Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Missionary Monday 🙀✌🏻 Texting her gf she’s not making to class. Because she’s getting d🍌ck by a man twice her age. 😈🍌💦💦💦💦 🌟 Ms Mula Bandz She Likes It White ♏Double Soul♏ Brown Chicks ♥️ White Dicks promo 4 u📢 BWWM Enjoyer

DanielTheDilf's profile picture

Daniel The Dilf 😈🍌

11,917 subscribers

94,802 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

NSFW
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

This is insane. Tory ‘Train-wreck’ Whanau says she is prepared to trash democracy and break the electoral laws in order to achieve “transformational change” by not holding the Māori ward referendum. Tory gave a 45min interview IMMEDIATELY after her Tame disaster, which she says she did badly in as she was exhausted. She told Tame that her ZB interview was a disaster as she was exhausted as well, but anyway here she is on this looney tunes show below 👇 This is a very strange ultra woke podcast where the left hangout and get beserk. One presenter is Uber woke - and the other one is quite incapacitated .. well have a look, it’s all very DEI. Bullet Points : 🔴Media is obsessed with her personal life including her drinking & ADHD 🔴 Tory thought Mayors “ flew under the radar, sure they do some public events but this scrutiny is intense” 🔴 She says she’s using the negative media focus on her stuff ups as a tool to help NZ become aware of Wellington issues😂 🔴 She’s getting advice from Jacinda’s advisors … she’s also been told by WORLD LEADERS the attacks on her are because she’s a) progressive b) Māori c) a woman d) is Neuro Diverse. 🔴 Her detractors are (white) privileged haters against progress. 🔴She is taking the knocks on behalf of future generations and says she’s a trailblazer. 🔴 She is the victim of a Mis/Dis information campaign that says she wastes rate payers money. 🔴She is going to be thanked in 8 years time after society has been transformed (Marxism). 🔴 Tory is consulting iwi about the Māori ward referendum and will leave it up to them to advise her what to do - including braking the law and not holding the referendum. 🔴 Since Wellington is progressive, the city would be fine with breaking electoral laws and disregarding democracy. This bloody barfly bozo bitch is a disgrace. Residents should with-hold paying rates until she’s gone. She lied openly then lied about lying and then continues to lie and gaslight and make up excuses. She’s an abomination. Slam Wellington into administration asap. This is truly twilight zone stuff.
9:21

This is insane. Tory ‘Train-wreck’ Whanau says she is prepared to trash democracy and break the electoral laws in order to achieve “transformational change” by not holding the Māori ward referendum. Tory gave a 45min interview IMMEDIATELY after her Tame disaster, which she says she did badly in as she was exhausted. She told Tame that her ZB interview was a disaster as she was exhausted as well, but anyway here she is on this looney tunes show below 👇 This is a very strange ultra woke podcast where the left hangout and get beserk. One presenter is Uber woke - and the other one is quite incapacitated .. well have a look, it’s all very DEI. Bullet Points : 🔴Media is obsessed with her personal life including her drinking & ADHD 🔴 Tory thought Mayors “ flew under the radar, sure they do some public events but this scrutiny is intense” 🔴 She says she’s using the negative media focus on her stuff ups as a tool to help NZ become aware of Wellington issues😂 🔴 She’s getting advice from Jacinda’s advisors … she’s also been told by WORLD LEADERS the attacks on her are because she’s a) progressive b) Māori c) a woman d) is Neuro Diverse. 🔴 Her detractors are (white) privileged haters against progress. 🔴She is taking the knocks on behalf of future generations and says she’s a trailblazer. 🔴 She is the victim of a Mis/Dis information campaign that says she wastes rate payers money. 🔴She is going to be thanked in 8 years time after society has been transformed (Marxism). 🔴 Tory is consulting iwi about the Māori ward referendum and will leave it up to them to advise her what to do - including braking the law and not holding the referendum. 🔴 Since Wellington is progressive, the city would be fine with breaking electoral laws and disregarding democracy. This bloody barfly bozo bitch is a disgrace. Residents should with-hold paying rates until she’s gone. She lied openly then lied about lying and then continues to lie and gaslight and make up excuses. She’s an abomination. Slam Wellington into administration asap. This is truly twilight zone stuff.

Holyhekatuiteka

15,482 views • 1 year ago

Karen Read: The Tail-Light Truth and the Death of Reason Karen Read didn’t just hit John O’Keefe—she rewrote the definition of “caught red-handed,” only in this case, it’s red plastic. The kind that shattered from her Lexus and ended up embedded in his clothes and sprinkled around his lifeless body like murderous confetti. But sure, Karen, tell us again about the magical invisible snowplow and the ghost dog that grazes but never bites. Let’s talk actual evidence, not the Facebook fever dreams of Turtleboy disciples: •John stops moving within a minute of getting out of her car. Literally. One minute. He steps out, and the clock stops—on his life, and on Karen’s credibility. His phone temp immediately starts dropping. •Her car impacts something—hard. TechStream data logs it. Her taillight shatters. John’s injuries match it like a deranged game of forensic bingo. •She starts calling and texting him immediately, not with concern, but with rage. “I hate you.” She sounds less like a worried girlfriend and more like a Jodie Arias on a bender with a vendetta. •She claims she thought he went inside. Cute story—except she never told anyone until dateline a year and a half later. The morning she starts driving around like a Roomba on a revenge mission. •The backup camera. A full-color, widescreen display. You could see the curvature of the Earth in that thing. Yet she accidentally backs into the man she “loves”? Girl, please. Helen Keller would’ve noticed something was behind her with all the bells and whistles. •She woke the niece. Said “I might’ve done something.” Not “that bastard is cheating”. Not “he must’ve crashed on someone’s couch.” That’s not the vocabulary of an innocent woman—it’s the language of someone whose conscience just tapped her on the shoulder and screamed. And don’t forget the pièce de résistance: She calls Kerry, she throws in the towel and essentially decides, “Eh, guess he’s dead.” Because nothing screams innocent like abandoning your unconscious boyfriend in a snowbank like last season’s Christmas tree. Karen Read’s defense isn’t a theory—it’s a rotating buffet of delusions. First it was the Alberts. Then the McCabes. Then Higgins. Now it’s the Deep State, the Weather Channel, and maybe Big Pharma. Anyone but Karen. But the facts don’t care about her Vodka-fueled fan fiction. The evidence lines up like a police escort to prison: •Taillight broken. •Backup camera she definitely saw. •TechStream confirming the impact. •GPS confirming he never made it inside. •Her own mouth confirming she hit him. •Forensics confirming it wasn’t a fight. This isn’t just second-degree murder. It’s second-degree obvious. She didn’t “lose him in the snow.” She put him there. And every lie she’s told since is just a desperate attempt to keep her cocktail privileges. Karen Read isn’t on trial because she’s being framed. She’s on trial because she did it—and the snow isn’t the only thing that’s white and full of crap. #FreeKarenRead
1:25

Karen Read: The Tail-Light Truth and the Death of Reason Karen Read didn’t just hit John O’Keefe—she rewrote the definition of “caught red-handed,” only in this case, it’s red plastic. The kind that shattered from her Lexus and ended up embedded in his clothes and sprinkled around his lifeless body like murderous confetti. But sure, Karen, tell us again about the magical invisible snowplow and the ghost dog that grazes but never bites. Let’s talk actual evidence, not the Facebook fever dreams of Turtleboy disciples: •John stops moving within a minute of getting out of her car. Literally. One minute. He steps out, and the clock stops—on his life, and on Karen’s credibility. His phone temp immediately starts dropping. •Her car impacts something—hard. TechStream data logs it. Her taillight shatters. John’s injuries match it like a deranged game of forensic bingo. •She starts calling and texting him immediately, not with concern, but with rage. “I hate you.” She sounds less like a worried girlfriend and more like a Jodie Arias on a bender with a vendetta. •She claims she thought he went inside. Cute story—except she never told anyone until dateline a year and a half later. The morning she starts driving around like a Roomba on a revenge mission. •The backup camera. A full-color, widescreen display. You could see the curvature of the Earth in that thing. Yet she accidentally backs into the man she “loves”? Girl, please. Helen Keller would’ve noticed something was behind her with all the bells and whistles. •She woke the niece. Said “I might’ve done something.” Not “that bastard is cheating”. Not “he must’ve crashed on someone’s couch.” That’s not the vocabulary of an innocent woman—it’s the language of someone whose conscience just tapped her on the shoulder and screamed. And don’t forget the pièce de résistance: She calls Kerry, she throws in the towel and essentially decides, “Eh, guess he’s dead.” Because nothing screams innocent like abandoning your unconscious boyfriend in a snowbank like last season’s Christmas tree. Karen Read’s defense isn’t a theory—it’s a rotating buffet of delusions. First it was the Alberts. Then the McCabes. Then Higgins. Now it’s the Deep State, the Weather Channel, and maybe Big Pharma. Anyone but Karen. But the facts don’t care about her Vodka-fueled fan fiction. The evidence lines up like a police escort to prison: •Taillight broken. •Backup camera she definitely saw. •TechStream confirming the impact. •GPS confirming he never made it inside. •Her own mouth confirming she hit him. •Forensics confirming it wasn’t a fight. This isn’t just second-degree murder. It’s second-degree obvious. She didn’t “lose him in the snow.” She put him there. And every lie she’s told since is just a desperate attempt to keep her cocktail privileges. Karen Read isn’t on trial because she’s being framed. She’s on trial because she did it—and the snow isn’t the only thing that’s white and full of crap. #FreeKarenRead

MEDIA AUTOPSY

67,218 views • 1 year ago

As Ever’s Trademark Truth—What Meghan Doesn’t Want You to Notice On February 17, 2025, Meghan Markle claimed she “secured” the As Ever name back in 2022. That’s a lie. Here’s the truth: Her first trademark filing for As Ever wasn’t submitted until late 2022—and then sat untouched for over a year. She didn’t pursue it until September 12, 2024 under USPTO Serial Nos. 98748479 and 97985404. And no—it wasn’t filed under her name. It was filed by 2022 Trademarks LLC—almost certainly a legal shell tied to her team. That LLC shares an address with Mama Knows Best, LLC—the same entity behind her failed American Riviera Orchard trademark. Is that the “2022” she’s referencing? Maybe—but forming an LLC isn’t “securing” anything. She didn’t seriously pursue the trademark until late 2024—and it’s still not secured. This isn’t brand-building. It’s smoke and mirrors. Here’s What Actually Happened: 1. Her filing for clothing was rejected—blocked by Chinese brand ASEVER. 2. Her lawyers deleted the clothing category to force partial approval. 3. Right now, she holds only a Notice of Allowance (NOA)—which means she doesn’t own the trademark yet. She must prove real sales and file a Statement of Use—or risk losing the trademark. Bottom line: - No trademark. - No legal ownership. - The clock is ticking—and rejection is still possible. The Real Game Behind Those “Weird” Drops: Here’s why her launches felt so strange—why they seemed confusing, contradictory, and rushed: Many brands run tiny product drops—not to build buzz—but to satisfy USPTO trademark rules: - The law only requires minimal sales—just enough to prove “use in commerce.” - And separate proof is required for each trademark class. Once those boxes are checked? The trademark locks in. Now look how perfectly her timeline lines up: First Drop: Teas, spreads, garnishes, baking mixes—all categories in her filing (Classes 29 & 30). Honey was listed—but never existed. Then… Silence. She vanished. No restocks. No updates. Later, she resurfaced in Fast Company, claiming she was “studying customer behavior,” saying she didn’t want to frustrate people with “scarcity drops.” She insisted she wouldn’t restock until 2026. She repeated the same excuse on her podcast with Beyoncé’s mother—promising future drops would be “more accessible.” Yet—within days—she abruptly announced a new drop. Total contradiction. Here’s why: This wasn’t “market research.” It was legal scrambling—plain and simple. Second Drop: Honey finally appears—conveniently just in time to show proof of use for her honey category (Class 30). Third Drop: Wine suddenly appears—another box checked for her trademark (Class 33). Why the Tiny Quantities? Follow the Money—And the Law: Here’s the part she doesn’t want discussed: These products aren’t handcrafted or curated. They’re whites-labeled: - Teas/Flower Sprinkles? From Republic of Tea. - Honey? From a Williams Sonoma supplier. - Spreads—Republic of Tea facility in Illinois. - Wine? Fairwinds Estate (vineyard) and Kunde Family Winery (bottler). And with white-labeling? You pay upfront. That means she likely ordered the bare minimum—just enough to satisfy her trademark obligations. These weren’t exclusive luxury drops. They were legal maneuvers—bare-bones orders sold just long enough to check trademark boxes. The Part She’ll Never Admit: Why is she already promising future launches will be different? Simple: Once her Statement of Use is filed and trademarks locked in, she won’t need these tiny, awkward “drops” anymore. But does she value proof of sales—or the illusion of instant sellouts? She’s already hinting at that—because she knows. This was never about customers. It was always about: getting the trademark secured. These weren’t product launches. They were legal checklists disguised as a brand. Stop watching her posts. Watch her filings. #AsEverGrifting #MeghanMarkleExposed #MeghanMarkleLies
1:43

As Ever’s Trademark Truth—What Meghan Doesn’t Want You to Notice On February 17, 2025, Meghan Markle claimed she “secured” the As Ever name back in 2022. That’s a lie. Here’s the truth: Her first trademark filing for As Ever wasn’t submitted until late 2022—and then sat untouched for over a year. She didn’t pursue it until September 12, 2024 under USPTO Serial Nos. 98748479 and 97985404. And no—it wasn’t filed under her name. It was filed by 2022 Trademarks LLC—almost certainly a legal shell tied to her team. That LLC shares an address with Mama Knows Best, LLC—the same entity behind her failed American Riviera Orchard trademark. Is that the “2022” she’s referencing? Maybe—but forming an LLC isn’t “securing” anything. She didn’t seriously pursue the trademark until late 2024—and it’s still not secured. This isn’t brand-building. It’s smoke and mirrors. Here’s What Actually Happened: 1. Her filing for clothing was rejected—blocked by Chinese brand ASEVER. 2. Her lawyers deleted the clothing category to force partial approval. 3. Right now, she holds only a Notice of Allowance (NOA)—which means she doesn’t own the trademark yet. She must prove real sales and file a Statement of Use—or risk losing the trademark. Bottom line: - No trademark. - No legal ownership. - The clock is ticking—and rejection is still possible. The Real Game Behind Those “Weird” Drops: Here’s why her launches felt so strange—why they seemed confusing, contradictory, and rushed: Many brands run tiny product drops—not to build buzz—but to satisfy USPTO trademark rules: - The law only requires minimal sales—just enough to prove “use in commerce.” - And separate proof is required for each trademark class. Once those boxes are checked? The trademark locks in. Now look how perfectly her timeline lines up: First Drop: Teas, spreads, garnishes, baking mixes—all categories in her filing (Classes 29 & 30). Honey was listed—but never existed. Then… Silence. She vanished. No restocks. No updates. Later, she resurfaced in Fast Company, claiming she was “studying customer behavior,” saying she didn’t want to frustrate people with “scarcity drops.” She insisted she wouldn’t restock until 2026. She repeated the same excuse on her podcast with Beyoncé’s mother—promising future drops would be “more accessible.” Yet—within days—she abruptly announced a new drop. Total contradiction. Here’s why: This wasn’t “market research.” It was legal scrambling—plain and simple. Second Drop: Honey finally appears—conveniently just in time to show proof of use for her honey category (Class 30). Third Drop: Wine suddenly appears—another box checked for her trademark (Class 33). Why the Tiny Quantities? Follow the Money—And the Law: Here’s the part she doesn’t want discussed: These products aren’t handcrafted or curated. They’re whites-labeled: - Teas/Flower Sprinkles? From Republic of Tea. - Honey? From a Williams Sonoma supplier. - Spreads—Republic of Tea facility in Illinois. - Wine? Fairwinds Estate (vineyard) and Kunde Family Winery (bottler). And with white-labeling? You pay upfront. That means she likely ordered the bare minimum—just enough to satisfy her trademark obligations. These weren’t exclusive luxury drops. They were legal maneuvers—bare-bones orders sold just long enough to check trademark boxes. The Part She’ll Never Admit: Why is she already promising future launches will be different? Simple: Once her Statement of Use is filed and trademarks locked in, she won’t need these tiny, awkward “drops” anymore. But does she value proof of sales—or the illusion of instant sellouts? She’s already hinting at that—because she knows. This was never about customers. It was always about: getting the trademark secured. These weren’t product launches. They were legal checklists disguised as a brand. Stop watching her posts. Watch her filings. #AsEverGrifting #MeghanMarkleExposed #MeghanMarkleLies

༺𝐻𝑅𝐻 𝐿𝒶𝒹𝓎 𝒥༻ 👑

76,387 views • 1 year ago

#Euphoria #Season3Episode3 “You love who you love” Contrary to popular belief, Nate truly seems to love Cassie and accepts her with all her crazy antics. In this clip, she publicly humiliates him but he still tries to placate her. Yes, this doesn’t seem like the Nate we knew, but isn’t he? He wanted to be loved but his dynamic with Cal was so toxic, he felt unlovable. Lashed out in anger for lack of expression otherwise. Maddy’s feisty ways did nothing to nurture the broken child in him. They had a horrible relationship because neither could heal the other’s real wounds. Both he and Cassie betrayed their best friends and seemed to find something in each other that made them feel loved. As broken and flawed their story might be, as Nate tells Jules “you love who you love”. We had plenty of hints that the night of this incredible wedding party was going to end in total chaos. Nate is caught between a rock and a hard place. He truly wants to build an honest life, but as an entrepreneur myself, I fully empathize with his business struggles and the financial hole he is in. He has to maintain a mask of competence so that he doesn’t lose investor confidence in the business. Bureaucratic shenanigans in real estate coupled with high interest rates, especially in California where building codes are increasingly debilitating, have led to many bankruptcies and foreclosures in the construction business. An endangered flower like the white fritillaries in a construction zone can bring a project to a grinding halt, putting jobs, livelihoods and businesses at risk. The balance between conservation and progress in California is reaching unhealthy proportions. Nate’s business woes are not rooted in him wanting to con people. And yet, he now has to face the consequences of this thin line he has been walking to maintain investor confidence versus cutting visible corners so he could better manage his costs. Cassie refused to understand this and so he caved to her demands and puts on a more lavish wedding than he could afford. The cinematic choice of Nate getting beaten to a pulp while she wails about her bloody nose is such a typical “Crazy Cassie” thing to do! The key is in what Naz tells her: “Some women inherit wealth but other inherit debt”. Watch her turn to Alamo/Silver Slippers so that she is truly next to Nate for “richer or poorer”. Regardless of her melodrama about not wanting to be poor (thanks to her mother’s incessant poisoning of the well), Cassie’s biggest desire in life is to be loved. And for better or for worse, Cassie & Nate have taken the vows to be there for each other. I predict she goes out into the world to make money in ways she knows how, to service this debt she’s inherited as Mrs. Jacobs. I know Jacob and Sydney will push the limits of their characters caught in these ludicrous scenarios. I am seated for this! Maddy’s uncomfortable presence at the wedding, Marsha’s jabs at her, her witnessing the love Nate & Cassie seem to have for each other, are beautifully and painfully captured by Alexa. She truly owns her role as Maddy, who is a pro at faking it till she makes it. She’s hurt by the life she didn’t get but she should feel blessed about making an honest living where she stands on her own. Being rich is a nice aspiration but sometimes the prices to be paid are too high. Nate is now dismembered from the desire to maintain their affluent status. Jules’ plot is tragic. The character who seems to have the most sense of self in high school, who whole heartedly and unapologetically embraced her queerness, is now a walking shell with no sense of integrity. It will be interesting to see what Sam imagines for her to reclaim herself again. Rue navigating this new world of crime is a challenging role for Zendaya she’s knocking out of the ball park. I know she’s just getting started. Looking forward to more of her sassy, gender bending antics as her plot unfolds. Loving this season!!
0:33

#Euphoria #Season3Episode3 “You love who you love” Contrary to popular belief, Nate truly seems to love Cassie and accepts her with all her crazy antics. In this clip, she publicly humiliates him but he still tries to placate her. Yes, this doesn’t seem like the Nate we knew, but isn’t he? He wanted to be loved but his dynamic with Cal was so toxic, he felt unlovable. Lashed out in anger for lack of expression otherwise. Maddy’s feisty ways did nothing to nurture the broken child in him. They had a horrible relationship because neither could heal the other’s real wounds. Both he and Cassie betrayed their best friends and seemed to find something in each other that made them feel loved. As broken and flawed their story might be, as Nate tells Jules “you love who you love”. We had plenty of hints that the night of this incredible wedding party was going to end in total chaos. Nate is caught between a rock and a hard place. He truly wants to build an honest life, but as an entrepreneur myself, I fully empathize with his business struggles and the financial hole he is in. He has to maintain a mask of competence so that he doesn’t lose investor confidence in the business. Bureaucratic shenanigans in real estate coupled with high interest rates, especially in California where building codes are increasingly debilitating, have led to many bankruptcies and foreclosures in the construction business. An endangered flower like the white fritillaries in a construction zone can bring a project to a grinding halt, putting jobs, livelihoods and businesses at risk. The balance between conservation and progress in California is reaching unhealthy proportions. Nate’s business woes are not rooted in him wanting to con people. And yet, he now has to face the consequences of this thin line he has been walking to maintain investor confidence versus cutting visible corners so he could better manage his costs. Cassie refused to understand this and so he caved to her demands and puts on a more lavish wedding than he could afford. The cinematic choice of Nate getting beaten to a pulp while she wails about her bloody nose is such a typical “Crazy Cassie” thing to do! The key is in what Naz tells her: “Some women inherit wealth but other inherit debt”. Watch her turn to Alamo/Silver Slippers so that she is truly next to Nate for “richer or poorer”. Regardless of her melodrama about not wanting to be poor (thanks to her mother’s incessant poisoning of the well), Cassie’s biggest desire in life is to be loved. And for better or for worse, Cassie & Nate have taken the vows to be there for each other. I predict she goes out into the world to make money in ways she knows how, to service this debt she’s inherited as Mrs. Jacobs. I know Jacob and Sydney will push the limits of their characters caught in these ludicrous scenarios. I am seated for this! Maddy’s uncomfortable presence at the wedding, Marsha’s jabs at her, her witnessing the love Nate & Cassie seem to have for each other, are beautifully and painfully captured by Alexa. She truly owns her role as Maddy, who is a pro at faking it till she makes it. She’s hurt by the life she didn’t get but she should feel blessed about making an honest living where she stands on her own. Being rich is a nice aspiration but sometimes the prices to be paid are too high. Nate is now dismembered from the desire to maintain their affluent status. Jules’ plot is tragic. The character who seems to have the most sense of self in high school, who whole heartedly and unapologetically embraced her queerness, is now a walking shell with no sense of integrity. It will be interesting to see what Sam imagines for her to reclaim herself again. Rue navigating this new world of crime is a challenging role for Zendaya she’s knocking out of the ball park. I know she’s just getting started. Looking forward to more of her sassy, gender bending antics as her plot unfolds. Loving this season!!

mh-Musings

116,105 views • 4 months ago

Anyone recognise this woman? Yesterday at 5:10pm in Humberstone park in Leicester, England, whilst taking my family’s dogs for a walk, I was subject to what the police have called a racist attack, whilst I was with my little sister During this attack, an old lady - who thought her age gave her a free pass to be a vile bigot - made racist remarks about my origins, hit me to try and stop me from recording her antics, and shoved me in the chest. This started over a disagreement about our dogs I could sense she was getting agitated, and I had no interest in shouting at a pensioner, so I told her to go her way and we’ll go our way She argued back and proceeded to call me indecent “You’re not decent” I could sense subtle undertones of racism in the way she said this, but wanted confirmation before jumping to conclusions, so I probed her and asked “What do you mean by that?” She replied: “you’re not decent, none of you are, you’re not decent, just like the rest of them” At this point I’m thinking “i know exactly what sort of Facebook posts you’re liking and who you’re gonna vote for” So i probe again, “what do you mean by that?” she says “like the rest of you, *where you come from*” I wasn’t able to record these initial racist remarks as I don’t exactly expect to be racially abused when taking the 2 family dogs for a walk, so I didn’t have the camera rolling at the time I was actually just going to leave the park at that point, but thought to myself “Naah you can’t let them get away with this” people should not just be able to racially abuse you in public and go back home to their beans on toast and coronation street. This has happened to me before but the last times I kept quiet and didn’t say anything back but this time was infront of my sister and I wasn’t about to set the precedent for her that you should just let people racially abuse you free from consequence So I took out my phone and started recording the aftermath where: - I told her to say it again - she hit and shoved me Needless to say when the camera came out, the vile bigot started to: 1) wind her neck in because now she was on tape. Didn’t stop her from commenting on my origins again though, or from hitting me twice. 2) play the victim 3) try to provoke me into being the “big bad foreigner” she so desperately wanted me to be 4) accuse me of intimidating her as if she hadn’t just racially insulted me and hit me At this point my sister is holding onto my arm sobbing saying she just wants to go home, and I didn’t want things to escalate so we go our separate ways We then end up crossing paths with her at the park exit where she starts recording me and my sister. I tell her to leave my sister out of it if she has a problem with me, because my sister was crying, she was still in her school uniform and had no involvement. She proceeds to mock my sister for crying I then told the woman “she’s just a child, leave her alone” The woman responds “and what about me? Leave me alone, I’m an old woman, you have no respect for the elderly” I tell her that if she wants to be respected she should be respectful, and that being old doesn’t give her a free pass to be racist or to hit people She then says oh of course you’re gonna play the racism card, that’s all you people ever do I said it’s not playing the racism card if you’re actually being racist There were witnesses to this, but at the time my concern was getting my sister home so I didn’t think to stop and ask the people in the park I have had my initial consultation/interview with the police I know most English people are lovely, half my family are white and English after all, but these racists are getting too comfortable with and open about their hatred of people who are a couple shades too dark for their liking. They’ll have no issue ordering a curry though :)
0:32

Anyone recognise this woman? Yesterday at 5:10pm in Humberstone park in Leicester, England, whilst taking my family’s dogs for a walk, I was subject to what the police have called a racist attack, whilst I was with my little sister During this attack, an old lady - who thought her age gave her a free pass to be a vile bigot - made racist remarks about my origins, hit me to try and stop me from recording her antics, and shoved me in the chest. This started over a disagreement about our dogs I could sense she was getting agitated, and I had no interest in shouting at a pensioner, so I told her to go her way and we’ll go our way She argued back and proceeded to call me indecent “You’re not decent” I could sense subtle undertones of racism in the way she said this, but wanted confirmation before jumping to conclusions, so I probed her and asked “What do you mean by that?” She replied: “you’re not decent, none of you are, you’re not decent, just like the rest of them” At this point I’m thinking “i know exactly what sort of Facebook posts you’re liking and who you’re gonna vote for” So i probe again, “what do you mean by that?” she says “like the rest of you, *where you come from*” I wasn’t able to record these initial racist remarks as I don’t exactly expect to be racially abused when taking the 2 family dogs for a walk, so I didn’t have the camera rolling at the time I was actually just going to leave the park at that point, but thought to myself “Naah you can’t let them get away with this” people should not just be able to racially abuse you in public and go back home to their beans on toast and coronation street. This has happened to me before but the last times I kept quiet and didn’t say anything back but this time was infront of my sister and I wasn’t about to set the precedent for her that you should just let people racially abuse you free from consequence So I took out my phone and started recording the aftermath where: - I told her to say it again - she hit and shoved me Needless to say when the camera came out, the vile bigot started to: 1) wind her neck in because now she was on tape. Didn’t stop her from commenting on my origins again though, or from hitting me twice. 2) play the victim 3) try to provoke me into being the “big bad foreigner” she so desperately wanted me to be 4) accuse me of intimidating her as if she hadn’t just racially insulted me and hit me At this point my sister is holding onto my arm sobbing saying she just wants to go home, and I didn’t want things to escalate so we go our separate ways We then end up crossing paths with her at the park exit where she starts recording me and my sister. I tell her to leave my sister out of it if she has a problem with me, because my sister was crying, she was still in her school uniform and had no involvement. She proceeds to mock my sister for crying I then told the woman “she’s just a child, leave her alone” The woman responds “and what about me? Leave me alone, I’m an old woman, you have no respect for the elderly” I tell her that if she wants to be respected she should be respectful, and that being old doesn’t give her a free pass to be racist or to hit people She then says oh of course you’re gonna play the racism card, that’s all you people ever do I said it’s not playing the racism card if you’re actually being racist There were witnesses to this, but at the time my concern was getting my sister home so I didn’t think to stop and ask the people in the park I have had my initial consultation/interview with the police I know most English people are lovely, half my family are white and English after all, but these racists are getting too comfortable with and open about their hatred of people who are a couple shades too dark for their liking. They’ll have no issue ordering a curry though :)

