Sensitive content
This media may contain sensitive content.
Загрузка видео...
Не удалось загрузить видео
Oil on my sensitive nipples while wearing the swimsuit pulled down... can't hold back anymore 🥵 오일 바르고 유두 자위를 하다가 마무리를 했더니 잔뜩 나왔어 💦 Part 2 - Full version on Fansly/OnlyFans 👇 #Sissy #Tgirl #NipplePlay #Swimsuit #Gush2 #MtF #男の娘
30,174 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)
Комментарии: 0
Нет доступных комментариев
Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста
![Pyotr Kurzin Pyotr Kurzin , host of The Global Gambit podcast, published an interesting interview with Peter Zeihan Peter Zeihan about Russia's war against Ukraine. I found it quite compelling, so I decided to share its main points: ▪️ "[Putin] has another seven million people he can mobilize if he wants to. Granted, that is the last generation of Russian men under 30. That obviously comes at a huge cost. But the Russians really have not put their shoulder into this war yet. They have tried to treat it as what they've said - a special military operation. We have not seen the full economy mobilized. We have not seen the industrial plants receive the investment necessary for a mass expansion. And we certainly haven't seen the population mobilized in a way past wars involving either the Soviets or the Russians have. We are starting to see that now. It is not risk-free. There's no guarantee they win this anymore. But to think there's going to be a political break in Russia without a significantly greater economic dislocation than we have seen so far is being over-optimistic." ▪️ "For the first time, we're actually seeing the Russians on a military economic footing. While that is, from the capitalistic point of view, wildly inefficient, that doesn't mean it can't work. It means that for the first time in 5 years, the Russians are actually fighting like this is a real war as opposed to something that's a sideshow. That does have consequences. It means we have to have, among other things, a full mobilization. But to say that that's going to break the system, I don't know if I buy that. It just puts stresses in different places." ▪️ "We have to have a much sharper break. And that means the apathy has to end. The best example I can give you is when Prigozhin led his rebellion. He marched his people 1,500 kilometers to Moscow. No regular military commanders joined him, and no regular military commanders tried to stop him. That really underlined just the huge degree of apathy in Russia, even among the security services, about what was going on. While that means it's really difficult for Putin to motivate people, it also means it's very difficult for Putin to be motivated against. Until we have a situation where we don't just have defectors on the front, but actually people shooting their commanders, I don't see Putin in significant domestic danger." ▪️ "Five years on, and Ukrainians are not simply still fighting, but they found new ways to give the Russians a bloody nose and actually change the mechanics on the ground. With the new military technology we've seen this year, that eight-to-one ratio is being achieved regularly. For the first time in this conflict, we are finally at an even fight. That doesn't mean the Ukrainians are going to win, but for the first time, they're not losing ground. And that matters immensely." ▪️ "The Ukrainians are trying to change the math of the war in a very intelligent way. The [drone] technology is innovative. Since the Ukrainians are launching hundreds of these a day, we're in a situation where the entire Russian system is running out of anti-aircraft capability. It changes the math because now the Russians have to defend every square inch and absolutely cannot. Putin has redirected air defenses to concentrate around a few specific areas, most notably Crimea and Moscow, and everything else is kind of open. What we've seen in just the last couple of weeks is that the mid-range strikes that the Ukrainians have been doing since March, basically destroying the logistical tail of the military forces within about 300 or 400 kilometers of the front, have had such an impact that the Ukrainians are actually able to go on the offensive in zones that are mined and win. For the first time, the Russians just can't get more drones, more men, more fuel, more food within the battle zone at all. And that's now affected their ability to hold the line." ▪️ "The amount of economic damage that the Ukrainians cause is really deeply immense. We've had over 140 attacks now on 'shadow fleet' tankers in the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea in just the last six weeks. We are looking at the end of Russia's ability to export through the Baltic or the Black Sea. Conservatively, that's three to four million barrels a day of oil and product. They'll still be able to use, for now, their Siberian export route, but collectively, rail and pipe there is less than a third of what goes west. Long-term impact. This is the end of Russia as a significant energy exporter. Once this physical infrastructure is destroyed, the wells will be shut in, and most of them are mature wells that require foreign technology for their development. The Russians will have to re-drill them, and they can't re-drill them until such time as the sanctions are gone. The Chinese don't have the technology." ▪️ "Strategically, there is no version of an independent Ukraine that can function unless Crimea is part of Ukraine, or at least neutral, because it commands the access to the rivers that are the lifeblood of the Ukrainian economy for their exports of steel and especially grains. And if the Russians control Crimea, they basically control the north half of the Black Sea and can project power west and south very easily. But that assumes that they can resupply Crimea successfully, which is no longer for sure. With the mid-range drone strikes, it basically turned Crimea into an island that the Russians can't support, which means it turns from a springboard into a sandbag. The Ukrainians don't need to make a push in order to drain the Russians. They're just forcing the Russians to use all of their logistical capacity to try to reach someplace that they really can't defend anymore. It's a good strategy." ▪️ "For the Ukrainians to win, they don't just need to get Crimea back. They need to make sure that the Russians lose the military capacity to threaten them. And that means neutralizing or occupying the two Russian cities that are the logistic hubs that enable the war - Belgorod and Rostov-on-Don. We're nowhere close to that right now. But if those two cities are removed from the equation, it's not just that Russia loses the ability to project power west; it loses the ability to project power into the Caucasus. And then you're talking about the entire southern rim of the Russian state falling. And all of those barriers are then completely up in the air, and the Russians are too far from all of them and can't defend any of their territory. And whatever vector a future threat comes in from, the Russians just can't deal with it at all." ▪️ "At this moment, it's a question of whether or not and how soon the Russians can copy what the Ukrainians are doing with drones against two other developments. Number one, the Russians are finally putting huge investments into their ballistic missile capabilities because that's a technology that the Ukrainians have no defense for. The first large numbers of those missiles will probably come online in about six months. That's about the same time that these joint facilities that the Ukrainians are building with the European NATO allies and a number of countries in the Persian Gulf will also come online. So, we're going to have many more Ukrainian memory drones at the same time we have many more Russian ballistic missiles. This war is changing month by month."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2090500581333021162/amplify_video_thumb/2090500437518528512/img/Qq6d8pbtKfIuoVWL.jpg)
