked the life of the captive.

On October 7, the protocol was reportedly adapted on a wide scale to address the mass infiltration and abduction of both soldiers and civilians.

Key aspects of how the directive and related emergency protocols manifested on October 7 include:

* The "No Vehicles Returning to Gaza" Order: Investigative reports indicated that around 11:22 AM on October 7, the IDF’s Gaza Division transmitted an order stating that "not a single vehicle can return to Gaza," turning the border fence area into a heavily targeted zone.

* Targeting Vehicles Suspected of Containing Captives: Military units and air assets were instructed to use force to halt vehicles moving back toward the Gaza Strip, knowing that many of them were transporting captured Israeli soldiers or civilians. This resulted in strikes on vehicles at or near the border, raising the risk to the captives inside.

* Employment at Military Facilities: Reports and testimonies from mid- and senior-level IDF officers showed that the directive was applied at multiple military bases and installations that had been overrun or attacked, aiming to neutralize attackers and prevent them from successfully abducting personnel back across the border.

* A "Mass" Application Amid Chaos: Former military officials and internal sources described a widespread, decentralized implementation of the protocol driven by extreme uncertainty and "hysteria". Because frontline commanders often did not know where captives were being held or moved, heavy firepower—including drone strikes, helicopter fire, and tank shells—was deployed in proximity to locations where both captors and captives were present.

* Incidents Involving Hostages and Structures: High-profile cases, such as an incident at a house in Kibbutz Be'eri where a tank opened fire on a building containing both militants and Israeli hostages, brought intense public scrutiny to the balance between rescue operations and the prevention of mass abductions.

*Scaling Up Through the Morning: As the scale of the multi-pronged infiltration became clear, additional crews were called up from reserve status or base-permanence. By 9:00 AM, six Apache helicopters were airborne in the southern theater, and over the course of the entire day, a total of 28 combat helicopters cycled through missions, exhausting their complete ammunition stores and rearming multiple times. The most deaths by the IDF Apache attack helicopters occured at the Nova music festival, in which senior security officials—including then-Shin knew over a year ahead of time that an attack by Hamas was likely to occur.

Conclusion: We have the funding to prepare for Hamas coming through Qatar, which Netanyahu was warned about through Israeli intelligence. We have as much as a year’s notice of the likely occurrence of the attacks. We have the stand-down order for the IDF to allow Hamas to cross the most secure border in the world, and then we have the issuance of the 'Hannibal Directive' to ensure that the number of dead Israelis would be sufficient to gain the backing of the Israeli public and the world to commence the ge

nocide in Gaza.

The evidence is clear.

And with that I drop the mike. 🖕

Your turn Zionist faggot.

.

One of the most tragic tales that I have discovered while doing research on the multigenerational occultic practices of the aristocrats and elitists is the story of Ivanka Kushner.

She is undoubtedly one of the untold millions of stories, but I feel as if I've come to know her through the extensive research I've conducted on her and her family.

It's true that the men have been subjected to the same depraved programming, and I'll cover some of it in this piece. Perhaps it's because I'm a woman that my heart goes out to her more.

Yet, one of my primary roles on this earth is to advocate for those who may never be able to tell their stories themselves. Whether you choose to believe me or not, this article has nothing to do with being political.

To prove this, I will discuss some aspects of Ashley Biden's story in this piece as well; I just know Ivanka's story on a more intimate level.

Before we get into the details of Ashley and Ivanka's stories, I feel it's necessary to share how most of these children of elites are programmed and have very little, if any, agency of their own.

To do this, we will begin with how this process is used to create the perfect assassin, and then we will discuss the parallels in the brainwashing that is done to so many of these children. I have reason to believe that both Ashley and Ivanka have been programmed to varying degrees.

During the 1950s, reports about hypnotized US soldiers being controlled by enemy forces circulated around the world. From this media coverage, the term "brainwashing" was popularized in American culture. The idea of mind control also frightened the public on the silver screen in the 1962 political thriller, The Manchurian Candidate.

Let's start unlocking a few doors.

In 1959, Richard Condon's novel The Manchurian Candidate quickly became a hot property for adaptation into a movie, even before hitting the bookshelves. Rights to the story were ultimately acquired by writer George Axelrod and director John Frankenheimer. Frank Sinatra became involved in the project, cast as Bennett Marco.

"When you became part of it, it became a real movie. I mean, without you, we wouldn't have had a movie. I think so, yes. No, but that's true."

John Frankenheimer the director of the film to

Sinatra

Lawrence Harvey was brought on to play Raymond Shaw. Angela Lansbury was cast as Raymond's mother, and Janet Leigh as Rosie.

If we may proceed with the demonstration.

In 1952, a US army patrol is captured and brainwashed by Soviet and Chinese forces during the Korean war. The patrol is programmed to believe one of its members, Sergeant Raymond Shaw, is a hero.

"You like him a lot, don't you?

Raymond Shaw is the bravest, kindest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life."

This line is spoken by multiple characters—including Captain Bennett Marco (played by Frank Sinatra) and Corporal Al Melvin (played by James Edwards)—while under the influence of communist brainwashing

But at the film's outset, Raymond is shown as an unsympathetic figure that his men greatly dislike.

"It's just our Raymond, our lovable Sergeant Shaw."

Corporal Melvin (played by James Edwards)

The captors also program Raymond as an assassin, capable of killing anyone he is ordered to. To demonstrate the power held over Raymond's mind, the communist agent giving the presentation, Dr. Yen Lo, instructs Raymond to kill two members of his patrol.

The patrolmen are returned to America, made to believe it was through Raymond's efforts that they defeated the enemy forces. While Raymond is given a hero's welcome, we are introduced to his dominating mother Eleanor and his step-father, US Senator John Iselin. They are both presented as strongly anti-communist.

Raymond dislikes his mother and step-father and lets them know he's accepted a job with a newspaper in New York.

"Research assistant to Mr. Hoban Gaines.

Oh, Hoban Gaines? That communist?"

Raymond's mother Eleanor

"He's not a communist mother. As a matter of fact, he's a Republican.'

Raymond's to his mother Eleanor

After some time of Raymond settling back into life in the United States, the communist agents begin instructing him over the telephone by providing a trigger sentence.

"Violence is passed the time by playing a little solitaire."

Once reaching the Queen of Diamonds during his game of solitaire, Raymond's mind is open for commands.

(Note: this is how the programming works on both these programmed assassins and on the children that have "altered" or alternate personalities. The method of programming has differences, and we will get to that. But in my opinion, it's far worse for the children than it is for the P.O.W's, though I know that this may be hard to imagine. Patience, we'll get there. We need this foundation in place first.)

"Normally conditioned American who's been trained to kill and then to have no memory of having killed. Without memory of his deed, he cannot possibly feel guilt."

This line is spoken by Yen Lo (played by Khigh Dhiegh), the brilliant and chilling chief psychiatrist/brainwasher of the Manchurian project.

The communist agents also discuss that Raymond will eventually be handed over to an American operator. But before this handover happens, as a test, Raymond is instructed to kill his boss at the newspaper.

But for his own protection, he must be instructed that if he is ever, at any time, discovered at the scene of an assignment, this other person or persons must also be killed.

While Raymond is been used as an assassin, other members from the patrol, such as Major Bennett Marco, are having nightmares about being brainwashed.

Major Marco pays a visit to Raymond and finds out it's not just him having the dreams. Marco's efforts lead to a joint intelligence investigation into the patrol's brainwashing.

With Major Marco keeping an eye on Raymond, he opens up to Marco about his past, talking about falling in love with Josie Jordan, daughter of a senator, Thomas Jordan.

When news of this relationship reached Raymond's mother, she forced Raymond to stop seeing Josie, saying "her father is a communist and that he stands for evil."

Raymond explains that he obeyed his mother and stopped seeing Josie.

While Major Marco continues his efforts in figuring out Raymond's mind control, Raymond is paid a visit by his mother, who now wants to reunite Raymond with Josie at a costume party she'll be hosting with Raymond's step-father.

But during the costume party, we find out Raymond's mother is the American operator working with the enemy.

"Why don't you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?"

Raymond's mother Eleanor

Before Raymond receives his instructions, he gets a visit from Josie. The two quickly reconnect, run off, and get married. Eventually, Raymond's mother programs him to commit another murder.

This time of Josie's father, Senator Thomas Jordan. Raymond also kills Josie, who walks in on the assassination.

The death of Senator Jordan allows Raymond's stepfather to become a nominee for Vice President of the United States.

Major Marco is finally able to break through Raymond's conditioning, but the final objective is still not known. Taking a risk that Raymond could still be programmed to kill, Marco allows Raymond to leave so he can receive his new instructions.

Raymond's final instructions from his mother are that he is to shoot the presidential nominee while giving a speech.

This murder will allow Raymond's stepfather to move in and take the presidential nomination.

Major Marco is unable to stop Raymond. But Raymond doesn't shoot the presidential nominee.

Instead, he shoots his mother and stepfather. When Marco arrives in the room, Raymond says he had to stop them, then shoots himself.

The film ends with Marco reflecting on the tragedy of Raymond's life and death.

The story for the Manchurian Candidate is a very compelling one, slowly revealed, keeping the final assassination plot a mystery for most of the film.

"I tell you there's something phony going on. There's something phony about me, about Raymond Shaw, about the whole Medal of Honor business."

Frank Sinatra as Major Bennett Marco

One of the more memorable parts of the film is its portrayal of the brainwashing dream sequences.

Major Marco's dream begins by showing that he and his patrolmen are attending a garden club meeting, which was programmed into their minds to cover the truth about where they are, in Manchuria, having their minds manipulated.

The scene mixes elements of the fake garden club meeting with that of the actual brainwashing demonstration, giving a sense of the chaos inside Marco's mind.

"Well then, comrade. May I present the famous Raymond Shaw?

Young man, you've flown 8,000 miles to this dreary spot in Manchuria to see.

Raymond, pull your chair over here by me, please."

This lines are also spoken by Yen Lo (Khigh Dhiegh) during the brainwashing demonstration sequence.

The film also does well in exploring the tragic life of Raymond Shaw, a character trying to forge his own identity, seemingly unable to make personal connections with people, except for Josie.

He comes across as constantly tortured by the controlling interest of his mother, but seems compelled to remain loyal to her.

"You know that my whole life is devoted to helping you and to helping Johnny. My boy is my two little boys."

This line is spoken by Eleanor Iselin (played by Angela Lansbury), Raymond Shaw's chillingly manipulative mother.

Frank Sinatra does well as Major Bennett Marco, who's dealing with his own personal issues, trying to maintain his composure and sanity after being brainwashed during the Korean War.

But it's the performance of Angela Lansbury that stands out the most.

Rally a nation of television viewers into hysteria, to sweep us up into the White House with powers that will make martial law seem like anarchy.

Her portrayal of Raymond's mother is absolutely cold-hearted and sinister, which is a stark contrast from the role she became most known for later in her career on the long-running television show, Murder, She Wrote. Also of note with the casting of Angela Lansbury as Raymond's mother is that she is only three years older than actor Laurence Harvey, portraying her son.

In the book, there's quite a big thing about the incest, incestuous relationship between the between the mother and son.

But somehow, the way she played it at the very end, she implied it very subtly and very effectively, I thought.

(Note: These incestuous relationships are more closely tied to the programming of alternate personalities or "alters" of the multigenerational occultic families. This is one of the more sinister aspects of the breaking or fragmenting of the mind that must occur to create a psychological framework for the other personality or the "alter" to be formed for thus programmed. This is more commonly known today in psychology as "dissociative identity disorder.")