Xavier

486,761 views • 4 months ago

❤️ IM SOOO HAPPY I GOT TO DO THIS VIDEO I MANIFESTED WHILST CRYING 😢 MY LITTLE ANGEL ROMA is now completely PAIN FREE she couldn’t walk 6 months ago without limping, I DONT KNOW WHAT HAS HELPED HER THE MOST but I’ll bullet point everything we done below ⬇️ , in my heart Supreme CBD - UK’s #1 CBD OIL Juicing, organic fruit, and eating organic red meat is what healed her, I’ll do LOADS MORE VIDEOS ON THIS 🙏🏻 IT WORKED FOR US NO SUGAR absolutely none Either water from glass bottles or distilled (tap water boiled in kettle and cooled down) MASTICATING JUICER has to be this one for the enzymes needs to be drank within 20 mins of making the juice whilst the enzymes are live ORGANIC ALL FRUIT AND VEG local farm shops grow your own etc HAS to be organic ORGANIC GRASS FED MEAT local farms, beef is one of the best. She needs lots of red meat not white meat WILD FISH if u can find a fish monger they sell wild fish we get cod skinned no bones tell them it’s for a baby etc HAS to be wild not farmed ZERO CHEMICALS body washes shampoos toothpaste moisturisers ANYTHING has to be plant based harsh chemical free ZERO CHEMICALS AROUND HOUSE Air fresheners plug ins candles ALL cleaning products dishwasher tabs what u wash the clothes with etc we use all method products for home cleaning RADIATION BLOCKERS turn WiFi off for bed microwaves stay away from them!! Cook nothing in the microwave and don’t have it on at all when she’s in the house R SITTING BARE FOOT ON THE GRASS any grass at all even in a park research benefits from it ENERGY ROOM @quantumenergy_harrogate @gmsosteo139 doctor he is AMAZING 24000mg CBD OIL twice a day morning after breakfast and just before bed THC? I know we live in England but SUNLIGHT as much sunlight as she can get boost her vitamin d levels too Add pure bone broth to her foods it’s packed with goodness I add it to every single thing
3:04

❤️ IM SOOO HAPPY I GOT TO DO THIS VIDEO I MANIFESTED WHILST CRYING 😢 MY LITTLE ANGEL ROMA is now completely PAIN FREE she couldn’t walk 6 months ago without limping, I DONT KNOW WHAT HAS HELPED HER THE MOST but I’ll bullet point everything we done below ⬇️ , in my heart Supreme CBD - UK’s #1 CBD OIL Juicing, organic fruit, and eating organic red meat is what healed her, I’ll do LOADS MORE VIDEOS ON THIS 🙏🏻 IT WORKED FOR US NO SUGAR absolutely none Either water from glass bottles or distilled (tap water boiled in kettle and cooled down) MASTICATING JUICER has to be this one for the enzymes needs to be drank within 20 mins of making the juice whilst the enzymes are live ORGANIC ALL FRUIT AND VEG local farm shops grow your own etc HAS to be organic ORGANIC GRASS FED MEAT local farms, beef is one of the best. She needs lots of red meat not white meat WILD FISH if u can find a fish monger they sell wild fish we get cod skinned no bones tell them it’s for a baby etc HAS to be wild not farmed ZERO CHEMICALS body washes shampoos toothpaste moisturisers ANYTHING has to be plant based harsh chemical free ZERO CHEMICALS AROUND HOUSE Air fresheners plug ins candles ALL cleaning products dishwasher tabs what u wash the clothes with etc we use all method products for home cleaning RADIATION BLOCKERS turn WiFi off for bed microwaves stay away from them!! Cook nothing in the microwave and don’t have it on at all when she’s in the house R SITTING BARE FOOT ON THE GRASS any grass at all even in a park research benefits from it ENERGY ROOM @quantumenergy_harrogate @gmsosteo139 doctor he is AMAZING 24000mg CBD OIL twice a day morning after breakfast and just before bed THC? I know we live in England but SUNLIGHT as much sunlight as she can get boost her vitamin d levels too Add pure bone broth to her foods it’s packed with goodness I add it to every single thing

Anthony Fowler

450,473 views • 1 year ago

The following is a message from Diana Bloom, an anonymous Iranian activist living in Germany who is being threatened with potentially extremely dangerous "exposure" by what appears to be a lunatic. I am passing this message on since Diana has deleted her account for her own protection and safety. To note, I don't think I should be involved with this crazy Evil Evi woman or her OSINT dramas whatsoever since she went bonkers the other day, but she is acting in defamatory ways and with malicious recklessness in a way that endanger an anonymous Iranian dissident I believe to be good, so I must pass this along. A MESSAGE FROM DIANA BLOOM This is a post in two parts. Part one is a brief summary of what has happened so far. Part two addresses the defamatory claims being made about me. PART 1 - [JL: Diana's explanation and responses] For everyone who doesn’t understand what led to this point, here’s the shortest summary possible: Evi [Kokalari] and I had been friendly in DMs since the end of June. She messaged me first. After [DataRepublican] published her piece on the State Department, I asked Evi not to go too hard against DR. Evi did anyway, and James Lindsay defended DR. I didn’t like the way Evi went after James, including citing Milo. So I unfollowed and removed Evi. She confronted me in DMs, and I explained why. Evi then made a post attacking James that started and ended with me and used my profile picture. I responded once, as politely as I could. Evi then repeatedly threatened to dox me, so I deactivated my account. Now, regarding the substance of the accusations she has made so far: 1. I am not a man. My name is not Derek. 2. I am Iranian. 3. I do know stuff about American politics because (and that is the boring truth) German television is really bad. So I’ve only watched English/American stuff for the past, I don’t know, 15 years, podcasts, late night shows, etc. I didn’t think about it, I just did. Little did I know that that would give me an understanding of the inner dynamics of what’s going on within the Republican Party that would tie back to the Iranian people’s cause in 2026. Believe me, I’m still baffled by it whenever I pause to think about it. But that’s the truth, and here we are. 4. I am not in the United States. I shared a blog, and the provider of that blog (a big, common one) is in the United States. My VPN location is sometimes in the United States. Not me. 5. I am not responsible for the content of people defending me. I have no control over it. It’s not my content, and I keep my distance whenever I see problematic stuff. Many accounts defended me, but going to look for one that has done/said problematic stuff to tie it back to me is not right or fair. I am not responsible. I have nothing to do with it. 6. I wanted to help DR because Evi was threatening to go after her hard, and I didn’t think DR deserved that. I meant no harm, I wanted to help. I made a mistake, and I regret it now, but my intention wasn’t bad at that moment in time. 7. Evi herself was the first to come into my DMs and tell me not to fight with an account named Stephanie. So I did Evi that favor. Meaning: Evi came into my DMs first and tried to calm down a public disagreement between me and someone else. When I did this in defense of DR, I did the same thing Evi had done before. I would never think to accuse Evi of restricting my right to free speech because of it. 8. Publishing private DMs from someone without their permission is wrong. It is something both Evi and Stephanie have now done. Both have shared private messages from me without my permission. 9. Part of Evi’s “sources” seem to be Azi Yazdi (granddaughter of Khomeini’s first foreign minister), Benji, and Nima Yamini, as well as his ghost accounts (I have blocked multiple of them by now). If you know any of them, you know this is insane. None of them are reliable. It’s like using Milo as a source against James Lindsay. This is not about truth but about a (malicious) takedown to silence me and get me out of the way. 10. Evi has threatened to dox me (there is no doubt) multiple times, and she keeps going after me. This puts my life and my family’s lives in Iran in real danger, but she doesn’t care. She keeps going, and I can’t stop her. She keeps putting out one lie after another, and it traps me in a forever loop of defending myself. If I don’t respond to more and more accusations from her against me, rest assured, my silence should never be taken as agreement with the lies she puts out there. Be sure there is always context, a counterargument, counterevidence, etc., that would show that none of what she shares is fair or true. But it’s a forever war that is meant to drain me. So me not commenting on her stuff moving forward is never, ever, ever an admission that she is right about something. It’s just a rejection of playing a game I cannot win. To ALL the people who wrote/shared one or multiple posts and comments in my defense: Thank you very, very, very much. I’ve seen it, and I am grateful. But I think it’s best for my own and my family’s safety, as well as for the whole situation, that I step away and stay away from X. I hope that’s understandable. And Evi, for the last time: if you are not malicious, please just stop. Let me out of this. I am not your target. Just leave me and, through doxxing/"exposing", my family out of it moving forward. I beg of you, please. PART 2 - proof - [JL: The following are direct quotes from Evi indicating her intention to "expose" Diana, which she tries to claim is different than "doxxing," though for all practical purposes the effect will be the same and this is a distinction without a difference. The video below shows all of these quotes from her own posts.] 1. “I’m getting enough information on her from her own community. I may share it…” 2. “Either log back in with your real name, or I will start exposing you. And trust me, you will not like that.” 3. “So stop provoking me. If you continue, I will look much deeper into who you are and what your actual role is behind this anonymous account.” 4. “You know what...WAR IT IS. I will start with Diana!! STAY TUNED” 5. “So I will take those words seriously and dig as deep as I can” 6. “The identities of the "Iranian activists" would never have been called into question had they not attacked my right to freedom of speech in my own country.” 7. Someone: “She deleted her account because she’s concerned for her safety and the safety of her relatives in Iran your threats to dox her” Evi: “She should be...but if she turns out to be clean, I shall protect her identity. But trust me, she is not who she claims to be” 8. “Last I checked, Support on X is against fake accounts. Why are we being threatened for wanting to know the true identity of certain accounts…” 9. “Do you think I know who Diana bloom is? No but I need to find out at this point” 10. “... because I asked one of their group operatives from Germany to debate me using her/his true identity, or I would expose who’s behind the account.” 11. “So I don’t know what you’re all thinking, but this isn’t simply about Diana being scared of the IRGC in Iran. The IRGC has been significantly weakened and has plenty of other things to worry about. There are thousands of Iranian accounts fighting for Iran’s freedom under their own names while still having family members back in Iran. At this point, I think people have every right to ask who is actually behind these anonymous accounts… After a few more new posts on her feed, I was forced to tell her to either come back on X and do this under her real name, or I would expose who she was, so at least we would be having this discussion on equal grounds.” 12. “Don’t freaking interfere with other people’s business like that retard did and no one comes after you. So go ahead down and sue me and I will push harder to expose her and you and anyone else…” MY OWN [JL's] COMMENTS, which Diana has nothing to do with and doesn't know I'm appending here. I now believe Evi is likely to be a malignant narcissist who is incapable of admitting that she is wrong. She will not stop in her behavior, and she will aim to harm anyone who attempts to intervene. I do not recommend you do this. I recommend you mark, avoid, and block. Fighting with her will only fuel her because she simply cannot admit that she's wrong about all of this and can only double down in increasingly insane, dangerous, and reckless ways, including toward Diana and her safety. She believes everything she sees that's trying to talk sense into her about any of this is part of an elaborate "op" that "disrespects her free speech" (which isn't a thing, by the way). No one is silencing her. People are just trying to talk sense into her to stop spreading defamation and reckless "exposure" of people who she will put at risk with it and who do not in any way deserve it, people she considered friends and allies until literally four days ago when she suddenly blew up. Therefore, not only is her reckless belief hermetically sealed against any disagreement, she turns any disagreement into proof of allegedly coordinated attacks against her from a network that simply doesn't exist. As a response, in her malignancy, she is threatening to damage, "expose," or otherwise reputationally harm anyone who even tries politely to talk sense into her, much less to disagree with her or oppose her. I strongly recommend everyone realize what they're getting into if they work with or ally themselves with this crazy woman going forward. You do so at your own risk. I can attest from watching her over the last few days that her research abilities, at least when agitated, are so sloppy as to be beyond worthless, even dangerous. The post I'm quoting below is proof of that. She's trying to prove Diana is secretly an American because she's too sloppy and stupid to realize that a Wordpress domain has an American location. She isn't doing research in good faith or with fidelity on this issue, or about me. She is looking for any information she can to hurt people who have upset her. In fact, she is presently being sued for defamation by an Albanian singer (Evi is an Albanian immigrant to the United States and a U.S. citizen for at least a couple decades), so we might recognize this bad behavior and poor praxis as a pattern with her. I can provide just from the last few days, as can others, much evidence that she's simply grasping at the nastiest straws she can find to try to harm people she has suddenly decided are her opponents because of her jealous outburst at DataRepublican and her narcissistic injury at being called on it. The sloppiness and outright retardation of her "fact" finding and "analysis" are so shocking that it's hard not to laugh even given how horrifically dangerous it is. We can therefore infer this sloppiness, recklessness, and malice-when-opposed to be at least partially true of her other "research" against her other targets, by extension. That's a shame because many of those targets are worthy of real scrutiny, which she is undermining with her loose cannon. Therefore, I insist her OSINT "research" is at best worthless and at worst maliciously harmful. In either case, it cannot be engaged by people who want to make a positive difference in the world, so mark and avoid. Evi seems good at making connections. She was quite positively in my own DMs for a while, trying to find ways to work productively together, even suggesting we start an alternative to CPAC (lol). She appears to be friends with both Eric Trump and Don Jr., though the relationship with the former appears to be more solid. She seems to have worked behind the scenes with a lot of relatively prominent Republican groups. I find all of this incredibly concerning after the events of this week, even though I wouldn't have beforehand. My own assessment from this stupid and nasty drama is that Evi's primary motivation is that she is pathologically envious of DataRepublican and her influence, likely believing it should be her in DataRepublican's place. As we can see, she isn't nearly careful or accurate enough for that. Mark and avoid. Further, though, while DataRepublican has no driving interest to be who or what she is and is doing it in service to the best of her abilities (which are considerable but still limited and imperfect as are anyone's), Evi appears to covet the role, which she has demonstrated she cannot possibly handle responsibly. Again, mark and avoid. Block if you will. I will not unblock her for this post or in the future. You can think of that whatever you want. I will rarely, almost never, say anything about her except in the defense of others she is wantonly and recklessly attacking. I will NEVER interact with her directly again, no arguments, no back and forth, no dunks, nothing. My involvement here is pure exposure and nothing else. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
0:20

The following is a message from Diana Bloom, an anonymous Iranian activist living in Germany who is being threatened with potentially extremely dangerous "exposure" by what appears to be a lunatic. I am passing this message on since Diana has deleted her account for her own protection and safety. To note, I don't think I should be involved with this crazy Evil Evi woman or her OSINT dramas whatsoever since she went bonkers the other day, but she is acting in defamatory ways and with malicious recklessness in a way that endanger an anonymous Iranian dissident I believe to be good, so I must pass this along. A MESSAGE FROM DIANA BLOOM This is a post in two parts. Part one is a brief summary of what has happened so far. Part two addresses the defamatory claims being made about me. PART 1 - [JL: Diana's explanation and responses] For everyone who doesn’t understand what led to this point, here’s the shortest summary possible: Evi [Kokalari] and I had been friendly in DMs since the end of June. She messaged me first. After [DataRepublican] published her piece on the State Department, I asked Evi not to go too hard against DR. Evi did anyway, and James Lindsay defended DR. I didn’t like the way Evi went after James, including citing Milo. So I unfollowed and removed Evi. She confronted me in DMs, and I explained why. Evi then made a post attacking James that started and ended with me and used my profile picture. I responded once, as politely as I could. Evi then repeatedly threatened to dox me, so I deactivated my account. Now, regarding the substance of the accusations she has made so far: 1. I am not a man. My name is not Derek. 2. I am Iranian. 3. I do know stuff about American politics because (and that is the boring truth) German television is really bad. So I’ve only watched English/American stuff for the past, I don’t know, 15 years, podcasts, late night shows, etc. I didn’t think about it, I just did. Little did I know that that would give me an understanding of the inner dynamics of what’s going on within the Republican Party that would tie back to the Iranian people’s cause in 2026. Believe me, I’m still baffled by it whenever I pause to think about it. But that’s the truth, and here we are. 4. I am not in the United States. I shared a blog, and the provider of that blog (a big, common one) is in the United States. My VPN location is sometimes in the United States. Not me. 5. I am not responsible for the content of people defending me. I have no control over it. It’s not my content, and I keep my distance whenever I see problematic stuff. Many accounts defended me, but going to look for one that has done/said problematic stuff to tie it back to me is not right or fair. I am not responsible. I have nothing to do with it. 6. I wanted to help DR because Evi was threatening to go after her hard, and I didn’t think DR deserved that. I meant no harm, I wanted to help. I made a mistake, and I regret it now, but my intention wasn’t bad at that moment in time. 7. Evi herself was the first to come into my DMs and tell me not to fight with an account named Stephanie. So I did Evi that favor. Meaning: Evi came into my DMs first and tried to calm down a public disagreement between me and someone else. When I did this in defense of DR, I did the same thing Evi had done before. I would never think to accuse Evi of restricting my right to free speech because of it. 8. Publishing private DMs from someone without their permission is wrong. It is something both Evi and Stephanie have now done. Both have shared private messages from me without my permission. 9. Part of Evi’s “sources” seem to be Azi Yazdi (granddaughter of Khomeini’s first foreign minister), Benji, and Nima Yamini, as well as his ghost accounts (I have blocked multiple of them by now). If you know any of them, you know this is insane. None of them are reliable. It’s like using Milo as a source against James Lindsay. This is not about truth but about a (malicious) takedown to silence me and get me out of the way. 10. Evi has threatened to dox me (there is no doubt) multiple times, and she keeps going after me. This puts my life and my family’s lives in Iran in real danger, but she doesn’t care. She keeps going, and I can’t stop her. She keeps putting out one lie after another, and it traps me in a forever loop of defending myself. If I don’t respond to more and more accusations from her against me, rest assured, my silence should never be taken as agreement with the lies she puts out there. Be sure there is always context, a counterargument, counterevidence, etc., that would show that none of what she shares is fair or true. But it’s a forever war that is meant to drain me. So me not commenting on her stuff moving forward is never, ever, ever an admission that she is right about something. It’s just a rejection of playing a game I cannot win. To ALL the people who wrote/shared one or multiple posts and comments in my defense: Thank you very, very, very much. I’ve seen it, and I am grateful. But I think it’s best for my own and my family’s safety, as well as for the whole situation, that I step away and stay away from X. I hope that’s understandable. And Evi, for the last time: if you are not malicious, please just stop. Let me out of this. I am not your target. Just leave me and, through doxxing/"exposing", my family out of it moving forward. I beg of you, please. PART 2 - proof - [JL: The following are direct quotes from Evi indicating her intention to "expose" Diana, which she tries to claim is different than "doxxing," though for all practical purposes the effect will be the same and this is a distinction without a difference. The video below shows all of these quotes from her own posts.] 1. “I’m getting enough information on her from her own community. I may share it…” 2. “Either log back in with your real name, or I will start exposing you. And trust me, you will not like that.” 3. “So stop provoking me. If you continue, I will look much deeper into who you are and what your actual role is behind this anonymous account.” 4. “You know what...WAR IT IS. I will start with Diana!! STAY TUNED” 5. “So I will take those words seriously and dig as deep as I can” 6. “The identities of the "Iranian activists" would never have been called into question had they not attacked my right to freedom of speech in my own country.” 7. Someone: “She deleted her account because she’s concerned for her safety and the safety of her relatives in Iran your threats to dox her” Evi: “She should be...but if she turns out to be clean, I shall protect her identity. But trust me, she is not who she claims to be” 8. “Last I checked, Support on X is against fake accounts. Why are we being threatened for wanting to know the true identity of certain accounts…” 9. “Do you think I know who Diana bloom is? No but I need to find out at this point” 10. “... because I asked one of their group operatives from Germany to debate me using her/his true identity, or I would expose who’s behind the account.” 11. “So I don’t know what you’re all thinking, but this isn’t simply about Diana being scared of the IRGC in Iran. The IRGC has been significantly weakened and has plenty of other things to worry about. There are thousands of Iranian accounts fighting for Iran’s freedom under their own names while still having family members back in Iran. At this point, I think people have every right to ask who is actually behind these anonymous accounts… After a few more new posts on her feed, I was forced to tell her to either come back on X and do this under her real name, or I would expose who she was, so at least we would be having this discussion on equal grounds.” 12. “Don’t freaking interfere with other people’s business like that retard did and no one comes after you. So go ahead down and sue me and I will push harder to expose her and you and anyone else…” MY OWN [JL's] COMMENTS, which Diana has nothing to do with and doesn't know I'm appending here. I now believe Evi is likely to be a malignant narcissist who is incapable of admitting that she is wrong. She will not stop in her behavior, and she will aim to harm anyone who attempts to intervene. I do not recommend you do this. I recommend you mark, avoid, and block. Fighting with her will only fuel her because she simply cannot admit that she's wrong about all of this and can only double down in increasingly insane, dangerous, and reckless ways, including toward Diana and her safety. She believes everything she sees that's trying to talk sense into her about any of this is part of an elaborate "op" that "disrespects her free speech" (which isn't a thing, by the way). No one is silencing her. People are just trying to talk sense into her to stop spreading defamation and reckless "exposure" of people who she will put at risk with it and who do not in any way deserve it, people she considered friends and allies until literally four days ago when she suddenly blew up. Therefore, not only is her reckless belief hermetically sealed against any disagreement, she turns any disagreement into proof of allegedly coordinated attacks against her from a network that simply doesn't exist. As a response, in her malignancy, she is threatening to damage, "expose," or otherwise reputationally harm anyone who even tries politely to talk sense into her, much less to disagree with her or oppose her. I strongly recommend everyone realize what they're getting into if they work with or ally themselves with this crazy woman going forward. You do so at your own risk. I can attest from watching her over the last few days that her research abilities, at least when agitated, are so sloppy as to be beyond worthless, even dangerous. The post I'm quoting below is proof of that. She's trying to prove Diana is secretly an American because she's too sloppy and stupid to realize that a Wordpress domain has an American location. She isn't doing research in good faith or with fidelity on this issue, or about me. She is looking for any information she can to hurt people who have upset her. In fact, she is presently being sued for defamation by an Albanian singer (Evi is an Albanian immigrant to the United States and a U.S. citizen for at least a couple decades), so we might recognize this bad behavior and poor praxis as a pattern with her. I can provide just from the last few days, as can others, much evidence that she's simply grasping at the nastiest straws she can find to try to harm people she has suddenly decided are her opponents because of her jealous outburst at DataRepublican and her narcissistic injury at being called on it. The sloppiness and outright retardation of her "fact" finding and "analysis" are so shocking that it's hard not to laugh even given how horrifically dangerous it is. We can therefore infer this sloppiness, recklessness, and malice-when-opposed to be at least partially true of her other "research" against her other targets, by extension. That's a shame because many of those targets are worthy of real scrutiny, which she is undermining with her loose cannon. Therefore, I insist her OSINT "research" is at best worthless and at worst maliciously harmful. In either case, it cannot be engaged by people who want to make a positive difference in the world, so mark and avoid. Evi seems good at making connections. She was quite positively in my own DMs for a while, trying to find ways to work productively together, even suggesting we start an alternative to CPAC (lol). She appears to be friends with both Eric Trump and Don Jr., though the relationship with the former appears to be more solid. She seems to have worked behind the scenes with a lot of relatively prominent Republican groups. I find all of this incredibly concerning after the events of this week, even though I wouldn't have beforehand. My own assessment from this stupid and nasty drama is that Evi's primary motivation is that she is pathologically envious of DataRepublican and her influence, likely believing it should be her in DataRepublican's place. As we can see, she isn't nearly careful or accurate enough for that. Mark and avoid. Further, though, while DataRepublican has no driving interest to be who or what she is and is doing it in service to the best of her abilities (which are considerable but still limited and imperfect as are anyone's), Evi appears to covet the role, which she has demonstrated she cannot possibly handle responsibly. Again, mark and avoid. Block if you will. I will not unblock her for this post or in the future. You can think of that whatever you want. I will rarely, almost never, say anything about her except in the defense of others she is wantonly and recklessly attacking. I will NEVER interact with her directly again, no arguments, no back and forth, no dunks, nothing. My involvement here is pure exposure and nothing else. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

James Lindsay, anti-Communist

27,090 views • 9 hours ago

2024 was absolutely the best year of my life. I expect 2025 to be full of continued exponential growth. 2024 Recap: I will start with the bad: I didn’t have very many bad things happen to me in 2024 but I did have the worst single week of my life in October. In one 7 day period I lost my grandmother that has lived 5 minutes away from me for my entire life, my lifelong best friends Dad, who was like a second father to me growing up, killed himself, and I roundtripped my biggest trade (at the time) to date($350k) which was 2/3 of my port at the time. My grandmother passed from pancreatic cancer. She was 82 and lived a beautiful life. I knew it was coming for about a month and I got to hangout with her for her last good weekend. We took her down to our land and we got to sit and talk with her for hours on the front porch. It was beautiful and incredibly sad. It was simply her time to go and although it was/is sad, I know that she is celebrating upstairs and watching over me with a smile. She told my little brothers lifelong best friend who plays college baseball she would help him hit his a home run and he hit his first of college the afternoon she passed. She went out knowing I had run up 6 figures and that she didn’t need to worry about me. She’s the only person that knew/knows besides my little brother. The morning I found out she passed I turned my phone off and just lifted all day. Over the next few days my +$350k upnl trade diminished to an L because I checked out and went on tilt. My brother and I went home the following weekend to grieve with family. I had been in town for a few hours when my Mom got a text about my best friends Dad. Nobody knew he was in as dark of a place as he was and it caught us completely by surprise. I’m thankful I was in town bc I was able to be there for a guy I truly consider family during his darkest time. He spent the night w me the night it happened and we stayed up til 6am just talking. My Grandmother passing was sad but reasonable, this was not and it simply did not make sense. It was selfish and uncalled for and he had a ton of ppl that truly loved him that would have helped him out in a heartbeat. My grandma passing was more sad to me personally bc she was blood and a huge part of my life still, but I had many more questions for God about my best friends Dad. Through all of this I kept my faith and realized that sometimes I don’t get to know why things happen. The Good: There were a million great things about this year but I will only touch on the big ones. I started trading Memes 15 months ago with $180 after being a mediocre options trader. I round tripped ~$200-$300k last cycle and had nothing left. I turned this $180 into ab $100k via holding Wif for 4+ months being fully convicted that it would be the doge of Solana. I not only hit my first 6 figs at one time ever, but I’ve since hit my first 7 figs. I’ve been trying for that $1m number since I was 17 and I always said I’d have it by my 23rd birthday. I didn’t make it happen, was ab 4 months late, but I hit $2m within 24h of touching 1 and did it while I’m still 23. I’ve since been bouncing btw the two but I have a feeling that is going to change soon. I am 1 semester away from graduating from a top ~50 school w a major in Econ and a double minor in Entrepreneurship and business admin and a decent GPA. I’m taking the LSAT soon and if I want to will probably become a lawyer. My second semester freshman year I made a .7 and nuked my gpa simply bc I stopped going to class altogether and didn’t withdraw. I have been clawing my way back ever since. I broke up w my gf of 4+ years over 2 years ago and had been praying for a girl for me for 2+ years. I had gone on some dates but hadn’t met anyone I adored/ considered a potential wife until about 4 months ago. She is now my girlfriend and she is absolutely incredible. Easily the most wonderful girl I have ever met. Over the past year I’ve also gotten much closer with my little brother.
0:28

2024 was absolutely the best year of my life. I expect 2025 to be full of continued exponential growth. 2024 Recap: I will start with the bad: I didn’t have very many bad things happen to me in 2024 but I did have the worst single week of my life in October. In one 7 day period I lost my grandmother that has lived 5 minutes away from me for my entire life, my lifelong best friends Dad, who was like a second father to me growing up, killed himself, and I roundtripped my biggest trade (at the time) to date($350k) which was 2/3 of my port at the time. My grandmother passed from pancreatic cancer. She was 82 and lived a beautiful life. I knew it was coming for about a month and I got to hangout with her for her last good weekend. We took her down to our land and we got to sit and talk with her for hours on the front porch. It was beautiful and incredibly sad. It was simply her time to go and although it was/is sad, I know that she is celebrating upstairs and watching over me with a smile. She told my little brothers lifelong best friend who plays college baseball she would help him hit his a home run and he hit his first of college the afternoon she passed. She went out knowing I had run up 6 figures and that she didn’t need to worry about me. She’s the only person that knew/knows besides my little brother. The morning I found out she passed I turned my phone off and just lifted all day. Over the next few days my +$350k upnl trade diminished to an L because I checked out and went on tilt. My brother and I went home the following weekend to grieve with family. I had been in town for a few hours when my Mom got a text about my best friends Dad. Nobody knew he was in as dark of a place as he was and it caught us completely by surprise. I’m thankful I was in town bc I was able to be there for a guy I truly consider family during his darkest time. He spent the night w me the night it happened and we stayed up til 6am just talking. My Grandmother passing was sad but reasonable, this was not and it simply did not make sense. It was selfish and uncalled for and he had a ton of ppl that truly loved him that would have helped him out in a heartbeat. My grandma passing was more sad to me personally bc she was blood and a huge part of my life still, but I had many more questions for God about my best friends Dad. Through all of this I kept my faith and realized that sometimes I don’t get to know why things happen. The Good: There were a million great things about this year but I will only touch on the big ones. I started trading Memes 15 months ago with $180 after being a mediocre options trader. I round tripped ~$200-$300k last cycle and had nothing left. I turned this $180 into ab $100k via holding Wif for 4+ months being fully convicted that it would be the doge of Solana. I not only hit my first 6 figs at one time ever, but I’ve since hit my first 7 figs. I’ve been trying for that $1m number since I was 17 and I always said I’d have it by my 23rd birthday. I didn’t make it happen, was ab 4 months late, but I hit $2m within 24h of touching 1 and did it while I’m still 23. I’ve since been bouncing btw the two but I have a feeling that is going to change soon. I am 1 semester away from graduating from a top ~50 school w a major in Econ and a double minor in Entrepreneurship and business admin and a decent GPA. I’m taking the LSAT soon and if I want to will probably become a lawyer. My second semester freshman year I made a .7 and nuked my gpa simply bc I stopped going to class altogether and didn’t withdraw. I have been clawing my way back ever since. I broke up w my gf of 4+ years over 2 years ago and had been praying for a girl for me for 2+ years. I had gone on some dates but hadn’t met anyone I adored/ considered a potential wife until about 4 months ago. She is now my girlfriend and she is absolutely incredible. Easily the most wonderful girl I have ever met. Over the past year I’ve also gotten much closer with my little brother.