!["The label just says No Brand" GRWM w Desi Generated on Atlas Cloud Wan 3.0 Prime Esr upscale stitched together on ElevenCreative studio prompt Desi: South Asian woman, mid-20s, warm brown skin with natural, realistic texture — visible pores, subtle natural sheen, no airbrushed smoothness. Expressive dark brown eyes, defined brows, full lips. Long dark wavy hair, undone/messy at the start. No jewelry until the earrings beat. Gold jhumka earrings and thin gold necklace are her fixed accessories once applied. Environment — Desi's Bedroom: Modest, lived-in bedroom, soft neutral-toned walls, single window with sheer curtains, warm diffused morning light with real shadow falloff. Wooden/laminate flooring, small woven area rug. Flows from bed area to vanity/mirror corner to a closet/wardrobe area to a doorway. Bed: simple platform frame, unmade, muted duvet, mismatched pillows, folded throw, nightstand with a plain ceramic mug, analog alarm clock, small lamp. Vanity: wooden dresser, plain oval mirror, small ceramic dish holding her rings/studs/jhumka earrings, a plain glass jar labeled "NO BRAND" in small black sans-serif text, a plain wooden hairbrush — all visible on the surface from the start. Wardrobe area: simple open wardrobe/hangers with a small handful of plain unbranded clothing already visible. Doorway: simple wooden door, softly lit hallway beyond. Visual style (all blocks): Cinematic realism, not commercial polish. Soft natural film-like grain, warm slightly imperfect color grading true to real morning light. Skin genuinely textured, never smoothed or beauty-filtered. Smooth floating steadicam/gimbal camera movement throughout, cinematic framing sensibility, not raw flat phone footage. Audio style (all blocks): Warm, natural, close-mic room-tone quality, not sterile or studio-clean. Real object-contact sounds, natural room reverb on her voice. No music, no artificial sound effects. Standing negatives (repeat in every block): No AI morphing of any kind — no shifting, warping, or unstable facial features, body proportions, or object shapes. No items suddenly appearing or disappearing in frame — every object must already be visible in its place before she interacts with it. No over-polished or beauty-filtered skin — natural texture and imperfection required throughout. No overly clean, sterile, or commercial visual grade. No duplicate Desi in any frame. No identity drift from block to block. Every product/container shows either no text/logo or exactly the plain "NO BRAND" mark — simple black sans-serif on plain packaging. No recognizable real-world brand names, logos, or trademarked packaging/clothing design anywhere in frame. No extra fingers, fused hands, or distorted anatomy. No text overlays or captions. No music — natural ambient audio only. Mirror reflections physically accurate and consistent; camera never visible in any reflection. No sudden speed changes, no time-lapse compression, no rushed dialogue delivery. BLOCK 1 — [0:00–0:15] The Alarm, Waking, Yawn, First Line Continuity note: Opening block — no prior frame to match. Action: Dark, close frame on Desi's sleeping face, soft warm morning light beginning to catch her skin's natural texture. A phone alarm begins ringing on the nightstand. Hold on her unmoving for a real beat as it rings. Her hand fumbles slowly toward the sound, silences it. She lies still a moment longer, then opens her eyes slowly, squinting at the light. She yawns — full, unhurried, genuine — stretching slightly where she lies. A long pause settles after. Dialogue: (after the yawn, slow, groggy, real pauses) "Okay... (pause) ...so it is way too early for this..." (long pause, slow exhale) "...but let's get ready anyway." Camera: Static-to-slow-float — begins locked close on her face, only beginning the faintest float as she finishes speaking, ending the block just as she starts to shift toward sitting up. Block-specific negatives: The alarm sound must play first, before any dialogue or visible movement. Do not have her wake up abruptly or sit up quickly — the entire block stays in slow, groggy stillness. Do not begin the standing/sitting motion before the final line completes. BLOCK 2 — [0:15–0:30] Five More Minutes + Coffee Stretch Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 1 ended — Desi still lying down, having just finished her line, beginning to shift toward sitting up. Match her position, the room's lighting, and her expression precisely to Block 1's final frame. Action: She sits up fully, stretches with a real, full arms-overhead extension, laughs softly at herself. She reaches for the ceramic mug already present on the nightstand, takes a slow sip, holds it a moment, exhales contentedly. Only after finishing the sip does she swing her legs out and stand, unhurried. Dialogue: "Five more minutes..." (pause, small laugh) "...turned into not five minutes." (beat) "Classic." (pause, after the sip) "Okay." (beat) "...That helps." Camera: Smooth floating steadicam, holding a steady elevated angle through the stretch, following her rise to standing by the block's end. Block-specific negatives: Do not skip or shorten the full stretch. The sip of coffee must complete before she stands — no simultaneous drinking-and-standing. Do not have her rush to her feet; the stand is the final motion of the block, unhurried. BLOCK 3 — [0:30–0:45] Moisturizer Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 2 ended — Desi just risen to standing beside the bed. This block covers her walk to the vanity and the full moisturizer application. Match her position and the room's light to Block 2's final frame. Action: Camera drifts with her as she walks unhurried from the bed to the vanity, arriving at the mirror. The plain glass jar labeled "NO BRAND" is already visible on the vanity surface as she arrives. She unscrews the lid slowly, scoops a small amount, and applies it in full, unhurried circular motions across her face — the entire application shown start to finish within this block. Dialogue: (spoken only once the application is fully finished, near the block's end) "This is like..." (pause) "...the one step I actually never skip." (beat) "Everything else is negotiable." Camera: Floating lateral tracking during the walk, settling into a steady medium shot at the mirror for the application itself. Block-specific negatives: The jar must already be visible on the vanity before she reaches for it — no appearing mid-motion. The application must be shown completing in full before any dialogue begins. Do not rush the walk to the mirror to make room for the application — both get real, unhurried time within the 15 seconds. BLOCK 4 — [0:45–1:00] Hairbrush + Earrings Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 3 ended — Desi standing at the mirror, moisturizer just applied. Match her position and expression to Block 3's final frame. Action: She picks up the plain wooden hairbrush, already resting on the vanity, and brushes out her hair with several full, unhurried strokes, working through it completely. She sets the brush down, then picks up her gold jhumka earrings from the ceramic dish and puts them on one at a time — each fully finished and settled before she begins the second. Dialogue: (mid-brushing) "Yeah, I don't even know what's in that jar anymore." (soft laugh) "The label just says 'No Brand.'" (beat, as she puts in the second earring) "...Works though." Camera: Steady medium-close shot at the mirror, holding through both the brushing and the earrings without cutting away. Block-specific negatives: The hairbrush and earrings must both already be visible on the vanity from the block's start. The first earring must be fully in place before she begins the second — no simultaneous application. Do not shorten the number of brush strokes to save time; let the motion read as genuinely unhurried. BLOCK 5 — [1:00–1:15] Wardrobe Change (Revised: Explicit Detail + Locked Outfit) Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 4 ended — Desi at the mirror, both earrings now in place. This block covers her moving to the wardrobe area and changing. New Outfit — Locked Reference (carries into Block 6 and any future scenes): A simple, plain white or cream-colored short-sleeve cotton top with a round or slightly scooped neckline, no graphics, no visible branding — soft, everyday fabric with natural draping and slight creasing. Paired with plain straight-leg or slightly relaxed-fit trousers in a muted neutral tone (soft khaki, warm taupe, or dark grey), no visible logos, no stitched branding on pockets or waistband. Simple flat sandals or bare feet, consistent with the casual, staying-home-in-the-morning energy of the piece. This exact combination — top, trousers, footwear — must remain identical through Block 6 and any subsequent generation; treat it as a locked reference image once established. Action, explicitly detailed: Camera follows her as she walks from the vanity toward the wardrobe area, where the clothing has been visible on the rod/hangers since the environment was established — including the