__

Meanwhile in the real world this is occurring.

When Richard Condon was writing the fictional story for The Manchurian Candidate, American intelligence was conducting their own real-world secret experiments on human subjects.

From the early 1950s and into the 60s, a project code-named MKUltra was run by the CIA. This project has received attention from a number of authors and journalists, including writer Tom O'Neal.

( Note: Investigative journalist Tom O’Neill’s book exploring the CIA’s MK-ULTRA program and its historical shadows is Chaos: Charles Manson, the CIA, and the Secret History of the Sixties (co-written with Dan Piepenbring).

While the book doesn't focus on clinical dissociative identity disorder or modern frameworks of "alters," O'Neill’s extensive investigation into MK-ULTRA, psychiatric mind-control experiments, and the 1960s counterculture uncovers several riveting conceptual threads regarding behavioral conditioning, fragmented identities, and programmed compliance:

* The Dr. West Connection and Compartmentalized Compliance: O'Neill investigates figures like Dr. Louis Jolyon West, a psychiatrist with ties to MK-ULTRA who later examined Jack Ruby (Lee Harvey Oswald's killer). West's research into hypnosis, LSD, and behavioral modification explored whether a subject could be induced to commit acts without conscious awareness or a unified memory of the deed—the exact mechanical premise behind creating a weaponized, compartmentalized "alter" or dissociated proxy.

* The "Manchurian Candidate" Blueprint in Reality: O'Neill details how the CIA's top-secret behavioral modification programs sought methods to splinter a subject's psyche, erase continuity of memory, and implant alternate behavioral controls. The book exposes declassified documents showing how researchers actively tried to split or override normal consciousness to see if a secondary, compliant state could take the wheel and execute high-stakes orders.

* The Blur Between Cult Indoctrination and Programming: A major theme of O'Neill's work is questioning how an illiterate ex-con like Charles Manson could completely shatter the autonomy of ordinary young followers, inducing them to adopt new, unyielding personas that committed horrific acts without apparent guilt.

O'Neill contrasts the official narrative with evidence of intelligence figures, fringe medical researchers, and lax parole oversight intersecting around the same demographic, suggesting that the psychological techniques used to dissolve identity in the 1960s mirrored military experiments in compartmentalization.

Tom O'Neill interview

This video provides direct discussion with Tom O'Neill regarding his twenty-year investigation into MK-ULTRA, mind control operations, and the hidden psychological structures explored in his book.

🔗 Link:

https://youtu.be/RporZYbAPC4?si=mLiXRUN_NHsn2DBK )

was a mind-control program, a brainwashing program that the CIA was trying to learn how to control people's behavior without their knowledge.

The project included behavioral modification experiments, testing psychoactive chemicals on American citizens.

They did these drug tests on prisoners, hospital patients, Johns, hippies, people that had no idea that this was going on for 25 years.

In 1973, then CIA director Richard Helms ordered the records of the MKUltra program destroyed, but some documents survived the purge, leaked later in the 1970s.

Their main objective was to create what they called hypno-programmed assassins, people who would kill on command through drugs and hypnotism and have no memory of their programming.

They were also trying to create couriers, people, you know, military people that they could implant messages and deliver messages and then have them wipe from their memory in case they were captured.

The CIA admitted that they had done this, but no one would say exactly what they did.

While the full extent of the MKUltra project will likely never be uncovered, it is known the program was not contained to the United States. Secret experiments were also conducted in Canada.

Experimental drugs including LSD were administered to human guinea pigs. The patients were never told that their treatment was part of a CIA experiment.

These experiments were exposed in the early 1980s on Canadian television.

They kept you asleep for 23 days and while I was asleep, they were shocking the heck out of me with electric shocks and playing tapes over and over. I don't know what was on the tapes yet, but we're going to find out what was on the tapes.

The Canadian research "Project MKUltra" (Subproject 68), took place at the Allen Memorial Institute in Montreal, and run by a Dr. Ewen Cameron.

His aim was to wipe the mind clean, then he would implant new messages by forcing the patient to listen to a hypnotic repetition as many as a quarter of a million times.

He was a an authoritarian, ruthless, power hungry, angry man. Not very nice.

It's not entirely clear if Dr. Cameron knew his research was being funded by the CIA, but what has been revealed about his methods is, to put it mildly, deeply disturbing.

With some patients, Dr. Cameron tried a drastic treatment called depatterning. Massive doses of electroshock, 20 times more intense than the standard shock treatments used today, were administered to patients who were kept sleeping for days.

(Note: These are also methods that are more closely related to the programming of the alternate personalities created in the children. They induce severely traumatic situations to fracture their minds, with more on this in later segments of this series.)

Dr. Cameron thought he could wipe out patient's sick behavior, and leave the healthy personality intact.

But first patients were to be so de-patterned that some even forgot their toilet training.

There was no informed consent, especially as regards the use of LSD perhaps, or the de-patterning. I doubt if those patients knew what they were being led into.

Next time, we will delve deeper into the programming of the 'alters' in these multigenerational aristocratic/occult families. These methods were further perfected by the Mossad, Israeli intelligence. Ghislaine Maxwell was an expert in this field, and this was her primary role as a partner in the intelligence gathering/blackmail network with Jeffrey Epstein. All of this and more will be discussed in future installments.

Stay tuned...

__

Disclaimer: I don't ever want it to seem that I'm trying to sensationalize these stories. I've paid a heavy psychological toll in doing this research, and it's my hope to make these stories somewhat interesting, but this is for the benefit of the reader. It's my intention to attempt to lessen the psychological blow to the reader to keep them from going through the trauma that I've experienced in researching these matters. Some, if not most, of the more depraved things that I've witnessed, especially on film, I'll never speak about here, and only my trauma therapist will ever know about them. It's not necessary for you to know these demonic things to fully understand how this process works and to have sympathy for these poor children, now adults, who have to keep their darkest secrets hidden their whole lives. In many ways, women, especially like Ivanka, have to be reprogrammed constantly. I believe this is Jared Kushner's primary role, and I also have reason to believe that he was Trump's 'handler' in the White House during his first term. Ivanka is the apple of Trump's eye mainly due to very particular reasons, and this is why Jared has her and keeps her under lock and key. If you look closely at the two pictures, you'll understand what I mean. Especially the one on the right; you see the psychological toll that it's obviously taken on Ivanka.

Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Aguilar (Ret.) is a retired United States Army Special Forces officer (Green Beret) and a West Point Graduate.

He has a vast array of knowledge about the United States military capabilities and the geopolitics of the world, especially in the Middle East region.

Here are his recent assessments as of September 2, 2026. These ideas have also been expressed by Professor Mohammed Merandi. Seyed Mohammad Marandi is an Iranian-American academic, political commentator, and professor of English Literature and Orientalism at the University of Tehran. He is widely recognized for his frequent appearances on global news networks as a prominent, staunch defender of the Iranian government's foreign policy. He also has insider information regarding the potential strategies of the IRGC.

I believe that Americans are finally seeing that we are up against a very capable adversary that has vast global support while the United States is in a race with Israel to become the most hated nation on earth, and justifiably so.

From the Dialogue Works podcast episode:

Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Aguilar

"Every day when I wake up over the last couple of days, I have flashbacks to when I was a West Point cadet, when I was a plebe, a freshman. Because when I was a freshman at West Point, we had to memorize what was called the days. Every day on a moment’s notice, we had to be prepared to answer how many days until some major event: how many days until the Army-Navy football game? How many days until Thanksgiving break? How many days until Christmas? Right? So now I have this in my head, and it’s stuck there as if I’m a freshman at West Point.

There are 55 days until the Israeli elections, as of today. As of today, there are 62 days until the US midterm elections. That’s not just work days; those are total calendar days. We have been in this war for 186 days as of today.

I firmly believe that when we are under the 50-day window for the Israeli elections, which puts us below the 60-day window for the US midterms, Iran is going to increase the frequency of preemptive defensive strikes using the same justification that the United States used in striking Iran: defensive in nature, preemptive defensive in nature.

I believe that once we get closer to the 50-day mark for Israel and below the 60-day mark towards US elections, which are inherently tied together, Iran is going to step up its strikes on Tel Aviv and in Israel to send a message.

In addition to that, I expect an increase in the intensity of strikes against US assets: Jordan, Al Udeid Air Base, and potentially Kuwait, depending on what interceptors we still have there. If not the missiles themselves, then the actual interceptor systems, because they still have radar capability. Whether they can shoot something, they can still potentially see viable military targets in Iraq, and I’m sure Iran is gauging those viable military targets in Iraq. But I also believe that Iran is going to continue to bait the United States Navy into confrontation in the Strait of Hormuz.

As the days approach, I believe that we are going to see an increase in the intensity and the destruction of Iranian strikes."

Context notes:

- U.S. midterms are scheduled for November 3, 2026.

- Israeli elections were expected around late October 2026 (commonly referenced as October 27 or nearby dates in contemporary reporting).

- Aguilar frames the approaching election windows as a likely trigger for escalated Iranian actions framed as 'preemptive defensive' strikes, paralleling U.S. justifications and linking the two countries’ election calendars.

My thoughts:

The intention of the IRGC is both strategic and propagandistic in scope: to increase the pressure on the Israeli public, which has had an extended break from hostilities in a war that they started, by the way; Jewish blood is too precious; make the American goyim die instead. If the Israeli public, especially in Tel Aviv, is heading to the bomb shelters several times a day again, Benjamin Netanyahu's intended plans to cheat in the upcoming elections will become all the more obvious.

Likewise, in the United States, the intention is to have a landslide victory for the Democrats, which is likely to occur anyway. Though the Jews have a firm hold on both sides of the House and the Senate, this is mainly intended to have a psychological effect on Donald Trump. Narcissists are very fragile in this regard. The more his delusions of grandeur are exposed to his own conscious mind, the more unstable he will become. This could be dangerous. I believe Iran is counting on the US military to intervene if Trump begins to seriously consider using nuclear weapons, for example. I also believe this is a real possibility. There are already rumblings among the upper military brass to remove Trump from office. Perhaps a military coup, which the majority of Americans would support. This could be very helpful in the prevention of a civil war, for which we are not at all prepared.'