DLN

21,177 views • 1 year ago

When I was reading Brian Tully, Ken Mello and Robert Cosgrove's affidavits yesterday in the Aidan TurtleBoy Kearney case, I was challenged by an account that was intent on defending Leigha Bathtub Genduso and Kate Peter. Best quotes from my retort; "Number one, Steph, please address the fact—please address why Kate Peter’s February 24, 2024 email to Ken Mello was not turned over in the 5,000 pages of emails that Robert Cosgrove spent seven months putting together that were between Kate Peter and Ken Mello and Kate Peter and Brian Tully. Why was that February 24, 2024 email not turned over? Secondly, is the fact that those emails were turned over—despite the fact that it wasn’t a full turnover of emails—in August of 2025 tie into why the Lindsey Gaetani charges involving Aiden were dismissed? Thirdly: is the fact that Kate Peter—now we know from these documents—directly handled two pieces of key evidence in the Gaetani indictments involving Kearney the reason why, coupled with the August 2025 disclosure of those manipulated email records between Tully and Kate and Kate Peter and Ken Mello, was that the reason why the 2024 indictments involving Lindsey Gaetani were actually null-prossed? Time to answer some tough questions, Steph. Why was that audio of Leigha Genduso not included in the extraction that Brian Tully released completely unredacted in April of 2024? And why have you never said a word about how Tully manipulated that extraction to remove messages from Tully to Lindsey and from Kate to Lindsey before releasing it? And Tully apparently didn’t include Leigha Genduso’s audio message that is now part of the public court record, as well? Yes, Steph, you can’t address it on merit, you can’t, because you’re not here to do that, are you? You’re here to vacuously distract with nonsensical emotional rhetoric. And I will not stand for it. No, I’ll continue reading. It’ll get worse before it gets better, Steph. I’ll tell you that right now. No, she did not, Steph. I’ll tell you what, right now. You know how I know? Because look at Steph, it was posted on social media. Oh, Steph, it was posted on social media and not included in the extraction. So how could Lindsey have deleted it? Lindsey saved it, because Tully didn’t include it in the extraction, and then Lindsey dropped it on social media. And that proves it. That absolutely proves it. All right, so Steph, if you don’t know and don’t care, that’s the end of this discussion. If we have to move you on begrudgingly, we will. But as of now, you can’t address any of this on merit. You don’t know the factual record. You’re getting humiliated. And furthermore, I’m sending a message through you to Kate that her moles are not welcome here. So, well, yeah, but no, that’s not—hold on, do you realize, Steph, the point is not where it was posted. It was that the audio file exists. If it was not on Lindsey’s phone when they did the extraction, she couldn’t have it. But she still has it. There you go. So, listen, oh, I knew we were onto something. I didn’t know it was this bad, Steph. You shouldn’t have tipped Kate’s hand like this, by the way. Reacting that way is only making me aware that this is the whole kit and caboodle. No, Steph, again, you have no standing to stand up for anyone, call anyone anything, or otherwise say anything here, because you will not address the merits of the argument. You just admitted you don’t care about the filings, you don’t know the details, and you refuse to engage. So therefore, we’re done." PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT: If you’re just tuning in, my name is Grant Smith Ellis, and we are reading through Brian Tully, Robert Cosgrove, and Ken Mello’s affidavit. It’s tough to call it an affidavit from Ken Mello, because quite frankly, he didn’t write an affidavit. Robert Cosgrove adapted hearsay statements in Ken Mello’s voice in his own affidavit. That might tell you something. I don’t know. What the fuck do I know? I’m just a towel. Thank you very much for tuning in. I have noticed that there is a very specific group of people in Kate Peter’s orbit trying to target Towel right now. People do not want Towel to be heard. That means I’m going to speak more. I am going to just keep talking and keep saying things, because now I have put it all together. Oh, that’s right. I have one more thing to type. Furthermore, as soon as, within weeks of Kate’s emails to Tully and Mello being turned over in, what was it? August of 2025, the TurtleBoy charges involving Lindsey Gaetani were dropped. And what do you know? Kate was involved in handling evidence submitted by Tully and Mello to the grand jury for Lindsey’s charges, for the charges involving Lindsey Gaetani, for Aiden’s charges involving Lindsey Gaetani. Furthermore, the new email from Kate to Mello indicates Kate was indeed also involved in the 2023 indictments against Kearney that the Norfolk DA seems intent on trying to wall off from Kate Peter’s involvement. Oh, little towels, I'm just a little towel. Steph, Grant says, “Why are you making fun of her by calling her bathtub.” Wait, what? No, no, no, Steph, let’s be very clear. When Leigha Genduso engaged in—and I think it was Kate actually who did it—but when Leigha Genduso or Kate responded to revenge porn with revenge porn, nothing about that was okay, okay? Whether it was legal or not at the time, nobody sharing revenge porn of anybody else was okay, all right? I just want to be very clear. So when Kate did it, it was not okay. When Aiden did it, if that’s what happened with Leigha—I don’t know, I wasn’t around—not okay. If Leigha did it to Aiden, not okay, okay? Everybody on the same page? Like, it’s not okay to do that to people. I just want everyone on the same page. No one would—it’s just like, treat people how you want to be treated, bro. So I just don’t do it. Now, I get some people would say, fight fire with fire, okay, still, don’t fucking do it. Please don’t do it. I don’t understand why people do it. It blows my mind. I don’t understand why people justify it. Oh, it’s okay that Kate or Leigha did it, cause Aiden did it too. It’s like, no, though. I get it's a shitty thing to happen. Don’t do it back. Just stop. It’s ridiculous. Steph's like—"I keep seeing you call her bathtub." Yea, bro she took a video in a bathtub once and posted it on social media. Okay, you want to livestream yourself from a fucking bathtub then I'm going to call you Leigha Bathtub Genduso. I don’t know what to tell you. You don’t have to call her that, but I’m going to do that, right? And I’m not going to stop. But yeah, Three-Clerk-Monte bang bang. Sometimes you just got to tell them how it is, Three-Clerk Monte, you know what I’m saying? Even while you’re on your break. By the way, Steph, I’m just going to break here just posting things, right? And I’m saying I’m not even supposed to be riled up right now. We’re going to go back to reading the indictment in a little bit. I’m just a little towel. I’m on one, you know what I’m saying? Absolutely not. I don’t know which Steph you are. I don’t know if you’re that Steph or whatever, the fake Canadian. You’re not going to come on here and tell me I cannot call her Leigha Bathtub Genduso. I’m going to triple down. I’m going to call Leigha Bathtub Genduso more now. Thank you for all the comments, by the way. It helps the stream get attention in the Kate Peter sucks. Remember that? Yes, that I want you to get this tattooed on your arm: Kate Peter sucks. I’ll help you spell it: K-A-T-E P-E-T-E-R, no S at the end, just Kate Peter, now a new word, sucks, S-U-C-K-S. Everybody on the same page? All right, it’s artistic expression, bro. What do you want to say? Oh no, she’s gone. Steph, I was enjoying all your comments. Yes, Steph, that’s exactly what I want. I want you to keep interacting in the comments because it gets the stream more attention in the feed. I want that. I want you to continue to engage, and I’m going to keep calling her Leigha Bathtub Genduso. It’s not an obsession. It is the product of multiple years of work on the story to uncover something hidden that you don’t want to be talked about in public. That’s the reality. Is that not right Steph, you’re concerned that Kate Peter compromised the cases against Aiden Kearney because she worked as a PI for Marty Craft, who’s now lost his license because of what she was up to according to people’s reports in this chat, and you feel that it’s uncomfortable to have to hold her to the same moral standard that you do Aiden because you’re biased, right? Fine, I don’t care. I’ll tell it to your face yes. No, Steph, you have something to say? You say it right here, one-on-one. Let’s debate. We can do it. I have all the evidence now. We can talk about it all. That’s correct. I don’t create realities, Steph. I bring them to light. Your normative moral framework and what you want to happen is just that. The descriptive reality is independent of what any of us want. It is simply a factual record. In the context of our asymptotic relationship with that factual record, notwithstanding, I was interested in the truth, and you are who is afraid of it, let’s be clear. I wouldn’t say you’re debating me, Steph. You can’t debate on the merit of the facts. You want to know why? Because, for example, it would be very hard for you to counter something like this paragraph right here, right? Where Robert Cosgrove says that any data missing from Lindsey Gaetani’s phone was not on the phone at the time Brian Tully did the extraction. And you might be saying to yourself, Grant, how can you know? How can you know that Brian Tully intentionally released the phone unredacted after only removing messages from Kate to Lindsey and from Tully to Lindsey and after removing things like audio messages from Leigha Genduso? How do I know? Well, because how else would Lindsey have posted it on social media? My word, Steph. It’s almost like there’s proof that Robert Cosgrove was withholding material information related to the sum and substance of Kate Peter’s communications with various members of the prosecution team and/or witnesses and/or the handling of evidence in order to insulate certain charges from Kate Peter touching that evidence so that they could continue to trial, notwithstanding the discovery obligations of the state under the new updated Rule 14 as implemented on March 1, 2025. And towel is in a snarky mood indeed. And you’re not going to be able to do anything about it—oh, please, you're not saying to yourself, "what’s wrong with towel, Steph?" You’re basically saying, "why are you crossing the thin blue line?" And I would like to respond to you by saying, in the least unloving way, but the fact that you would ask me, “What is Grant doing?” because I won’t adhere to your thin blue line? Get the fuck out of here. Go climb up somebody else’s tree. Go find your own treehouse. Not happening. Absolutely not happening. You will look this factual record in the eye. You will confront your moral problems with the various actions of different people involved on your own time. And Leigha Bathtub Genduso will be central to this moral reckoning. And there’s not a damn thing you or your fake Canadian ass can do about it. I’m on one. I told you. Listen, you want it? You want it to be on record? We’ll do it. No, no, I’m just not loyal to your interests, Steph. I’m loyal to truth. I’m loyal to the people who are actually harmed. I’m not loyal to you or any of your friends or Kate Peter or the thin blue line or the thin green line or the thin pink line for that matter. All of you can take your lines and go fuck yourselves. Fake Canadian. Yeah, right, Steph. Yeah, let’s go with that. Yep, let’s go with fake Canadian, because why would you want me looking more in to you? A reporter? You want me to look more into you? No. God, take the L, man, just move on. That’s correct. No, listen, Steph, you want to talk about Michael Proctor’s family’s relationship to my mother? You want to be the person who draws that line? I’ll tell you about it. You sure you want to talk about it? You damn fake Canadian. We may have to get this fake Canadian out of here. She’s riling me up. You’re riling me up by trying to defend Kate Peter. I knew you were a rat the whole time. Goddamn Kate Peter mole. I knew it. I saw through that shit. "I just heard you acknowledge me about the AI. No hate. I appreciate you reading this. Good content." Thank you, sir. Thank you, to the person who said that! You see what I’m saying, Steph? You know what? I think we should just let Steph talk to herself, all right? She can just keep promoting the stream and the algorithm. Let her talk to herself. But Steph, even if you’re talking to yourself, I still have to write the post, okay? Damn fake Canadians. Steph is a fake Canadian and she may or may not be a communist. What you gonna' do about it? You damn fake Canadian. All right, no, I actually have to write this follow-up post. Stop it, Steph. Stop trying to gaslight to protect Kate Peter. You’ll be thrown out of here faster than someone with a cannabis conviction trying to enter Canada who doesn’t actually live there. Damn fake Canadians. Thank you, Kristina. I appreciate it. Yes, and Kristina, you ever wonder if maybe people come in here specifically to derail the conversation because we’re talking about very damning things as to Kate Peter? Well then, let me write my other post, by the way. I’ll help. I will put it up on the screen for you in one second. I just got to get the video loading before I start typing. Oh, Steph, you were on assignment. Stop bitching. I hope they paid you well for it. Don’t bark up my towel tree about you had to spend time with me so you could run intel to all the Kate Peter people. I don’t care. I knew what you were doing. Do you think I was born yesterday? Come on. You all insult my intelligence routinely—not you in the chat. Some of you moles are just like, “He won’t know.” What, are you just going to tell me I’m the greatest thing ever and then it’s going to go along? I’m just saying, I’ve been posting on social media being like, “Aidan, if people tell you that you’re the greatest thing ever, that might be true, but some of them are going to tell you that because they’re moles.” Come on. This is very basic-level intel stuff here. Steph, that was very nice of you. I am never going to degrade you for supporting people in need. What I’m concerned about, okay—I’m not concerned about who you are as a person. I’m concerned about what you didn’t tell us. All right? Yeah? And that's my right. No, absolutely not, Steph. You know exactly what happened. You flipped on a dime as soon as I started asking questions about Kate Peter because she has a lot of moles in her orbit. And then as soon as we started talking about her today, coincidentally enough, you popped right back up. Oh, what’s this? Robert Cosgrove represented in a sworn affidavit that any material missing from Lindsey Gaetani’s—see what I’m doing, Steph? This is, uh, this is for you—Lindsey Gaetani’s phone extraction was not on the phone when MSP did that extraction. And then Brian Tully leaked that extraction unredacted. That’s a message from Leigha Bathtub Genduso proves Tully failed to include material that was indeed on Lindsey's phone. That was for you too, Steph. It’s weird that you know Bathtub, by the way. That’s just odd. Like she’s known Kate Peter for years too. If this Steph, who I watched Sandlot with, is the same Steph as the one who’s a second cousin of John O’Keefe, then she lied to me. She lied to me. If we can prove that this is the same, same Steph, then she lied to me. She told me she was from Canada, Saskatchewan, whatever the fuck. That’s what I’m saying. So Steph, if you are that Steph from wherever the fuck you live, bro—if you are that Steph—you lied to us all. You told us you were fucking Canadian. Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute—are you actually that Steph? No fucking way. You lied to all of us this whole time and pretended to be Canadian? No, that was not—I didn’t ask if you were from Canada. I said, are you the same Steph who was second cousins with John O’Keefe and did you come on this channel and go on a Zoom call with me representing yourself to be Canadian from Saskatchewan? I don’t even have—no, that is not the question I’m asking you. Are you the same Steph that is second cousins with John O’Keefe? Thanks for letting us know. See what I mean? Kristina, it’s not the same Steph. It’s just some random person who really likes Leigha Genduso, Leigha Bathtub Genduso, and Kate Peter. Random coincidence! Just totally random. Come on. I’m rolling my eyes so hard I’m laughing. This has been really interesting though. I know you said no. That makes it even weirder. If you’re not that Steph, your fervent defense of Kate Peter and Leigha Bathtub Genduso is even more weird. Go back to Discord. Come on now, shoo. You’re bothering me. If you bother me too much, I’m just going to go on a 45-minute rant eviscerating Kate Peter with facts, all right? So it’s better to just go. Like I told Benny Sweatpants the other day. Send him my regards, all right? No, I like calling out your hypocrisy. You wouldn’t say a negative word about Kate Peter if I demonstrated the factual record for you in real time. Live! Which I’m doing. You haven’t addressed one element of it on substance. All you’ve done is gaslight, and frankly you’re going to find yourself removed if you continue to fail to adhere to the rules of Towel Channel. As you know, the rules of Towel Channel are pretty simple, which is: one, don’t be discriminatory; two, don’t be derogatory; three, don’t sealion; four, don’t gaslight; and five, no Kate Peters. All right? Jay’s like, “I’m aboard the Grant train.” Thanks, Jay. It wasn’t one question, Steph. It was three questions. Let me reiterate them to you very quickly. Number one, Steph, please address the fact—please address why Kate Peter’s February 24, 2024 email to Ken Mello was not turned over in the 5,000 pages of emails that Robert Cosgrove spent seven months putting together that were between Kate Peter and Ken Mello and Kate Peter and Brian Tully. Why was that February 24, 2024 email not turned over? Secondly, is the fact that those emails were turned over—despite the fact that it wasn’t a full turnover of emails—in August of 2025 tie into why the Lindsey Gaetani charges involving Aiden were dismissed? Second question: is the fact that Kate Peter—now we know from these documents—directly handled two pieces of key evidence in the Gaetani indictments involving Kearney the reason why, coupled with the August 2025 disclosure of those manipulated email records between Tully and Kate and Kate Peter and Ken Mello, was that the reason why the 2024 indictments involving Lindsey Gaetani were actually null-prossed? Time to answer some tough questions, Steph. And furthermore, why was that audio of Leigha Genduso not included in the extraction that Brian Tully released completely unredacted in April of 2024? And why have you never said a word about how Tully manipulated that extraction to remove messages from Tully to Lindsey and from Kate to Lindsey before releasing it? And Tully apparently didn’t include Leigha Genduso’s audio message that is now part of the public court record. Yes, Steph, you can’t address it on merit, you can’t, because you’re not here to do that, are you? You’re here to vacuously distract with nonsensical emotional rhetoric. And I will not stand for it. No, I’ll continue reading. It’ll get worse before it gets better, Steph. I’ll tell you that right now. No, she did not, Steph. I’ll tell you what, right now. You know how I know? Because look at Steph, it was posted on social media. Oh, Steph, it was posted on social media and not included in the extraction. So how could Lindsey have deleted it? Lindsey saved it, because Tully didn’t include it in the extraction, and then Lindsey dropped it on social media. And that proves it. That absolutely proves it. All right, so Steph, if you don’t know and don’t care, that’s the end of this discussion. If we have to move you on begrudgingly, we will. But as of now, you can’t address any of this on merit. You don’t know the factual record. You’re getting humiliated. And furthermore, I’m sending a message through you to Kate that her moles are not welcome here. So, well, yeah, but no, that’s not—hold on, do you realize, Steph, the point is not where it was posted. It was that the audio file exists. If it was not on Lindsey’s phone when they did the extraction, she couldn’t have it. But she still has it. There you go. So, listen, oh, I knew we were onto something. I didn’t know it was this bad, Steph. You shouldn’t have tipped Kate’s hand like this, by the way. The reacting that way is only making me aware that this is the whole kitten caboodle. No, Steph, again, you have no standing to stand up for anyone, call anyone anything, or otherwise say anything here, because you will not address the merits of the argument. You just admitted you don’t care about the filings, you don’t know the details, and you refuse to engage. So therefore, we’re done. Oh, it’s such a shame. All right, I gotta move her on. All right, Steph, it was great. We’ll put you in a little timeout. You can come back tomorrow, okay? I’m glad you spent some time with us, but the reality is I just don’t—I don’t wanna play that type of Kate Peter game, all right? Yep, now, Christina, you, as you know, this channel in Br… every possible perspective. I don’t care what you want to come in here and believe, you know you and I align on a lot of the factual record about a lot of these different cases. It’s not that. I’ll never ever have a problem with that. It’s the bad faith—and it’s not you, Christina. You are wonderful. You’ve never done it—but it’s the people who get too close to Kate Peter and then as embodied in that colloquy with Steph right there, whoever the fuck she is, we still don’t know. As embodied in that colloquy, you have a situation where when confronted with the facts instead of responding or even giving the time of day to what Kate Peter or Tully or Cosgrove might have done wrong, immediately it starts with the emotional manipulation, the attacks, the distraction. So I hope that—I hope that tells us all something. But yes, let’s keep reading because before I got in that fun colloquy, we were—I bet Steph was sent here to try to derail me. Nice try, Steph, take it elsewhere. All right, so we got those two posts up, by the way. All right, following service. Do you remember where we were in all this? The very last—so we just read about the Kate emails. By the way, now we know the whole Kate and Kaboodle is the Kate emails. We just read about the Kate emails and take a look where it goes next. All right, it just keeps going and going. Oh, do you think I should add Kate, Steph to the chart, by the way? Where should she go on the chart? Should she go under the Trollhollmio section? I feel like that’s appropriate. You know, this is just my opinion of how all these people tie together. Say you got Kate Peter, the Lord of Darkness in the middle—that’s my opinion. Then you got Jamz up there, Llama over there, Jason Broyles down here, Gaffney over here, Trollhollomio here. Then you got people like Critical Mass, Virgil, that—I don’t know who that is. And then you got Tully, Michael Morrissey, and Michael Proctor. Then you got Jake Sun, Twisted Tragedies tied to Gaffney. Then you got that guy, Jason Broyles, who thinks—who pretends to be a woman online. You got him, I think he’s tied to Barry Lewis and this weird woman from Connecticut that Kate keeps working with. She used to pretend to be like an advocate for medical patients, but now apparently she’s a big advocate of prednisone. I don’t really understand. She’s been going online telling people that people with colitis have to use prednisone apparently and they can’t use cannabis. I’m baffled by it. I didn’t know she was a doctor. Listen, if I knew that this woman was a doctor, I would start looking to whether she’s received payments from the pharmaceutical industry because I’ve never met a cannabis advocate who tells people they have to use prednisone for colitis. So that woman baffles me. Also, she’s the reason consumption event in Massachusetts are now regulated by the CCC. So listen, you all think that Kate Peter’s just some kind of like moron. She just plays that role, okay? Like she plays like she doesn’t know what she’s talking about and she doesn’t mostly with these court developments. But look at her network. Like people fawn over her like TurtleBoy. She is the female TurtleBoy in so many ways. And what makes her scary is she doesn’t own it.
33:21