specific white/cream top and neutral trousers she will select, already hanging there from the start. She reaches the wardrobe, looks over the few items for a moment, unhurried, and lifts the plain white top and the neutral trousers off their hangers, laying them briefly over her arm or the chair. She turns slightly away from camera or angles herself naturally at the wardrobe (matter-of-fact, not performative), and removes her sleep t-shirt first — pulling it up and off in one unhurried motion, setting it aside on the chair or a nearby surface. She then pulls the plain white top on over her head, arms finding the sleeves naturally, settling the fabric down over her torso with a small adjusting tug at the hem. She then steps out of her sleep bottoms or loungewear pants — sitting briefly on the edge of the chair or bed if needed for balance, one leg at a time — and pulls on the neutral trousers, standing to fasten or settle them at the waist, a small natural motion to smooth them down her hips. Once fully dressed, she does a small self-check — glancing down at the outfit, smoothing the top's hem once more, rolling one sleeve cuff slightly — before turning back toward the mirror. Dialogue: "Okay..." (pause, mid-change) "...let's see." (beat, once dressed, considering the outfit) "...Yeah. That works." Camera: Floating steadicam following her to the wardrobe, holding a respectful medium distance throughout the change — matter-of-fact framing, never a close or lingering angle, treating the change the way an ordinary morning routine would actually look on camera, not stylized or drawn out for effect. Block-specific negatives: The white top and neutral trousers must already be visible hanging in the wardrobe from the start of the block — no appearing only once she reaches for them. The change must be shown as a clear, complete sequence — sleep shirt removed, new top pulled on, sleep bottoms removed, new trousers pulled on — with no skipped steps or instant swaps between states. The change must read as ordinary and unhurried but not sexualized or dwelt upon — medium-distance framing throughout, natural body positioning, nothing posed. No outfit teleporting at any point — every layer change must be visibly performed by her, not implied through a cut or dissolve (there are no cuts in this piece regardless). This exact outfit (plain white/cream short-sleeve top, neutral trousers, sandals or bare feet) is now the locked wardrobe reference for the remainder of the piece — it must not vary in color, cut, or detail in Block 6 or any subsequent scene. BLOCK 6 — 1:15–1:30 FINAL LOOK → WALK OUT CONTINUITY OPEN Block 6 begins immediately from the final frame of Block 5. There is no cut. Desi stands in front of the mirror wearing the exact outfit established in Block 5. Her: white/cream top; neutral trousers; footwear; gold jhumka earrings; gold necklace; hairstyle; makeup; facial features remain exactly consistent. --- 1:15–1:20 FINAL MIRROR CHECK Desi faces the oval mirror. The camera floats gently into position behind/alongside her. She looks at her reflection. A genuine pause. She looks down briefly at the outfit. Smooths the top once. Looks back at herself. A tiny satisfied nod. No exaggerated posing. No influencer-style presentation. She simply looks like someone deciding that she is ready enough to leave. --- 1:20–1:26 WALK TOWARD DOOR Desi turns away from the mirror. The camera smoothly follows. She walks through the bedroom toward the doorway. Her pace remains natural and unhurried. The camera never overtakes her. No whip-pan. No sudden acceleration. No speed ramp. The hallway beyond the doorway is already visible. Morning light spills naturally from the hallway. Dialogue Desi: "Okay." pause "Human." beat "Presentable." pause "Good enough." A small genuine laugh. --- 1:26–1:30 EXIT Desi reaches the doorway. She opens the wooden door. Warm hallway light falls across her. She steps through. The camera continues following her naturally. Just before she disappears completely, she turns her head slightly toward the camera. A genuine late-arriving smile. Dialogue "Alright..." pause "...let's go be a person today." beat "Bye." She exits. The camera remains inside the bedroom. It settles naturally on the empty doorway. Hold for one quiet beat. END. --- MASTER NEGATIVES & CONSTRAINTS BLOCKS 5–6 CONTINUITY One continuous physical camera take. Zero hard cuts. Zero hidden cuts. Zero jump cuts. Zero dissolves. Zero fades between states. Zero time skips. Zero time-lapse. Zero teleportation. Zero duplicated footage. Zero sudden camera repositioning. WHIP-PAN ONE WHIP-PAN ONLY. It occurs exclusively during the wardrobe change in Block 5. The whip-pan must: physically originate from the camera's current position; move through the same bedroom; temporarily obscure Desi; return naturally to the wardrobe area. It must never be used as a disguised cut. No whip-pan during Block 6. --- NO MORPHING / NO MESHING Absolutely no: face morphing; facial meshing; body morphing; wardrobe morphing; texture morphing; object morphing; environmental morphing; frame interpolation artifacts; identity blending; unstable facial geometry; unstable hands; unstable hair; unstable jewelry. Desi must remain the same woman throughout the entire sequence. --- IDENTITY LOCK Do not alter: eyes; eyebrows; nose; lips; jaw; cheekbones; skin tone; face shape; body proportions; age; hair texture; hairline. No identity drift. No alternate version of Desi. No duplicate Desi. No phantom Desi. --- WARDROBE CHANGE The wardrobe change must be physically believable. No: instant outfit swap; outfit teleportation; clothing appearing on her body; clothing disappearing from her body; clothing growing onto her; magical transition; glowing transformation; particle effect; dissolve; morph. The single whip-pan simply gives privacy while maintaining the continuous physical flow of the camera. --- OBJECT CONTINUITY No object may suddenly appear or disappear. The following must remain spatially consistent: wardrobe; clothing; chair; vanity; mirror; jewelry; dresser; plants; rug; door; hallway. The white/cream top and neutral trousers must be visibly hanging in the wardrobe before Desi selects them. --- OUTFIT LOCK Once Desi finishes changing: WHITE/CREAM SHORT-SLEEVE TOP + EXACT NEUTRAL TROUSERS + SAME FOOTWEAR must remain unchanged through the end. No recoloring. No redesign. No different sleeve length. No different trouser cut. No different footwear. No spontaneous accessories. --- MIRROR CONSISTENCY Mirror reflection must be physically accurate at all times. One Desi. Reflection matches her movements exactly. No reflection drift. No alternate face. No duplicated reflection. No delayed reflection. Camera never appears in the mirror. --- ANATOMY No: extra fingers; missing fingers; fused fingers; duplicated hands; malformed hands; warped arms; elongated limbs; distorted torso; unnatural joints; anatomical meshing. --- VISUAL STYLE Cinematic realism. Natural morning light. Natural skin pores and texture. Subtle film-like grain. Slightly imperfect real-world color. No: beauty filter; plastic skin; excessive skin smoothing; glossy commercial lighting; HDR; hyper-clean advertising aesthetic; artificial glow; excessive sharpening. --- AUDIO Continuous natural audio only: footsteps; fabric movement; clothing rustle; jewelry movement; room ambience; natural breathing; door movement; hallway ambience; Desi's natural voice. No music. No cinematic impact sounds. No artificial transition sounds. No sound effect accompanying the whip-pan. --- VOICE Warm low-mid female voice. Natural morning rasp. Close and intimate. Slow. Unhurried. Conversational. Real pauses between phrases. Never sounds like a commercial, narrator, actress, or influencer reading a script. Do not compress dialogue to fit the timestamps. Natural delivery takes priority. --- FINAL GENERATION LOCK ONE DESI. ONE BEDROOM. ONE CAMERA. ONE CONTINUOUS PHYSICAL FLOW. ONE WHIP-PAN ONLY — BLOCK 5 WARDROBE CHANGE. NO CUTS. NO MORPHING. NO MESHING. NO TELEPORTATION. NO IDENTITY DRIFT. NO OBJECT POP-IN. NO WARDROBE TELEPORTATION. NO DUPLICATION. NO TIME-LAPSE. NO RUSHED MOTION. Block 6 must begin exactly where Block 5 ends, with the exact same Desi, exact same face, exact same jewelry, exact same hairstyle, exact same outfit, exact same environment, and exact same spatial continuity. #AtlasCloud](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2093701367797785024/amplify_video_thumb/2093701197957869568/img/ZREoSERJvFSA0lqh.jpg)