Speaker 1 (Roza Gilles):

"I kept my identity protected as Jane Doe. I woke up one day with my name mentioned over 500 times. While a reticent power remained protected by reduction, my name was exposed to the world. Now reporters from across the globe contact me. I cannot live without looking over my shoulder. Three years, I was subject to ongoing rape. Jeffrey Epstein was under house arrest for the molestation of underage girls at the exact time he was abusing me. Seeing that the fact that he could commit those acts made justice feel impossible to me, and it took my ability to seek for help. In 2008, I just turned 18 when I met a MC2 Model Management owner named Jean-Luc Brunel. Coming from a financially stable background, I was a perfect target for coercion. I was promised a modeling career beyond my dreams. In less than six months, MC2 obtained an O-1 visa for me. It felt nearly impossible for a teenager with almost no experience. I did not have the documentation to earn that visa. By May of 2009, I was in New York City. I was isolated, controlled in a manner I've never experienced before. Within three months, the agency claimed I owed them over $10,400. I had no family, no friends, or no money. MC2 controlled every aspect of my life, where I went, how I dressed, and how I looked. They provided me enough of an allowance to keep me afloat, but never enough to be independent. Less than a month after I arrived in the United States, my agency sent me to a home of a registered sex offender. I was introduced to his girlfriend under the disguise that she was a photographer who helped me build my portfolio. Now I know that Jeffrey Epstein was supposed to be in a jail cell in June of 2008. I met him at his house right here in West Palm Beach. He was not in the jail. Jean-Luc Brunel brought me to West Palm Beach to have dinner with Epstein in July. Epstein used the names of powerful politicians to demonstrate his influence. He told me he's an investor of the very agency that promised me a career. He also spoke of his arrest that it was a game, bragging about girls visiting his cell, and his and his friendships with authorities. Jeffrey offered me a position at the Florida Science Foundation to handle phone calls to help me with my financial troubles. One day, his masseuse called me into his room where I was molested for the first time by Jeffrey. For the following three years, I was subject to ongoing rape. Jeffrey Epstein was under house arrest for the molestation of underage girls at the exact time he was abusing me. Seeing that the fact that he could commit those acts made justice feel impossible to me, and it took my ability to seek for help. I was summoned to his residence right here in West Palm Beach. My agency relocated me to Miami to keep me closer, and only after he was released from the house arrest I was allowed to go back to New York City, where my nightmares continued. Those years of abuse turn into a decade of fear that I still carry today. I eventually found the courage to reach out for help. I stepped forward along with other survivors, hoping those who allowed this to happen will be held accountable. I kept my identity protected as Jane Doe. I woke up one day with my name mentioned over 500 times. While a reticent power remained protected by reduction, my name was exposed to the world. Now reporters from across the globe contact me. I cannot live without looking over my shoulder. I can only imagine the long-term impact this mistake will have on my life. I wanted to be a doctor when I was a kid, so I want to end this statement with a story. In 1800, the doctor named Ignaz Semmelweis discovered something lifesaving. He realized that the doctors who were performing autopsies and then immediately delivering babies without washing their hands were carrying cadaverous particles causing women to die in agony. He had evidence, he had a solution, he begged the medical establishment to wash their hands to save lives. But the doctors were offended. They found it easier to protect their own reputation and maintain the status quo than to admit they were the ones causing harms. They closed they chose their pride over the life of women, and Dr. Semmelweis was ignored, ridiculed, and eventually cast out. I see the same patterns happening today with handling of these files. Release releasing my name while redacting the name of other powerful is not a mistake, it's a choice. It's a choice to prioritize the comfort of institutions over the safety of survivors. The evidence is right here, yet those in power rather than us dieing socially, emotionally, and physically, then admit their own complicity. I am no longer Jane Doe hiding in the files. I'm a woman, I'm a fighter, and I'm a witness, and I'm begging you, please wash your hands."

* Speaker 2 (Representative Robert Garcia ):

"Thank you, Ms. Rose. I, obviously, I think uh one of the true horrors of this investigation has been the way uh so many survivors continue to be retraumatized and I think this is one uh just really horrific example of um how even through the transparency act um so much so much horror and retraumatization um continues to happen. Um, so thank you for the testimony. Mister Mr. Cooven, I'm going to recognize you for your opening statement."

* Speaker 3 ( Attorney Spencer Kuvin):

"Thank you. Truly moved by her strength. Um, ranking member, members of Congress, my name is Spencer Cooven. I have represented numerous survivors of sexual exploitation and trafficking over the years, including the first victim to come forward in the Epstein investigation here in Palm Beach. I'm here today because what happened during the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein was not simply a failure of judgment. It was a systemic failure of justice. In Palm Beach County, credible evidence of widespread sexual abuse involving minors was presented to state prosecutors, including my client. Law enforcement initially identified dozens of victims. The conduct was organized, repeated, and devastating. Yet instead of a prosecution that matched the scale of the harm, what followed was a secret agreement, as we know, that minimized the abuse and insulted the children that had been abused. Despite the efforts of some of the federal agents at the time, the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District decided to have these secret meetings with Epstein's attorneys. The U.S. Department of Justice in conjunction with the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office at the time colluded in secret to quietly shelve this case with minimal state charges that branded a 15 and 16-year-old child victim as prostitutes. They gave a sweetheart deal to Jeffrey Epstein and four named as well as unnamed coconspirators. The Southern District U.S. Attorney at the time, Alex Acosta, spearheaded what every attorney advocate saw as the worst non-prosecution agreement ever executed by a U.S. Attorney.

(Note: how was Alex Acosta rewarded for his protection of this sexual predator of minors.

The now infamous star of the Epstein Files himself with over 38,000 mentions in the file Donald Trump rewarded Acosta for his service in the protection of fellow pedophile Jeffrey Epstein by: Rene Alexander Acosta (born January 16, 1969) is an American lawyer and government official who served as the 27th United States secretary of labor from 2017 to 2019 during the first presidency of Donald Trump.

Source citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Acosta)

Attorney Spencer Kuvin continues:

This sent a message. It told victims that even when the evidence is strong, accountability is negotiable if you are rich and powerful. This awful non-prosecution agreement completely shut down further federal charges for the events they were investigating here in Florida. As I mentioned, that tragic deal was negotiated and signed in secret. Not only was it kept secret from the world, it was kept secret from me. Calls were made repeatedly to the U.S. attorneys investigating this at the time by myself, an advocate for multiple victims at the time, and of course it was kept secret from those victims. I was forced to file motions with the court to compel its ultimate disclosure even after it had been executed and finally after obtaining court orders, they turned it over to us a full year after it had been signed. The victims were not consulted, their advocates like me were not consulted, victims were never given an opportunity to be heard. This was not just a moral failure. We believed it was a violation of law under the Crime Victims' Rights Act, originally passed in 2004, subsequently amended by Congress in 06, 08, and 15. Victims have had the right to confer with prosecutors and the right to be treated with fairness and respect. Yet those rights were ignored at the very moment that it mattered most, when decisions were being made that would determine whether justice would ever be pursued. The result was predictable. Survivors, as you've heard, were retraumatized not only by the abuse they endured, but by a system that excluded them from the process designed specifically to protect them. And the public was left questioning whether justice can be trusted when powerful interests are involved. This failure by the Department of Justice at the time was a subject of litigation brought, as you heard, by Ms. Wild. That case ultimately exposed a gap in the law, one that must be closed by you. Today, I want to offer that clear path forward. First, Congress should amend the Crime Victims' Rights Act to make it explicit that victims must be notified and given a meaningful opportunity to confer before any non-prosecution agreement or deferred prosecution agreement is finalized. Second, as you've heard, there must be enforceable remedies, not just suggestions. Victims should have standing to challenge agreements reached in violation of the Act, and courts must have the authority to review and, where appropriate, void those agreements. Third, transparency must be the rule, not the exception. Secret agreements that extinguish criminal liability, particularly in cases involving multiple victims, should not exist in our system of justice. And finally, there must be accountability. When prosecutors fail to uphold victims' rights, there must be consequences sufficient to ensure that those failures are not repeated. This is not about re-litigating the past, it's about ensuring what happened here never happens again. The survivors in this case have shown extraordinary courage coming here today. They told the truth and they trusted the system, and the system failed them. Congress now has the opportunity and, I would suggest, the responsibility to fix it. Thank you. We look forward to your questions."

* Speaker 4 (Representative Robert Garcia ):

"Thank you very much. I'd like to go to Ms. Hirsch, please, who's now recognized for her opening statement."

* Speaker 5 (Lauren Hirsch, CEO of World Without Exploitation):

"Thank you so much, ranking member, members of Congress. I'm Lauren Hirsch, the CEO of World Without Exploitation, the largest anti-trafficking coalition in the country. We have nearly 200 member organizations across the country. Many of those organizations are survivor-led. It is an absolute honor to sit beside each one of you. You are the reason this moment of reckoning is happening. What we have witnessed in the handling of the Epstein case is not simply a bureaucratic misstep. It is a deeply horrific failure to protect the very people the system is meant to serve. Survivors have repeatedly been promised dignity, confidentiality, and care, and instead, we have seen a systemic breakdown in their protection at nearly every step of the way. We have watched those with power and privilege manipulate the system, shielding themselves from accountability while survivors have suffered in silence. Every one of these failures sends a devastating message, not only to Epstein survivors, but to survivors everywhere, that accountability is optional for the powerful. Survivors have had enough, and frankly, the American public has had enough of this, too. We are now in a moment of reckoning that requires a thorough examination of all of the things that have gone horribly wrong, but it also requires a serious course correction. Survivors have been repeatedly harmed, first by Epstein and his associates, and then by law enforcement who refused to bring adequate cases, who didn't notify victims when secret sweetheart deals were made, who allowed abuse to continue even after pleas were entered in, and then they were again abused by the DOJ. When the federal government fails to protect, provide protection under the Crime Victims' Rights Act, survivors cannot be left without remedy. We need a legislative fix immediately to provide compensation and recourse for violations of the Crime Victims' Right

s Act, and this is urgent."

One of the most tragic tales that I have discovered while doing research on the multigenerational occultic practices of the aristocrats and elitists is the story of Ivanka Kushner.

She is undoubtedly one of the untold millions of stories, but I feel as if I've come to know her through the extensive research I've conducted on her and her family.

It's true that the men have been subjected to the same depraved programming, and I'll cover some of it in this piece. Perhaps it's because I'm a woman that my heart goes out to her more.

Yet, one of my primary roles on this earth is to advocate for those who may never be able to tell their stories themselves. Whether you choose to believe me or not, this article has nothing to do with being political.

To prove this, I will discuss some aspects of Ashley Biden's story in this piece as well; I just know Ivanka's story on a more intimate level.

Before we get into the details of Ashley and Ivanka's stories, I feel it's necessary to share how most of these children of elites are programmed and have very little, if any, agency of their own.

Stay tuned for the rest of part one of this extensive series, on the darkest sides of these multigenerational occultic families.

Thanks for sharing. This information is vital so that we may be able to form an international alliance of independent national states fighting each for their individual sovereignty. This is indeed a war for the freedom of the whole world; otherwise, we will all live under the enslavement of the Jews. They have already formed their system of laws to govern the world, aka "the Noahide Laws," and have tricked the masses into believing that the whole world will be governed from Jerusalem. We're in the greatest fight in the history of the planet, and no sacrifice is too great. The challenge will be to wake up the masses, and getting through the brainwashing is extremely difficult, especially where the Jerusalem part comes into play, and I think you know what I mean without me going into further detail. The most heartbreaking part about this is the people that we will have to fight because they refuse to wake up. This is why we must always, every single day, ask ourselves before we close our eyes to sleep: "Have I done enough for my people today?"

LEGENDARY U.S. General George S. Patton realized late in the war that the United States fought the wrong country. Patton felt the U.S. should have sided with Germany to destroy Jewish Bolshevik/Communist USSR. This information comes from Patton’s diary entries, letters he wrote to his wife, and comments he made to military officers and staff.

World War II was incredibly complex. However, in the final analysis, WWII was essentially a war between two competing ideologies: Nationalism vs. Jewish internationalism/globalism. Adolf Hitler and his allies fought to preserve the concept of nationalism, not just for Germans but for all peoples the world over. Nationalism really just means the sovereignty of an ethnic people and the right of such ethnic people/nationalists — within their own bordered country — to self-determination. What is meant by self-determination? Self-determination just means an ethnic people preserving their unique culture and heritage and pursuing their collective goals as a unique people. This applies to any ethnic peoples: Nigerians, Germans, Swedes, Vietnamese, Mexicans, Tibetans, etc.