When I was reading Brian Tully, Ken Mello and Robert Cosgrove's affidavits yesterday in the Aidan TurtleBoy Kearney case, I was challenged by an account that was intent on defending Leigha Bathtub Genduso and Kate Peter. Best quotes from my retort; "Number one, Steph, please address the fact—please address why Kate Peter’s February 24, 2024 email to Ken Mello was not turned over in the 5,000 pages of emails that Robert Cosgrove spent seven months putting together that were between Kate Peter and Ken Mello and Kate Peter and Brian Tully. Why was that February 24, 2024 email not turned over? Secondly, is the fact that those emails were turned over—despite the fact that it wasn’t a full turnover of emails—in August of 2025 tie into why the Lindsey Gaetani charges involving Aiden were dismissed? Thirdly: is the fact that Kate Peter—now we know from these documents—directly handled two pieces of key evidence in the Gaetani indictments involving Kearney the reason why, coupled with the August 2025 disclosure of those manipulated email records between Tully and Kate and Kate Peter and Ken Mello, was that the reason why the 2024 indictments involving Lindsey Gaetani were actually null-prossed? Time to answer some tough questions, Steph. Why was that audio of Leigha Genduso not included in the extraction that Brian Tully released completely unredacted in April of 2024? And why have you never said a word about how Tully manipulated that extraction to remove messages from Tully to Lindsey and from Kate to Lindsey before releasing it? And Tully apparently didn’t include Leigha Genduso’s audio message that is now part of the public court record, as well? Yes, Steph, you can’t address it on merit, you can’t, because you’re not here to do that, are you? You’re here to vacuously distract with nonsensical emotional rhetoric. And I will not stand for it. No, I’ll continue reading. It’ll get worse before it gets better, Steph. I’ll tell you that right now. No, she did not, Steph. I’ll tell you what, right now. You know how I know? Because look at Steph, it was posted on social media. Oh, Steph, it was posted on social media and not included in the extraction. So how could Lindsey have deleted it? Lindsey saved it, because Tully didn’t include it in the extraction, and then Lindsey dropped it on social media. And that proves it. That absolutely proves it. All right, so Steph, if you don’t know and don’t care, that’s the end of this discussion. If we have to move you on begrudgingly, we will. But as of now, you can’t address any of this on merit. You don’t know the factual record. You’re getting humiliated. And furthermore, I’m sending a message through you to Kate that her moles are not welcome here. So, well, yeah, but no, that’s not—hold on, do you realize, Steph, the point is not where it was posted. It was that the audio file exists. If it was not on Lindsey’s phone when they did the extraction, she couldn’t have it. But she still has it. There you go. So, listen, oh, I knew we were onto something. I didn’t know it was this bad, Steph. You shouldn’t have tipped Kate’s hand like this, by the way. Reacting that way is only making me aware that this is the whole kit and caboodle. No, Steph, again, you have no standing to stand up for anyone, call anyone anything, or otherwise say anything here, because you will not address the merits of the argument. You just admitted you don’t care about the filings, you don’t know the details, and you refuse to engage. So therefore, we’re done." PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT: If you’re just tuning in, my name is Grant Smith Ellis, and we are reading through Brian Tully, Robert Cosgrove, and Ken Mello’s affidavit. It’s tough to call it an affidavit from Ken Mello, because quite frankly, he didn’t write an affidavit. Robert Cosgrove adapted hearsay statements in Ken Mello’s voice in his own affidavit. That might tell you something. I don’t know. What the fuck do I know? I’m just a towel. Thank you very much for tuning in. I have noticed that there is a very specific group of people in Kate Peter’s orbit trying to target Towel right now. People do not want Towel to be heard. That means I’m going to speak more. I am going to just keep talking and keep saying things, because now I have put it all together. Oh, that’s right. I have one more thing to type. Furthermore, as soon as, within weeks of Kate’s emails to Tully and Mello being turned over in, what was it? August of 2025, the TurtleBoy charges involving Lindsey Gaetani were dropped. And what do you know? Kate was involved in handling evidence submitted by Tully and Mello to the grand jury for Lindsey’s charges, for the charges involving Lindsey Gaetani, for Aiden’s charges involving Lindsey Gaetani. Furthermore, the new email from Kate to Mello indicates Kate was indeed also involved in the 2023 indictments against Kearney that the Norfolk DA seems intent on trying to wall off from Kate Peter’s involvement. Oh, little towels, I'm just a little towel. Steph, Grant says, “Why are you making fun of her by calling her bathtub.” Wait, what? No, no, no, Steph, let’s be very clear. When Leigha Genduso engaged in—and I think it was Kate actually who did it—but when Leigha Genduso or Kate responded to revenge porn with revenge porn, nothing about that was okay, okay? Whether it was legal or not at the time, nobody sharing revenge porn of anybody else was okay, all right? I just want to be very clear. So when Kate did it, it was not okay. When Aiden did it, if that’s what happened with Leigha—I don’t know, I wasn’t around—not okay. If Leigha did it to Aiden, not okay, okay? Everybody on the same page? Like, it’s not okay to do that to people. I just want everyone on the same page. No one would—it’s just like, treat people how you want to be treated, bro. So I just don’t do it. Now, I get some people would say, fight fire with fire, okay, still, don’t fucking do it. Please don’t do it. I don’t understand why people do it. It blows my mind. I don’t understand why people justify it. Oh, it’s okay that Kate or Leigha did it, cause Aiden did it too. It’s like, no, though. I get it's a shitty thing to happen. Don’t do it back. Just stop. It’s ridiculous. Steph's like—"I keep seeing you call her bathtub." Yea, bro she took a video in a bathtub once and posted it on social media. Okay, you want to livestream yourself from a fucking bathtub then I'm going to call you Leigha Bathtub Genduso. I don’t know what to tell you. You don’t have to call her that, but I’m going to do that, right? And I’m not going to stop. But yeah, Three-Clerk-Monte bang bang. Sometimes you just got to tell them how it is, Three-Clerk Monte, you know what I’m saying? Even while you’re on your break. By the way, Steph, I’m just going to break here just posting things, right? And I’m saying I’m not even supposed to be riled up right now. We’re going to go back to reading the indictment in a little bit. I’m just a little towel. I’m on one, you know what I’m saying? Absolutely not. I don’t know which Steph you are. I don’t know if you’re that Steph or whatever, the fake Canadian. You’re not going to come on here and tell me I cannot call her Leigha Bathtub Genduso. I’m going to triple down. I’m going to call Leigha Bathtub Genduso more now. Thank you for all the comments, by the way. It helps the stream get attention in the Kate Peter sucks. Remember that? Yes, that I want you to get this tattooed on your arm: Kate Peter sucks. I’ll help you spell it: K-A-T-E P-E-T-E-R, no S at the end, just Kate Peter, now a new word, sucks, S-U-C-K-S. Everybody on the same page? All right, it’s artistic expression, bro. What do you want to say? Oh no, she’s gone. Steph, I was enjoying all your comments. Yes, Steph, that’s exactly what I want. I want you to keep interacting in the comments because it gets the stream more attention in the feed. I want that. I want you to continue to engage, and I’m going to keep calling her Leigha Bathtub Genduso. It’s not an obsession. It is the product of multiple years of work on the story to uncover something hidden that you don’t want to be talked about in public. That’s the reality. Is that not right Steph, you’re concerned that Kate Peter compromised the cases against Aiden Kearney because she worked as a PI for Marty Craft, who’s now lost his license because of what she was up to according to people’s reports in this chat, and you feel that it’s uncomfortable to have to hold her to the same moral standard that you do Aiden because you’re biased, right? Fine, I don’t care. I’ll tell it to your face yes. No, Steph, you have something to say? You say it right here, one-on-one. Let’s debate. We can do it. I have all the evidence now. We can talk about it all. That’s correct. I don’t create realities, Steph. I bring them to light. Your normative moral framework and what you want to happen is just that. The descriptive reality is independent of what any of us want. It is simply a factual record. In the context of our asymptotic relationship with that factual record, notwithstanding, I was interested in the truth, and you are who is afraid of it, let’s be clear. I wouldn’t say you’re debating me, Steph. You can’t debate on the merit of the facts. You want to know why? Because, for example, it would be very hard for you to counter something like this paragraph right here, right? Where Robert Cosgrove says that any data missing from Lindsey Gaetani’s phone was not on the phone at the time Brian Tully did the extraction. And you might be saying to yourself, Grant, how can you know? How can you know that Brian Tully intentionally released the phone unredacted after only removing messages from Kate to Lindsey and from Tully to Lindsey and after removing things like audio messages from Leigha Genduso? How do I know? Well, because how else would Lindsey have posted it on social media? My word, Steph. It’s almost like there’s proof that Robert Cosgrove was withholding material information related to the sum and substance of Kate Peter’s communications with various members of the prosecution team and/or witnesses and/or the handling of evidence in order to insulate certain charges from Kate Peter touching that evidence so that they could continue to trial, notwithstanding the discovery obligations of the state under the new updated Rule 14 as implemented on March 1, 2025. And towel is in a snarky mood indeed. And you’re not going to be able to do anything about it—oh, please, you're not saying to yourself, "what’s wrong with towel, Steph?" You’re basically saying, "why are you crossing the thin blue line?" And I would like to respond to you by saying, in the least unloving way, but the fact that you would ask me, “What is Grant doing?” because I won’t adhere to your thin blue line? Get the fuck out of here. Go climb up somebody else’s tree. Go find your own treehouse. Not happening. Absolutely not happening. You will look this factual record in the eye. You will confront your moral problems with the various actions of different people involved on your own time. And Leigha Bathtub Genduso will be central to this moral reckoning. And there’s not a damn thing you or your fake Canadian ass can do about it. I’m on one. I told you. Listen, you want it? You want it to be on record? We’ll do it. No, no, I’m just not loyal to your interests, Steph. I’m loyal to truth. I’m loyal to the people who are actually harmed. I’m not loyal to you or any of your friends or Kate Peter or the thin blue line or the thin green line or the thin pink line for that matter. All of you can take your lines and go fuck yourselves. Fake Canadian. Yeah, right, Steph. Yeah, let’s go with that. Yep, let’s go with fake Canadian, because why would you want me looking more in to you? A reporter? You want me to look more into you? No. God, take the L, man, just move on. That’s correct. No, listen, Steph, you want to talk about Michael Proctor’s family’s relationship to my mother? You want to be the person who draws that line? I’ll tell you about it. You sure you want to talk about it? You damn fake Canadian. We may have to get this fake Canadian out of here. She’s riling me up. You’re riling me up by trying to defend Kate Peter. I knew you were a rat the whole time. Goddamn Kate Peter mole. I knew it. I saw through that shit. "I just heard you acknowledge me about the AI. No hate. I appreciate you reading this. Good content." Thank you, sir. Thank you, to the person who said that! You see what I’m saying, Steph? You know what? I think we should just let Steph talk to herself, all right? She can just keep promoting the stream and the algorithm. Let her talk to herself. But Steph, even if you’re talking to yourself, I still have to write the post, okay? Damn fake Canadians. Steph is a fake Canadian and she may or may not be a communist. What you gonna' do about it? You damn fake Canadian. All right, no, I actually have to write this follow-up post. Stop it, Steph. Stop trying to gaslight to protect Kate Peter. You’ll be thrown out of here faster than someone with a cannabis conviction trying to enter Canada who doesn’t actually live there. Damn fake Canadians. Thank you, Kristina. I appreciate it. Yes, and Kristina, you ever wonder if maybe people come in here specifically to derail the conversation because we’re talking about very damning things as to Kate Peter? Well then, let me write my other post, by the way. I’ll help. I will put it up on the screen for you in one second. I just got to get the video loading before I start typing. Oh, Steph, you were on assignment. Stop bitching. I hope they paid you well for it. Don’t bark up my towel tree about you had to spend time with me so you could run intel to all the Kate Peter people. I don’t care. I knew what you were doing. Do you think I was born yesterday? Come on. You all insult my intelligence routinely—not you in the chat. Some of you moles are just like, “He won’t know.” What, are you just going to tell me I’m the greatest thing ever and then it’s going to go along? I’m just saying, I’ve been posting on social media being like, “Aidan, if people tell you that you’re the greatest thing ever, that might be true, but some of them are going to tell you that because they’re moles.” Come on. This is very basic-level intel stuff here. Steph, that was very nice of you. I am never going to degrade you for supporting people in need. What I’m concerned about, okay—I’m not concerned about who you are as a person. I’m concerned about what you didn’t tell us. All right? Yeah? And that's my right. No, absolutely not, Steph. You know exactly what happened. You flipped on a dime as soon as I started asking questions about Kate Peter because she has a lot of moles in her orbit. And then as soon as we started talking about her today, coincidentally enough, you popped right back up. Oh, what’s this? Robert Cosgrove represented in a sworn affidavit that any material missing from Lindsey Gaetani’s—see what I’m doing, Steph? This is, uh, this is for you—Lindsey Gaetani’s phone extraction was not on the phone when MSP did that extraction. And then Brian Tully leaked that extraction unredacted. That’s a message from Leigha Bathtub Genduso proves Tully failed to include material that was indeed on Lindsey's phone. That was for you too, Steph. It’s weird that you know Bathtub, by the way. That’s just odd. Like she’s known Kate Peter for years too. If this Steph, who I watched Sandlot with, is the same Steph as the one who’s a second cousin of John O’Keefe, then she lied to me. She lied to me. If we can prove that this is the same, same Steph, then she lied to me. She told me she was from Canada, Saskatchewan, whatever the fuck. That’s what I’m saying. So Steph, if you are that Steph from wherever the fuck you live, bro—if you are that Steph—you lied to us all. You told us you were fucking Canadian. Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute—are you actually that Steph? No fucking way. You lied to all of us this whole time and pretended to be Canadian? No, that was not—I didn’t ask if you were from Canada. I said, are you the same Steph who was second cousins with John O’Keefe and did you come on this channel and go on a Zoom call with me representing yourself to be Canadian from Saskatchewan? I don’t even have—no, that is not the question I’m asking you. Are you the same Steph that is second cousins with John O’Keefe? Thanks for letting us know. See what I mean? Kristina, it’s not the same Steph. It’s just some random person who really likes Leigha Genduso, Leigha Bathtub Genduso, and Kate Peter. Random coincidence! Just totally random. Come on. I’m rolling my eyes so hard I’m laughing. This has been really interesting though. I know you said no. That makes it even weirder. If you’re not that Steph, your fervent defense of Kate Peter and Leigha Bathtub Genduso is even more weird. Go back to Discord. Come on now, shoo. You’re bothering me. If you bother me too much, I’m just going to go on a 45-minute rant eviscerating Kate Peter with facts, all right? So it’s better to just go. Like I told Benny Sweatpants the other day. Send him my regards, all right? No, I like calling out your hypocrisy. You wouldn’t say a negative word about Kate Peter if I demonstrated the factual record for you in real time. Live! Which I’m doing. You haven’t addressed one element of it on substance. All you’ve done is gaslight, and frankly you’re going to find yourself removed if you continue to fail to adhere to the rules of Towel Channel. As you know, the rules of Towel Channel are pretty simple, which is: one, don’t be discriminatory; two, don’t be derogatory; three, don’t sealion; four, don’t gaslight; and five, no Kate Peters. All right? Jay’s like, “I’m aboard the Grant train.” Thanks, Jay. It wasn’t one question, Steph. It was three questions. Let me reiterate them to you very quickly. Number one, Steph, please address the fact—please address why Kate Peter’s February 24, 2024 email to Ken Mello was not turned over in the 5,000 pages of emails that Robert Cosgrove spent seven months putting together that were between Kate Peter and Ken Mello and Kate Peter and Brian Tully. Why was that February 24, 2024 email not turned over? Secondly, is the fact that those emails were turned over—despite the fact that it wasn’t a full turnover of emails—in August of 2025 tie into why the Lindsey Gaetani charges involving Aiden were dismissed? Second question: is the fact that Kate Peter—now we know from these documents—directly handled two pieces of key evidence in the Gaetani indictments involving Kearney the reason why, coupled with the August 2025 disclosure of those manipulated email records between Tully and Kate and Kate Peter and Ken Mello, was that the reason why the 2024 indictments involving Lindsey Gaetani were actually null-prossed? Time to answer some tough questions, Steph. And furthermore, why was that audio of Leigha Genduso not included in the extraction that Brian Tully released completely unredacted in April of 2024? And why have you never said a word about how Tully manipulated that extraction to remove messages from Tully to Lindsey and from Kate to Lindsey before releasing it? And Tully apparently didn’t include Leigha Genduso’s audio message that is now part of the public court record. Yes, Steph, you can’t address it on merit, you can’t, because you’re not here to do that, are you? You’re here to vacuously distract with nonsensical emotional rhetoric. And I will not stand for it. No, I’ll continue reading. It’ll get worse before it gets better, Steph. I’ll tell you that right now. No, she did not, Steph. I’ll tell you what, right now. You know how I know? Because look at Steph, it was posted on social media. Oh, Steph, it was posted on social media and not included in the extraction. So how could Lindsey have deleted it? Lindsey saved it, because Tully didn’t include it in the extraction, and then Lindsey dropped it on social media. And that proves it. That absolutely proves it. All right, so Steph, if you don’t know and don’t care, that’s the end of this discussion. If we have to move you on begrudgingly, we will. But as of now, you can’t address any of this on merit. You don’t know the factual record. You’re getting humiliated. And furthermore, I’m sending a message through you to Kate that her moles are not welcome here. So, well, yeah, but no, that’s not—hold on, do you realize, Steph, the point is not where it was posted. It was that the audio file exists. If it was not on Lindsey’s phone when they did the extraction, she couldn’t have it. But she still has it. There you go. So, listen, oh, I knew we were onto something. I didn’t know it was this bad, Steph. You shouldn’t have tipped Kate’s hand like this, by the way. The reacting that way is only making me aware that this is the whole kitten caboodle. No, Steph, again, you have no standing to stand up for anyone, call anyone anything, or otherwise say anything here, because you will not address the merits of the argument. You just admitted you don’t care about the filings, you don’t know the details, and you refuse to engage. So therefore, we’re done. Oh, it’s such a shame. All right, I gotta move her on. All right, Steph, it was great. We’ll put you in a little timeout. You can come back tomorrow, okay? I’m glad you spent some time with us, but the reality is I just don’t—I don’t wanna play that type of Kate Peter game, all right? Yep, now, Christina, you, as you know, this channel in Br… every possible perspective. I don’t care what you want to come in here and believe, you know you and I align on a lot of the factual record about a lot of these different cases. It’s not that. I’ll never ever have a problem with that. It’s the bad faith—and it’s not you, Christina. You are wonderful. You’ve never done it—but it’s the people who get too close to Kate Peter and then as embodied in that colloquy with Steph right there, whoever the fuck she is, we still don’t know. As embodied in that colloquy, you have a situation where when confronted with the facts instead of responding or even giving the time of day to what Kate Peter or Tully or Cosgrove might have done wrong, immediately it starts with the emotional manipulation, the attacks, the distraction. So I hope that—I hope that tells us all something. But yes, let’s keep reading because before I got in that fun colloquy, we were—I bet Steph was sent here to try to derail me. Nice try, Steph, take it elsewhere. All right, so we got those two posts up, by the way. All right, following service. Do you remember where we were in all this? The very last—so we just read about the Kate emails. By the way, now we know the whole Kate and Kaboodle is the Kate emails. We just read about the Kate emails and take a look where it goes next. All right, it just keeps going and going. Oh, do you think I should add Kate, Steph to the chart, by the way? Where should she go on the chart? Should she go under the Trollhollmio section? I feel like that’s appropriate. You know, this is just my opinion of how all these people tie together. Say you got Kate Peter, the Lord of Darkness in the middle—that’s my opinion. Then you got Jamz up there, Llama over there, Jason Broyles down here, Gaffney over here, Trollhollomio here. Then you got people like Critical Mass, Virgil, that—I don’t know who that is. And then you got Tully, Michael Morrissey, and Michael Proctor. Then you got Jake Sun, Twisted Tragedies tied to Gaffney. Then you got that guy, Jason Broyles, who thinks—who pretends to be a woman online. You got him, I think he’s tied to Barry Lewis and this weird woman from Connecticut that Kate keeps working with. She used to pretend to be like an advocate for medical patients, but now apparently she’s a big advocate of prednisone. I don’t really understand. She’s been going online telling people that people with colitis have to use prednisone apparently and they can’t use cannabis. I’m baffled by it. I didn’t know she was a doctor. Listen, if I knew that this woman was a doctor, I would start looking to whether she’s received payments from the pharmaceutical industry because I’ve never met a cannabis advocate who tells people they have to use prednisone for colitis. So that woman baffles me. Also, she’s the reason consumption event in Massachusetts are now regulated by the CCC. So listen, you all think that Kate Peter’s just some kind of like moron. She just plays that role, okay? Like she plays like she doesn’t know what she’s talking about and she doesn’t mostly with these court developments. But look at her network. Like people fawn over her like TurtleBoy. She is the female TurtleBoy in so many ways. And what makes her scary is she doesn’t own it.

Grant Smith Ellis

13,617 views • 9 months ago

Trump Keeps Admitting That He Is Bought And Owned By The World’s Richest Israeli It’s bizarre how little mainstream attention is given to the fact that the president of the United States has repeatedly confessed to being bought and owned by the world’s richest Israeli, especially given how intensely fixated his political opposition was on the possibility that he was compromised by a foreign government during his first term. During a speech before the Israeli parliament on Monday, President Trump once again publicly admitted that he has implemented Israel-friendly policies at the behest of Israeli-American billionaire Miriam Adelson and her late husband Sheldon, this time adding that he believes Adelson favors Israel over the United States. Here’s a transcript of Trump’s remarks: “As president, I terminated the disastrous Iran nuclear deal, and ultimately, I terminated Iran’s nuclear program with things called B2 bombers. It was swift and it was accurate, and it was a military beauty. I authorized the spending of billions of dollars, which went to Israel’s defense, as you know. And after years of broken promises from many other American presidents — you know that they kept promising — I never understood it until I got there. There was a lot of pressure put on these presidents. It was put on me, too, but I didn’t yield to the pressure. But every president for decades said, ‘We’re going to do it.’ The difference is I kept my promise and officially recognized the capital of Israel and moved the American Embassy to Jerusalem. “Isn’t that right Miriam? Look at Miriam. She’s back there. Stand up. Miriam and Sheldon [Adelson] would come into the office and call me. They’d call me — I think they had more trips to the White House than anybody else, I guess. Look at her sitting there so innocently — got $60 billion in the bank, $60 billion. And she loves, and she, I think she said, ‘No, more.’ And she loves Israel, but she loves it. And they would come in. And her husband was a very aggressive man, but I loved him. It was a very aggressive, very supportive of me. And he’d call up, ‘Can I come over and see you? I’d say ‘Sheldon, I’m the president of the United States. It doesn’t work that way.’ He’d come in. But they were very responsible for so much, including getting me thinking about Golan Heights, which is probably one of the greatest things ever happened. Miriam, stand up, please. She really is, I mean, she loves this country. She loves this country. Her and her husband are so incredible. We miss him so dearly. But I actually asked her, I’m going to get her in trouble with this. But I actually asked her once, I said, ‘So Miriam, I know you love Israel. What do you love more? The United States or Israel?’ She refused to answer. That means — that might mean Israel, I must say, we love you. Thank you, darling, for being here. That’s a great honor. Great honor. She’s a wonderful woman. She is a great woman.” Sheldon Adelson reportedly gave Trump and the Republicans over $424 million in campaign funding from 2016 up until his death in 2021. His widow Miriam continued her husband’s legacy and poured a further $100 million into Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign. On the 2024 campaign trail Trump also admitted to being controlled by Adelson cash. Here’s a transcript of those remarks: “Just as I promised, I recognize Israel’s eternal capital and opened the American embassy in Jerusalem. Jerusalem became the capital. I also recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. “You know, Miriam and Sheldon would come into the White House probably almost more than anybody outside of people that work there. And they were always after — and as soon as I’d give them something — always for Israel. As soon as I’d give them something, they’d want something else. I’d say, ‘Give me a couple of weeks, will you, please?’ But I gave them the Golan Heights, and they never even asked for it. “You know, for 72 years they’ve been trying to do the Golan Heights, right? And even Sheldon didn’t have the nerve. But I said, ‘You know what?’ I said to David Friedman, ‘Give me a quick lesson, like five minutes or less on the Golan Heights.’ And he did. And I said, ‘Let’s do it.’ We got it done in about 15 minutes, right?” Legitimizing Israel’s illegal annexation of the Golan Heights and moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem were two of the most controversial moves Trump made in Israel’s favor during his first term, which have now been eclipsed by his backing the genocide in Gaza and his bombings of Iran and Yemen. And here is his, openly admitting that his billionaire Zionist megadonors have been using the access their donations bought them to push him to take drastic action in favor of Israel. Just imagine for a second if someone had leaked documents to the press proving that Trump and received extensive financial backing from a Russian oligarch to whom he doled out favors of immense geopolitical consequence. It would be the biggest scandal in the history of American politics, bar none. But because it’s an Israeli oligarch, he can admit to it openly and repeatedly without anyone batting an eye. During Trump’s first term his political rivals spent years pushing a bogus conspiracy theory that he was controlled by Vladimir Putin, despite his having spent that entire term aggressively ramping up cold war hostilities against Russia. Entire political punditry careers were birthed trying to create a scandal out of a narrative that could be plainly seen as false just by looking at the movements of the US war machine and Washington’s actions against Moscow. But here’s Trump openly admitting to bending over backwards to give an Israeli oligarch whatever she wants because she gave his campaign huge sums of money, while pouring weapons into Israel to facilitate its mass atrocities and engaging in acts of war on Israel’s behalf. And it barely makes a blip in mainstream western politics or media. This is because mainstream western politics and media understand that we are living in an unofficial oligarchic empire to which both the US and Israel belong. They never acknowledge it, they never talk about it, but all high-level politicians, pundits and operatives in the western world understand that they serve a globe-spanning power structure run by a loose alliance of plutocrats and empire managers. They understand that states like Israel are a part of said power structure, while states like Russia, China and Iran are not. So they spend their time normalizing the corruption and abuses of imperial member states while facilitating the empire’s efforts to attack and undermine the states which have successfully resisted being absorbed into the imperial power umbrella. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the only thing I like about Donald Trump is his infantile tendency to say the quiet part out loud. He advances the same kinds of abuses as his predecessors who were no less corrupt and controlled, but he exposes the underlying mechanics of those abuses in ways that more refined presidents never would. Reading by Tim Foley:
7:23

Trump Keeps Admitting That He Is Bought And Owned By The World’s Richest Israeli It’s bizarre how little mainstream attention is given to the fact that the president of the United States has repeatedly confessed to being bought and owned by the world’s richest Israeli, especially given how intensely fixated his political opposition was on the possibility that he was compromised by a foreign government during his first term. During a speech before the Israeli parliament on Monday, President Trump once again publicly admitted that he has implemented Israel-friendly policies at the behest of Israeli-American billionaire Miriam Adelson and her late husband Sheldon, this time adding that he believes Adelson favors Israel over the United States. Here’s a transcript of Trump’s remarks: “As president, I terminated the disastrous Iran nuclear deal, and ultimately, I terminated Iran’s nuclear program with things called B2 bombers. It was swift and it was accurate, and it was a military beauty. I authorized the spending of billions of dollars, which went to Israel’s defense, as you know. And after years of broken promises from many other American presidents — you know that they kept promising — I never understood it until I got there. There was a lot of pressure put on these presidents. It was put on me, too, but I didn’t yield to the pressure. But every president for decades said, ‘We’re going to do it.’ The difference is I kept my promise and officially recognized the capital of Israel and moved the American Embassy to Jerusalem. “Isn’t that right Miriam? Look at Miriam. She’s back there. Stand up. Miriam and Sheldon [Adelson] would come into the office and call me. They’d call me — I think they had more trips to the White House than anybody else, I guess. Look at her sitting there so innocently — got $60 billion in the bank, $60 billion. And she loves, and she, I think she said, ‘No, more.’ And she loves Israel, but she loves it. And they would come in. And her husband was a very aggressive man, but I loved him. It was a very aggressive, very supportive of me. And he’d call up, ‘Can I come over and see you? I’d say ‘Sheldon, I’m the president of the United States. It doesn’t work that way.’ He’d come in. But they were very responsible for so much, including getting me thinking about Golan Heights, which is probably one of the greatest things ever happened. Miriam, stand up, please. She really is, I mean, she loves this country. She loves this country. Her and her husband are so incredible. We miss him so dearly. But I actually asked her, I’m going to get her in trouble with this. But I actually asked her once, I said, ‘So Miriam, I know you love Israel. What do you love more? The United States or Israel?’ She refused to answer. That means — that might mean Israel, I must say, we love you. Thank you, darling, for being here. That’s a great honor. Great honor. She’s a wonderful woman. She is a great woman.” Sheldon Adelson reportedly gave Trump and the Republicans over $424 million in campaign funding from 2016 up until his death in 2021. His widow Miriam continued her husband’s legacy and poured a further $100 million into Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign. On the 2024 campaign trail Trump also admitted to being controlled by Adelson cash. Here’s a transcript of those remarks: “Just as I promised, I recognize Israel’s eternal capital and opened the American embassy in Jerusalem. Jerusalem became the capital. I also recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. “You know, Miriam and Sheldon would come into the White House probably almost more than anybody outside of people that work there. And they were always after — and as soon as I’d give them something — always for Israel. As soon as I’d give them something, they’d want something else. I’d say, ‘Give me a couple of weeks, will you, please?’ But I gave them the Golan Heights, and they never even asked for it. “You know, for 72 years they’ve been trying to do the Golan Heights, right? And even Sheldon didn’t have the nerve. But I said, ‘You know what?’ I said to David Friedman, ‘Give me a quick lesson, like five minutes or less on the Golan Heights.’ And he did. And I said, ‘Let’s do it.’ We got it done in about 15 minutes, right?” Legitimizing Israel’s illegal annexation of the Golan Heights and moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem were two of the most controversial moves Trump made in Israel’s favor during his first term, which have now been eclipsed by his backing the genocide in Gaza and his bombings of Iran and Yemen. And here is his, openly admitting that his billionaire Zionist megadonors have been using the access their donations bought them to push him to take drastic action in favor of Israel. Just imagine for a second if someone had leaked documents to the press proving that Trump and received extensive financial backing from a Russian oligarch to whom he doled out favors of immense geopolitical consequence. It would be the biggest scandal in the history of American politics, bar none. But because it’s an Israeli oligarch, he can admit to it openly and repeatedly without anyone batting an eye. During Trump’s first term his political rivals spent years pushing a bogus conspiracy theory that he was controlled by Vladimir Putin, despite his having spent that entire term aggressively ramping up cold war hostilities against Russia. Entire political punditry careers were birthed trying to create a scandal out of a narrative that could be plainly seen as false just by looking at the movements of the US war machine and Washington’s actions against Moscow. But here’s Trump openly admitting to bending over backwards to give an Israeli oligarch whatever she wants because she gave his campaign huge sums of money, while pouring weapons into Israel to facilitate its mass atrocities and engaging in acts of war on Israel’s behalf. And it barely makes a blip in mainstream western politics or media. This is because mainstream western politics and media understand that we are living in an unofficial oligarchic empire to which both the US and Israel belong. They never acknowledge it, they never talk about it, but all high-level politicians, pundits and operatives in the western world understand that they serve a globe-spanning power structure run by a loose alliance of plutocrats and empire managers. They understand that states like Israel are a part of said power structure, while states like Russia, China and Iran are not. So they spend their time normalizing the corruption and abuses of imperial member states while facilitating the empire’s efforts to attack and undermine the states which have successfully resisted being absorbed into the imperial power umbrella. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the only thing I like about Donald Trump is his infantile tendency to say the quiet part out loud. He advances the same kinds of abuses as his predecessors who were no less corrupt and controlled, but he exposes the underlying mechanics of those abuses in ways that more refined presidents never would. Reading by Tim Foley:

Caitlin Johnstone

199,675 views • 10 months ago

The tariffs aren’t coming today. Thank Premier Smith for being in DC this wknd actively making the case for avoiding a tariff war by sitting down with the Presidents closest advisors. You can see her at galas and at the embassy. My friend Andrew Coyne thinks this is appeasement. I think it’s committed diplomacy. She’s making a clear case, not selling out. And where are the feds? Who are they meeting with? I’m at the Inauguration with some friends who will serve in the new Administration. I’ve been at some receptions and galas a conversations about Canada and tariffs always come up. Yesterday morning the Trump team delayed tariffs and made it clear again: they are about getting Mexico and Canada to solve for border security. In private people say Mexico is preparing a clinical response to the border/drug issues and Canada is MIA except for Premier Smith talking about energy security. Here’s what else I’m hearing: 1. Virtually no one in D.C. could tell you who or what the federal Canadian is doing to fix the broken border and the security, military, trade and the NATO freeloading issues that are the basis of the original tariff threat. The state dept guy said we are notorious for our security problems now and tolerance was fading. 2. Premier Smith is making friends and influencing people. She is focused on direct conversations with the Presidents closest advisors who will decide energy and foreign trade policy including Bergum, Rubio and Wright. Canadian Fed naysayers meanwhile aren’t here, preferring to talk tough on CBC while she’s taking open interviews on Fox and defending Canada directly with Cabinet members. 3. Canada’s leadership vacuum is obvious. No one here understands how a PM can resign & suspend a democracy for three months so his party can have a leadership race. 4. The American priority is security: economic, border, Arctic and NATO. Anyone in Cdn politics who wants to talk tough needs to explain how we will actually fix our broken borders and weak national security. - CTV/CBC, needs to ask every idiot repeating that ‘everything is on the table’ ask them how they will convince the US we are fixing the broken border & our reckless asylum, visa and immigration fraud that invited our growing extremism and criminal and terror syndicate activity to explode. How will the Feds guarantee the Americans they won’t interdict another 1000 watchlist terrorists (90pc+ of all US terror interdictions) in the next few years? I’d love to hear what Joly would say to the state dept guys I just had brunch with. Because their critique of our national security posture is devastating which is why the Americans are intrigued to know how we will fix our immigration/asylum/terror/crime/security/law enforcement issues. 5. While the feds have no coherent messsages or presence on the core security issue Premier Smith is actively addressing energy security with an all-Canada argument: - that our energy is key to US energy security - that they get it today as a discounted input to thousands of jobs and hundreds of billions in U.S. value-added refined and traded goods - when the energy trade is deducted from all other sectors, the Americans actually enjoy a trade surplus with Canada of over $50 billion. Great argument and if you check the video below she makes it clear. So here’s a question for the feds: She’s actively meeting and explaining energy economics to defend against tariffs on all Canadian goods. So what exactly are you doing? The tariff threat isn’t gone just delayed to see progress on the border. Maybe it’s time to get to DC and start talking to US media and the White House instead of trying to take cheap shots on CBC? It’s a much tougher crowd down here. You’ll need real answers. But it would be the right thing to do for team Canada, our economy and our security. Danielle can show you the ropes. She’s a team player. Just doesn’t stay on the bench… 🇨🇦
2:50

The tariffs aren’t coming today. Thank Premier Smith for being in DC this wknd actively making the case for avoiding a tariff war by sitting down with the Presidents closest advisors. You can see her at galas and at the embassy. My friend Andrew Coyne thinks this is appeasement. I think it’s committed diplomacy. She’s making a clear case, not selling out. And where are the feds? Who are they meeting with? I’m at the Inauguration with some friends who will serve in the new Administration. I’ve been at some receptions and galas a conversations about Canada and tariffs always come up. Yesterday morning the Trump team delayed tariffs and made it clear again: they are about getting Mexico and Canada to solve for border security. In private people say Mexico is preparing a clinical response to the border/drug issues and Canada is MIA except for Premier Smith talking about energy security. Here’s what else I’m hearing: 1. Virtually no one in D.C. could tell you who or what the federal Canadian is doing to fix the broken border and the security, military, trade and the NATO freeloading issues that are the basis of the original tariff threat. The state dept guy said we are notorious for our security problems now and tolerance was fading. 2. Premier Smith is making friends and influencing people. She is focused on direct conversations with the Presidents closest advisors who will decide energy and foreign trade policy including Bergum, Rubio and Wright. Canadian Fed naysayers meanwhile aren’t here, preferring to talk tough on CBC while she’s taking open interviews on Fox and defending Canada directly with Cabinet members. 3. Canada’s leadership vacuum is obvious. No one here understands how a PM can resign & suspend a democracy for three months so his party can have a leadership race. 4. The American priority is security: economic, border, Arctic and NATO. Anyone in Cdn politics who wants to talk tough needs to explain how we will actually fix our broken borders and weak national security. - CTV/CBC, needs to ask every idiot repeating that ‘everything is on the table’ ask them how they will convince the US we are fixing the broken border & our reckless asylum, visa and immigration fraud that invited our growing extremism and criminal and terror syndicate activity to explode. How will the Feds guarantee the Americans they won’t interdict another 1000 watchlist terrorists (90pc+ of all US terror interdictions) in the next few years? I’d love to hear what Joly would say to the state dept guys I just had brunch with. Because their critique of our national security posture is devastating which is why the Americans are intrigued to know how we will fix our immigration/asylum/terror/crime/security/law enforcement issues. 5. While the feds have no coherent messsages or presence on the core security issue Premier Smith is actively addressing energy security with an all-Canada argument: - that our energy is key to US energy security - that they get it today as a discounted input to thousands of jobs and hundreds of billions in U.S. value-added refined and traded goods - when the energy trade is deducted from all other sectors, the Americans actually enjoy a trade surplus with Canada of over $50 billion. Great argument and if you check the video below she makes it clear. So here’s a question for the feds: She’s actively meeting and explaining energy economics to defend against tariffs on all Canadian goods. So what exactly are you doing? The tariff threat isn’t gone just delayed to see progress on the border. Maybe it’s time to get to DC and start talking to US media and the White House instead of trying to take cheap shots on CBC? It’s a much tougher crowd down here. You’ll need real answers. But it would be the right thing to do for team Canada, our economy and our security. Danielle can show you the ropes. She’s a team player. Just doesn’t stay on the bench… 🇨🇦

David Knight Legg

26,174 views • 1 year ago

"Come on, folks. Do we see what's playing out here? Marbury v. Mad might have just brought down the Commissioner of the Boston Police Department." - Towel, November 6, 2025 Rule #1 in Massachusetts politics right now; Do not mess with Attorney Corey Hopkins. She's going to get barred here just to reform the government (then I'll become her paralegal and we'll submit public records requests all day). Good plan. TRANSCRIPT (from Towel's coverage of the letter in question, uncovered by Attorney Hopkins); Hello and good evening. It is just past 6 p.m. on Monday, November 3rd, 2025. My name is Grant Smith-Ellis, and I'm back with you again for another developing news update, this time related to Boston Police Commissioner Cox responding to a developing series of scandals, in particular related to former Boston Police Officer—well, first former Canton Police Officer, then former Boston Police Officer—Kelly Dever. Now, Kelly Dever was an integral witness during the John O'Keefe and Karen Read trial about one specific series of events in the early morning of January 29, 2022—not really related to John's death per se, but related to the then-chief of the Canton Police Department, Ken Berkowitz, who was also potentially the person that went to the FBI about Brian Tully's MSP unit, Massachusetts State Police unit, detailed to the Norfolk DA, who were the same people that investigated Karen Read for John's death. Berkowitz was the same person who apparently went to the FBI in 2022 about Tully's unit through John Fanning covering up Sandra Birchmore's death at the hands of former Stoughton PD officer Matthew Farwell. Okay, Ken Berkowitz and Brian Higgins—then undercover ATF agent who himself had been in a relationship of some kind, we'll call it that, with Karen in the months before John's death. That's a whole story we will not get into. The point is, Higgins and Berkowitz go into the sally port. Now, Kelly Dever had been working since, I think it was 12 a.m. on January 28th. She worked—let me make sure I get this right now—she worked at 12 p.m., noon on January 28th to 8 p.m. Then she worked the 8 p.m. to 4 a.m. shift. Okay, she was doing 16 hours over those two days. At like 1:30 a.m., she saw Berkowitz and Higgins—or around there, maybe a little later—go into the area, an area of the Canton PD. Then—and we're going to find out—she had a meeting with Boston Police Commissioner Cox. Now, why did Commissioner Cox get himself in trouble? Well, not because of the interview we're going to watch, but instead because of an interview about a year ago where he said he knew nothing about the Kelly Dever situation or the Karen Read case. All right, now we're going to quickly come to find out that what we're about to hear from the commissioner is not the best answer in light of this little document found by the incredible Marbury v. Madison on X, Corey A. Hopkins, a business litigator based in North Carolina. Towel really likes Marbury v. Madison because, first of all, Marbury v. Madison is an awesome case, and it entrenched the supremacy of the judiciary as to saying what the law is by virtue of the Constitution. Solved a very complex problem related to the Judiciary Act of 1789 and, in particular, the emergence of political parties in 1796 and, in particular, 1800, and a slew of last-minute appointments by President Adams and a refusal by President Jefferson to commission—or one of the refusal by Jefferson's Secretary of State Madison to commission a justice of the peace. But it really was about the supremacy of the judiciary branch. Marbury v. Madison uses a lot of FOIAs, and what you're going to see right here is a FOIA request that resulted in this wonderful little document. And what does this show? All right, this document shows, folks, a letter from Stephen J. Kelleher, who's with the White Collar Public Corruption and Civil Rights Division of the FBI in Boston. It is a letter that Marbury v. Madison obtained via a FOIA, and it shows the DOJ reaching out to Commissioner Cox and saying, "Sir, hope all is well. Just a reminder—this was on February 22nd, 2024. The documents were released to the DA's office late last night." This has to do with federal documents about the investigation of John's death by the MSP unit run by Brian Tully working for the Norfolk DA. "The officer we spoke about is Kelly Dever. If you have any questions at all, feel free to call me. Vr. Steve." Okay, folks, this proves that Commissioner Cox was told about Kelly Dever and documents related to her testimony and what she saw Higgins and Berkowitz doing—which I don't think was related to John's death, but it's just embarrassing for Higgins. He was an undercover ATF agent, and embarrassing for Berkowitz. And although Berkowitz is now dead, he was either dying or not dead in 2024. And clearly, this was embarrassing, okay, to the Canton Police Chief, to the Boston Police, to Higgins, to all these people. All right. And so we see here, Cox knows about it. Cox then goes on a few months later—I think it was either after, I think it was right after Karen's second trial, but it was some months after this initial email was sent to Cox. And Cox, in his infinite wisdom, tells Boston 25 or Channel 5 or whatever it was at a news conference that he's basically never heard of Kelly Dever or the Karen Read and John O'Keefe case. Okay, that was a stupid thing to say because then this FOIA comes out in recent weeks. That leads to Alan Jackson to send a Brady letter to Mayor Michelle Wu, the Democratic mayor of Boston running unopposed in the coming election, saying that Cox should be on the Brady list. I think it was—yes, because Cox was not forthcoming about what he was told by the feds about Dever. Okay, now this is Cox's response. I just want to show you how bad of a response this is. Okay, this is a clip via Boston 25, just Cox's comment on these new developments, which—although Alan Jackson's Brady letter is what Cox was asked for comment on—even Alan Jackson himself has rightfully so given credit to Marbury v. Madison for their excellent find on this FOIA document that was unearthed. And this could cost Cox his position. All right, the Democrats in Boston already have the eye of President Trump. The DOJ is all over this unit, in my opinion, and the cover-up of Birchmore's death. Look at the DOJ's pattern of indictments, okay? Recently, not just the Jessica LeClair leaks, but also Sheriff Tompkins and other major Democrats. Look at what's going on here, folks. Think about the larger picture—the most recent indictment, the superseding indictment of Matt Farwell for the murder of Sandra Birchmore's unborn child. It's all coming together. And Commissioner Cox's answer is bad. And that's why I want to analyze it. It's not just like inappropriate. It is a bad, bad, bad answer. When I heard it, I had to immediately make a video to analyze it because that's how bad this answer is. It's short, but I'm going to tell you how bad it is after we listen to it. "But what I need, you know, it's not to be asked this question ever again because it's not—it has to pertain to anything to do with the police department. My condolences to the O'Keefe family for, you know, what they've gone through. And because we did lose a department member. But outside of that, this has nothing to do with us. And I'm not going to speak with this again." Okay, let me just make something clear. I'm not saying he was wrong. It's not wrong to invoke John's name. But doing it that way—that's grotesque. Okay, he didn't answer the question. He basically refused to do so. And again, if you didn't hear the statement—although I'm sure you did—he said, "What I need is to not be asked this question ever again pertaining to anything to do with the police department." What? "My condolences to the O'Keefe family for what they've gone through because we did lose a department member." John O'Keefe was an honorable member of the Boston PD and the SA offenders unit. "But outside of that, this has nothing to do with us, the Boston PD, and I'm not going to speak on this again." No, no, no, no—that you just cost yourself your job right there. I'm sorry. That was a terrible, terrible answer. I'm sorry for the volume. I'm just running it back. Terrible answer. The worst possible answer. You may well have just cost yourself your job because you ducked the question. Everyone knows that the question is about this document. Anyone following this knows. The implications are what Dever knew about Berkowitz and Higgins, and maybe that's not the most serious thing. But as President Nixon said, it is not the crime, it's the cover-up. Dever, whatever she did—not wanting to talk about certain things about Higgins and Berkowitz, unrelated to John's death, just because it's kind of embarrassing—that is not a problem really. It's a minor thing. You know what's a big deal? Dever definitely got Brady-listed or whatever because her testimony was a little weird. I think Alan Jackson also pressured her a little bit. But whatever, that's not the point here. Cox's response—that was bad. That was bad PR. That's like the kind of thing when Prince Andrew was forced to go out and do an interview with BBC One about Epstein, and it just cost him all his titles because he got no PR help; he got sandbagged. That kind of thing—somebody didn't prep him, or the people he was talking to didn't even think this would come up. That's a horrible answer. Twenty seconds can cost you your career if you have done something bad and you answer a tough question like that. It's defensive; it shows you have something to hide; it undermines people's faith in your ability to answer those kind of questions. That's the biggest problem for Commissioner Cox here. Instead of inspiring confidence and making it look like it was nothing or it was just a routine, he couldn't even address the fact that he was made aware in February, in particular, about Kelly Dever and he had knowledge—he had a meeting with her. Let's be clear: He put her on his schedule the very next day. Not only did he have recipient knowledge of what was going on with the federal investigation and the John O'Keefe and Karen Read case—Dever got called into his office the next day, which of course Cox initially tried to play off as just some routine meeting, as if he meets with all 2,600 or whatever of the Boston police force. No. Come on, folks. Come on, folks. Do we see what's playing out here? Marbury v. Madison might have just brought down the Commissioner of the Boston Police Department. My name is Grant Smith-Ellis. Enjoy the rest of your Monday. We'll see what other news comes in today. Sean Good on suspension. Michael Proctor's cell phone gate engulfing the world in a conflagration. Little towel basically running down the street from the masses, trying to insulate himself from the fallout of this God-forsaken situation. Institutional reform is coming—to the Norfolk DA, hopefully throughout the state police—so that the good people in law enforcement can keep helping the vulnerable and that the exploited, no matter how much pressure they come under, continue to speak their truth. And let me just say this: Whenever we stand against the flow of opinion on hotly contested issues, a man, a woman, and a Towel—do what they must in spite of the personal consequences, in spite of the dangers and obstacles and pressures. For that is the basis of all human morality. We will be there for each other in times of struggle. We will be side by side in times of joy. And when everything is on the line and when our principles matter the most, there will be no price too high to pay to center the voices of the unheard, to bring justice to the vulnerable, and to reform this God-forsaken justice system in Massachusetts so that we can all hand down a structural system to our future generations that is worthy of our Constitution, that is worthy of our collective intelligence, and that is worthy of the due reverence we all should be providing to the pursuit of justice. My name is Grant Smith-Ellis. Until next time, you're a towel, I am as well. Be well. God bless.
12:38

"Come on, folks. Do we see what's playing out here? Marbury v. Mad might have just brought down the Commissioner of the Boston Police Department." - Towel, November 6, 2025 Rule #1 in Massachusetts politics right now; Do not mess with Attorney Corey Hopkins. She's going to get barred here just to reform the government (then I'll become her paralegal and we'll submit public records requests all day). Good plan. TRANSCRIPT (from Towel's coverage of the letter in question, uncovered by Attorney Hopkins); Hello and good evening. It is just past 6 p.m. on Monday, November 3rd, 2025. My name is Grant Smith-Ellis, and I'm back with you again for another developing news update, this time related to Boston Police Commissioner Cox responding to a developing series of scandals, in particular related to former Boston Police Officer—well, first former Canton Police Officer, then former Boston Police Officer—Kelly Dever. Now, Kelly Dever was an integral witness during the John O'Keefe and Karen Read trial about one specific series of events in the early morning of January 29, 2022—not really related to John's death per se, but related to the then-chief of the Canton Police Department, Ken Berkowitz, who was also potentially the person that went to the FBI about Brian Tully's MSP unit, Massachusetts State Police unit, detailed to the Norfolk DA, who were the same people that investigated Karen Read for John's death. Berkowitz was the same person who apparently went to the FBI in 2022 about Tully's unit through John Fanning covering up Sandra Birchmore's death at the hands of former Stoughton PD officer Matthew Farwell. Okay, Ken Berkowitz and Brian Higgins—then undercover ATF agent who himself had been in a relationship of some kind, we'll call it that, with Karen in the months before John's death. That's a whole story we will not get into. The point is, Higgins and Berkowitz go into the sally port. Now, Kelly Dever had been working since, I think it was 12 a.m. on January 28th. She worked—let me make sure I get this right now—she worked at 12 p.m., noon on January 28th to 8 p.m. Then she worked the 8 p.m. to 4 a.m. shift. Okay, she was doing 16 hours over those two days. At like 1:30 a.m., she saw Berkowitz and Higgins—or around there, maybe a little later—go into the area, an area of the Canton PD. Then—and we're going to find out—she had a meeting with Boston Police Commissioner Cox. Now, why did Commissioner Cox get himself in trouble? Well, not because of the interview we're going to watch, but instead because of an interview about a year ago where he said he knew nothing about the Kelly Dever situation or the Karen Read case. All right, now we're going to quickly come to find out that what we're about to hear from the commissioner is not the best answer in light of this little document found by the incredible Marbury v. Madison on X, Corey A. Hopkins, a business litigator based in North Carolina. Towel really likes Marbury v. Madison because, first of all, Marbury v. Madison is an awesome case, and it entrenched the supremacy of the judiciary as to saying what the law is by virtue of the Constitution. Solved a very complex problem related to the Judiciary Act of 1789 and, in particular, the emergence of political parties in 1796 and, in particular, 1800, and a slew of last-minute appointments by President Adams and a refusal by President Jefferson to commission—or one of the refusal by Jefferson's Secretary of State Madison to commission a justice of the peace. But it really was about the supremacy of the judiciary branch. Marbury v. Madison uses a lot of FOIAs, and what you're going to see right here is a FOIA request that resulted in this wonderful little document. And what does this show? All right, this document shows, folks, a letter from Stephen J. Kelleher, who's with the White Collar Public Corruption and Civil Rights Division of the FBI in Boston. It is a letter that Marbury v. Madison obtained via a FOIA, and it shows the DOJ reaching out to Commissioner Cox and saying, "Sir, hope all is well. Just a reminder—this was on February 22nd, 2024. The documents were released to the DA's office late last night." This has to do with federal documents about the investigation of John's death by the MSP unit run by Brian Tully working for the Norfolk DA. "The officer we spoke about is Kelly Dever. If you have any questions at all, feel free to call me. Vr. Steve." Okay, folks, this proves that Commissioner Cox was told about Kelly Dever and documents related to her testimony and what she saw Higgins and Berkowitz doing—which I don't think was related to John's death, but it's just embarrassing for Higgins. He was an undercover ATF agent, and embarrassing for Berkowitz. And although Berkowitz is now dead, he was either dying or not dead in 2024. And clearly, this was embarrassing, okay, to the Canton Police Chief, to the Boston Police, to Higgins, to all these people. All right. And so we see here, Cox knows about it. Cox then goes on a few months later—I think it was either after, I think it was right after Karen's second trial, but it was some months after this initial email was sent to Cox. And Cox, in his infinite wisdom, tells Boston 25 or Channel 5 or whatever it was at a news conference that he's basically never heard of Kelly Dever or the Karen Read and John O'Keefe case. Okay, that was a stupid thing to say because then this FOIA comes out in recent weeks. That leads to Alan Jackson to send a Brady letter to Mayor Michelle Wu, the Democratic mayor of Boston running unopposed in the coming election, saying that Cox should be on the Brady list. I think it was—yes, because Cox was not forthcoming about what he was told by the feds about Dever. Okay, now this is Cox's response. I just want to show you how bad of a response this is. Okay, this is a clip via Boston 25, just Cox's comment on these new developments, which—although Alan Jackson's Brady letter is what Cox was asked for comment on—even Alan Jackson himself has rightfully so given credit to Marbury v. Madison for their excellent find on this FOIA document that was unearthed. And this could cost Cox his position. All right, the Democrats in Boston already have the eye of President Trump. The DOJ is all over this unit, in my opinion, and the cover-up of Birchmore's death. Look at the DOJ's pattern of indictments, okay? Recently, not just the Jessica LeClair leaks, but also Sheriff Tompkins and other major Democrats. Look at what's going on here, folks. Think about the larger picture—the most recent indictment, the superseding indictment of Matt Farwell for the murder of Sandra Birchmore's unborn child. It's all coming together. And Commissioner Cox's answer is bad. And that's why I want to analyze it. It's not just like inappropriate. It is a bad, bad, bad answer. When I heard it, I had to immediately make a video to analyze it because that's how bad this answer is. It's short, but I'm going to tell you how bad it is after we listen to it. "But what I need, you know, it's not to be asked this question ever again because it's not—it has to pertain to anything to do with the police department. My condolences to the O'Keefe family for, you know, what they've gone through. And because we did lose a department member. But outside of that, this has nothing to do with us. And I'm not going to speak with this again." Okay, let me just make something clear. I'm not saying he was wrong. It's not wrong to invoke John's name. But doing it that way—that's grotesque. Okay, he didn't answer the question. He basically refused to do so. And again, if you didn't hear the statement—although I'm sure you did—he said, "What I need is to not be asked this question ever again pertaining to anything to do with the police department." What? "My condolences to the O'Keefe family for what they've gone through because we did lose a department member." John O'Keefe was an honorable member of the Boston PD and the SA offenders unit. "But outside of that, this has nothing to do with us, the Boston PD, and I'm not going to speak on this again." No, no, no, no—that you just cost yourself your job right there. I'm sorry. That was a terrible, terrible answer. I'm sorry for the volume. I'm just running it back. Terrible answer. The worst possible answer. You may well have just cost yourself your job because you ducked the question. Everyone knows that the question is about this document. Anyone following this knows. The implications are what Dever knew about Berkowitz and Higgins, and maybe that's not the most serious thing. But as President Nixon said, it is not the crime, it's the cover-up. Dever, whatever she did—not wanting to talk about certain things about Higgins and Berkowitz, unrelated to John's death, just because it's kind of embarrassing—that is not a problem really. It's a minor thing. You know what's a big deal? Dever definitely got Brady-listed or whatever because her testimony was a little weird. I think Alan Jackson also pressured her a little bit. But whatever, that's not the point here. Cox's response—that was bad. That was bad PR. That's like the kind of thing when Prince Andrew was forced to go out and do an interview with BBC One about Epstein, and it just cost him all his titles because he got no PR help; he got sandbagged. That kind of thing—somebody didn't prep him, or the people he was talking to didn't even think this would come up. That's a horrible answer. Twenty seconds can cost you your career if you have done something bad and you answer a tough question like that. It's defensive; it shows you have something to hide; it undermines people's faith in your ability to answer those kind of questions. That's the biggest problem for Commissioner Cox here. Instead of inspiring confidence and making it look like it was nothing or it was just a routine, he couldn't even address the fact that he was made aware in February, in particular, about Kelly Dever and he had knowledge—he had a meeting with her. Let's be clear: He put her on his schedule the very next day. Not only did he have recipient knowledge of what was going on with the federal investigation and the John O'Keefe and Karen Read case—Dever got called into his office the next day, which of course Cox initially tried to play off as just some routine meeting, as if he meets with all 2,600 or whatever of the Boston police force. No. Come on, folks. Come on, folks. Do we see what's playing out here? Marbury v. Madison might have just brought down the Commissioner of the Boston Police Department. My name is Grant Smith-Ellis. Enjoy the rest of your Monday. We'll see what other news comes in today. Sean Good on suspension. Michael Proctor's cell phone gate engulfing the world in a conflagration. Little towel basically running down the street from the masses, trying to insulate himself from the fallout of this God-forsaken situation. Institutional reform is coming—to the Norfolk DA, hopefully throughout the state police—so that the good people in law enforcement can keep helping the vulnerable and that the exploited, no matter how much pressure they come under, continue to speak their truth. And let me just say this: Whenever we stand against the flow of opinion on hotly contested issues, a man, a woman, and a Towel—do what they must in spite of the personal consequences, in spite of the dangers and obstacles and pressures. For that is the basis of all human morality. We will be there for each other in times of struggle. We will be side by side in times of joy. And when everything is on the line and when our principles matter the most, there will be no price too high to pay to center the voices of the unheard, to bring justice to the vulnerable, and to reform this God-forsaken justice system in Massachusetts so that we can all hand down a structural system to our future generations that is worthy of our Constitution, that is worthy of our collective intelligence, and that is worthy of the due reverence we all should be providing to the pursuit of justice. My name is Grant Smith-Ellis. Until next time, you're a towel, I am as well. Be well. God bless.