![Well, friends, the interview the John O'Keefe and Karen Read trial world didn't know they wanted has finally occurred. I appreciate The Glarer for having me on his program. We discussed Kate Peter, I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, both sides agreed as to the importance of civil debate and leaving people's families out of the fray and then Will helped Olivia and I move towards amicable discussion. Overall, a 10/10 way to celebrate the day towel become a YouTube partner. Here are my two favorite quotes from Will and myself; [Grant] "If any of you took 10 minutes --not on camera-- to talk to Lindsey Gaetani, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God I will defend that 'till my last day." [Grant] "I realized that there was just this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change — I had to reflect that change in my actions." [The Glarer] "If you believe so much in Karen Read’s guilt, then the facts should speak for themselves. You shouldn’t have to bring people’s family members into it. [The Glarer] "But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself — because of how smart you are — that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion." Here's the full transcript: [Grant] Well, good afternoon towel friends. My name is Grant Smith Ellis and in addition to becoming a YouTube partner today I also decided to call into The Glarer's show. It was the collaboration that the world didn't know they needed but now they have. And if you'd like to listen to this fascinating conversation, related to new allegations as to Kate MafiaMasshole Peter being a PI in the orbit of the Aidan Turtleboy Kearney prosecution, as well as somehow both Will and I eventually coming to a discussion where I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, along with a closing segment about the importance on both sides of the Karen Read and John O’Keefe case of being mutually respectful, even if we have differences of opinion on those facts, you can do so right now. Will and I shared a belief that positive changes in the Karen Read and John O'Keefe trial world, at least in terms of that improving dynamic as to disagreeing without being disagreeable, are evident. So enjoy the conversation, folks. It was certainly an interesting one. [The Glarer] You're on — who am I speaking with? [Grant] Hey, Will, it's me. I'm Grant... [The Glarer] — hold on, I gotta give you applause, buddy. You made it. [Grant] Well, we certainly may have different views on the case, but I think we share respect for Jesus and we can talk bad about Kate Peter for sure. [The Glarer] Yeah, that we can do. Sure. Sure. So what's up, bud? What do you got to say? [Grant] Well, I think if people have been following me on X, they will know I've been yelling about Kate Peter taking an envelope of cash in the Chick-fil-A parking lot in front of me for months. And I feel vindicated as of the news of this weekend. [The Glarer] Okay. Okay, so wait a minute. That tracks. So the person who is in this sworn affidavit who claims to have seen Kate Peter with the manila envelope — you're claiming to have seen her with the same envelope. Is that what you're saying? [Grant] It wasn't a manila envelope. Well, there's two pertinent facts. So Kate Peter and I met up for the first time — I would say it was in the winter of 2024 — in a Chick-fil-A parking lot somewhere on the South Coast, maybe near Raynham or something. Anyway, she came and got in my car and she was like, "Well, I'm waiting for someone in a white Toyota Corolla to drop me off money. We try to do it with cash so it doesn't leave a record." And I was like, "Well, this seems a little weird." And then the car pulled up. I didn't actually see the car. She got out, went over to it, came back into my car. It was a white envelope with a green thank-you card. She opened it. There were probably four or five hundred — four or five fifties and a bunch of twenties. [The Glarer] Wow.... Okay, now Grant, I gotta ask you a tough question, buddy. I would be remiss if I didn't do that, all right? Now, a lot of people are thinking the same thing I'm thinking right now, which is: how can we believe you? Where's your credibility? Because you've lied about so many other things so easily. [Grant] Well, I would challenge that and say maybe you have different perspectives on me, but that should reinforce what I'm saying here. The Melanie Little and Alan Jackson Aruba thing — I apologized for that on stream and in a post (because Melanie Little told people not to go after Lindsey's kids, and I found that honorable). [The Glarer] Fair enough. [The Glarer] You did apologize. Okay, so you apologized for that. Okay. [Grant] But I'm critiquing someone [Kate Peter] who would ostensibly be aligned with what I believe about the case, and I still believe what I believe about Karen being responsible for John's death— we don't have to get into it — but I'm critiquing someone who supports that view. That should reinforce my credibility here. [The Glarer] Yeah, and MicroDots backs you up at least on this thing, you know, he says he believes you on this thing. I'm just saying — dude, I've read what you've written. You're a talented writer, clearly. But I can honestly say I've got a whole community of people here — a shit ton of people in this chat right now — that I know would agree with me that if you made a habit of reporting the truth, you'd have support, you'd have readers, you'd have a whole audience. I'd be a fan! But your credibility is fucked with me right now, dude. You know, and I hate that, because I actually enjoy reading what you write. [Grant] I appreciate what you're saying. I think I would just say maybe it's smaller than your community, but I just got made a YouTube partner today. I'm actually celebrating that. I have a small community, people do support me — maybe not as many as support your channel, but it's just people with different views consuming different content. [The Glarer] Yeah, but the thing is — like, I'm content with my audience. My audience could be bigger, but I cuss a lot and I use words that offend people and I just don't kind of play by the normal YouTube game that most creators play when they grow, you know? And I'm okay with the rate at which my channel grows because I get to be myself. But I don't hold back and I don't play by these rules. So I get all that. But I mean, I'm not ethically doing anything wrong. If I were spreading misinformation or contributing to any spread of misinformation, I would have a problem with myself and what I'm doing. You see what I'm saying? Like, it's a little bit different. You're telling me that you're content with your audience being small because you like to make shit up? You know what I mean? [Grant] No, no. Because it's a new channel. That's why the audience is growing. Anyway, the reason I shake your hand is I do think you're authentic in your beliefs, even if we disagree. And well — before I forget, one more thing about that Chick-fil-A parking lot cash that's actually important: when Kate got that money handed over, she told me it was for a donation drive to help other people offset babysitting costs or whatever nonsense. Someone sent a text message — a family member of the person who paid her that cash — and they put in writing that they sent the money for Kate's own expenses. So she lied to me in the car about what the money was for. Something’s up with that. [The Glarer] So she told you in the car that the money was for... [Grant] She said it was to pay for babysitters for people who need help and to donate to other people, which I don't believe. Like, of course not. Nobody believes that. [The Glarer] And then you found out — through what — that this money was actually for her personal expenses? [Grant] Eventually a text message got released from someone in the orbit of whoever paid Kate. It was a family member — I don't know who it was. I've only seen the text message. I'm happy to reshare it on my X later. In that text message, it says — quoting the person — "I sent that envelope with my sister over to Kate. It was for her expenses" or something like that. So even that is evidence. [The Glarer] Wow. Okay, so you are strictly of the opinion, based on things you've seen yourself, that Kate Peter is absolutely being paid by the Commonwealth to spin narratives? [Grant] I'll give you one more piece of information, Will, and maybe you or your audience can track this down: I don't think Kate was involved in the Karen Read investigation directly, but