On the other side of WWII was Jewish (Bolshevik) internationalism (today we simply call this ‘globalism’). In the 1920’s, 1930’s, and of course during WWII, powerful Jewish internationalists were fervently advancing the Jewish worldview of eventually eliminating all nations… except for a Jewish homeland… (what was later to be — after WWII — the nation of Israel in 1948). Today we see that nothing has changed; Jewish internationalism/globalism still works toward gradually “merging” all peoples of the world (particularly in the Western World) into one globalist system with a global government, global laws, consistent global culture, global bank, global currency, etc. In short, Jewish globalism (i.e., the weakening and eventual elimination of all nations) is the exact opposite of nationalism (i.e., a world composed of nations … specifically, ethnically homogenous and bordered nations). The Allied powers of WWII (led by Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin, et al) were tools of International Jewry and thus de facto fighting for the Jewish globalist worldview. After the (Jewish-run) Allies won WWII in 1945, international Jewish forces were then free to exercise a Jewish ‘Sphere of Influence’ over the greater Western World (and as we see today, increasingly over the rest of the world).

Alternatively, if Hitler had won World War II and then exercised a Nationalist ‘Sphere of Influence’ over the greater Western World, we’d have a more just, fair, and moral Western World today. The rest of the world would have similarly benefited had the Germans been victorious since German influence would have surely spread elsewhere (ideas such as non-usurious banking and strong family oriented culture would likely have spread globally).

Had Hitler won World War II, what would be different in the post-war world? Here are a few examples:

1 – No USSR (the Soviet government murdered millions of its own people during its 70 year reign — to study this topic read the writings of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn; Hitler would have liberated the USSR, though taking large parts of its Western region for lebensraum, “living space”)

2 – No cold war (because there would be no USSR)

3 – No Communist Eastern Europe/Iron Curtain (when WWII ended, Eastern Europe fell to Communism — this was part of Stalin’s spoils of war)

4 – No Red China and Mao’s subsequent killing of 40 – 60 million Chinese (the USSR created favorable conditions for Mao’s Communists which ultimately led to Mao’s victory over Chiang Kai-shek’s nationalists in 1949, thus if no USSR, no Mao victory)

5 – No Communist North Vietnam (both the Soviet Union and Red China aided Ho Chi Minh)

6 – No Communist Cambodia and Pol Pot’s slaughter of 2 million Cambodians (Red China aided Pol Pot)

7 – No dividing Korea into North Korea and South Korea (the Allies split Korea after WWII ended, with North Korea becoming Communist… another of Stalin’s spoils of war)

8 – No Communist Cuba (given the previous, what support would Castro have had in the 1950’s?)

9 – No Communism anywhere (Hitler was the world’s most fervent anti-Communist)

10 – Liberalism and multiculturalism wouldn’t dominate Western ethos (both are Jewish creations and both have always been heavily promoted/advanced by Jews; thus if no Jewish influence, then no liberalism and no multiculturalism… at least certainly nowhere near the degree we see today)

11 – No Cultural Marxism and no political correctness (these are social engineering “tools” which came out of the Jewish think tank known as the Frankfurt School)

12 – No third world immigration into Western nations (Jews wouldn’t be in power positions to craft and force through liberal immigration laws; Jews are responsible for each and every Western nation’s liberal immigration policy/laws, as all were orchestrated by a consortium consisting of the World Jewish Congress, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, and B’nai B’rith)

13 – No depraved filth on TV, in movies, etc. (because Jews wouldn’t run Hollywood)

14 – No widespread pornography (Jewish lawyers and Jewish activists were the main challengers of anti-obscenity laws, under the guise of “Freedom of Speech”)

15 – There would still be prayer in public schools (Jewish lawyers were instrumental in banning prayer in public schools under the guise of so-called “separation of church and state,” something that appears nowhere in the U.S. Constitution)

16 – No man-hating radical feminist movement (Jews such as Betty Friedan, Sonia Pressman, and Gloria Steinem, among others, were the key drivers of radical feminism)

17 – No Israel and all the problems it has brought the USA and the immeasurable misery it has wrought on the Palestinians

18 – Jews would be living in Madagascar (perhaps) and would be carefully monitored (Madagascar was one place Hitler considered as a Jewish homeland)

Many reading this will ask, “But what about the Holocaust?” The Holocaust has been grossly exaggerated by organized Jewry in order to create sympathy for Jews worldwide and thus help advance the Jewish agenda (i.e., people seen as victims tend to get their way). It is also used as a political weapon to justify Israeli militarism against the Palestinians. Hitler’s Final Solution (rebranded in the early 1970’s as the “Holocaust”) was a plan to remove Jews from Europe, not to kill them. During WWII, just as the U.S. couldn’t trust Japanese Americans, thus causing FDR to round many of them up and place them in concentration camps, Hitler couldn’t trust Jews since many were partisans sympathetic to the USSR and hence they aided the USSR in various subversive, anti-German activities. Therefore the National Socialists rounded up Jews and placed them in concentration camps.

Somewhere around one million Jews died during WWII (not six million) mostly due to disease and starvation in the final months of the war. Heavy Allied bombing of Germany and parts of German occupied Europe destroyed many roads, rail lines, and bridges making it impossible for Germany to adequately supply the camps with food and medicine. The result is that many Jews died of starvation and disease; and of course many non-Jews also died of starvation and disease (again, due to a massive Allied bombing campaign and its destruction of German transportation infrastructure). Lastly, there were no “gas chambers.” Much has been written about this. To study the “gas chamber” subject, read the research papers published by Germar Rudolf and Carlo Mattogno (there are many others as well). To get a broad overview of the Holocaust, read my article, What Was The Holocaust… What Actually Happened?

It should also be noted that Hitler never wanted to “conquer the world.” He simply wanted to safeguard Europe and the greater Western World from all manner of nefarious Jewish influence and, more broadly, safeguard the world-at-large specifically from, 1) usurious Jewish banking and, 2) Jewish-driven cultural degradation.

As previously stated, the Allied heads-of-State (Roosevelt, Churchill, et al) were puppets of International Jewry; each sold his soul for power and prestige. Again, as earlier stated, World War II was a war between two competing ideologies: Nationalism -vs- Jewish Bolshevik internationalism/globalism — unfortunately International Jewry won.

Was World War II “the good war” as is often claimed? No, it was exactly the opposite. The Allied victory marked the beginning of the end of Western Civilization.

* * *

Relevant comments that I found interesting to this original article below:

Not sure where you’re getting the 1 million Jews who died during WWII. It’s been common knowledge that the International Committee for the Red Cross–which had access to and regular contact with internees in the labor camps throughout the war until the Allies bombed all the access routes (causing the starvation)–stated in their final report of war victims that 300,000 died in “prisons and concentration camps”. When subtracting the prison tally, an itemized list of all victims of ALL races, ethnicities and religions, across all the camps came to a total of 271,301. This would support the fact that, as per the self-reported world Jewish population figures as tallied by the American Jewish Committee Bureau of the Synagogue Council and delivered to the World Almanac showed the global Jewish population changed.

Lasse Kristensen

_

Reply to

NoneSuch

I agree, I mean an incredible article but I also think we are more or less down to 300.000 in real life! which is 20x lesser than the claimed 6 million hoax. But 300.000 compared to the 60-70 million total dead in WW2 is a drop in the sea, that's why personally I am sick and tired of the jews whining and always put themselves in the center. But i do suppose they're in a different class, and that their deaths matter far more than anyone else's who died. "They're the chosen people after all." 🤮

But wonderful article! respect! and I TOTALLY agree with all of the above!

Lasse Kristensen

_

Red Cross official documentation of the whole war found here👇

https://archive.org/details/ReportOfTheInternationalCommitteeOfTheRedCrossOnItsActivitiesDuring

/ReportOfTheInternationalCommitteeOfTheRedCrossOnItsActivitiesDuringTheSecondWorldWarseptember11939-June301947Vol.2/page/n15/mode/2up

Mr. H. scoffed at what he called Jewish Democratic Capitalism.

The red Cross numbers are well known.

_

Excellent article !

My question is this, how do we stop preaching to the choir and get this information out in front of the American public?

For the last 75 years the American public has been so thoroughly brainwashed by the wartime lies of Jewish propaganda that it they were finally presented with the facts today, the cognitive dissonance would cause their heads to explode.

PTFogg

_

Hello and thank you for the idea to bring it out to the American people. So many would love to bring it out to the Germans in order to regain their self confidence and remember their parents and grandparents with pride. We are not allowed to talk about all this in Germany or we will end up in jail. Everybody fears the long arm that takes one away. See Ursula Haverbeck a 90 Year old Lady with the heart of an angel and with an awake, intelligent and wise brain, now about the 4th time in jail, because she asked logical questions. Same with Horst Mahler, Ernst Zündel (he died in the meantime) and many others. Yet I believe, the more of the folk wake up and ask questions.

Ursula

_

Hello Paul, thank you for your response! Oh yes there are more “woken-up” people in Germany than one thinks, BUT as I mentioned before. If one is too loud, one runs into danger to be imprisoned. I learned a ton from my mom, my grandma and in general from my family who was on the trek out of Schlesien and Ostpreußen. Many experienced horrible things and only now when the younger people are asking, slowly they open up to talk. They talk and cry. It is sometimes heart breaking, but so necessary to bring out the truth onto the next generations that information does not get lost. In Germany EVERYTHING is controlled by the Zentralrat der Juden in Berlin. They control the media in any direction, newsletters, magazines, radio.

Ursula

_

Below is a link which explains were the word Nazi came from, it came from a Jew as usual. By the way the website below is excellent. Its an American gentlemans website.

http://www.chuckmaultsby.net/id143.html

Terence Smart

_

Yes, this term “Nazi” was covered here, using some of that same material and more: https://whitebiocentrism.com/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=511

“Nazi” i and “neo-Nazi” are buzz words calculated to shut down any discussion of positive ideas of National-Socialism.

Will Williams

_

I am so sad to hear this. Germany is under control of the jews maybe even more than before WW2. It's sad at the end of western civilization in the long run. But they control the world including the USA. It makes me sick! :(

Lasse

_

Here you will find the explanation of the epithet “Nazi”, invented of course by a Jew to denigrate the National Socialist Party. This site is very interesting, you can find a lot of true history. Germany was not an aggressor, Germany was a victim, the Germans fought heroically to save their homeland. I can’t help but cry for the Germans who were killed in a war of financial Judaism. Greetings f

rom Romania!

https://ww2truth.com/2020/12/19/exposing-the-nazi-epithet-who-started-it-why-how-and-who-benefits/

Valentin

Newly released documents from the Justice Department trove, including emails from Epstein, indicate that communication was planned with Trump as late as 2011, challenging the narrative that contact ceased after he was banned from Mar-a-Lago. Trump claimed he banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago in the early two thousands because Epstein had poached young women who worked at his spa. Trump hasn't provided an exact date, and there is no known official documentation from him confirming the specific timing of the ban; this lends itself to the claim lacking in credibility.

High-profile clubs maintain formal records of membership cancellations or expulsions to ensure clear administrative records, and if Trump's claim were true, it would have been extremely easy for him to obtain these records. Furthermore, since this was an exclusive club where the crème de la crème frequently rubbed elbows, especially in Palm Beach, Epstein would have been upset, and if documentation wasn't submitted, Trump would have been open to an easily winnable lawsuit from Epstein. Having formal documentation helps protect the establishment from potential claims of wrongful termination or breach of membership agreements, and every club in America has this policy.

Furthermore, witness allegations from unredacted documents suggest that Trump never actually banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago, contradicting his claims and pointing towards an ongoing relationship.