Grant Smith Ellis

13,006 views • 7 months ago

Woman files lawsuit after arrest for Facebook post concerning Trinidad water supply issues ... TRINIDAD, Texas - A Facebook post about problems with the City of Trinidad's water quality led to the arrest of a woman who now says she's filed a lawsuit against the city after calling the arrest "political retaliation." Police in the City of Trinidad, located in Henderson County around an hour south-east of Dallas, charged Jennifer Combs on May 8 with felony false alarm or report. Her arrest stems from a Facebook post she made on her ‘Southern Belle Watch' account, where she claimed that the city's water issues had led to hospitalizations due to bacteria. The post, in part, reads: "We have received reports that some citizens have been hospitalized due to bacteria in the water. This is a serious public health concern that deserves immediate attention. If your water looks discolored, contains sediment, has a strong odor, or you have experienced related health issues, please send us a message. We are gathering information and reporting findings to the state." The Trinidad Police Department, in an April 6 Facebook post of their own, said Combs wrote "false information that creates fear, panic, or unnecessary emergency response within a community." A May 10 post from Trinidad Police Chief Charles Gregory doubled down on the decision to arrest Combs. Gregory claimed the case was "cut and dry," and Combs' claims about hospitalizations "are simply false and have only caused unnecessary fear and confusion in our community." "It was probably one of the most humiliating things I’ve ever gone through in my entire life. It was very, very bad." Combs, who tells FOX 4's David Sentendrey she's never received a speeding ticket, calls the ordeal of spending the night in jail "horrifying." "I feel like this is an extreme stretch," Combs said of her arrest. "There’s people that are saying that their appliances are getting ruined, they can’t cook with the water, they can’t bathe with it, they can’t do laundry," she continued. "A lot of them feel hushed, and like they don’t have a voice and no one listens to them and no one takes them seriously." Combs says multiple citizens had posted to Trinidad PD's Facebook page stating they were hospitalized or affected by consuming the city's water. Images provided to FOX 4 show brown water coming from faucets in sinks and bathtubs within the community. Combs described the city's water supply as looking like "the Trinity River is flowing from their water taps." A water boil had previously been issued for Trinidad on Apr. 21, several weeks after both Combs' post and the Trinidad Police Department's post. The boil was lifted on Apr. 23. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) confirmed to FOX 4 it received a complaint regarding the water quality in Trinidad, and that an investigation is ongoing. Trinidad officials did not deny that the city is struggling with its water supply. Dennis Haws, the Mayor of Trinidad, told Sentendrey on Tuesday that the city's water pipes date back to the 1950s. "We have to get to a position where we can fix that infrastructure, and it’s very expensive as I’m sure you can imagine," Haws said. "The city’s water situation is a struggle, without question." Haws would not confirm if anyone had gotten sick from drinking the city's water, but says there have been discussions on creating a committee to focus on the water issues. At a Trinidad City Council meeting on Tuesday, the city's water issues were a hot button topic. "The reason why everyone is here and the reason why FOX 4 is here, is because your city is acting like tyrants," one resident said. Police Chief Gregory was not present at Tuesday's meeting. "I really haven’t seen anything like this before." Dale Carpenter, a constitutional law professor at SMU, questions whether a crime was committed by Combs, and believes her First Amendment rights may have been violated. "She’s making a statement regarding a matter of great public interest and so people sometimes make false statements on matters of great public interest, and they’re allowed to do so." Combs has since filed a federal lawsuit against the City of Trinidad, which includes Chief Gregory, another member of the Trinidad Police Department and a Trinidad City Council member. The lawsuit states that Combs was arrested in "an act of deliberate political retaliation." CJ Grisham, the attorney representing Combs in the case, provided the following statement to FOX 4: "The City of Trinidad has become a cautionary tale of what happens when unchecked ego masquerades as governance. At the center of this ongoing constitutional crisis is the case of Jennifer Combs, whose unlawful treatment by city officials exposed a pattern of corruption, retaliation, and abuse of power that has infected the entire municipal apparatus. Rather than course-correct, city leadership has chosen to double down on its misconduct by engaging in an escalating campaign of retaliatory firings, punishing employees whose only offense was bearing witness to the truth or refusing to participate in the cover-up. The bitter irony is that the only individuals in this saga who have earned termination are Police Chief Gregory and City Councilwoman Marie Bannister, whose reckless abuse of authority and personal vendettas are not merely destroying careers: they are dismantling the institutional trust, public safety infrastructure, and financial stability of an entire community. Trinidad deserves leaders who serve its people, not officials who sacrifice them on the altar of wounded pride."
5:17

Woman files lawsuit after arrest for Facebook post concerning Trinidad water supply issues ... TRINIDAD, Texas - A Facebook post about problems with the City of Trinidad's water quality led to the arrest of a woman who now says she's filed a lawsuit against the city after calling the arrest "political retaliation." Police in the City of Trinidad, located in Henderson County around an hour south-east of Dallas, charged Jennifer Combs on May 8 with felony false alarm or report. Her arrest stems from a Facebook post she made on her ‘Southern Belle Watch' account, where she claimed that the city's water issues had led to hospitalizations due to bacteria. The post, in part, reads: "We have received reports that some citizens have been hospitalized due to bacteria in the water. This is a serious public health concern that deserves immediate attention. If your water looks discolored, contains sediment, has a strong odor, or you have experienced related health issues, please send us a message. We are gathering information and reporting findings to the state." The Trinidad Police Department, in an April 6 Facebook post of their own, said Combs wrote "false information that creates fear, panic, or unnecessary emergency response within a community." A May 10 post from Trinidad Police Chief Charles Gregory doubled down on the decision to arrest Combs. Gregory claimed the case was "cut and dry," and Combs' claims about hospitalizations "are simply false and have only caused unnecessary fear and confusion in our community." "It was probably one of the most humiliating things I’ve ever gone through in my entire life. It was very, very bad." Combs, who tells FOX 4's David Sentendrey she's never received a speeding ticket, calls the ordeal of spending the night in jail "horrifying." "I feel like this is an extreme stretch," Combs said of her arrest. "There’s people that are saying that their appliances are getting ruined, they can’t cook with the water, they can’t bathe with it, they can’t do laundry," she continued. "A lot of them feel hushed, and like they don’t have a voice and no one listens to them and no one takes them seriously." Combs says multiple citizens had posted to Trinidad PD's Facebook page stating they were hospitalized or affected by consuming the city's water. Images provided to FOX 4 show brown water coming from faucets in sinks and bathtubs within the community. Combs described the city's water supply as looking like "the Trinity River is flowing from their water taps." A water boil had previously been issued for Trinidad on Apr. 21, several weeks after both Combs' post and the Trinidad Police Department's post. The boil was lifted on Apr. 23. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) confirmed to FOX 4 it received a complaint regarding the water quality in Trinidad, and that an investigation is ongoing. Trinidad officials did not deny that the city is struggling with its water supply. Dennis Haws, the Mayor of Trinidad, told Sentendrey on Tuesday that the city's water pipes date back to the 1950s. "We have to get to a position where we can fix that infrastructure, and it’s very expensive as I’m sure you can imagine," Haws said. "The city’s water situation is a struggle, without question." Haws would not confirm if anyone had gotten sick from drinking the city's water, but says there have been discussions on creating a committee to focus on the water issues. At a Trinidad City Council meeting on Tuesday, the city's water issues were a hot button topic. "The reason why everyone is here and the reason why FOX 4 is here, is because your city is acting like tyrants," one resident said. Police Chief Gregory was not present at Tuesday's meeting. "I really haven’t seen anything like this before." Dale Carpenter, a constitutional law professor at SMU, questions whether a crime was committed by Combs, and believes her First Amendment rights may have been violated. "She’s making a statement regarding a matter of great public interest and so people sometimes make false statements on matters of great public interest, and they’re allowed to do so." Combs has since filed a federal lawsuit against the City of Trinidad, which includes Chief Gregory, another member of the Trinidad Police Department and a Trinidad City Council member. The lawsuit states that Combs was arrested in "an act of deliberate political retaliation." CJ Grisham, the attorney representing Combs in the case, provided the following statement to FOX 4: "The City of Trinidad has become a cautionary tale of what happens when unchecked ego masquerades as governance. At the center of this ongoing constitutional crisis is the case of Jennifer Combs, whose unlawful treatment by city officials exposed a pattern of corruption, retaliation, and abuse of power that has infected the entire municipal apparatus. Rather than course-correct, city leadership has chosen to double down on its misconduct by engaging in an escalating campaign of retaliatory firings, punishing employees whose only offense was bearing witness to the truth or refusing to participate in the cover-up. The bitter irony is that the only individuals in this saga who have earned termination are Police Chief Gregory and City Councilwoman Marie Bannister, whose reckless abuse of authority and personal vendettas are not merely destroying careers: they are dismantling the institutional trust, public safety infrastructure, and financial stability of an entire community. Trinidad deserves leaders who serve its people, not officials who sacrifice them on the altar of wounded pride."

David Sentendrey

13,448 views • 3 months ago

Some of Mae West's Best One-liners. Mae West was a master of witty, saucy, and iconic one-liners that celebrated independence, glamour, and double entendres. Her sharpest quips covered everything from romance and wealth to living life on her own terms. • “You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.” • “There are no good girls gone wrong ― just bad girls found out.” • “I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it.” • “Every man I meet wants to protect me. I can't figure out what from.” • “I wrote the story myself. It's about a girl who lost her reputation and never missed it.” • “Between two evils, I always pick the one I never tried before.” • “Good sex is like good bridge. If you don't have a good partner, you'd better have a good hand.” • “When I'm good, I'm very good, but when I'm bad, I'm better.” • “I'll try anything once, twice if I like it, three times to make sure.” • “I'm single because I was born that way.” • “Good girls go to heaven, bad girls go everywhere.” • “I'm no model lady. A model's just an imitation of the real thing.” • “Ladies who play with fire must remember that smoke gets in their eyes.” • “A dame that knows the ropes isn't likely to get tied up.” • “Marriage is a fine institution, but I'm not ready for an institution.” • “It's not the men in your life that matters, it's the life in your men.” • “All discarded lovers should be given a second chance, but with somebody else.” • “Don't cry for a man who's left you ― the next one may fall for your smile.” • “Sex is an emotion in motion.” • “I never said it would be easy, I only said it would be worth it.” • “Cultivate your curves - they may be dangerous but they won't be avoided.” • “Those who are easily shocked should be shocked more often.” • “Too much of a good thing can be wonderful!” • “I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number you get in a diamond.” • “It is better to be looked over than overlooked.” • “I used to be Snow White, but I drifted.” • “Anything worth doing is worth doing slowly.” • “Don't keep a man guessing too long ― he's sure to find the answer somewhere else” • “You are never too old to become younger!” • “Love thy neighbor ― and if he happens to be tall, debonair and devastating, it will be that much easier.” “Women like a man with a past, but they prefer a man with a present.” • “He who hesitates is a damned fool.” • “Look your best ― who said love is blind? ” • “His mother should have thrown him away and kept the stork.” • “A woman in love can't be reasonable ― or she probably wouldn't be in love.” • “Is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?” • “To err is human ― but it feels divine.” • “I have found men who didn't know how to kiss. I've always found time to teach them.” • “If a little is great, and a lot is better, then way too much is just about right!” • “Men are my hobby, if I ever got married I'd have to give it up.” • “Getting married is like trading in the adoration of many for the sarcasm of one.” • “When women go wrong, men go right after them.” • “The curve is more powerful than the sword.” • “Good women are no fun... The only good woman I can recall in history was Betsy Ross. And all she ever made was a flag.” • “I've no time for broads who want to rule the world alone. Without men, who'd do up the zipper on the back of your dress? ” • “I never loved another person the way I loved myself.” • “Love conquers all things except poverty and toothache.” • “The score never interested me, only the game.” • “Keep a diary and one day it'll keep you.” • “She's the kind of girl who climbed the ladder of success wrong by wrong.” • JUDGE: “Are you trying to show contempt for this court?” MAE WEST: “I was doin' my best to hide it.” • “Women with pasts interest men because they hope history will repeat itself.” • “I've been things and seen places.” • “I only read biographies, metaphysics and psychology. I can dream up my own fiction.” • “I'm a woman of very few words, but lots of action.” • “An ounce of performance is worth pounds of promises.” • “One more drink and I'll be under the host.” • “A man’s kiss is his signature.” • “Everyone has the right to run his own life ― even if you're heading for a crash. What I'm against is blind flying.” • “Love isn't an emotion or an instinct - it's an art.” • “No one can have everything, so you have to try for what you want most.” • “Love is like a booger, you pick and pick at it. Then when you get it you wonder how to get rid of it.” • “I've been in more laps than a napkin.” • “I see you're a man with ideals. I better be going before you've still got them.” • “It's all right for a perfect stranger to kiss your hand as long as he's perfect.” • “Don't marry a man to reform him ― that's what reform schools are for.” • “I saw what a mess a lot of people could make of their lives when they're smitten. Some of them go temporarily insane. They find a person who they think holds the key to their happiness ― the only key to their happiness... My work has always been my greatest happiness” • “It isn't what I do, but how I do it. It isn't what I say, but how I say it, and how I look when I do it and say it.” • “The best way to hold a man is in your arms.” • “A hard man is good to find.” • “I didn't discover curves; I only uncovered them.” • “You may admire a girl's curves on the first introduction, but the second meeting shows up new angles.” • “Goodness, what beautiful diamonds!' ― 'Goodness had nothing to do with it'.” • “Ten men waiting for me at the door? Send one of them home, I'm tired.” • “If I had known I was going to live this long, I would have taken better care of myself.” • “A man in the house is worth two on the street.” • “Men are all alike ― except the one you've met who's different.” • “Brains are an asset, if you hide them.” • “I only like two kinds of men, domestic and imported.” • “I've been rich and I've been poor, and rich is better.” • “You can do what you want, but saving love doesn't bring any interest.” • Woman: “You certainly know the way to a man's heart.” Mae West: “Funny, too, 'cause I don't know how to cook.” • “When in doubt, take a bath...” • “Sex with love is the greatest thing in life. But sex without love — that's not so bad either.” • “What's the good of resisting temptation? There'll always be more.” • “If I can't have a man with a million dollars, I'll have a million men with one dollar.” • “Gentlemen prefer blondes, but who says blondes prefer gentlemen?” • “Whenever I have to choose between two evils, I always like to try the one I haven't tried before” • “An ounce of performance is worth a pound of promises.” • “Don’t ever make the same mistake twice, unless it pays.” MAE WEST
2:11

Some of Mae West's Best One-liners. Mae West was a master of witty, saucy, and iconic one-liners that celebrated independence, glamour, and double entendres. Her sharpest quips covered everything from romance and wealth to living life on her own terms. • “You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.” • “There are no good girls gone wrong ― just bad girls found out.” • “I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it.” • “Every man I meet wants to protect me. I can't figure out what from.” • “I wrote the story myself. It's about a girl who lost her reputation and never missed it.” • “Between two evils, I always pick the one I never tried before.” • “Good sex is like good bridge. If you don't have a good partner, you'd better have a good hand.” • “When I'm good, I'm very good, but when I'm bad, I'm better.” • “I'll try anything once, twice if I like it, three times to make sure.” • “I'm single because I was born that way.” • “Good girls go to heaven, bad girls go everywhere.” • “I'm no model lady. A model's just an imitation of the real thing.” • “Ladies who play with fire must remember that smoke gets in their eyes.” • “A dame that knows the ropes isn't likely to get tied up.” • “Marriage is a fine institution, but I'm not ready for an institution.” • “It's not the men in your life that matters, it's the life in your men.” • “All discarded lovers should be given a second chance, but with somebody else.” • “Don't cry for a man who's left you ― the next one may fall for your smile.” • “Sex is an emotion in motion.” • “I never said it would be easy, I only said it would be worth it.” • “Cultivate your curves - they may be dangerous but they won't be avoided.” • “Those who are easily shocked should be shocked more often.” • “Too much of a good thing can be wonderful!” • “I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number you get in a diamond.” • “It is better to be looked over than overlooked.” • “I used to be Snow White, but I drifted.” • “Anything worth doing is worth doing slowly.” • “Don't keep a man guessing too long ― he's sure to find the answer somewhere else” • “You are never too old to become younger!” • “Love thy neighbor ― and if he happens to be tall, debonair and devastating, it will be that much easier.” “Women like a man with a past, but they prefer a man with a present.” • “He who hesitates is a damned fool.” • “Look your best ― who said love is blind? ” • “His mother should have thrown him away and kept the stork.” • “A woman in love can't be reasonable ― or she probably wouldn't be in love.” • “Is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?” • “To err is human ― but it feels divine.” • “I have found men who didn't know how to kiss. I've always found time to teach them.” • “If a little is great, and a lot is better, then way too much is just about right!” • “Men are my hobby, if I ever got married I'd have to give it up.” • “Getting married is like trading in the adoration of many for the sarcasm of one.” • “When women go wrong, men go right after them.” • “The curve is more powerful than the sword.” • “Good women are no fun... The only good woman I can recall in history was Betsy Ross. And all she ever made was a flag.” • “I've no time for broads who want to rule the world alone. Without men, who'd do up the zipper on the back of your dress? ” • “I never loved another person the way I loved myself.” • “Love conquers all things except poverty and toothache.” • “The score never interested me, only the game.” • “Keep a diary and one day it'll keep you.” • “She's the kind of girl who climbed the ladder of success wrong by wrong.” • JUDGE: “Are you trying to show contempt for this court?” MAE WEST: “I was doin' my best to hide it.” • “Women with pasts interest men because they hope history will repeat itself.” • “I've been things and seen places.” • “I only read biographies, metaphysics and psychology. I can dream up my own fiction.” • “I'm a woman of very few words, but lots of action.” • “An ounce of performance is worth pounds of promises.” • “One more drink and I'll be under the host.” • “A man’s kiss is his signature.” • “Everyone has the right to run his own life ― even if you're heading for a crash. What I'm against is blind flying.” • “Love isn't an emotion or an instinct - it's an art.” • “No one can have everything, so you have to try for what you want most.” • “Love is like a booger, you pick and pick at it. Then when you get it you wonder how to get rid of it.” • “I've been in more laps than a napkin.” • “I see you're a man with ideals. I better be going before you've still got them.” • “It's all right for a perfect stranger to kiss your hand as long as he's perfect.” • “Don't marry a man to reform him ― that's what reform schools are for.” • “I saw what a mess a lot of people could make of their lives when they're smitten. Some of them go temporarily insane. They find a person who they think holds the key to their happiness ― the only key to their happiness... My work has always been my greatest happiness” • “It isn't what I do, but how I do it. It isn't what I say, but how I say it, and how I look when I do it and say it.” • “The best way to hold a man is in your arms.” • “A hard man is good to find.” • “I didn't discover curves; I only uncovered them.” • “You may admire a girl's curves on the first introduction, but the second meeting shows up new angles.” • “Goodness, what beautiful diamonds!' ― 'Goodness had nothing to do with it'.” • “Ten men waiting for me at the door? Send one of them home, I'm tired.” • “If I had known I was going to live this long, I would have taken better care of myself.” • “A man in the house is worth two on the street.” • “Men are all alike ― except the one you've met who's different.” • “Brains are an asset, if you hide them.” • “I only like two kinds of men, domestic and imported.” • “I've been rich and I've been poor, and rich is better.” • “You can do what you want, but saving love doesn't bring any interest.” • Woman: “You certainly know the way to a man's heart.” Mae West: “Funny, too, 'cause I don't know how to cook.” • “When in doubt, take a bath...” • “Sex with love is the greatest thing in life. But sex without love — that's not so bad either.” • “What's the good of resisting temptation? There'll always be more.” • “If I can't have a man with a million dollars, I'll have a million men with one dollar.” • “Gentlemen prefer blondes, but who says blondes prefer gentlemen?” • “Whenever I have to choose between two evils, I always like to try the one I haven't tried before” • “An ounce of performance is worth a pound of promises.” • “Don’t ever make the same mistake twice, unless it pays.” MAE WEST

Hollywood Golden Age of Cinema

29,883 views • 21 days ago

Analyzing Episode 42. Season 2 aka Of Thresholds, Truth, and Taking Sides It took a while for me to come out of the euphoria we all experienced thanks to ep 42, but I managed somehow. I had some questions while watching the episode live, such as how Alya and Cihan could just do the deed when, a few episodes ago, they were all about acting correctly. Or whatever happened to Cihan’s pesky guilt? Or was this really the right time for the writer to bring in halvet? I watched and rewatched with those questions until I picked up a few details I’d missed earlier. Hopefully, this analysis will help clear out some cobwebs in your grey matter, too. So let’s get to it. We start the episode with Boran watching Alya and Cihan dance with murder in his eyes. To say the zombie is jealous would be an understatement. He then marches on to the middle of the square, grabs Alya’s hand, and announces who he is to the whole wide world. He thinks he’s all macho when he does that. There’s a sense of puffed-up self-importance about him, like he’s trying to prove how brave he is. Fortunately for us, his little bubble of boorish chauvinism goes ‘pop’ the minute Demir’s little henchman fires a bullet at him. And that’s Boran for you in a nutshell. He thinks he’s all that, but he really isn't. It reminded me of the scene where Cihan says he knew the instant Boran regretted k-wording Sulaiman because the seriousness of his stupidity had finally begun dawning on him, but by then it was too late. It also makes me think the zombie has serious self-destructive tendencies, combined with impulsiveness and resentment. This man is a recipe for disaster. Because think about it. He chooses visibility over safety, knowing it would unleash all kinds of hell, but does it anyway. He would rather burn everything than accept the hand he’s been dealt with humility. This was Boran crossing over the threshold. Now, let’s switch to Cihan. We all knew Ciho was going to jump in front of that thankless freak because of his hero complex (a side-effect of Sadakat’s conditioning). But, I think Cihan saving the zombie this way also highlights his own nature and the narrative at large. Because with his protective gesture, Cihan makes it clear that he doesn’t see Boran as a rival, he has no ill will in his heart for his brother, and that the right man was made Ağa because his protection isn’t contingent on who he loves or likes (unlike the zombie). That responsibility and sacrifice have been bred into Cihan’s very core is rather clear in this scene. It makes an excellent contrasting juxtaposition for the viewers between the two brothers. Both men make decisions in this scene, but the whys and hows couldn’t be more different. Now, let’s take a moment to go back to the questions I mentioned right at the beginning, relating to the halvet, Ciho’s guilt, and the timing of it all. Upon rewatching the episode, I realized that what happens in this scene sets off why we end the episode with consummation. Just keep this in the back of your mind for a bit, as we cover the other parts. Another scene that caught my attention in untangling the theme of episode 42 is Alya and Cihan’s talk after poor Yalcin has to extract yet another bullet from Cihan’s person. Why? That’s simple. It highlights Alya’s fear of losing Cihan. The way she points out the bullet could have pierced his heart, her telling him he needs to control his self-sacrificing tendencies, etc. I mean, Cihan keeps joking to get Alya to calm down, but the truth is, she’s very afraid. She loves Cihan more than her own life; we know that. But the lives they lead, the danger that always follows them, and Boran’s dark presence keep hounding this woman day and night. In such a situation, would it really make sense to keep denying your true feelings when it could all end in a second? Nope. That’s why I marked this scene as Reason no 1 of why the episode ends the way it does. The next scene that stood out to me in the scheme of characters choosing sides is, of course, the jail showdown. There’s a popular opinion in the fandom that Sadakat is afraid of Boran, etc. I am not of that opinion. Because so much of Boran is Sadakat, and that’s very clear in this scene. Instead of accepting the blame for the clusterfuck of a situation he’s created, the zombie blames Cihan. That reminds me of how Sadakat says she would never have threatened the nurse to give an innocent woman blood thinners if only Alya had agreed to leave. See? It’s never Sadakat’s fault. It’s always someone else’s actions that force her to behave badly, blah blah. Like mother, like son. Not surprising. What was surprising was the way Cihan behaves because he makes it very clear he’s picked a side (Next to Alya) and he’s not budging. This is Cihan crossing his point of no return because, in other words, what he says is, appeasement and brotherhood before all is a thing of the past. And here’s the key to the ‘guilt’ question. What Cihan observes of his brother, episode 39 onwards, probably makes him realize there will be no pretty way to make Boran let Alya go. Being the good brother and taking a step back wouldn’t change Boran; it would just make Alya vulnerable. Then there’s the fact that Boran revealing himself endangers everyone, including Alya and Deniz, so restraint is also dangerous now. Finally, nothing helps cure Cihan of his guilt more than Boran being himself. We tend to glorify the dead. And nostalgia can warp more than clarify. When the series began, we met a Cihan Albora caving under the guilt of not being able to save his brother. Now, we see a Cihan who is slowly beginning to realize he idolized what never should have been mourned as innocence. Boran’s actions help fracture his myth that the Albora siblings built in their minds. That helps free Cihan from a parasitic type of devotion, built on illusion rather than the truth. This is Motive no 2. Motive no 3 is when Cihan catches Sadakat in the act of trying to prey on Alya’s weakness - Deniz. I’m not saying Cihan sleeps with Alya because he wants to manipulate her into staying. But, in the overall scheme of things, I think Ciho recognizes that he can trust no one to look after Alya and Deniz, to keep them safe from Boran, except himself. I think he knows after that point that curbing his feelings creates a distance between him and Alya that leaves her exposed, emotionally isolated, and cornered. In other words, it leaves her weakened. However, choosing her fully, being with her body and soul, can become her shield. So, in a way, for both Alya and Cihan, intimacy morphs from being born of desire to also being about presence. And once they realize that, near the end of the episode, the line between waiting and giving in becomes rather faint. Now, let’s talk about THE scene. Did you notice how the opportunity for consummation comes about? A blocked road. That’s how. At the beginning of the episode, fate intervenes to kick-start a series of events that force all the characters out into the open, violence goes public, loyalties are divided, insights are achieved, and secrets are brought to light. By the end of the episode, fate intervenes again, with a blocked road that pushes Alya and Cihan into a space far removed from their family lives, scrutiny, and threats. The hand of destiny, it seems, narrows down their path, until only one direction remains: inwards, towards each other. What looks like an inconvenience is, in truth, another threshold. Another point of no return, for both Alya and Cihan, this time. So, why did Alya and Cihan finally give in to their feelings? In short, because it was time. Besides the boundless love they feel for each other, there were external factors pointed out throughout the episode. And then, they got the perfect opportunity and went for it. Still, was this really the right time for Gulizar to write about lovemaking? I think so. I think instead of trying to act correctly, for once, Alya and Cihan acted honestly. They went with their hearts. How will this play out in the future? Well, I don’t know. But I sure as heck am excited. Till next time, Happy reading y’all :D #CihAl #UzakŞehir
3:13