I think starting in the fall of 2023 she worked for a private investigator named Marty Kraft. And I believe by proxy she was then retained to work on Aidan's case through that PI firm. [The Glarer] Okay, and then she just became the mouthpiece between the PI firm and the Commonwealth is what you're saying. [Grant] I will say a few things: I reasonably believe she does have direct contact with the DA and agents of the Commonwealth — I've said that before — and I also believe that she has favoritism towards specific witnesses in the orbit of this case. Not all of them — specific witnesses. [The Glarer] Okay, well, I mean, we know who they are, but okay. [Grant] I will also say — I think — that your caller was prescient earlier, and they mentioned there might be some mutual blackmail. Well, we know that Lindsey Gaetani’s phone extraction was manipulated to remove messages from Brian Tully to Lindsey and from Kate Peter to Lindsey. [The Glarer] ...what's your deal with Lindsey? [Grant] Hold, on let's pull it back first. First of all, I think there was a bifurcation: there's charges from October 2023 against Aidan and December 2023 against Aidan. One set of charges, from October of 2023, involved the Karen Read witnesses; the other set, from December of 2023, involved Lindsey. I don't think anyone set Aidan up in December 2023. I think he was just in love with Lindsey and it kind of got out of control. [The Glarer] Bro... [Grant] Well, but hold on, Will... [The Glarer] I'm listening... [Grant] I think that cell phone extraction goes right to the mutual blackmail point your friend talked about earlier. Someone, during the course of the Aidan Kearney investigation involving Lindsey, manipulated that cell phone extraction, and it could have only happened while it was in State Police custody. That is the whole — that's everything right there because of Kate Peter is the only person who could have gotten Brian Tully to get Nick Guarino to manipulate that extraction while it was in State Police custody before Tully leaked it, by hand, to Aidan's lawyer. [The Glarer] Okay, so listen, Grant. Like, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding. Now, I think Lindsey was used. But come on, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding to try to set Aidan up. Like, you know this. [Grant] No, I disagree, because I've looked at the timeline closely. Aidan begged to go over there when his indictments got handed down in December. [The Glarer] Well, listen — why? [Grant] Because he got charged in October, but the indictments for the October thing came down December 20th. [Grant] Then when did he beg to go over to Lindsey's? [Grant] I'm about to explain. December 21st, Lindsey tells him, "Hey Aidan, I just got a subpoena for a grand jury." Aidan's mind has gotta' start racing. "Why would there be another grand jury? Is it about me and Karen Read? What is this about?" So he begged her to go over there so he could find out. And that's — like — he looked at her phone that night to see the messages between her and Kate to try to find out about what this new grand jury was about. So no one set him up. He begged to go over there. [The Glarer] So you're just assuming that he begged to go over there based on...? [Grant] I know he begged to go over there. He was pleading because he wanted to find out what the new grand jury was. [The Glarer] The difference between you and Aidan is Aidan posts receipts, dude. But you don't. You get the difference? That's why Aidan has as much of a following as he has. [Grant] If you're asking for receipts of him begging to go over there on that day, I'm happy to provide those. I'll post them. [The Glarer] Then why didn't you do that already? [Grant] Well, I think because what I understand to be the evidentiary record from going to all the hearings is different than what people consume, because not everyone goes to every hearing. But I'm happy to do that. I have it all archived. [The Glarer] Okay, but the point is — like MicroDots is saying — that he was baited to go over there. So even if he begged to go over there under whatever circumstance, we have proof — we've seen proof — that he was baited to go over there based on false information that she was pregnant. [Grant] No. No. She was pregnant. [The Glarer] Oh my, Grant, bro... [Grant] Okay. I will swear on my God about that. [The Glarer] Hold on... [Grant] Well, to move on, I was going to give you some credit. I was going to say you might have been right that the subpoena issued to Lindsey, without her knowledge, could have been to bait Aidan. [The Glarer] But she wouldn't — how do you explain the metadata on the pictures that she sent him of the sonogram, dude? [Grant] First of all, if you're talking about someone's pregnancy — that's a medical issue, and to bring it up on air disgraces Jesus. [The Glarer] Oh, come on, Grant. [Grant] Let's not. [The Glarer] Alright, fine. We won't talk about that anymore. But let's face it, dude — you're making excuses for this girl. And why? Like, do you have a crush on her? Is that what's going on here? And it's okay. [Grant] Oh, oh, please. When I first came into this case, I saw a woman walk into a courtroom, and I started listening to her story. And even in this conversation, there are multiple things I corrected where you were willing to say, "Okay, Grant, maybe that is what happened." And Lindsey doesn't have anyone out there who is voicing that for her, so I'm taking the opportunity to do it. [The Glarer] And do you wonder why she doesn't have anyone voicing things out for her, dude? [The Glarer] Because Aidan isolates people! [The Glarer] Get out of here with that. Stop. Again with the whole "it's Aidan's fault" shit, man. That's between you and Lindsey, dude. I'm asking — like, I asked you why you think that. Nobody is going to bat for Lindsey. And I saw receipts. I heard a recording of her — you're talking about somebody who I heard a recording of [that night with Aidan in December of 2023]. This is... Come on, Grant. [Grant] I was in the courtroom. I saw the people crying when that tape was played. And you know what I also heard, Will? I heard the original version of that tape that didn't have her consent to record, which is why Aidan got charged with felony wiretapping. [The Glarer] Okay, but you're not denying that she said that, right? [Grant] Listen, I have never been awake at 12:30 in the morning. I'm not a woman. I've never been confronted with that situation. I would never pass judgment on someone in that situation. [The Glarer] Every woman that I've ever heard express their opinion on it — pretty negative, dude. Just saying. Pretty negative. Especially the moms. Especially the moms. [Grant] So I don't think any people talking in that way — I don't think you've even met this woman. [The Glarer] You're right. I have not. I have not met her. [Grant] And if — I don't know if she will ever do this — but if any of you took 10 minutes, not on camera, to talk to this woman, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God, I will defend that 'till my last day. [The Glarer] Alright. Declared. Got it. I gotta' ask you one more question though. Why are you saying stuff about Olivia Nile — Olivia Nile and her mom — being paid agents for the defense? Come on. [Grant] Okay. Hold on. Hold on. Let me just explain that. I know that's Olivia Lamb. Okay? [The Glarer] Right, yeah, same person. Yeah, yeah. [Grant] Okay, so we all know Christina Lamb does boutique PR consulting for lawyers. She's good at it. Olivia’s good at it. They should own it. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] What — how is that proof, though? That Olivia Lamb is being paid by the defense in some way? You see the problem? [Grant] Hold on. That is an extrapolation some people may make. My argument is only that what she does looks like PR for the defense. I think Olivia hasn't been paid since last year. [The Glarer] But she's saying that's not even what she does, dude. [Grant] Okay, maybe it's not. But I think Olivia's contract ran up at the end of the first trial, if you want me to be very blunt with you. [The Glarer] Contract? [Grant] Mm-hmm. [The Glarer] But her mom doesn't even do that either — what the fuck’s her mom got to do with it? [Grant] Well, why would her mom run some random boutique PR consulting firm for lawyers, and then Olivia just shows up with this extremely high-level acumen, rivaling lawyers? [The Glarer] But that’s not what she does. She's saying that's not even what her mom does or what she does. [Grant] Okay, well, I looked at her mom's website. I archived it going back a few years, so I can post the screenshots again. And I know what she advertised herself as doing. [The Glarer] But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself — because of how smart you are — that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. That's what I think. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion. Because you state your opinions as though they're fact. And I think that's an ego thing. I don't even think it's malice. It’s just ego. That's what it comes off as, anyway, dude. Because everything you say — every time I ask you, "Where's your proof?" — you explain how you came to your opinion. You give me a laid-out story. Go back and listen to this later on — you'll see what I mean. [Grant] Well, I don't even doubt you, actually, that I'm firm in my convictions. If I'm not there to experience something, I do not know the truth. But I've seen the screenshots. I only found out Olivia Lamb was Olivia Lamb because I found an archived X post where she shared something very sentimental about her grandfather. I didn't like that. I didn't appreciate having to talk about that. But it became relevant because I wanted to know why she was involved in the case. I will listen to her tell me I'm wrong. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] Yeah, but you can't just, like, trap people into interviews by threatening to spread lies about them if they don't, bro. What kind of shit is that? [Grant] Nothing that I said about her grandfather, her acumen or her mother's work was incorrect... [The Glarer] But why are you even talking about her family, dude? Like, that's really low, man. Like — that's... It's low, man. It's low. Her family didn't have nothing to do with this, man. She's doing this because she cares about it. And then people start talking about people's family members and shit. And it's like — it comes off as a not-so-subtle form of intimidation, frankly, Grant. You know, trying to get somebody to shut up. [Grant] No, I don't want to do that. I want to learn about why she's interested in the case. [The Glarer] But you could see how somebody could see it that way, right? Because what if her family starts telling her, "Hey, stop talking about this. Why are we being brought into your shit because you're passionate about something?" What if her family does that and puts her in an awkward position? And then people are cheated out of some really good insight because of that. [Grant] My brother — my brother who at four years old had a colectomy, three-stage, and is developmentally disabled as a result — has a profile someone made mocking him on X. That's a profile that people I respect engage with. Usually I overlook that stuff because I don't believe the people engaging in it are trying to do that. And I hope people realize I'm not doing that to her. I authentically want to know why Olivia's covering this case. [The Glarer] That's all right. So — but that's my point, Grant. I'm just saying, like, if you believe Karen Read is guilty, why not just stick to the facts? Because you don't see me going after anybody's family. You don't see Olivia going after anybody's family, talking about people's family and exposing their family and what they do. You know what I mean? That's not cool. I don't do that. And Olivia’s saying that she will happily talk to you anytime about why she's interested in the case. You see what? That's my point. That's my point — if you believe so much in Karen Read's guilt, then the facts should speak. Everything that you put out there — the facts, the details of the case, and the way you interpret those facts — that should be enough. You shouldn't have to bring people's family members into it. Come on. I feel like you're better than that. That's all. I still have faith that you're better than that. [Grant] Yeah. And I think that's the perfect place to end, because you've given me a lot of time and I share your sentiments. I think that is crucially important. You don't see me out there in the past six months or twelve months talking about Melanie Little, or Olivia or her parents anymore. [The Glarer] I have seen improvement, yes. I have seen it. [Grant] And let me just say why: because I came to believe that there was this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and that I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change — I had to reflect that change in my actions. And that's why that happened. So that's it. That's how I feel. [The Glarer] Okay. Yeah, I mean, everybody’s entitled to their feelings and opinions, man. We all are. But yeah, I’m glad that we got this talk. I got to express some things I wanted to express to you. You were very receptive, and I appreciate you coming on and being respectful and being cool. And you’re welcome here anytime, Grant. I can see that we could talk about pretty much anything, and it's fine. That will always be welcome here — no matter what we disagree on. So I appreciate you, Grant. [Grant] God bless, Will, enjoy the rest of your Saturday. [The Glarer] Have a good one. Alright, Grant, y'all. Alright, I'm gonna take another call. Let's do that.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1916273688736940311/amplify_video_thumb/1916261346590515200/img/hUvZMgeSmwtcpp9Y.jpg)
![Good morning. In November of 2024, I laid out why Brian Tully, Kate Peter, and Jason Broyles leaked an unredacted 15-year extraction of Lindsey Gaetani's phone. I didn't want the world to listen to me. I wanted someone, somewhere, to protect Lindsey. I can finally breathe. Here is the full text of my report (that now has 700,000 views); Okay, fine, as a special treat (on this, the day of oral arguments in the #KarenReadTrial appeal), I will lay out some of what I am thinking as to the timeline of events between August of 2023 and the spring of 2024. You are going to get a lot of inside information in this post. You have been warned. In the fall of 2023, via a woman named Natalie (who was friends with Karen Read and enjoyed talking about houseplants with Karen), I believe the Commonwealth of Massachusetts came to be in possession of evidence indicating that Read and blogger Aiden Turtle Boy Kearney were conspiring to intimidate witnesses in Read's ongoing criminal trial related to the murder of John O'Keefe. See the evidence of that contact (which started in April/May of 2023 --because of Natalie-- and occurred directly with Read and via Read's lawyers, David Yannetti and Alan Jackson) here - As a result of this information being uncovered, I believe the Commonwealth then began targeting Mr. Kearney with criminal charges related to witness intimidation in the context of Read's criminal trial (Kearney had been organizing, with Read's help, rallies at the homes of witnesses in the case and running smear campaigns to poison the jury pool in the lead up to Read's trial). I believe the intent of this targeting was multifaceted but, primarily, involved the following: 1) Getting Kearney to stop his abhorrent behavior related to witnesses in Read's case (which included, in some cases, Kearney's followers putting semen on pictures of witnesses' children and then sending those pictures to said witnesses, as explained here - 2) Placing criminal charges on Kearney in an effort to pressure him to "flip" on Karen Read and, in turn, testify that Read did, indeed, order the witness intimidation in question via a conspiracy. Kearney, when he was eventually jailed in late 2023/early 2024, confirmed that such an offer was presented while he was incarcerated. 