The strongest material for the side that says the relationship kept going after the Mar-a-Lago ban is the 2009 email Epstein forwarded to Ghislaine Maxwell. In it, Epstein’s lawyers summarized a conversation with Trump’s attorneys in which Trump reportedly said Epstein was never a member of the club, only a guest, and had never been asked to leave.

That directly undercuts the ban story. Membership records reviewed by Miami Herald reporters show Epstein’s account stayed open until October 2007 — more than a year after his 2006 indictment. Phone message pads seized from Epstein’s Palm Beach house in 2005 recorded two calls from Trump in November 2004, right around the time they were bidding against each other for the same oceanfront mansion. Trump won that auction.

Epstein’s own emails keep circling back to Trump for years afterward. In 2011 he called Trump “the dog that hasn’t barked” and claimed a victim spent hours at his house with him. In 2019 he wrote that Trump “knew about the girls” because he had asked Ghislaine to stop. A 2017 email even floated the idea of Trump being around for Thanksgiving in Palm Beach.

In conclusion, you can add this to the list of the 30,573 lies that independent fact-checkers caught him in during his first term.

First, allow me to say that I'm of the middle position, being an agnostic, neither a Christian nor a Pagan, and I will not be drawn into the debate as to whether or not Hitler or the NSDAP was a Christian or a Pagan movement. I believe that there's evidence to support both positions, and I will not list either of these, other than to say that I know this subject quite well and once partook in these unwise disagreements that not only fracture our movement but also turn us into bitter enemies wanting to kill one another, worse than the Jew or the white race traitor.

Think about that last statement for a moment.

Think about how delightful these kinds of disagreements are to our Jewish adversaries. In fact, I know for a fact that there were Jewish plants on Telegram inciting these disagreements.

For God's sake, get some impulse control, bruders and schwisters. We're talking about our survival as a race here.

Trust me, I struggle internally with this so often that I have to literally bite my tongue. Even in writing this piece, I'm compelled to let my viewpoints slip, but I will not do it.

I have written masterpieces providing indisputable proof as to how one of these brief systems is particularly destructive, but did it change one person's point of view? No!

Not one.

So what do we do with this?

We do what Hitler did; he gave us the template, being able to bring Catholics and Protestants together after a period of four hundred twelve years of infighting. (Note: It was 412 years from the point of the beginning of the Protestant Reformation, and the document was called the 95 Theses. Martin Luther, being a German himself, adds further understanding of how deep these roots of division were.) I believe Hitler was also in a very unique place and time in German history, which is what I also believe it will take to fully resolve this issue between National Socialists that are of the sects of Christian/Identists and Pagan/Traditionalists.

Let me explain further here. The Germans were desperate for solutions going through the dark and bleak period of the Weimar Republic, from November 9, 1918, to March 23, 1933, where Germans starved to death in mass, over 700,000 of them. They wanted any solution other than what they were suffering. Adolf Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933 and ended the Republic.

I truly hope that it doesn't become this desperate before we can lay down these petty trivialities.

Here's what my recommendation is to this issue:

1. During the war, we can have divisions that fight under both Pagan and Christian banners.

2. We can provide Chaplains and Pagan Priests for each of the divisions.

3. Don't establish a state-sanctioned religion until after the war.

4. After the war, we can have a council that either determines that we can coexist or divide territory.

5. The leader during the war will have an immediate confidence vote because this leader will decide on the proposals submitted by both sides.

These ideas are by no means comprehensive, and this is only the beginning of a working model, but someone needs to be thinking about solutions instead of ways to divide us even more.

In conclusion, the White race only represents 6% of the global population, and two Jews, Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Zelensky, are presently killing millions more battle-ready White men. Europe is being flooded by the Jews with fighting-aged Muslim men who are from war-torn countries, with already a bone to pick with Europeans for assisting the US and Israel in killing their comrades back in their homelands.

The prognosis for Europe is getting darker by the day. England, for all practical purposes, is already lost.

Leaving Australia, New Zealand, Iceland, a few of the Scandinavian countries, and the United States as our last potential strongholds.

The situation is dire; let's not make it more so.

We have covered in the past the situations onboard the USS Gerald Ford and the USS Abraham Lincoln, as to the conditions being so poor due to overextended deployments.

Families and parents of sailors aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln have voiced significant concerns regarding the ship’s record-breaking deployment, which exceeded 250 days without a port call.

Reports from relatives and military news outlets highlight ongoing issues such as intermittent shortages of food and hygiene supplies, malfunctioning plumbing and water systems, declining morale, and deteriorating mental health, alongside accounts of sailors going overboard. Insider reports from sailors, claimed that the ship was near a mutiny.

While family members have pushed for answers, stating further concerns as to the limitations of communication.

The families were concerned about the deteriorating conditions on board both ships, primarily expressing concerns for the mental health of the sailors.

Relatives of sailors aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln have reported serious concerns. One parent stated, "You've essentially stranded them out there," and mentioned a warning that the crew needed to reach port before "people started losing their minds." Another mother shared that her son messaged her about locked showers and severely limited meals.

Similarly, those with loved ones on the USS Gerald R. Ford has raised complaints about long deployments and difficult living conditions.

These concerns largely stem from persistent failures of the ship's undersized vacuum plumbing and sewage system, leading to unsanitary environments on board, such as constant puddling of raw sewage, scattered about the boat.

Families have also expressed frustration over the high operational tempo, extended time away from home, and the stress this takes on the crew's wellbeing, which was further exacerbated by a fire in a laundry space.

Brianna Caudill, whose sister is deployed on the USS Gerald R. Ford, shared that quote, saying, "If I'm being completely honest, my family and I are scared. This is our first time walking through something like this."

The Navy and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have maintained that reports of widespread poor conditions are misrepresented, discounting the soldiers concerns.

Donald Trump similarly brushed off concerns about the length of the deployment, remarking that the tour had "not been nearly long enough".

___

The state of the war with Iran is beyond disastrous.

The Pentagon is even struggling to make payroll for our brave service men and women.

"A navy official who was briefed on how the service is planning to address the shortfalls said money is shifted around in imaginative ways."

@AramRoston @guardian

Top military officials are issuing dire warnings about the destruction and devastation that the Trump regime has caused to the United States military—how the Trump regime has destroyed the military’s readiness, capabilities, equipment, morale, alliances, and the overall ability to project strength and to carry out basic operations.

Military leaders who served with distinction in the past, current military leaders who are leaking to the Wall Street Journal, the Guardian, New York Times, Washington Post, Financial Times, and others. And the picture that is being painted is absolutely cataclysmic.

It is absolutely dire.

For example, we're learning that the Trump regime has drained the US Navy's budget so badly that the United States is struggling to even pay our service members.

One Pentagon memo that leaked to the Guardian talks about how the Navy funding is so bad right now that there are shortfalls in payroll accounts due to the Department raiding payroll in order to fund combat operations, because Trump and Hegseth and this despicable and incompetent regime has run out of money.

Yet the Trump family crime syndicate has backed at least 4.5 Billion dollars in this team alone, through his various market manipulation schemes. Other than his constant lies (there's been at least 39 of them) about talking to Iran and that a deal is close, which eases the market driving up prices. But even worse we have the Poly market

Conflict of interest / “the family is making money while the government goes easy on them”

Donald Trump Jr. is an adviser to Polymarket and his investment firm (1789 Capital) has put a lot of money into it (including a big new investment announced around September 1–2, 2026 that helps value the company at about $21 billion).

At the same time, the Trump administration dropped earlier government investigations into Polymarket and has taken steps that make life easier for prediction-market companies.

Critics say this looks like the president’s family is personally benefiting from decisions made by the government he runs. It’s the classic “you can’t be both the referee and a player on one of the teams” problems.

Before Trump returned to office, the main U.S. regulator for these markets (the CFTC) and the Justice Department were looking into whether Polymarket was breaking rules by letting Americans bet on the platform.

After Trump took office, those probes were closed.

Critics claim the investigations were quietly dropped because the company is connected to Trump Jr., not because the company was fully cleared.

One official and one Navy contractor said that non-emergency maintenance on shore-based facilities has been deferred because there's such a massive cash crunch. "They're f***ed. We are F-U-C-K-E-D."

The Trump regime has shot all the weapons of the Navy, trashed all of their ships, and ran out of money. That's a direct quote from a former US military officer now working for a Navy contracting company who told this to the Guardian in an exposé that they just published.

"The piggy bank is broken," a retired naval officer, Harlan Ullman, said, who was willing to lend his name and go on the record.

And this is trying to be concealed by the Trump regime, but right now military leaders are saying this is getting dire. This is existential right now.

Meanwhile, we also learn through leaks to the Wall Street Journal, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is planning on summoning the US military leaders back to Quantico like he did over a year ago, where he yelled at them and told them, "You have to have the warrior ethos that I am demanding. Otherwise, get the hell out of here.

You need to do the grooming the way I want you to groom. The fitness the way I want you to be fit."

Meanwhile, Hegseth is the most absolutely incompetent person imaginable. I'll tell you who's been very outspoken lately—an individual by the name of Major General Randy Manner. He's a former acting vice chair of the National Guard Bureau, served with distinction for 36 years, nearly four decades, very well respected, and he's sounding the alarm and saying Pete Hegseth is a disgrace and is a clear and present danger to our national security.

Here's what he says here:

Major General Randy Manner: That man is a clear and present danger to the United States. Period. He has done more harm to our nation's security than any Secretary of Defense that I am aware of throughout our 250-year history.

He is not competent.

If you read his book where he says "we're going to give no quarter, we're not going to have any rules", those are the words of a potential war criminal. As a retired major general with 36 years of experience, for me to say that of a secretary of defense, I never, ever thought I would ever say anything like that.

It's very, sad because the commander-in-chief is supposed to be the leader of our military, the leader of our nation. Yet we cannot count on the words that he says as being true. The military right now, while still the most powerful on the planet, is extremely weakened by his adventure.

Now, we've lost many American lives, hundreds wounded, thousands killed in the Middle East.

We've lost many of our allies.

We have expended somewhere between 1/3 to 2/3 of all of our defensive and offensive missile capabilities. We can barely defend ourselves right now, and this war is being paid out of accounts that are affecting the readiness of the rest of our military.

So we are struggling, and the average American may not see it.

The average American though sees it because the average American is paying way more money for gas, 25% more, $4 approximately on average across our country, and food prices are higher, and they're going to go higher still because there is no end in sight.

And then he also went on other news networks, and here's what he said about Donald Trump. He said that if anybody behaved the way Trump did, they would immediately be kicked out of the military, because the behavior is despicable and horrific.

Enough of this!

I will tell you unequivocally that all my 36 years of service, if any Navy chief or, non-commissioned officer or officer or admiral or general had ever said those kind of words, they would have been relieved within minutes.

And I mean that literally.

It is totally inappropriate that the commander-in-chief of all military should show continued disdain and disrespect for our military members and for their family. This is unacceptable, whether it's talking about Gold Star mothers and fathers, or whether we're talking about those young men and women on board the USS Abraham Lincoln. This is unacceptable by any commander-in-chief or any military leader."

Here's someone else who's also sounding the alarm, Senator Mark Kelly.

Senator Mark Kelly, of course, is a Navy former Navy aviator, he flew, uh, 39 combat missions in Operation Desert Storm, of course, he's also an astronaut, an American hero, and he flew missions off of the USS Abraham Lincoln, as well as the, uh, USS George Washington.