Analyzing Episode 42. Season 2 aka Of Thresholds, Truth, and Taking Sides It took a while for me to come out of the euphoria we all experienced thanks to ep 42, but I managed somehow. I had some questions while watching the episode live, such as how Alya and Cihan could just do the deed when, a few episodes ago, they were all about acting correctly. Or whatever happened to Cihan’s pesky guilt? Or was this really the right time for the writer to bring in halvet? I watched and rewatched with those questions until I picked up a few details I’d missed earlier. Hopefully, this analysis will help clear out some cobwebs in your grey matter, too. So let’s get to it. We start the episode with Boran watching Alya and Cihan dance with murder in his eyes. To say the zombie is jealous would be an understatement. He then marches on to the middle of the square, grabs Alya’s hand, and announces who he is to the whole wide world. He thinks he’s all macho when he does that. There’s a sense of puffed-up self-importance about him, like he’s trying to prove how brave he is. Fortunately for us, his little bubble of boorish chauvinism goes ‘pop’ the minute Demir’s little henchman fires a bullet at him. And that’s Boran for you in a nutshell. He thinks he’s all that, but he really isn't. It reminded me of the scene where Cihan says he knew the instant Boran regretted k-wording Sulaiman because the seriousness of his stupidity had finally begun dawning on him, but by then it was too late. It also makes me think the zombie has serious self-destructive tendencies, combined with impulsiveness and resentment. This man is a recipe for disaster. Because think about it. He chooses visibility over safety, knowing it would unleash all kinds of hell, but does it anyway. He would rather burn everything than accept the hand he’s been dealt with humility. This was Boran crossing over the threshold. Now, let’s switch to Cihan. We all knew Ciho was going to jump in front of that thankless freak because of his hero complex (a side-effect of Sadakat’s conditioning). But, I think Cihan saving the zombie this way also highlights his own nature and the narrative at large. Because with his protective gesture, Cihan makes it clear that he doesn’t see Boran as a rival, he has no ill will in his heart for his brother, and that the right man was made Ağa because his protection isn’t contingent on who he loves or likes (unlike the zombie). That responsibility and sacrifice have been bred into Cihan’s very core is rather clear in this scene. It makes an excellent contrasting juxtaposition for the viewers between the two brothers. Both men make decisions in this scene, but the whys and hows couldn’t be more different. Now, let’s take a moment to go back to the questions I mentioned right at the beginning, relating to the halvet, Ciho’s guilt, and the timing of it all. Upon rewatching the episode, I realized that what happens in this scene sets off why we end the episode with consummation. Just keep this in the back of your mind for a bit, as we cover the other parts. Another scene that caught my attention in untangling the theme of episode 42 is Alya and Cihan’s talk after poor Yalcin has to extract yet another bullet from Cihan’s person. Why? That’s simple. It highlights Alya’s fear of losing Cihan. The way she points out the bullet could have pierced his heart, her telling him he needs to control his self-sacrificing tendencies, etc. I mean, Cihan keeps joking to get Alya to calm down, but the truth is, she’s very afraid. She loves Cihan more than her own life; we know that. But the lives they lead, the danger that always follows them, and Boran’s dark presence keep hounding this woman day and night. In such a situation, would it really make sense to keep denying your true feelings when it could all end in a second? Nope. That’s why I marked this scene as Reason no 1 of why the episode ends the way it does. The next scene that stood out to me in the scheme of characters choosing sides is, of course, the jail showdown. There’s a popular opinion in the fandom that Sadakat is afraid of Boran, etc. I am not of that opinion. Because so much of Boran is Sadakat, and that’s very clear in this scene. Instead of accepting the blame for the clusterfuck of a situation he’s created, the zombie blames Cihan. That reminds me of how Sadakat says she would never have threatened the nurse to give an innocent woman blood thinners if only Alya had agreed to leave. See? It’s never Sadakat’s fault. It’s always someone else’s actions that force her to behave badly, blah blah. Like mother, like son. Not surprising. What was surprising was the way Cihan behaves because he makes it very clear he’s picked a side (Next to Alya) and he’s not budging. This is Cihan crossing his point of no return because, in other words, what he says is, appeasement and brotherhood before all is a thing of the past. And here’s the key to the ‘guilt’ question. What Cihan observes of his brother, episode 39 onwards, probably makes him realize there will be no pretty way to make Boran let Alya go. Being the good brother and taking a step back wouldn’t change Boran; it would just make Alya vulnerable. Then there’s the fact that Boran revealing himself endangers everyone, including Alya and Deniz, so restraint is also dangerous now. Finally, nothing helps cure Cihan of his guilt more than Boran being himself. We tend to glorify the dead. And nostalgia can warp more than clarify. When the series began, we met a Cihan Albora caving under the guilt of not being able to save his brother. Now, we see a Cihan who is slowly beginning to realize he idolized what never should have been mourned as innocence. Boran’s actions help fracture his myth that the Albora siblings built in their minds. That helps free Cihan from a parasitic type of devotion, built on illusion rather than the truth. This is Motive no 2. Motive no 3 is when Cihan catches Sadakat in the act of trying to prey on Alya’s weakness - Deniz. I’m not saying Cihan sleeps with Alya because he wants to manipulate her into staying. But, in the overall scheme of things, I think Ciho recognizes that he can trust no one to look after Alya and Deniz, to keep them safe from Boran, except himself. I think he knows after that point that curbing his feelings creates a distance between him and Alya that leaves her exposed, emotionally isolated, and cornered. In other words, it leaves her weakened. However, choosing her fully, being with her body and soul, can become her shield. So, in a way, for both Alya and Cihan, intimacy morphs from being born of desire to also being about presence. And once they realize that, near the end of the episode, the line between waiting and giving in becomes rather faint. Now, let’s talk about THE scene. Did you notice how the opportunity for consummation comes about? A blocked road. That’s how. At the beginning of the episode, fate intervenes to kick-start a series of events that force all the characters out into the open, violence goes public, loyalties are divided, insights are achieved, and secrets are brought to light. By the end of the episode, fate intervenes again, with a blocked road that pushes Alya and Cihan into a space far removed from their family lives, scrutiny, and threats. The hand of destiny, it seems, narrows down their path, until only one direction remains: inwards, towards each other. What looks like an inconvenience is, in truth, another threshold. Another point of no return, for both Alya and Cihan, this time. So, why did Alya and Cihan finally give in to their feelings? In short, because it was time. Besides the boundless love they feel for each other, there were external factors pointed out throughout the episode. And then, they got the perfect opportunity and went for it. Still, was this really the right time for Gulizar to write about lovemaking? I think so. I think instead of trying to act correctly, for once, Alya and Cihan acted honestly. They went with their hearts. How will this play out in the future? Well, I don’t know. But I sure as heck am excited. Till next time, Happy reading y’all :D #CihAl #UzakŞehir

CocoLoco

11,751 views • 8 months ago

Alright, here's the epic towel rant from tonight; And so that's what kind of tipped me off in real time. I was like: wait a minute. Is Judge Doolin ruling from the bench right now? And then I was like: wait a minute. He's ruling from the bench and ordering them to appoint a new prosecutor and potentially the Attorney General. Oh my word. How—what is this? I—this wasn't on my bingo card. Even now I'm just like: Oh my God, I can't believe he did that. Judge Doolin—in a good way. I'm just like: Oh my God, there is hope. And then to follow it up with: "Oh yeah, I'm thinking about a hearing on the contempt." Oh my God—you're telegraphing. You're going to have a contempt hearing after the Attorney General is potentially on the case. The other witnesses, however, are left in this position where they have this kind of not really well-funded—like kind of spastic prosecution, like the special prosecutors on the Kearney cases. Then you got the December 23rd, 2023 criminal charges against Aidan that were charged in Dedham District Court, 23rd or 26th or so. And that was for illegally—allegedly—recording Lindsey Gaetani and then submitting an edited version of the recording into court for some reason. I don't know why Aidan did that, especially apparently when there's an original version of the recording pursuant to some of the statements in court. And then also for intimidating Lindsey—for allegedly going over there on December 23rd, 2023—against Karen Read's advice and against his lawyers' advice, apparently, according to a leaked group chat message from Facebook in 2024—in May of 2024—going over to Lindsey's apartment. And then according to the affidavit from the search warrant for Karen Read's cell phone—allegedly telling Lindsey that she shouldn't cooperate with the grand jury. She should—she could remove information from her phone or something—that Aidan would get her a lawyer, but only if she agreed to meet with a lawyer only with him present, because she had, quote, "broken his trust." It just like—wild stuff. And that new grand jury, by the way, was apparently—it did go forward. And then in time it came out that it—that was about Karen and Aidan and witness intimidation and conspiracy, because Aidan Kearney—between October and November—really August and November of 2023—it started telling Lindsey Gaetani about his communications with Karen Read that included—in writing—Exhibit O to Karen Read search warrant affidavit, which says that Karen Read told Aidan Kearney that in November of 2023—November 28, 2023, to be specific—that Karen Read told Aidan Kearney that Karen Read and her team at ex parte conversations with former U.S. Attorney Josh Levy—which was right in the window of time that Jessica Leslie, the grand juror leaker, was leaking information. Leslie started leaking in August of 2022—which is the same month that Alan Jackson joined Karen Read's legal team. And Josh Levy—who was one of the U.S. Attorneys in charge of that grand jury—Leslie was leaking about four different cases: probably the Birchmore case, definitely the Read and O'Keefe case, definitely the CDL case. One more case. We can't really—the group of us journalists involved in this—can't really figure out. So right in the middle of that—November of 2023—Josh Levy is leaking ex parte grand jury information to Karen Read, which she's putting—she's telling Aidan Kearney about; he's putting it in writing. He just was trying to just show off for Lindsey, but you don't like—come on—like what is it? First day in the IC, bro? I'm not in the IC. I'm not part of the government. I'm a towel. But anyway—so Aidan's bragging to Lindsey, and I don't think that was a very good idea. I mean, she's brilliant and stuff, but like—why would you ever say that to her? Don't say that stuff. But anyway—like, why would you say—even if it's your significant other—unless they are read-in on the intel that you are sharing—why would you ever, ever, ever share that with someone? It exposes them to an incredible liability—which, if you love them, don't do it. It also exposes your own credibility to an incredible risk of liability. You will never be trusted by the intelligence community again. Pillow talk and honeypots are how they trap operatives. If you chase sex, they will compromise you. How can you not understand that? So if you get compromised by someone who's not an agent—just someone who's your partner and you're just telling them stuff about protected federal investigations—what do you think your reputation is going to be like among the intelligence community when you're doing that and they haven't even honeypotted you? You just voluntarily started putting this shit in writing. They're going to look at you like you are out of your mind. So anyway—Karen Read apparently is telling Aidan Kearney that she's having ex parte conversations with Josh Levy. Now, the grand jury that Leslie was leaking from was impaneled in May of 2022 when Rachael Rollins used to be U.S. Attorney in Boston. Now think about this. In 2020, Rachael Rollins and Aidan Kearney—Rachael Rollins, a hyper-liberal known for her soft-on-crime stance. We'll also hear Rollins hated Michael Morrissey. Anyway, Rollins worked with Turtle Boy to send a Republican operative named Rayla Campbell to Joe Kennedy Jr.'s events in the Senate race against Ed Markey so that Ed Markey could win the Senate seat. Now, interestingly enough, Rachael Rollins then got appointed to the position of U.S. Attorney right after that. And you might say: well, Grant, that's a stretch. No, no—because then within a few months, Rachael Rollins—part of the reason she gets thrown out of office by the DOJ OIG—is because she attends an event in Andover with—guess who?—Dr. Jill Biden, the wife of the then-president who appointed her. Now, what does that mean? Well, if you really think about the geopolitical implications of the 2020 Senate race between Ed Markey in Massachusetts and Joe Kennedy Jr.—well, one of the things you're going to realize is that—think about 2020. The leadership around Biden did not know that the chaos of 2024 was going to happen with Kamala and Biden not really being up to it. You're thinking ahead to 2024. Why? Who's your biggest target if you are a sitting Democrat and you're worried about a primary challenge four years from now? Well, what if JFK's—what is it—nephew or whatever it is—is in the House of Representatives? And what if JFK started his career in the House of Representatives? And what if that new young Kennedy with red hair and sort of a photogenic face? What if he is running for JFK's old Senate seat? What if he's on the same exact trajectory as JFK? Oh, we can't have that. We—as the Biden White House—cannot have Joe Kennedy Jr. beating Ed Markey for Senate. And how it got to the point that somebody talked to Rachael Rollins and she came up with the brilliant idea to reach out to Turtle Boy so that Turtle Boy would talk to Rayla Campbell to send her to Joe Kennedy Jr.'s events to help Markey—I don't know. But that's why I think Rachael Rollins became U.S. Attorney—someone who, in my opinion, was uniquely unqualified and fundamentally unethically un-predisposed to being able to run that office. Who then in turn immediately tried to interfere in the 2022 Suffolk DA primary between Kevin Hayden and Ricardo O'Rourke—because Rollins wanted to see her progressive vision continue through O'Rourke—so she worked with Daniel Medwed—the same professor who was involved with advocating the media on behalf of Karen Read's team. She worked with Daniel Medwed to get a story leaked about how a non-existent federal probe into Kevin Hayden—to increase Ricardo O'Rourke's chances in the Suffolk DA primary. Sound familiar? Oh, hell yeah. So anyway—between November of 2022 and May of 2023—you got this weird situation where Rollins knows she's getting forced out; Levy's going to take over the office. The people who take Rollins out are Josh Levy, Bill Abley, and still head of the criminal division—Dustin Chao, I think—still head of the public integrity unit, and then executive officer who is also the press secretary or the communications director of the office. Those four people—without being named; they're named by title—were the people who cooperated with the DOJ to take Rollins out—DOJ-OIG to take Rollins out. Now, why is that interesting? Well, one—because it shows that people in that office knew that Rachael Rollins had a proclivity for weaponizing leaks about non-existent federal probes to interfere in particular district attorney races and matters. Second—Rachael Rollins and Michael Morrissey had a bifurcated history of ten years. One: Rachael Rollins had this list of 25 crimes she wouldn't prosecute, and other DAs critiqued her—not just Michael Morrissey but others. Rollins—I'm pretty sure—was the one who first called Morrissey a "meatball," in fact, because of his criticism of Rollins over that issue. Rachael Rollins—I think—has a proclivity, in my opinion, to hold a bit of a grudge. When she became U.S. Attorney and she realized she was on the way out—well, maybe the Sandra Birchmore probe started back in May of 2022 because former chief of the Canton police—Ken Berkowitz—went to the FBI and told them that the FBI covered up—the MSP unit detailed to the Norfolk DA covered up Sandra Birchmore's murder—potentially because Yuri Bukhenik and John Fanning used to work in Stoughton with Matt Farwell and Robert Devine and Billy Farwell—I think they all worked there. And furthermore—that Brian Tully, the unit commander, was partners with John Fanning for 20 years. All right, and in that regard—it is very interesting, I think—that Chief Berkowitz—who may have been very offended that his unit... So Sandra Birchmore was murdered on February 1st, 2021, at 9:23 p.m. in her apartment in Canton. Okay—on February 4th, Monday in the morning—the Canton police do a wellness check after they get a call from her—Sandra's—colleagues at the school where she worked as an administrative assistant. Now the Canton police respond—on Monday, February 4th—by Wednesday, February 6th. The Canton police have collected the following evidence in order. And if you don't believe me, you can read pages—I think 97 through 101—of the Canton Police Department audit report released in April of 2025. Point by point. Number one: the Canton police confirm—via a witness who was the maintenance worker at Sandra's apartment building—that Matt Farwell was the man on camera outside Sandra's apartment in the elevator at 9:23 p.m. on February 1st—which is exactly when Sandra died. Two: that the man was Matt Farwell, and he was the same man who helped Sandra move into her apartment. Three: that when the Canton PD went to Sandra's school, they got information that Farwell was telling people that Sandra was pregnant with his child—that he had abused her since she was a child—and that he was going to quote "take care of the problem himself" if Sandra decided to carry the baby to term. All right. All of that information—by February 6th of 2021—was passed over to the MSP. John Fanning and this whole unit—I think—really then facilitate a report sometime over the next six to 12 months that exonerates Farwell and says Sandra dies from self-harm. Well, I think that's why Ken Berkowitz blew the whistle before he died of cancer—and that's why there was a grand jury impaneled in May of 2022—and it was really about the cover-up of Sandra Birchmore's murder. Well—one—it was about Sandra Birchmore's murder. Why does that make everything so interesting? Because I think that the investigation wasn't just about who killed Sandra and why—but how was it ruled a—the result of self-harm—instead of the very obvious murder that it was. Well—that starts—2022, I think—May of 2022—the grand jury. Jessica Leslie was on the grand jury—leaker—who's going to be sentenced on October 4th of 2025. I think Jessica Leslie—ladies and gentlemen—in August of 2022 somehow leaked to Karen Read—Alan Jackson—that the Norfolk DA was dirty because they covered up—and that MSP unit—because they covered up Sandra Birchmore's murder. All right—so therefore, Alan Jackson—that's the skeleton in the closet. It wasn't what the people in the house were doing. I'm still a little suspect of who they know—but I don't think that's the big deal. I don't think Jen McCabe's social life is the big deal. Nobody cares—nobody fucking cares. Sorry for cussing. The big issue is that Jen was friends with Tully. Tully's unit knew literally where the bodies were buried. And they—I think—they brought on the PI—Marty Kraft—and Kate Peter—to insulate their exposure from the coming publicity that they knew was going to be brought upon them by Alan Jackson. And so they were worried. And who would you bring in if you had covered up a murder? If you were a MSP unit—you'd bring in someone like Kate Peter. Because you can read her in on that. She's hardened. She doesn't give a fuck. She lost two of her kids—and I don't think she even fucking cared. So who the fuck's the perfect person be like: "Bruh, if that shit gets national attention, we're fucked. So you better control that fucking narrative and handle all these like different people that get too close to this—or we're going to be exposed for Birchmore." But let me bring it back to the point here—which is in 2022, the feds clearly were starting to poke around. And come 2023—I think Brian Tully's unit was desperate. Who was going to find out because of the coverage of the Read case? Could they make sure that Kate Peter got close enough to Netflix and Gretchen Voss so that they couldn't find out what was actually going on? And could the Birchmore cover-up be kept up—even in light of the national spotlight? When you think about the fact that some people may not have been loyal to the Justice for John O'Keefe movement—but were instead primarily loyal to Brian Tully's unit. And when you think about the fact that maybe Tully's unit didn't run the best investigation of Karen Read—maybe there were some flaws. But if you think about the fact that they did get her—but if you think about it in the context of: Karen knew from the jump that the MSP were dirty over Birchmore—then you understand: Karen—that's why it was going to become an incident. Everyone knew—everyone around Tully, his friends, all of them—the unit—they knew they covered up Birchmore's murder. And they knew Karen had it in her hands if she could just figure out the PR. And that's exactly what she did—to put enough pressure on them. They took her to trial anyway—and it destroyed the fucking Norfolk DA—destroyed Brian Tully's unit. It cost them dearly—and she's a tactical fucking genius. I think Brian Tully thought he was slicker than he was by using the prosecution of Aidan Kearney—not to get a genuinely—in my opinion—bad guy who was deserving of the indictment handed up by a grand jury of his peers. But because Tully wanted to know what the real target of the federal probe is. If you don't know what a backhand is, folks—a backhand is where you investigate one thing on the surface because you're dealing with a very high-level operation like the state police—who are a paramilitary intelligence-gathering operation. So you trick them. You make them think they're under investigation for John's death and the investigation of that death. But really—you're investigating them for the cover-up of Sandra Birchmore's murder. And that's exactly what I think happened to this unit. That's what I think Brian Tully was trying to figure out—from August of 2023 until about December. I think they eventually put it together—and by August of 2024, Matthew Farwell got indicted. Now—it's a question of all this as a result of today. I want to be very clear: this is what was called for. There needed to be an independent voice with power and who takes no nonsense—who came into this and said: Nope—it's out of your hands. And that's what Judge Doolin did today. Someone just needed to not either be involved with Karen Read, Aidan Kearney, or the Norfolk DA—or Kate Peter or Marty Kraft—and prosecute this. Now, all those other witnesses—I have no idea what the hell is going to happen there. But at least for Lindsey—Judge Doolin was like: enough of this nonsense. And that's why today was such a big deal in light of that historical context—because just tracing that very insidious pattern of events over the past 18 months—you can see this became a proxy war. It was Michael Morrissey on one side with his marching soldiers: Brian Tully, Kate Peter, Marty Kraft. And then it was Karen Read and the DOJ on the other side. Okay. And their soldiers were like the Free Karen Read movement and Turtle Boy and Natalie and all these other people. This was an intelligence community proxy war. And that's why I've been trying to tell people for so long: Lindsey Gaetani was not involved. She was an unwitting pawn. These two factions both took advantage of her—including Brian Tully—who was more interested in preserving his unit's reputation than actually defending the interest of the vulnerable. In my opinion, I think Brian Tully is a terrible person. Does that mean that he's a bad person for trying to hold Karen Read accountable for John O'Keefe's death? No, of course not. He's a bad person because in what fucking world do you—as a fucking state police officer—who you—you are entrusted—not just to get the bad guys—but to protect the most fucking vulnerable? One: how do you justify what happened with Sandra Birchmore? Two: how the fuck do you get it in your fucking mind that you're going to take a 15-year unredacted extraction of a fucking vulnerable victim's cell phone and release it to a fucking defendant known for promulgating exactly that material? What fucking headspace? What satanic fucking chamber do you and Kate Peter have to be drinking blood from fucking cups in to think that that's fucking okay? Fuck you. How do you even get in the headspace where doing something like that to a fucking victim becomes acceptable. The rot in that unit—whether enabled by Morrissey or whether he didn't know about it—I don't fucking know. But the point is: the rot in that unit was so deep that they lost their fucking souls. They didn't think of victims as victims. They re-victimized victims because it was a political fucking war—and these people are so hardened, I guess, that they don't understand what it means to be vulnerable. And these were police officers—detectives—people entrusted to uphold and protect the dignity of the most vulnerable—and they fucking used victims to advance some political agenda—to deal with the fact that they covered up a fucking murder. I'm done being gentle about this. Fuck these people. And I'm not saying that it was wrong for them to investigate Karen Read. I am pleased someone tried to prosecute her. I'm pissed at them because they were thinking about it from the perspective of their own liability for an unrelated case—and they fucked everything up—and introducing Kate Peter to this shit. Oh my God. It's a disgrace. It's a disgrace to the people who were hurt. It's a disgrace to the vulnerable. I frankly do not understand how Jen McCabe, Brian Tully, and Kate Peter go to bed each night. I don't get it. I don't know. Maybe there's something that shuts off the GABA-1 receptor or something and just makes you go to bed. I don't know. Never heard of such a thing. But I'm just saying: I don't know how you do it. How do you do it? But anyway—Judge Doolin—without giving a... extemporaneous, uh, bloviating cuss-based rant like I just did—instead, in my opinion, is like: fuck all of you! You're not being involved in this prosecution anymore. Someone's gonna protect this fucking woman—Lindsey Gaetani. I'm making you appoint someone! I love that man. Good for Judge Doolin. But still—we never should have gone to this point. This is incredible. With the... the... the MSP. The fact that they had a unit operating like this for so long. This is worse than what John Connolly and Whitey Bulger did. This is institutional rot that is so pervasive that it requires fundamental reform of the MSP. They're not incapable of—um, uh—solving crimes. I'm sure most of the MSP are wonderful. Anyway—my point is: I don't think the state police officers that I generally run into—or troopers—are bad people. I think most of them are wonderful. They've never been really mean to me. They do good work. They're out there protecting our roads. They stop people from speeding. They—what else do they do? They go after commercial truck violations. They investigate homicides—like, on the whole. And this is why I think we have to be careful about how we talk about this. I am not saying that the entire MSP is just rotten. I'm saying that when you have factions or sections within the institution that understand its machinations and are able to thus manipulate the bureaucratic structure and avoid accountability—you lose the confidence of everyone. And how do you think some of those good troopers feel when they have to go out there? Yes—people like me are going to smile at them and bless them and whatever—because I know they're not part of the problem. But most people look at them and they think that they're fucking hated. They don't deserve that. They literally put their lives on the line for us every day. And if we're going to give them the respect they deserve—if we're going to make the profession have the respect that it deserves—then this kind of institutional rot can't be looked at as just an embarrassment. And it can't be looked at as something that—oh, we just wish didn't happen. Maybe some guys are going to go away. No—you point at it. You scream it from the rooftops and you say: if this happens even once—then we have so failed as an institution; we must fundamentally reform from the ground up. And this wasn't just once. It was Birchmore. It was the phone extraction. It was the SA report leak over and over and over and over again. They knew the law. They were an old boys' club. They abused it. They had cover—and it was systemically enabled. And that's why I think—to save the profession of policing in Massachusetts—there needs to be a full-on unbridled discussion about how this happened—how the personalities involved were able to do what they did. And we can't be so tribalistic that because someone we support as to their views on one case, right? We cannot be so tribalistic that we just block out everything bad that they do. Or this rot will continue. And it is pernicious. It is insidious. It is invidious. It undermines the faith that citizens completely removed from this situation have in our system of government. It undermines victims' confidence in the ability to seek redress in the face of serious fucking harm—because they think the system doesn't actually care about them. It's just using them to get someone bigger. We cannot allow this to perpetuate. And the only way to fix it is to hold up situations like what happened to Birchmore—Sandra Birchmore—and what happened to Lindsey Gaetani—hold them up in the national spotlight—and say: we—the MSP—have failed you. Brian Tully failed these people. John Fanning failed these people. Nick Guarino failed these people. Yuri Bukhenik failed these people. We need to say that. We need to highlight it. We need to say: this happened even once. Therefore, we are not good enough. Not only are we not good enough—the very fact that either of these things were able to happen—the Birchmore cover-up, the phone extraction leak—is such a pervasive, systemic degradation of the faith that victims and the public have in the justice system—that our only option is to talk about this—congressional hearings. We need the State House to have congressional hearings. We need these people to answer for what they did. And we need to make sure it never happens again. And the only way you do that is by finding out what aspects of the bureaucratic structure allowed this to happen. And it's not going to be comfortable. I don't think it's going to be comfortable for anyone to talk about the fallout of any of this—but that's exactly what happened at the CCC on a smaller scale. And if this country matters—if this form of government matters—if this republic matters—then we will fix this. We will fix it together. We will address the hard questions. We will address the uncomfortable questions. We will shed our prejudices and polemical biases at the door. We will engage in no fear, no favoritism—and we will look only for the truth and nothing but it. And if you are incapable of doing that—you're contributing—either consciously or subconsciously—to the problem. It's our only option. And you can't just say: because they prosecuted Karen Read, we can't talk about anything bad that they did. That's tribalism. That's polemical. That's what drove us to this point.
1:17:36