3) Getting information for the Massachusetts State Police, and the Norfolk District Attorney, as to the nature of an ongoing federal probe into the conduct of those departments (an investigation which, in time, it turns out had moved on from investigating John O'Keefe's death and, in turn, evolved into a probe of a potential cover-up of the death of Sandra Birchmore). Read more background on that complex situation --involving two Troopers assigned to the Norfolk DA, who also worked on the Read case, that signed off on a "misleading" state-level police report into Matthew Farwell-- here - At the same time, and in furtherance of those investigatory activities, I believe the State Police began working directly with a former colleague of Aiden Kearney, a woman named Kate Peter AKA MafiaMasshole who has a small online cult following related to humiliating First Amendment Auditors (which, admittedly, is noble work). What may have not been so noble (along with Peter taking cash in a Chick-Fil-A parking lot for her "efforts" on behalf of some wealthy witnesses in the Read trial), however, is that --as Mr. Kearney became the subject of police investigations related to the aforementioned witness intimidation-- the Norfolk DA announced to the public that a Special Prosecutor would be appointed to oversee those charges (because of the numerous allegations of corruption that Kearney had made towards the DA in public). That Special Prosecutor, Ken Mello, was nonetheless assigned to work with the same State Police Trooper (Brian Tully) who worked on the Read case and who reported directly to the Norfolk DA at the time. And, furthermore, I believe the State Police and the Norfolk DA, via Brian Tully, also around this time (fall of 2023) began working directly with Kate Peter (who, for some time, was working for a Private Investigations firm with ties to a number of figures in the orbit of the Read case) in order to obtain evidence against Mr. Kearney, seek out and catalog information from sources close to Mr. Kearney and, in some cases, even help draft parts of Mr. Kearney's eventually October, 2023, criminal indictment. However, what I think the State Police (and the Norfolk DA) did not know at the time was that Aiden Kearney was working as a confidential federal informant, specifically looking into allegations of civil rights violations against said State Police, since at least May of 2023. Furthermore, I also think the State Police were not aware that it was Karen Read's lawyers, Alan Jackson and David Yannetti, who had the necessary connections in order to help Kearney obtain that status. Read more here - That said, at the same time, when Kearney was initially brought on by the federal government in May of 2023, in my view, I don't think the DOJ was finished looking into the death of John O'Keefe. In fact, I think the DOJ pulled out an old FBI tactic (which I can confirm exists) and, after the US Attorney for the District of Massachusetts wrapped-up the O'Keefe probe in the fall of 2023, Kearney was encouraged by the FBI to use his coverage of the Read case to generate leads related to other misconduct by the State Police unit attached to the Norfolk DA (in particular Brian Tully). Read more about that FBI playbook here - Indeed, that timeline perfectly synchs with a recent announcement by US Attorney Josh Levy indicating that the federal probe of Sandra Birchmore's death began in, roughly, August of 2023. See more background on Birchmore's tragic life and death here - Nonetheless, because of Kearney's ongoing work for the federal government in the fall of 2023, and because the State Police did not realize this was happening (although they should have been able to put it together, because Kate Peter and Kevin from Yellow Cottage Tails for sure knew, as early as May of 2023, that FBI agents were calling around, on behalf of Kearney, related to ongoing criminal cases entirely removed from the Read trial) I believe said State Police, stupidly, committed some of the very civil rights violations that the FBI was looking for. I believe the State Police did this, in particular Brian Tully, by way of his relationship to Kate Peter. [Side note: I will always remember talking to Kate, over winter and spring of 2024, and explaining my firm belief that Aiden Kearney was an FBI agent. Peter simply could not come to terms with that reality, despite having been the person who called the FBI back in May in order to confirm the agency was poking around some of Kearney's criminal cases, and, in that moment, I knew that pride was, indeed, about to cometh before her fall.] And, indeed, I also think Karen Read, herself, was well aware that the federal probe into John's death had ended in the fall of 2023 (for the most part) and that, in turn, the feds were going to move on to other serious allegations of corruption related to Tully and his unit at the State Police. However, for many reasons, I think Karen was happy to let the FBI (and TurtleBoy) use her trial as "cover" to get more information, and leads, related to said Troopers (this was, after all, the very same unit that had investigated Read and mocked her with horrifying language during that process). [Also, another side note, there is an intense history of tension between the Norfolk DA's office and the DOJ in Boston which dates back to the 1990's and William Delahunt, but which, in reality, really heated up during a 2015 mob trial.] Basically, there is a connection between Josh Levy (Acting US Attorney For District of Massachusetts) + Karen Read (accused murderer) + Dustin Chao (head of Boston DOJ's Public Integrity Section) + David Yannetti (lawyer for accused murderer Karen Read) + Rachael Rollins (former Suffolk County DA, and US Attorney for the district of Massachusetts, until Spring of 2023, who was also Josh Levy's boss in November of 2022 and who previously had direct contact with Read's lawyer, Mr. Yannetti) + Aiden TurtleBoy Kearney (blogger indicted with 19 felonies in relation to targeting witnesses in the Read case, until he was thrown out of Read's inner circle for exposing Read's connection to Acting US Attorney Levy). Chao (aforementioned head of the DOJ Boston's Public Integrity Section) had a grudge to use whatever means necessary take down the Norfolk DA since 2015 (After Chao's wife was passed over for a promotion and left that DA's office on bad terms) and, in turn, the proxy-battle behind all of this chaos becomes a bit more clear. Read the primary source documents laying all of this out here - and here - That said, I think there one was wild-card who came into the picture between October of 2023 that no one (be it Kate Peter, the FBI, the DOJ, the State Police, Aiden Kearney or otherwise) expected, and her name is Lindsey Gaetani. At first, between October and December of 2023, Lindsey was simply someone who had met Mr. Kearney online, chatted with him, and then begun to form a bond. Little did Ms. Gaetani realize, however, that, by virtue of a simple twist of fate, Kearney's pillow talk related to Karen Read and Josh Levy having direct contact, FBI agents, and civil rights probes of the State Police would put her directly in the middle of an unholy conflagration that was, on the night of December 23rd, 2023, about to take a turn that would change the course of history for an untold number of human lives. For, you see, in the weeks leading up to Christmas of 2023, the State Police discovered that Ms. Gaetani had information about Karen Read and TurtleBoy being in direct communication (along with information that Read and Josh Levy spoke directly). See those documents here - That, in turn, meant Ms. Gaetani was going to be forced to provide testimony at a Grand Jury scheduled for the week after Christmas (roughly December 26th, 2023). When Kearney found out this news, on or around December 22nd, it sent him into a tailspin (for good reason, it turns out, as what Mr. Kearney did next would, over time, lead to him being kicked out of Karen Read's inner circle and sent to jail...or, as Kearney says it, "...[that night] was a very expensive trip to [the city where Lindsey lives.]" Leveraging a very difficult time in Ms. Gaetani's life, Kearney demanded he be able to visit her, at home, late at night on December 23rd of 2023. Then, Kearney forced Gaetani to allow Kearney to review the contents of her phone (specifically her messages with Kate Peter) and take notes (using an ongoing medical situation that Gaetani was going through as leverage to get permission to do so). However, after Gaetani raised an objection to Kearney taking those notes, and after Gaetani retrieved her own notepad (that Kearney had used to take said notes) Kearney entirely lost his cool, pushed Gaetani onto a couch, and then began illegally recording her with his phone (an audio file Kearney would later try to edit in order to suggest Gaetani had consented to the recording, although that plan failed when a copy of the original recording, without the line about consent, was introduced into the court record). That, in turn, led to Kearney being criminally charged (again) with witness intimidation, illegal interception of an oral communication and assault and, as a result, a warrant to arrest (with probable cause) was issued. Kearney, after being a self-admitted "fugitive" from justice for multiple days with the warrant active, then turned himself in to authorities and was sent to jail after