We all know about the USS Abraham Lincoln, of course, where the Trump regime, did not provide our service members, our sailors, and our Marines with the nutrition needed, or with, and the Abraham Lincoln's now heading to Thailand, the USS George Washington coming in from the, uh, Pacific.

Donald Trump is posting, or he's telling Axios, "The sucker is open! The US is gaining the upper hand in the battle over the Strait of Hormuz."

We've gone from fake deal announcements to now fake success in the Strait of Hormuz announcements every day. This is clearly market manipulation.

Let's see what his assessments are?

Senator Mark Kelly: "Yeah, I think most Americans don't take him seriously anymore. He is known to be a prolific liar to the American people.

(Note: according to independent fact checkers documented 30,573 false or misleading claims during Donald Trump's first presidential term 2017–2021, but a comprehensive cumulative total for his second administration is not available.

Pace Over Time: The rate of false claims increased each year:Year 1: 6 claims per dayYear 2: 16 claims per dayYear 3: 22 claims per dayYear 4: 39 claims per day. There's no doubt that he's a pathological-liar.)

He did that during his first term, he's doing it now. And I got to say, it also seems to be spreading, and I really worry about that.

I was watching, the way some members of the military have been presenting this thing, this conflict in the Middle East against, Iran right now has been a little disingenuous.

Talking about, executing this naval blockade, perfectly, expertly, whatever you want to say, without acknowledging the fact that the Iranians have shut down the strait.

And there's little to no trade going through, that's jacking up the prices for the American people significantly.

So Americans are suffering, unless you are the president or his family or, the billionaires, like him, you're doing really well in this economy.

Everybody else has been, presented with a shit sandwich, I have to say."

We know that the Trump Truth Social accounts are going to be lie after lie and deranged, but what's really hit me hard, and I think it's what Senator Mark Kelly was alluding to, is the CENTCOM account and the blatant lies that we're hearing from them.

In the beginning I was looking at Admiral Brad Cooper and some of the leadership team, and I was like, thank God at least we have people there who are going to just tell it straight.

And what I've observed is, sadly and tragically, I felt the exact opposite, and it feels like even worse betrayal.

Then you had CENTCOM do a post where they used Adobe royalty-free images—that's not even the Strait of Hormuz—of ships leaving and military stock footage, and then portraying it as this was our successful mission in the Strait of Hormuz.

They must think that we're pretty stupid to believe such obvious lies.

(Note: you can track the ships in real time here:

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-72.5/centery:12.0/zoom:3 )

I've been closely observing the ships going in and out of the Persian Gulf and through the strait of Hormuz, and CENTCOM and the President is lying their asses off.

This is embarrassing!

We know this isn't true.

Why are you doing this?

Senator Mark Kelly:

"No, it hurts me. I spent 25 years in the United States Navy and served under incredible, leaders. People I really looked up to, my first commanding officer—he's actually second, but he's the commanding officer I had when we went to war against Iraq in the first Gulf War—Terry Toms from Iowa, uh, a great leader, very common sense guy, I would follow him anywhere.

I think good leadership can be contagious. The problem right now also is that bad leadership can be contagious as well. And we're starting to see some of that, that folks around Pete Hegseth and around the president start to try to emulate his behavior, which is not being straightforward, not being transparent, trying to avoid accountability at all costs.

I think most of them probably realize they made a mistake, getting into a war with another country with the Iranians without a strategic goal, without a plan, without a timeline, and without a way out.

And now they're stuck and they don't know what to do about it.

And this president doesn't have answers.

He has no idea what he's doing.

He just makes up the most random shit, and expects us to be stupid enough to believe it.

Remember, this is a guy who truly believes, truly believes that he knows more than experienced admirals and generals about the military, about conflict, about national security, about combat operations. He does not.

He actually thinks he knows more about, everything than everyone. That's very dangerous and that's why we find ourselves in this spot because, he's the president of the United States.

He took us to war, and with no good reason to do it.

And some of our top military generals and leaders have been purged.

Everybody from General Randy George, the Army Chief of Staff—beloved him and his wife, Patty, were probably the most popular people, in the military.

Then you have Chris Donahue last year, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, CQ Brown Jr.

They had to give a waiver to, Raisin Cane because he wasn't a four-star, when he didn't have the qualifications to even be in the position.

But you have what we're down to half as many four-star generals than we had before, and it just seems like our very deep bench of talent who understood war and tactics—I don't think we should have been in this war, let me be very clear, but understood tactics and strategy—like we we've taken away our best players, and we've put in people who weren't there yet who seem to be more loyal, Trump.

They purged people who they didn't view as sufficiently loyal to them.

The military is supposed to be apolitical.

For 250 years, I mean, it was a feature of the United States military, that it is apolitical, it's not partisan. We swear an oath to the Constitution, not to a person.

But my sense is that they're looking for people, who are loyal to the president as an individual, and his party.

That is not healthy for this nation.

You know, when we get to January of 2029, we're going to have to start trying to repair some of the damage, significant damage that I think has been done, by the DOD, the Secretary of Defense and the president."

It pains me every morning seeing, I say this not in a political way, just seeing obviously loser behavior, and being on a team, this country that I know is a country of winners and a country that can do good, but it feels every day like we're just like a bunch of losers.

Senator Mark Kelly:

"I think it's a combination of people feeling sorry for us, laughing at us, angry with us.

You know, yesterday's changing the name of Lake Ontario, not realizing it's not named.

I mean, the province, I think, may have been named after the lake. But with his childish antics he thinks he's sticking it to Canada.

I mean, stuff that he should not be spending his time on, putting his name on buildings like the Kennedy Center, building a ballroom, replacing the granite, helipad, all this stuff, catapults on aircraft carriers. He also wants to move the island, which is the superstructure on the aircraft carrier forward because he thinks it looks better.

I have a bachelor's degree in marine engineering, a master's degree in aeronautical engineering, I'm a test pilot, I'm an astronaut, I have 375 carrier landings. I would not even suggest to the Navy how to how to design systems on Navy ships. I mean, this guy, he is way out of his lane, he doesn't seem to care, folks around the world are laughing at us as a nation and it is embarrassing."

It's embarrassing to me. We're the United States of America, and we have a president who is not doing the job, who's completely checked out, and US service members are at incredible risk because of this. 18 of them have lost their lives, over 700 more are injured. This thing in Iran has been a disaster, but here at home, half of Americans are having a hard time affording food right now, and they can't afford rent, and he kicked people, millions of people off their health care coverage.

This administration is going to go down in history as a total joke, and it's embarrassing to all of us.

You're the commander-in-chief and you are hiding in a catering container with Natalie when you could be on the Air Force One, which has the most protected plane, you're leaving NATO, and you're hiding in a catering container.

You know, I'm thinking it's like, your favorite sports team and the captain shows up for the game and then sees the other team and then runs away.

What what what are you doing?

You're still supposed to, you realize you're still supposed to be the commander-in-chief.

What went through your mind when you heard that behavior?

Senator Mark Kelly: Well, the worst part of that is, he snuck away in the other airplane, and I get it.

He's the president. The Secret Service, you know, needs to make some hard decisions at times to keep the president of the United States safe.

I get that.

But then how do you let the press and your staff take a plane where our adversaries, the Iranians, who want to kill Donald Trump, they actually think he's on that plane.

Why didn't you just wait a couple hours and say, 'Hey, the president's gone,' and show him landing in the UK or wherever he went, and then and then to make it clear to everybody that he is not on this airplane, so you don't put those individuals at risk of losing their lives?

Doesn't he care about anybody?

The numb

er one role of a leader is to improve the lives of the people you're leading.

That's his staff.

Those are the American people, those are American journalists.

I just cannot believe that he put those people at that kind of risk and didn't even seem to care about it..."

***

Often our whole world is built upon social acceptance. In fact many people's jobs are dependent on how people view them. This creates a sphere that encompasses our whole lives.

Being in a state in which you're living a fake existence is a miserable condition.

So let's examine why being rigorously honest is essential in having a happy and meaningful life.

The Power of Radical Honesty –

By Dr. Anna Lembke

Every major religion and code of ethics has included honesty as essential to its moral teachings. All my patients who have achieved long-term recovery have relied on truth-telling as critical for sustained mental and physical health. I too have become convinced that radical honesty isn’t just helpful for limiting compulsive overconsumption, but also at the core of a life well-lived.

The question is, how does telling the truth improve our lives? Let’s first establish that telling the truth is painful. We are wired from the earliest ages to lie, and we all do it, whether or not we care to admit it. Children begin lying as early as age two.

The smarter the kid, the more likely they are to lie, and the better they are at it. Lying tends to decrease between ages three and fourteen, possibly because children become more aware of how lying harms other people. On the other hand, adults are capable of more sophisticated antisocial lies than children, as the ability to plan and remember becomes more advanced. The average adult tells between 0.59 and 1.56 lies daily. Liar, liar, pants on fire—we’ve all got a little smoke coming off our shorts.

Humans aren’t the only animals with the capacity for deception. The animal kingdom is rife with examples of deception as a weapon and a shield. The "Lomechusa pubicollis" beetle, for example, is able to penetrate ant colonies by pretending to be one of them, something it accomplishes by emitting a chemical substance that makes it smell like an ant. Once inside, the beetle feeds on ant eggs and larvae. But no other animal rivals the human capacity for lying.

Evolutionary biologists speculate that the development of human language explains our tendency and superior ability to lie. The story goes like this: The evolution of "Homo sapiens" culminated in the formation of large social groups. Large social groups were possible because of the development of sophisticated forms of communication, allowing for advanced mutual cooperation.

Words used to cooperate can also be used to deceive and misdirect. The more advanced the language, the more sophisticated the lies.

Lies arguably have some adaptive advantage when it comes to competing for scarce resources, but lying in a world of plenty risks isolation, craving, and pathological overconsumption. Let me explain.

In today’s world of overwhelming abundance, it is easy to slip into behaviors that feel good in the short term but are ultimately destructive in the long term. We engage in lying and create a false persona or a mask to cover up our behaviors, which leads to shame and isolation and fuels ongoing consumption.

We can’t get out of the cycle of destructive shame that fuels addiction until we stop lying and start being who we really are.

Radical honesty—telling the truth about things large and small—is essential not just to recovery from addiction, but for all of us trying to live a more balanced life in our reward-saturated ecosystem. It works on many levels.

First, radical honesty promotes awareness of our actions.

Second, it fosters intimate human connections.

Third, it leads to a truthful autobiography which holds us accountable not just to our present, but also to our future selves.

Further, telling the truth is contagious and might even prevent the development of future addiction.

Awareness.

Lying can become so routine that we aren’t aware that we are even doing it. I call this the lying habit. To restore a truthful narrative of our lives, we must become aware of the lies we tell ourselves and others. Recounting our experiences gives us mastery over them. Whether in the context of psychotherapy, talking to an AA sponsor, confessing to a priest, confiding in a friend, or writing in a journal, our honest disclosure brings our behavior into relief, allowing us, in some cases, to see it for the first time. This is especially true for behaviors that involve a level of automaticity outside of conscious awareness.

When I was compulsively reading romance novels, I was only partially aware of doing so. That is to say, I was aware of the behavior at the same time I wasn’t aware of it. This is a well-recognized phenomenon in addiction, a kind of half-conscious state akin to a waking dream, often referred to as denial. Denial is likely mediated by a disconnect between the reward pathway part of our brain and the higher cortical brain regions that allow us to narrate the events of our lives, appreciate consequences, and plan for the future. Many forms of addiction treatment involve strengthening and renewing connections between these parts of the brain.

Honesty promotes intimate human connections.