Alright, here's the epic towel rant from tonight; And so that's what kind of tipped me off in real time. I was like: wait a minute. Is Judge Doolin ruling from the bench right now? And then I was like: wait a minute. He's ruling from the bench and ordering them to appoint a new prosecutor and potentially the Attorney General. Oh my word. How—what is this? I—this wasn't on my bingo card. Even now I'm just like: Oh my God, I can't believe he did that. Judge Doolin—in a good way. I'm just like: Oh my God, there is hope. And then to follow it up with: "Oh yeah, I'm thinking about a hearing on the contempt." Oh my God—you're telegraphing. You're going to have a contempt hearing after the Attorney General is potentially on the case. The other witnesses, however, are left in this position where they have this kind of not really well-funded—like kind of spastic prosecution, like the special prosecutors on the Kearney cases. Then you got the December 23rd, 2023 criminal charges against Aidan that were charged in Dedham District Court, 23rd or 26th or so. And that was for illegally—allegedly—recording Lindsey Gaetani and then submitting an edited version of the recording into court for some reason. I don't know why Aidan did that, especially apparently when there's an original version of the recording pursuant to some of the statements in court. And then also for intimidating Lindsey—for allegedly going over there on December 23rd, 2023—against Karen Read's advice and against his lawyers' advice, apparently, according to a leaked group chat message from Facebook in 2024—in May of 2024—going over to Lindsey's apartment. And then according to the affidavit from the search warrant for Karen Read's cell phone—allegedly telling Lindsey that she shouldn't cooperate with the grand jury. She should—she could remove information from her phone or something—that Aidan would get her a lawyer, but only if she agreed to meet with a lawyer only with him present, because she had, quote, "broken his trust." It just like—wild stuff. And that new grand jury, by the way, was apparently—it did go forward. And then in time it came out that it—that was about Karen and Aidan and witness intimidation and conspiracy, because Aidan Kearney—between October and November—really August and November of 2023—it started telling Lindsey Gaetani about his communications with Karen Read that included—in writing—Exhibit O to Karen Read search warrant affidavit, which says that Karen Read told Aidan Kearney that in November of 2023—November 28, 2023, to be specific—that Karen Read told Aidan Kearney that Karen Read and her team at ex parte conversations with former U.S. Attorney Josh Levy—which was right in the window of time that Jessica Leslie, the grand juror leaker, was leaking information. Leslie started leaking in August of 2022—which is the same month that Alan Jackson joined Karen Read's legal team. And Josh Levy—who was one of the U.S. Attorneys in charge of that grand jury—Leslie was leaking about four different cases: probably the Birchmore case, definitely the Read and O'Keefe case, definitely the CDL case. One more case. We can't really—the group of us journalists involved in this—can't really figure out. So right in the middle of that—November of 2023—Josh Levy is leaking ex parte grand jury information to Karen Read, which she's putting—she's telling Aidan Kearney about; he's putting it in writing. He just was trying to just show off for Lindsey, but you don't like—come on—like what is it? First day in the IC, bro? I'm not in the IC. I'm not part of the government. I'm a towel. But anyway—so Aidan's bragging to Lindsey, and I don't think that was a very good idea. I mean, she's brilliant and stuff, but like—why would you ever say that to her? Don't say that stuff. But anyway—like, why would you say—even if it's your significant other—unless they are read-in on the intel that you are sharing—why would you ever, ever, ever share that with someone? It exposes them to an incredible liability—which, if you love them, don't do it. It also exposes your own credibility to an incredible risk of liability. You will never be trusted by the intelligence community again. Pillow talk and honeypots are how they trap operatives. If you chase sex, they will compromise you. How can you not understand that? So if you get compromised by someone who's not an agent—just someone who's your partner and you're just telling them stuff about protected federal investigations—what do you think your reputation is going to be like among the intelligence community when you're doing that and they haven't even honeypotted you? You just voluntarily started putting this shit in writing. They're going to look at you like you are out of your mind. So anyway—Karen Read apparently is telling Aidan Kearney that she's having ex parte conversations with Josh Levy. Now, the grand jury that Leslie was leaking from was impaneled in May of 2022 when Rachael Rollins used to be U.S. Attorney in Boston. Now think about this. In 2020, Rachael Rollins and Aidan Kearney—Rachael Rollins, a hyper-liberal known for her soft-on-crime stance. We'll also hear Rollins hated Michael Morrissey. Anyway, Rollins worked with Turtle Boy to send a Republican operative named Rayla Campbell to Joe Kennedy Jr.'s events in the Senate race against Ed Markey so that Ed Markey could win the Senate seat. Now, interestingly enough, Rachael Rollins then got appointed to the position of U.S. Attorney right after that. And you might say: well, Grant, that's a stretch. No, no—because then within a few months, Rachael Rollins—part of the reason she gets thrown out of office by the DOJ OIG—is because she attends an event in Andover with—guess who?—Dr. Jill Biden, the wife of the then-president who appointed her. Now, what does that mean? Well, if you really think about the geopolitical implications of the 2020 Senate race between Ed Markey in Massachusetts and Joe Kennedy Jr.—well, one of the things you're going to realize is that—think about 2020. The leadership around Biden did not know that the chaos of 2024 was going to happen with Kamala and Biden not really being up to it. You're thinking ahead to 2024. Why? Who's your biggest target if you are a sitting Democrat and you're worried about a primary challenge four years from now? Well, what if JFK's—what is it—nephew or whatever it is—is in the House of Representatives? And what if JFK started his career in the House of Representatives? And what if that new young Kennedy with red hair and sort of a photogenic face? What if he is running for JFK's old Senate seat? What if he's on the same exact trajectory as JFK? Oh, we can't have that. We—as the Biden White House—cannot have Joe Kennedy Jr. beating Ed Markey for Senate. And how it got to the point that somebody talked to Rachael Rollins and she came up with the brilliant idea to reach out to Turtle Boy so that Turtle Boy would talk to Rayla Campbell to send her to Joe Kennedy Jr.'s events to help Markey—I don't know. But that's why I think Rachael Rollins became U.S. Attorney—someone who, in my opinion, was uniquely unqualified and fundamentally unethically un-predisposed to being able to run that office. Who then in turn immediately tried to interfere in the 2022 Suffolk DA primary between Kevin Hayden and Ricardo O'Rourke—because Rollins wanted to see her progressive vision continue through O'Rourke—so she worked with Daniel Medwed—the same professor who was involved with advocating the media on behalf of Karen Read's team. She worked with Daniel Medwed to get a story leaked about how a non-existent federal probe into Kevin Hayden—to increase Ricardo O'Rourke's chances in the Suffolk DA primary. Sound familiar? Oh, hell yeah. So anyway—between November of 2022 and May of 2023—you got this weird situation where Rollins knows she's getting forced out; Levy's going to take over the office. The people who take Rollins out are Josh Levy, Bill Abley, and still head of the criminal division—Dustin Chao, I think—still head of the public integrity unit, and then executive officer who is also the press secretary or the communications director of the office. Those four people—without being named; they're named by title—were the people who cooperated with the DOJ to take Rollins out—DOJ-OIG to take Rollins out. Now, why is that interesting? Well, one—because it shows that people in that office knew that Rachael Rollins had a proclivity for weaponizing leaks about non-existent federal probes to interfere in particular district attorney races and matters. Second—Rachael Rollins and Michael Morrissey had a bifurcated history of ten years. One: Rachael Rollins had this list of 25 crimes she wouldn't prosecute, and other DAs critiqued her—not just Michael Morrissey but others. Rollins—I'm pretty sure—was the one who first called Morrissey a "meatball," in fact, because of his criticism of Rollins over that issue. Rachael Rollins—I think—has a proclivity, in my opinion, to hold a bit of a grudge. When she became U.S. Attorney and she realized she was on the way out—well, maybe the Sandra Birchmore probe started back in May of 2022 because former chief of the Canton police—Ken Berkowitz—went to the FBI and told them that the FBI covered up—the MSP unit detailed to the Norfolk DA covered up Sandra Birchmore's murder—potentially because Yuri Bukhenik and John Fanning used to work in Stoughton with Matt Farwell and Robert Devine and Billy Farwell—I think they all worked there. And furthermore—that Brian Tully, the unit commander, was partners with John Fanning for 20 years. All right, and in that regard—it is very interesting, I think—that Chief Berkowitz—who may have been very offended that his unit... So Sandra Birchmore was murdered on February 1st, 2021, at 9:23 p.m. in her apartment in Canton. Okay—on February 4th, Monday in the morning—the Canton police do a wellness check after they get a call from her—Sandra's—colleagues at the school where she worked as an administrative assistant. Now the Canton police respond—on Monday, February 4th—by Wednesday, February 6th. The Canton police have collected the following evidence in order. And if you don't believe me, you can read pages—I think 97 through 101—of the Canton Police Department audit report released in April of 2025. Point by point. Number one: the Canton police confirm—via a witness who was the maintenance worker at Sandra's apartment building—that Matt Farwell was the man on camera outside Sandra's apartment in the elevator at 9:23 p.m. on February 1st—which is exactly when Sandra died. Two: that the man was Matt Farwell, and he was the same man who helped Sandra move into her apartment. Three: that when the Canton PD went to Sandra's school, they got information that Farwell was telling people that Sandra was pregnant with his child—that he had abused her since she was a child—and that he was going to quote "take care of the problem himself" if Sandra decided to carry the baby to term. All right. All of that information—by February 6th of 2021—was passed over to the MSP. John Fanning and this whole unit—I think—really then facilitate a report sometime over the next six to 12 months that exonerates Farwell and says Sandra dies from self-harm. Well, I think that's why Ken Berkowitz blew the whistle before he died of cancer—and that's why there was a grand jury impaneled in May of 2022—and it was really about the cover-up of Sandra Birchmore's murder. Well—one—it was about Sandra Birchmore's murder. Why does that make everything so interesting? Because I think that the investigation wasn't just about who killed Sandra and why—but how was it ruled a—the result of self-harm—instead of the very obvious murder that it was. Well—that starts—2022, I think—May of 2022—the grand jury. Jessica Leslie was on the grand jury—leaker—who's going to be sentenced on October 4th of 2025. I think Jessica Leslie—ladies and gentlemen—in August of 2022 somehow leaked to Karen Read—Alan Jackson—that the Norfolk DA was dirty because they covered up—and that MSP unit—because they covered up Sandra Birchmore's murder. All right—so therefore, Alan Jackson—that's the skeleton in the closet. It wasn't what the people in the house were doing. I'm still a little suspect of who they know—but I don't think that's the big deal. I don't think Jen McCabe's social life is the big deal. Nobody cares—nobody fucking cares. Sorry for cussing. The big issue is that Jen was friends with Tully. Tully's unit knew literally where the bodies were buried. And they—I think—they brought on the PI—Marty Kraft—and Kate Peter—to insulate their exposure from the coming publicity that they knew was going to be brought upon them by Alan Jackson. And so they were worried. And who would you bring in if you had covered up a murder? If you were a MSP unit—you'd bring in someone like Kate Peter. Because you can read her in on that. She's hardened. She doesn't give a fuck. She lost two of her kids—and I don't think she even fucking cared. So who the fuck's the perfect person be like: "Bruh, if that shit gets national attention, we're fucked. So you better control that fucking narrative and handle all these like different people that get too close to this—or we're going to be exposed for Birchmore." But let me bring it back to the point here—which is in 2022, the feds clearly were starting to poke around. And come 2023—I think Brian Tully's unit was desperate. Who was going to find out because of the coverage of the Read case? Could they make sure that Kate Peter got close enough to Netflix and Gretchen Voss so that they couldn't find out what was actually going on? And could the Birchmore cover-up be kept up—even in light of the national spotlight? When you think about the fact that some people may not have been loyal to the Justice for John O'Keefe movement—but were instead primarily loyal to Brian Tully's unit. And when you think about the fact that maybe Tully's unit didn't run the best investigation of Karen Read—maybe there were some flaws. But if you think about the fact that they did get her—but if you think about it in the context of: Karen knew from the jump that the MSP were dirty over Birchmore—then you understand: Karen—that's why it was going to become an incident. Everyone knew—everyone around Tully, his friends, all of them—the unit—they knew they covered up Birchmore's murder. And they knew Karen had it in her hands if she could just figure out the PR. And that's exactly what she did—to put enough pressure on them. They took her to trial anyway—and it destroyed the fucking Norfolk DA—destroyed Brian Tully's unit. It cost them dearly—and she's a tactical fucking genius. I think Brian Tully thought he was slicker than he was by using the prosecution of Aidan Kearney—not to get a genuinely—in my opinion—bad guy who was deserving of the indictment handed up by a grand jury of his peers. But because Tully wanted to know what the real target of the federal probe is. If you don't know what a backhand is, folks—a backhand is where you investigate one thing on the surface because you're dealing with a very high-level operation like the state police—who are a paramilitary intelligence-gathering operation. So you trick them. You make them think they're under investigation for John's death and the investigation of that death. But really—you're investigating them for the cover-up of Sandra Birchmore's murder. And that's exactly what I think happened to this unit. That's what I think Brian Tully was trying to figure out—from August of 2023 until about December. I think they eventually put it together—and by August of 2024, Matthew Farwell got indicted. Now—it's a question of all this as a result of today. I want to be very clear: this is what was called for. There needed to be an independent voice with power and who takes no nonsense—who came into this and said: Nope—it's out of your hands. And that's what Judge Doolin did today. Someone just needed to not either be involved with Karen Read, Aidan Kearney, or the Norfolk DA—or Kate Peter or Marty Kraft—and prosecute this. Now, all those other witnesses—I have no idea what the hell is going to happen there. But at least for Lindsey—Judge Doolin was like: enough of this nonsense. And that's why today was such a big deal in light of that historical context—because just tracing that very insidious pattern of events over the past 18 months—you can see this became a proxy war. It was Michael Morrissey on one side with his marching soldiers: Brian Tully, Kate Peter, Marty Kraft. And then it was Karen Read and the DOJ on the other side. Okay. And their soldiers were like the Free Karen Read movement and Turtle Boy and Natalie and all these other people. This was an intelligence community proxy war. And that's why I've been trying to tell people for so long: Lindsey Gaetani was not involved. She was an unwitting pawn. These two factions both took advantage of her—including Brian Tully—who was more interested in preserving his unit's reputation than actually defending the interest of the vulnerable. In my opinion, I think Brian Tully is a terrible person. Does that mean that he's a bad person for trying to hold Karen Read accountable for John O'Keefe's death? No, of course not. He's a bad person because in what fucking world do you—as a fucking state police officer—who you—you are entrusted—not just to get the bad guys—but to protect the most fucking vulnerable? One: how do you justify what happened with Sandra Birchmore? Two: how the fuck do you get it in your fucking mind that you're going to take a 15-year unredacted extraction of a fucking vulnerable victim's cell phone and release it to a fucking defendant known for promulgating exactly that material? What fucking headspace? What satanic fucking chamber do you and Kate Peter have to be drinking blood from fucking cups in to think that that's fucking okay? Fuck you. How do you even get in the headspace where doing something like that to a fucking victim becomes acceptable. The rot in that unit—whether enabled by Morrissey or whether he didn't know about it—I don't fucking know. But the point is: the rot in that unit was so deep that they lost their fucking souls. They didn't think of victims as victims. They re-victimized victims because it was a political fucking war—and these people are so hardened, I guess, that they don't understand what it means to be vulnerable. And these were police officers—detectives—people entrusted to uphold and protect the dignity of the most vulnerable—and they fucking used victims to advance some political agenda—to deal with the fact that they covered up a fucking murder. I'm done being gentle about this. Fuck these people. And I'm not saying that it was wrong for them to investigate Karen Read. I am pleased someone tried to prosecute her. I'm pissed at them because they were thinking about it from the perspective of their own liability for an unrelated case—and they fucked everything up—and introducing Kate Peter to this shit. Oh my God. It's a disgrace. It's a disgrace to the people who were hurt. It's a disgrace to the vulnerable. I frankly do not understand how Jen McCabe, Brian Tully, and Kate Peter go to bed each night. I don't get it. I don't know. Maybe there's something that shuts off the GABA-1 receptor or something and just makes you go to bed. I don't know. Never heard of such a thing. But I'm just saying: I don't know how you do it. How do you do it? But anyway—Judge Doolin—without giving a... extemporaneous, uh, bloviating cuss-based rant like I just did—instead, in my opinion, is like: fuck all of you! You're not being involved in this prosecution anymore. Someone's gonna protect this fucking woman—Lindsey Gaetani. I'm making you appoint someone! I love that man. Good for Judge Doolin. But still—we never should have gone to this point. This is incredible. With the... the... the MSP. The fact that they had a unit operating like this for so long. This is worse than what John Connolly and Whitey Bulger did. This is institutional rot that is so pervasive that it requires fundamental reform of the MSP. They're not incapable of—um, uh—solving crimes. I'm sure most of the MSP are wonderful. Anyway—my point is: I don't think the state police officers that I generally run into—or troopers—are bad people. I think most of them are wonderful. They've never been really mean to me. They do good work. They're out there protecting our roads. They stop people from speeding. They—what else do they do? They go after commercial truck violations. They investigate homicides—like, on the whole. And this is why I think we have to be careful about how we talk about this. I am not saying that the entire MSP is just rotten. I'm saying that when you have factions or sections within the institution that understand its machinations and are able to thus manipulate the bureaucratic structure and avoid accountability—you lose the confidence of everyone. And how do you think some of those good troopers feel when they have to go out there? Yes—people like me are going to smile at them and bless them and whatever—because I know they're not part of the problem. But most people look at them and they think that they're fucking hated. They don't deserve that. They literally put their lives on the line for us every day. And if we're going to give them the respect they deserve—if we're going to make the profession have the respect that it deserves—then this kind of institutional rot can't be looked at as just an embarrassment. And it can't be looked at as something that—oh, we just wish didn't happen. Maybe some guys are going to go away. No—you point at it. You scream it from the rooftops and you say: if this happens even once—then we have so failed as an institution; we must fundamentally reform from the ground up. And this wasn't just once. It was Birchmore. It was the phone extraction. It was the SA report leak over and over and over and over again. They knew the law. They were an old boys' club. They abused it. They had cover—and it was systemically enabled. And that's why I think—to save the profession of policing in Massachusetts—there needs to be a full-on unbridled discussion about how this happened—how the personalities involved were able to do what they did. And we can't be so tribalistic that because someone we support as to their views on one case, right? We cannot be so tribalistic that we just block out everything bad that they do. Or this rot will continue. And it is pernicious. It is insidious. It is invidious. It undermines the faith that citizens completely removed from this situation have in our system of government. It undermines victims' confidence in the ability to seek redress in the face of serious fucking harm—because they think the system doesn't actually care about them. It's just using them to get someone bigger. We cannot allow this to perpetuate. And the only way to fix it is to hold up situations like what happened to Birchmore—Sandra Birchmore—and what happened to Lindsey Gaetani—hold them up in the national spotlight—and say: we—the MSP—have failed you. Brian Tully failed these people. John Fanning failed these people. Nick Guarino failed these people. Yuri Bukhenik failed these people. We need to say that. We need to highlight it. We need to say: this happened even once. Therefore, we are not good enough. Not only are we not good enough—the very fact that either of these things were able to happen—the Birchmore cover-up, the phone extraction leak—is such a pervasive, systemic degradation of the faith that victims and the public have in the justice system—that our only option is to talk about this—congressional hearings. We need the State House to have congressional hearings. We need these people to answer for what they did. And we need to make sure it never happens again. And the only way you do that is by finding out what aspects of the bureaucratic structure allowed this to happen. And it's not going to be comfortable. I don't think it's going to be comfortable for anyone to talk about the fallout of any of this—but that's exactly what happened at the CCC on a smaller scale. And if this country matters—if this form of government matters—if this republic matters—then we will fix this. We will fix it together. We will address the hard questions. We will address the uncomfortable questions. We will shed our prejudices and polemical biases at the door. We will engage in no fear, no favoritism—and we will look only for the truth and nothing but it. And if you are incapable of doing that—you're contributing—either consciously or subconsciously—to the problem. It's our only option. And you can't just say: because they prosecuted Karen Read, we can't talk about anything bad that they did. That's tribalism. That's polemical. That's what drove us to this point.

Grant Smith Ellis

41,546 views • 11 months ago

Israel is the excuse to snatch away freedoms we once took for granted: In interviews and a comment article over the weekend, the UK education secretary Bridget Phillipson made clear she plans to exploit the pause in the Gaza genocide to snuff out criticism of Israel’s criminal actions – and, of course, her own government’s collusion in that criminality. Naturally, the British establishment media have been keen to amplify her message that there will be painful consequences both for individuals who continue protesting against Israeli atrocities and for institutions, such as universities, that mistakenly assume they have a duty to uphold centuries-old freedoms by tolerating such protests. These protests, let us remember, are fully in line with a ruling last year from the International Court of Justice, the world’s highest court, which declared: a) Israel is illegally occupying Palestinian territory and enforcing a system of apartheid rule over the Palestinian populations there – and has been doing so for decades. b) Western governments are obligated to do what they can to bring that illegal occupation and Israel’s apartheid system to an end as quickly as possible. Instead, those same governments are violating the ruling, and international law, both by continuing to support Israel’s criminality and by preventing their own citizens from putting pressure on them to end their support. The government of Keir Starmer, a former human rights lawyer, has even categorised protest against genocide as “support for terrorism”. For the first time in British history, a direct-action group, Palestine Action, has been banned as a terrorist organisation – in its case, for targeting weapons factories in Britain arming Israel’s genocide. It is now illegal to express any support for the group. In a commentary in the Sunday Express, Phillipson said she wanted the government’s campaign against free speech to go even further to protect Israel. She intends to import to our shores Donald Trump’s full-frontal assault on academic freedom. She has written to vice-chancellors warning them that their universities face fines and public funding cuts should they allow students to protest on campus against Israeli genocide and apartheid. She added: “I’m clear the buck stops with universities when it comes to ridding their campuses of hate. Institutions have my full backing to use their powers to do so and keep their students safe.” But as the rest of the article made clear, the universities don’t just have her “backing” to act against the protesters. They will be compelled to crack down on protests against Israeli apartheid and genocide – what she calls “hate” – or face stiff financial penalties. This comes in the wake, as Phillipson notes, of separate plans announced by home secretary Shabana Mahmood to give the police further powers to outlaw protests that have a “cumulative impact”. In other words, the police will be empowered to crush the very kind of protests that discomfit governments the most – those that are repeated because there is a strength of popular feeling to which the government is utterly unresponsive. It should hardly need pointing out that western governments are most likely to be unresponsive when it is their own criminal behaviours that are the target of protest, whether it is their collusion in Israel’s genocide or their collusion with corporations to gut meaningful action to halt climate breakdown. Though you would not know it from the media’s cheering, what the British government is doing is stripping out the last vestiges of the right to protest, a right that has been under relentless assault in the UK for the past 40 years. Phillipson’s Sunday interview with Trevor Philips on Sky was illustrative. He pushed the education secretary to be even more draconian in hollowing out speech and protest rights, as well as academic freedom. In turn, Phillipson sought once again to rationalise the government’s demolition of the last pillars of a free society on familiar grounds: as a supposed fight against antisemitism. After conversations with Jewish students and their parents, Phillipson said she had come to appreciate that they are “worried about what it is to be a young Jewish person on campus at the moment in the UK, and we can’t tolerate that”. The reality is that the police already have plenty of powers to deal with what she called antisemitic “harassment and intimidation”. Forces have the government’s backing and wide social support to tackle real race hate. So why are the police not cracking down on these antisemites supposedly roaming our university campuses? The answer – the one Phillipson wants to conceal from us – is that, in the overwhelming majority of cases she’s referring to, Jewish students are not the victims of an attack or even of personal criticism. They have simply been made uncomfortable by the presence of other students exercising a basic democratic right to protest in the public space of a campus – in this case, against Israel’s genocide in Gaza and our own government’s material, diplomatic and financial support for it. Any discomfort felt by some Jewish students flows not from the actual protests but from the fact that these students have been raised as Zionists. They have been raised with a political ideology that makes them identify with Israel. They have chosen to associate their Jewish identity with a state the World Court has declared is both illegally occupying Palestinian territory and enforcing a system of apartheid rule over the Palestinian population. It is not the protesters making an association between Jews and Israel. It is the Zionist Jewish families Phillipson has spoken to – and non-Jews such as Phillipson and Sky’s Philips who think like them. There is a quick fix to this “problem”, one that does not involve shredding the right to protest and freedom of speech, or fining universities who allow students to protest. And that is for the British government, and the British media, to stop treating Israel like it is a normal member of the community of nations – after it has just committed genocide and, on a very best-case scenario, is about to return to a status quo in which Palestinians are brutally abused under systems of apartheid, ethnic cleansing and siege. It is for the British government and media to make clear to Zionist Jewish families, and those non-Jews who think like them, that it is not okay to identify with a criminal state, or to expect any special privilege – protection from being offended – when others want to criticise that criminal state for its criminal actions. There are plenty of British Jews who do not identify with Israel. In fact, many are repulsed by its actions and take part in anti-genocide demonstrations like the one at the weekend in London. Anyone offended by the protests needs to engage in some serious soul-searching. Their offence signals not just an identification with Israel, but an endorsement of its actions, including its genocide and apartheid rule over Palestinians. So why is the government getting this issue so wrong? Here we get to the nub of the matter. The British establishment, including the government and media, are not a disinterested party simply concerned with protecting Jews. Rather, they are an elite desperately trying to protect their own interests in a system of US-driven military supremacy that confers on western powers a sense of their complete entitlement to control over the world’s material resources, most especially in the oil-rich Middle East. Israel is a central pillar of this criminal, militarised enterprise, which is why it needs to be protected at all costs. That cost has included hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who have been killed and maimed in Gaza over the past two years. But it also includes the freedoms and rights we once took for granted. Now we see that these freedoms were only ever on licence from the ruling class – a licence that is being revoked now that we have proved too unruly, too defiant, too rebellious.
2:56

Israel is the excuse to snatch away freedoms we once took for granted: In interviews and a comment article over the weekend, the UK education secretary Bridget Phillipson made clear she plans to exploit the pause in the Gaza genocide to snuff out criticism of Israel’s criminal actions – and, of course, her own government’s collusion in that criminality. Naturally, the British establishment media have been keen to amplify her message that there will be painful consequences both for individuals who continue protesting against Israeli atrocities and for institutions, such as universities, that mistakenly assume they have a duty to uphold centuries-old freedoms by tolerating such protests. These protests, let us remember, are fully in line with a ruling last year from the International Court of Justice, the world’s highest court, which declared: a) Israel is illegally occupying Palestinian territory and enforcing a system of apartheid rule over the Palestinian populations there – and has been doing so for decades. b) Western governments are obligated to do what they can to bring that illegal occupation and Israel’s apartheid system to an end as quickly as possible. Instead, those same governments are violating the ruling, and international law, both by continuing to support Israel’s criminality and by preventing their own citizens from putting pressure on them to end their support. The government of Keir Starmer, a former human rights lawyer, has even categorised protest against genocide as “support for terrorism”. For the first time in British history, a direct-action group, Palestine Action, has been banned as a terrorist organisation – in its case, for targeting weapons factories in Britain arming Israel’s genocide. It is now illegal to express any support for the group. In a commentary in the Sunday Express, Phillipson said she wanted the government’s campaign against free speech to go even further to protect Israel. She intends to import to our shores Donald Trump’s full-frontal assault on academic freedom. She has written to vice-chancellors warning them that their universities face fines and public funding cuts should they allow students to protest on campus against Israeli genocide and apartheid. She added: “I’m clear the buck stops with universities when it comes to ridding their campuses of hate. Institutions have my full backing to use their powers to do so and keep their students safe.” But as the rest of the article made clear, the universities don’t just have her “backing” to act against the protesters. They will be compelled to crack down on protests against Israeli apartheid and genocide – what she calls “hate” – or face stiff financial penalties. This comes in the wake, as Phillipson notes, of separate plans announced by home secretary Shabana Mahmood to give the police further powers to outlaw protests that have a “cumulative impact”. In other words, the police will be empowered to crush the very kind of protests that discomfit governments the most – those that are repeated because there is a strength of popular feeling to which the government is utterly unresponsive. It should hardly need pointing out that western governments are most likely to be unresponsive when it is their own criminal behaviours that are the target of protest, whether it is their collusion in Israel’s genocide or their collusion with corporations to gut meaningful action to halt climate breakdown. Though you would not know it from the media’s cheering, what the British government is doing is stripping out the last vestiges of the right to protest, a right that has been under relentless assault in the UK for the past 40 years. Phillipson’s Sunday interview with Trevor Philips on Sky was illustrative. He pushed the education secretary to be even more draconian in hollowing out speech and protest rights, as well as academic freedom. In turn, Phillipson sought once again to rationalise the government’s demolition of the last pillars of a free society on familiar grounds: as a supposed fight against antisemitism. After conversations with Jewish students and their parents, Phillipson said she had come to appreciate that they are “worried about what it is to be a young Jewish person on campus at the moment in the UK, and we can’t tolerate that”. The reality is that the police already have plenty of powers to deal with what she called antisemitic “harassment and intimidation”. Forces have the government’s backing and wide social support to tackle real race hate. So why are the police not cracking down on these antisemites supposedly roaming our university campuses? The answer – the one Phillipson wants to conceal from us – is that, in the overwhelming majority of cases she’s referring to, Jewish students are not the victims of an attack or even of personal criticism. They have simply been made uncomfortable by the presence of other students exercising a basic democratic right to protest in the public space of a campus – in this case, against Israel’s genocide in Gaza and our own government’s material, diplomatic and financial support for it. Any discomfort felt by some Jewish students flows not from the actual protests but from the fact that these students have been raised as Zionists. They have been raised with a political ideology that makes them identify with Israel. They have chosen to associate their Jewish identity with a state the World Court has declared is both illegally occupying Palestinian territory and enforcing a system of apartheid rule over the Palestinian population. It is not the protesters making an association between Jews and Israel. It is the Zionist Jewish families Phillipson has spoken to – and non-Jews such as Phillipson and Sky’s Philips who think like them. There is a quick fix to this “problem”, one that does not involve shredding the right to protest and freedom of speech, or fining universities who allow students to protest. And that is for the British government, and the British media, to stop treating Israel like it is a normal member of the community of nations – after it has just committed genocide and, on a very best-case scenario, is about to return to a status quo in which Palestinians are brutally abused under systems of apartheid, ethnic cleansing and siege. It is for the British government and media to make clear to Zionist Jewish families, and those non-Jews who think like them, that it is not okay to identify with a criminal state, or to expect any special privilege – protection from being offended – when others want to criticise that criminal state for its criminal actions. There are plenty of British Jews who do not identify with Israel. In fact, many are repulsed by its actions and take part in anti-genocide demonstrations like the one at the weekend in London. Anyone offended by the protests needs to engage in some serious soul-searching. Their offence signals not just an identification with Israel, but an endorsement of its actions, including its genocide and apartheid rule over Palestinians. So why is the government getting this issue so wrong? Here we get to the nub of the matter. The British establishment, including the government and media, are not a disinterested party simply concerned with protecting Jews. Rather, they are an elite desperately trying to protect their own interests in a system of US-driven military supremacy that confers on western powers a sense of their complete entitlement to control over the world’s material resources, most especially in the oil-rich Middle East. Israel is a central pillar of this criminal, militarised enterprise, which is why it needs to be protected at all costs. That cost has included hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who have been killed and maimed in Gaza over the past two years. But it also includes the freedoms and rights we once took for granted. Now we see that these freedoms were only ever on licence from the ruling class – a licence that is being revoked now that we have proved too unruly, too defiant, too rebellious.

Jonathan Cook

44,135 views • 10 months ago