Telling the truth draws people in, especially when we’re willing to expose our own vulnerabilities. This is counterintuitive because we assume that unmasking the less desirable aspects of ourselves will drive people away. It logically makes sense that people would distance themselves when they learn about our character flaws and transgressions. In fact, the opposite happens—people come closer. They see in our brokenness their own vulnerability and humanity. They are reassured that they aren’t alone in their doubts, fears, and weaknesses.

Intimacy is its own source of dopamine. Oxytocin, a hormone much involved with falling in love, mother-child bonding, and lifetime pair-bonding of sexual mates, binds to receptors on the dopamine-secreting neurons in the brain’s reward pathway and enhances the firing of the reward circuit. In other words, oxytocin leads to an increase in brain dopamine.

While truth-telling promotes human attachment, compulsive overconsumption of high-dopamine goods is the antithesis of human attachment. Consuming leads to isolation and indifference as the drug comes to replace the reward obtained from being in relationship with others. Experiments show that a free rat will instinctively work to free another rat trapped inside a plastic bottle. But once that free rat has been allowed to self-administer heroin, it is no longer interested in helping out the caged rat, presumably too caught up in an opioid haze to care about a fellow member of its species.

Any behavior that leads to an increase in dopamine has the potential to be exploited. What I’m referring to is a kind of “disclosure porn” that has become prevalent in modern culture, where revealing intimate aspects of our lives becomes a way to manipulate others for a certain type of selfish gratification rather than to foster intimacy through a moment of shared humanity. There is a well-known phenomenon in AA called “drunkalogs,” referring to tales of intoxicated exploits that are shared to entertain and show off rather than teach and learn. Drunkalogs tends to trigger craving rather than promote recovery. The line between honest self-disclosure and a manipulative drunkalog is a fine one, including subtle differences in content, tone, cadence, and effect, but you know it when you see it.

Truthful autobiographies create accountability.

Single, simple truths about our day-to-day lives are like links in a chain that translate into truthful autobiographical narratives. Autobiographical narratives are an essential measure of lived time. The stories we narrate about our lives not only serve as a measure of our past, but can also shape future behavior.

In more than twenty years as a psychiatrist, listening to tens of thousands of patient stories, I have become convinced that the way we tell our personal stories is a marker and predictor of mental health. Patients who tell stories in which they are frequently the victim, seldom bearing responsibility for bad outcomes, are often unwell and remain unwell. They are too busy blaming others to get down to the business of their own recovery. By contrast, when my patients start telling stories that accurately portray their responsibility, I know they’re getting better.

The victim narrative reflects a wider societal trend in which we’re all prone to see ourselves as the victims of circumstance and deserving of compensation or reward for our suffering. Even when people have been victimized, if the narrative never moves beyond victimhood, it’s difficult for healing to occur.

One of the jobs of good psychotherapy is to help people tell healing stories. If autobiographical narrative is a river, psychotherapy is the means by which that river is mapped and in some cases rerouted. Healing stories adhere closely to real-life events. Seeking and finding the truth—or the closest approximation possible with the data at hand—affords us the opportunity for real insight and understanding, which in turn allows us to make informed choices.

As I have alluded to before, the modern practice of psychotherapy sometimes falls short of that lofty goal. We as mental health care providers have become so caught up in the practice of empathy that we’ve lost sight of the fact that empathy without accountability is a short-sighted attempt to relieve suffering. If the therapist and patient recreate a story in which the patient is a perpetual victim of forces beyond their control, chances are good that the patient will continue to be victimized. But if the therapist can help the patient take responsibility—if not for the event itself, then for how they react to it in the here and now—that patient is empowered to move forward with their life.

I have been deeply impressed with AA philosophy and teachings on this point. One of the preeminent AA mottos, often printed in bold type on its brochure, is “I am responsible.” In addition to responsibility, Alcoholics Anonymous emphasizes rigorous honesty as a central precept of its philosophy, and these ideas go together. The fourth of AA’s twelve steps requires members to take a searching and fearless moral inventory in which the individual considers his or her character defects and how they have contributed to a problem. The fifth step is the confession step. This is where AA members admit to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs. This straightforward, practical, and systematic approach can have a powerful and transformative impact.

A truthful autobiographical narrative further allows us to be more authentic, spontaneous, and free in the moment. The psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott introduced the concept of the false self in the 1960s. According to Winnicott, the false self is a self-constructed persona in defense against intolerable external demands and stressors. Winnicott postulated that the creation of the false self can lead to feelings of profound emptiness—“no there there.”

Social media has contributed to the problem of the false self by making it far easier for us, and even encouraging us, to curate narratives of our lives that are far from reality. In his online life, my patient Tony, a young man in his twenties, ran every morning to take in the sunrise, spent the day engaged in constructive and ambitious artistic endeavors, and was the recipient of numerous awards. In his real life, he could barely get out of bed, compulsively looked at pornography online, struggled to find gainful employment, and was isolated, depressed, and suicidal. Little of his real day-to-day life was evident on his Facebook page.

When our lived experience diverges from our projected image, we are prone to feel detached and unreal, as fake as the false images we’ve created. Psychiatrists call this feeling derealization and depersonalization. It’s a terrifying feeling which commonly contributes to thoughts of suicide. After all, if we don’t feel real, ending our lives feels inconsequential.

The antidote to the false self is the authentic self. Radical honesty is a way to get there. It tethers us to our existence and makes us feel real in the world. It also lessens the cognitive load required to maintain all those lies, freeing up mental energy to live more spontaneously in the moment. When we’re no longer working to present a false self, we’re more open to ourselves and others. As the psychiatrist Mark Epstein wrote in his book *Going on Being* about his own journey toward authenticity: “No longer endeavoring to manage my environment, I began to feel invigorated to find a balance, to permit a feeling of connection with the spontaneity of the natural world and with my own inner nature.”

Truth-telling is contagious, and so is lying.

Lao Tzu wrote, “If you don’t trust people, you make them untrustworthy.” Trust is something that takes time and effort to build and can be destroyed in an instant. Friedrich Nietzsche wrote, “I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you.” Telling the truth is a two-way street. By being open and honest with others, we inspire them to be open and honest with us. If you don’t trust yourself, you will live in fear that others will betray you. So honesty starts with not lying to yourself, and this honesty has a contagious effect.

Conclusion.

My patients have taught me that honesty enhances awareness, creates more satisfying relationships, holds us accountable to a more authentic narrative, and strengthens our ability to delay gratification. It may even prevent the future development of addiction.

For me, honesty is a daily struggle. There’s always a part of me that wants to embellish the story just the slightest bit to make myself look better or to make an excuse for bad behavior. Now I try hard to fight that urge. Although difficult in practice, this handy little tool—telling the truth—is amazingly within our reach. Anyone can wake up on any given day and decide, “Today, I won’t lie about anything.” And in doing so, not just change their individual lives for the better, but maybe even change the world.

If you want to learn more, you might try my book, Dopamine Nation: "Finding Balance in the Age of Indulgence"

THE SHEEP WILL SPEND ITS ENTIRE LIFE FEARING THE WOLF, ONLY IN THE END TO BE EATEN BY THE SHEPHERD.

The government is meant to be the shepherd—protector of the flock, sworn to secure the people’s liberty, welfare, and posterity under the Constitution. Yet the pattern is clear: it has become the consumer. Domestic programs that sustain ordinary Americans are slashed or gutted while resources flow to endless military commitments and the contractors who profit from them. The wolves (foreign threats, domestic disorder) are real enough to justify fear, but the shepherd has developed a taste for mutton.

Federal Programs Cut or Severely Reduced

Recent years have seen broad reductions in non-defense spending, often through reconciliation legislation, executive freezes, terminations of grants, and budget proposals that Congress has only partially restrained. Documented examples include:

Medicaid: The 2025 reconciliation law (H.R. 1 / “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”) reduces federal Medicaid spending by more than $900 billion over a decade. Projections indicate millions could lose coverage; combined estimates with other changes reach into the tens of millions uninsured by the mid-2030s. Rural areas and low-income populations are hit hardest.

SNAP (food assistance): Cuts estimated at $187–300 billion over ten years. Changes include expanded work requirements (eliminating exemptions for some homeless individuals and veterans), reduced federal administrative support, freezing benefit calculations, and restricting eligibility. Participation has already dropped by millions.

ACA marketplace subsidies and related health coverage: Significant reductions contributing to coverage losses projected in the millions.

Housing and community development: Proposed or partial eliminations/reductions affecting Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), Continuum of Care homeless assistance, Permanent Supportive Housing, Youth Homelessness programs, HOME Investment Partnerships, and related self-sufficiency and fair-housing initiatives.

Other domestic areas: Large proposed reductions or eliminations in environmental programs, energy-efficiency/renewable energy funding, certain NASA science budgets (one request cut nearly a quarter), rural development and housing initiatives, Job Corps, Low-Income Home Energy Assistance in some proposals, and broad non-defense discretionary appropriations. Federal workforce reductions have been among the largest in decades. IRS enforcement and operations funding has also been cut.

These are not abstract line items. They translate into fewer health clinics, thinner food benefits, disrupted school supports, delayed research, and reduced local capacity—while the overall non-defense discretionary share of the economy is pushed toward historic lows relative to defense priorities.

Wars and the Enrichment of the Defense Oligarchy

At the same time, military spending has climbed past the $1 trillion mark annually in recent years, with proposals reaching toward $1.5 trillion. From 2020–2024 alone, private contractors received approximately $2.4 trillion—over half of Pentagon discretionary spending. Just five firms (Lockheed Martin, RTX/Raytheon, Boeing, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman) took $771 billion. That dwarfs the combined diplomacy, development, and non-military humanitarian budget over the same period.

U.S. support for Ukraine has totaled tens of billions in military aid. Aid and weapons commitments related to Israel/Gaza operations have also run into the tens of billions. More recent operations, including involvement around Iran, have driven further demand and stock gains for major contractors. The result is a reliable transfer of taxpayer resources to a concentrated set of firms whose revenues and stock performance rise with sustained conflict and elevated budgets. Sons and daughters still deploy or support these efforts; the primary durable beneficiaries sit in boardrooms and on Wall Street.

The rich get richer, while the poor bleed and feed the machine

The biggest untold story about how we pay for government involves a big switcheroo by America's wealthy.

Decades ago, wealthy Americans financed the federal government by paying taxes.

Their tax rate was far higher than what it is today.

Now, wealthy Americans finance the federal government by lending it money and collecting interest payments on those loans, profiting when the rest of us pay them back.

As the debt continues to grow, interest payments are becoming huge. Taxpayers are now paying more in interest on the federal debt than we spend on the military or on Medicaid.

Interest on the debt is expected to grow past $1 trillion next year, and could climb to nearly $2 trillion by the 2030s.

Follow the money.

Who's receiving these interest payments?

Mostly jewish Americans, who could care less that the poor suffer. Indeed they delight in suffering.

And most of these Americans are wealthy, investors who park their savings in treasury bonds held by mutual funds, hedge funds, pension funds, banks, insurance companies, personal trusts, and estates.

The richest 1% of Americans now own 33% of the nation's total wealth, which is more wealth than the bottom 90% put together.

Which means a big chunk of the growing interest payments American taxpayers make on the federal debt is going to rich Americans.

Now, keep following the money.

One of the biggest reasons the federal debt has exploded is that tax cuts, starting with the Bush administration in 2001 and extending through Trump's 2018 tax cut, have reduced government revenues by $10 trillion.

The extension of the Trump Republican tax cut will cause the debt to explode even further. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicts the new and extended cuts in Trump's "big, beautiful bill" would add at least $3.3 trillion of additional debt over the next decade.

Keep following the money. You know that same "big, beautiful bill" that cut vital services $900 billion from Medicaid and 300 billion from snap benefits. That's $1.2 Trillion dollars cut from benefits of the poor so that the richest 1% don't have to pay their fair share.

Most of the benefits from those tax cuts are going to the wealthy. A whopping 72% will go to the richest fifth of Americans, 22% to the top 1%.

So, you see the big switcheroo? The rich used to pay higher taxes to the government. Now, the government pays the rich interest on a swelling debt caused largely by lower taxes on the rich. Which means a growing portion of everybody else's taxes are now paying the rich interest on those loans, instead of paying for government services everybody needs.

That's wrong.

America's wealthy have never been wealthier. They should pay their fair share of taxes.

The big switcheroo should be reversed.

It should be, but it won't be, because as long as Americans allow these things to occur, they will, and it's only going to get worse. As the economy continues to crumble, they're going to get what they can from the scraps that remain; you best believe that.

The Constitution Watered Down

The founding document has been stretched thin by executive practice, legislative acquiescence, and judicial reinterpretation:

- Executive impoundment or delayed obligation of congressionally appropriated funds, concentrated in programs the administration dislikes.

- Aggressive assertions of removal power over independent agency heads, undermining statutory insulation from pure presidential control.

- Tariffs and emergency economic measures imposed with contested statutory authority, testing Congress’s power over commerce and revenue.

- Challenges to birthright citizenship via executive order against the plain text of the 14th Amendment.

- Expanded use of the emergency docket and stays that allow contested policies to proceed while litigation drags on.

- Erosion of voting-rights enforcement mechanisms and partisan gerrymandering tolerances that dilute equal representation.

- Politicization pressures on the Justice Department and selective enforcement patterns that treat the department more as an instrument of the executive than an independent guardian of law.

- Massive growth in the administrative state and surveillance apparatus over decades, combined with perpetual emergency authorities that outlast any single crisis.

What remains is a parchment barrier: separation of powers still exists on paper, but functional checks have atrophied. Rights that require active enforcement become optional when the institutions charged with them are captured, starved, or ignored.

"You get what you tolerate."

Dr Joseph Goebbels

The shepherd will keep eating for as long as the flock stays quiet, distracted by the wolf, or divided against itself. Things will continue to deteriorate—deeper cuts to the programs that cushion ordinary life, larger transfers to the permanent war economy, further hollowing of constitutional limits—until enough people decide the cost of inaction exceeds the cost of rising up.

That does not mean mindless violence; though it may mean well thought out targeted violence, it means sustained, organized pressure organizing locally, establishing trade and information routing, refusing the false

choice between “fear the wolf” and “trust the shepherd.” The alternative is to keep providing the meat.

Before we get into the NBC News report about their crew being attacked by these unhinged Israeli 'terrorists,' I want to pause and ask people an honest question.

How many hundreds of thousands of events do you have to witness to understand that this is an issue across the entire spectrum of the Jewish people?

There are literally millions of pages of documentation throughout the ages that attest to the nature of the Jew.

For thousands of years, it has been so. I marvel at the effectiveness of their brainwashing programs, and it's almost to the degree... well, it's to the degree that TVs, in general, need to be destroyed.

Let me put it in perspective for you. If you knew of a box that was in people's homes that played a literal spellbinding tune and flashed mesmerizing images in front of them, causing people en masse to believe complete and total lies, what would you think we should do with it?

"Having a TV in your home is like having a Jew in your living room." - Father Donley

Middle East

Palestinian woman and NBC News team attacked by masked Israeli settlers in West Bank

The woman and the crew were treated for injuries.

By F. Brinley Bruton

Masked Israeli settlers attacked and injured a Palestinian woman and members of an NBC News team reporting in the Israeli-occupied West Bank on Saturday.

Three members of an NBC team were interviewing Aida Ahmed Abdullah and her family in the Palestinian town of Jalud, near Nablus, when the attack occurred. Abdullah said they had been driven out of their home by Israeli settlers, and the team was walking down a hill toward the house.

A gray car with Israeli license plates then drove in reverse up the hill toward them, video of the incident shows.

A masked man in a blue tracksuit, holding a stick, was leaning out of the rear passenger window as the vehicle approached. When the car stopped, at least four men in dark clothes and with their faces covered leaped out, hitting Abdullah and the crew with sticks and throwing rocks at them.

“They jumped out, beat us, then jumped back in the car,” said NBC News international correspondent Matt Bradley, who was hit twice in the arm and later treated at a nearby clinic.

Masked attackers hit a car window as the car tries to escape

Masked Israeli settlers attacked NBC News journalists in the West Bank on Saturday.

Abdullah, 51, who was on the ground after the attack, was taken for medical care by the Red Crescent. Her injuries were not life-threatening, according to an Israeli military and Israel Border Police statement. According to her husband, Mahmoud Toubasi, Abdullah’s condition had improved but she remained in the hospital Saturday night.

Two additional members of the NBC News team — a cameraman and producer — were also injured and were treated following the attack.

Producer Lawahez Jabari described how the car rushed up the hill before its occupants beat members of the team and damaged camera equipment and one of the crew’s vehicles.

“Suddenly a car came to us,” she said after receiving medical care. “The settlers had sticks. I saw a gun, but they didn’t use the gun.”

____

If someone shows you who they're, you best believe them.

Do you think that these unhinged, sociopathic people are just kidding when they say these things about White people?

Quotes on the Jewish hatred for White people

“You White people are on an endangered list. And unlike, say, the bald eagle or some exotic species of muskrat, you are not worth saving. In forty years or so, maybe fewer, there won’t be any more White people around, and that’s a good thing.”

Tim Wise, Jewish activist and author

“The goal of abolishing the White race is, on its face, so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed White supremacists. Make no mistake about it, we intend to keep bashing the dead White males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as 'the White race' is destroyed."

Noel Ignatiev, Communist Party USA

“If White men were not complaining, it would be an indication we weren’t succeeding and making the inroads that we are.”

Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Chairman of the board of The New York Times

“Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world, only to serve the people of Israel. Why are Gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat. That is why Gentiles were created.”

Ovadia Yosef, Chief Rabbi of Israel and Talmudic scholar

“If you are a White male, you don’t deserve to live. You are a cancer, you’re a disease, White males have never contributed anything positive to the world! You maintain your White male privilege only by oppressing, discriminating against, and enslaving others.”

Noel Ignatiev, Communist Party USA

“It is in the Jewish interest, it is in humanities interest, that Whites experience a genocide. Until White children are burned alive, White women raped, mutilated, murdered, and all White men who have not been slaughtered watch powerlessly as their people are terrorized, only then will mankind be on a more equal footing, ready to discuss White privilege and the apparent chip on the shoulder that minorities have.”

Rabbi Ishmael Levitts

“The White race is the cancer of human history; it is the White race and it alone – its ideologies and inventions – which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself.”

Susan Sontag, Jewish activist and author

“Our race is the master race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves.”

Menahem Begin, 6th Prime Minister of Israel

“We intend to turn Europe and North America into a mixed mongrel race of Asians and Negros ruled over by Jews.”

Richard Kalergi, President of the Paneuropean Union

If they show you who they're you best believe them

____

I don't think you've seen enough yet.

Here's some more:

The Demonic nature of the jew

He incited his students serving in the Israel Occupation Forces to kill everyone in Gaza, including babies. He referenced alleged Jewish principles of war, stating, "The law: no soul shall live. If you don't kill them, they will kill you." When asked if babies were included, he responded, "Same. Shoot them."

What kind of a God would give you that command? "Shoot babies." Wouldn't you then question God?

I don't know if you saw this video that's going around.

This guy is a... Israeli lawyer, Yehuda Shimon has sparked a viral debate after calling for the complete genocide of the survivors in Gaza because he says one Jewish life is equivalent to 10 million Palestinians.

"That just sounds racist." "Yes, I know," he says.

One life for 10 million? That sounds rational and fair, doesn't it? But as an attorney, it makes you wonder what this guy charges an hour, you know? The bill comes out to everything you and all of your children... everything you own and all your children.

You want a receipt? "Sorry, uh, that'll cost you a kidney."

Let's listen. You want to hear him? He's going to say it. And he's got the curly-cues on the side.

Yehuda Shimon: ...to kill all the people in Tel al-Sultan. Even Jet and Fartah. Why? Because we don't want it to happen again.

Interviewer: It sounds like you're saying one Jewish life is worth hundreds or thousands of Palestinian lives.

Yehuda Shimon: Not. Million. One Jewish life, it's 10 million, okay?

Interviewer: That just sounds racist.

Yehuda Shimon: Yes. I know. I know, but this is the truth. Because God choose us. Because of this, you are jealous.

Oh, he's saying "God chose us. We're the chosen people."

What does that sound like? Does that sound like, "Oh, we're the master race"?

And by the way, they're all from Poland and Eastern Europe.

They're Ashkenazi Jew... The people who are running Israel—Benjamin Netanyahu, his name is... what was it, Mileikowsky?

And they changed their name to sound Semitic, because they're not Semitic.

He goes, "That sounds racist." "Yeah, we're racists! Israel is a racist country!

It's an apartheid state! We don't see Palestinians as equal to us!"

That... that's the... that's the philosophy of Zionism, in case you don't know.

Yehuda Shimon: Bible is the authorizing that this land, it's belong to us. Belong to us, okay?

Interviewer: Israel occupied it militarily, and under international law, that means that no civilian settlements can be built there.

Yehuda Shimon: Yes, but... but God not write in the Bible the international law.

Interviewer: So, you're a lawyer, and you're saying the only law that really counts for you is the Bible.

Yehuda Shimon: Yeah, of course.

And they say Muslims are fanatics.

"Today he's a baby, tomorrow he's a fighter." That's Rabbi... Eliyahu Mali, head of the settlers' Yeshiva school in occupied Jaffa.

He incited his students serving in the Israel Occupation Forces to kill everyone in Gaza, including babies.

He referenced alleged Jewish principles of war, stating, "The law: no soul shall live. If you don't kill them, they will kill you." When asked if babies were included, he responded, "Same. Shoot them."

What kind of a God would give you that command? Shoot babies. Wouldn't you then question God?

Your God is a little f***ed up.

So, there's a... there's a saying, and I'm going to butcher it, but it's about... to make good people do truly evil things takes religion. And that's what that is. 'Cause you believe God told you to do an evil thing.

"No soul shall live."

Well, that explains why Rabbi Mali is still alive—he doesn't have a soul. His face hinges open and he's got a little Men in Black alien in the controls.

"Kill them all." Why would anyone want to fight you for espousing that? I don't know. "Yes, thank you for killing us," right? Nothing psychotically delusional about that philosophy.

Rabbi Eliyahu Mali:

"When fighting in the holy war, in this case in Gaza, according to the doctrine, do not spare. And the logic is very clear: If you don't kill them, they will attempt to kill you. Today's saboteurs are the children of the previous war. And the reality is that women who create the terrorists... and this means that the principle of "do not spare any soul" is very clear in our concept. It's either you or them. And in reality, do not spare any soul. And the doctrine that says, "He who comes to kill you in the afternoon, kill him in the morning."

These guys sound really God-like, right?

Well, you thought it was tough using your Amex card. I'd say th

is clip here is going to void your victim card forever.

Jews you're not going to be able to use that victim card anywhere you go. It's going to be harder than using an Amex card.