a Judge in Dedham district court revoked Kearney's bond as a result of the new charges involving Gaetani. See the post where Kearney admitted to being a fugitive here - See full coverage of the moment Kearney's bail was revoked here - In turn, Kearney then spent the next 60 days in jail (in protective custody, per my sources, because of his status as a federal informant) and, during that time, Kearney has confirmed that he would have been able to "walk free" if he "flipped" on Karen Read in the context of an ongoing conspiracy and witness intimidation probe into the pair of star-crossed attention seekers. However, Kearney did not do so and, in turn, was released from jail in late February of 2023 after serving the full 60 days on his bail revocation. For Ms. Read, however, a newly-leaked series of text messages confirm that, even thought Kearney stayed loyal and sent love-letters begging Read's forgiveness while locked up, the incident on the 23rd with Lindsey was Karen's red line and Kearney had been cut off from Read's inner circle. See that leaked text message (from March 3rd) here - Interestingly, on one of the first day's that TurtleBoy was out of jail (February 26th, 2024), I captured this fascinating moment where Karen clearly is uncomfortable around Kearney (she entirely ignores his presence outside of court and her lawyer, Alan Jackson, puts his arm on Karen's back to gently tug her away from Kearney as they walk by his hallowed-shell) - And, even more interestingly, it was also on the same day (2/26/24) that Lindsey Gaetani (under mysterious circumstances that, again, trace back to Kate Peter being shady) attended a court hearing, wherein, because of Gaetani's active restraining order on Kearney, Kearney was forced to leave the courtroom during Karen's case (and, on this same day, Kearney was also charged with a violation of that RO for hiding in the bushes outside of the court after being asked to leave the area by authorities). See video of that day here - However, sadly, I believe Gaetani's "usefulness" also quickly ended around this time as Kearney, within weeks, got his RO amended to allow TurtleBoy to attend any court hearing in the Commonwealth (even with Lindsey present) and, furthermore, the pressure tactics to get Kearney to "flip" on Karen Read had failed. Furthermore, because Karen was now in fear of TurtleBoy (having cut Aiden off), I believe Peter, Tully and the Norfolk DA took an entirely new direction. They would try to get Karen Read to cooperate regarding the ongoing investigations into TurtleBoy. This move, however, had unintended consequences (in particular for Lindsey Gaetani). In what I believe was a colloquial "crime of opportunity" -- and because Gaetani was no longer "useful" for the purposes of pressuring Kearney into a plea or for the purposes of keeping Kearney away from Karen Read hearings -- Kate Peter came up with a new idea: Kate, before knowing anyone else in the case, was connected with Jen McCabe (a witness in the Read trial who heard Karen confess to hitting John O'Keefe and who was tormented by TurtleBoy, for months, as a result of her willingness to testify on behalf of justice for John). Kate, also, had extensive connections to a network of Discord operatives who use fake profiles and hunt down bad people on the internet (again, a noble calling). However, I believe Kate weaponized some of those people (including someone named Father Mark Murphy, who used a fake profile called "The Jennings Report" and a parking clerk named Jason Broyles who moonlights as a woman online named "Hailey W.") to, in a last ditch effort now that Lindsey had no other use and because TurtleBoy could not be stopped, deflect the attention of TurtleBoy's fans (known as "TurtleRiders") away from Jen McCabe and onto --an unwitting and entirely innocent-- Lindsey Gaetani). What makes this even more shocking is that the way public attention was deflect onto Lindsey involved, what I believe, was an operation (run by Kate) to leak sensitive documents about Lindsey (along with other private information) to those fake profiles (including Jason Broyles, who Kate Peter has known since 2019). Interestingly, Broyles (and Murphy) began operations targeting Lindsey, and her support network/allies, right around the end of February, 2023 (and, interestingly, those accounts, for months, went out of their way to avoid mentioning Kate Peter or Jen McCabe, nearly entirely). Read more about the fake "Jennings Report" profile here - and read more about the disturbing tactics deployed by Jason Broyles here - and here - Anyway, that entire fiasco was the subtext (that I referenced in earlier posts) behind my question to Karen Read, in April of 2024, regarding whether Karen wanted to apologize to Lindsey for what was happening (as, by that point, Karen knew full well what it was like to become the target of Aiden's ire simply because Karen had cut him off). Karen may not have responded to my question, but she is a smart person (really, I don't mean that gratuitously: Read plays on a level I don't think most of us understand, and she does it by hiding in plain sight) and Karen knew exactly what I was talking about (she probably could have written this post herself, in fact, but she probably wouldn't have said as much about her gilt as to John's death). See video of me asking Karen that pointed question here - So, where does that leave us? Well: 1) In my view, Karen Read is vulnerable, concerned about what Aiden will do to her and her family, running out of money, and constantly at risk of having her conversations with TurtleBoy and other insiders (past and present leaked). Karen, after she loses her appeal at the SJC, is likely to look for a way to take a plea and cooperate against Aiden (Robert Cosgrove, the new special prosecutor in the Read/Kearney cases, and Hank Brennan, the new ADA in Read's murder trial, are serious legal heavy hitters and Read is in deep trouble, in my view). 2) Likewise, I think Brian Tully and Kate Peter are also deeply concerned because they didn't realize the FBI is, in reality, probably coming for them (and it has nothing to do with John O'Keefe's death, but instead it has everything to do with Kate and Tully's actions between the fall of 2023 and the summer/fall of 2024 and, also, probably Tully's actions in the context of the Sandra Birchmore investigation). I think this is why Peter is facing so many state-level criminal charges (despite trying to use her connections to get those cases to "go away" and, even in one case, managing to get the Norfolk DA not to recuse itself related to one of those charges, despite a special prosecutor being assigned to Peter's other criminal cases in the jurisdiction because of her connection to the State Police and the DA). 3) I think a lot of people are trying to keep Lindsey Gaetani and her story away from the media, and away from documentaries/podcasts that they do not control, in order to hide this information from the public, punish Lindsey for "knowing" Aiden, and insulate Peter and Brian Tully from accountability. I do not think this strategy is going to work because, and I cannot understate this enough, Lindsey is actually a genius (and none of you can see it, because you're blinded by greed, ego, jealously or otherwise). 4) I think, at the end of the day, Karen Read killed John O'Keefe, while Karen was drunk driving, at 12:31am on 1/29/22 by hitting John with her SUV and then leaving John to die. In turn, I think Karen was mad that people "flipped on her" related to Karen's actions that night, and, in turn, Karen leveraged her political connections (which I don't fully understand, but which I think are based in the intelligence community) to "punish" the Norfolk DA and the State Police Troopers who uncovered said evidence of Karen's guilt. Little did Karen realize, all the way back in November of 2022, that she had stumbled onto overlapping social circles of power that, when the dust settles, would have been consumed by their hubris --and wanton disregard for the memory of John O'Keefe-- regardless. "Remember," dear friends and readers, "it's about Justice For John." I'm a towel, and that's what I think happened (as of November, 2024). Usual disclaimer: I am a towel, not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. You are reading social media. Get a lawyer if you have questions about the law.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1951990598375796787/amplify_video_thumb/1951989042272227328/img/AR5vFlH4FWaF-znG.jpg)
![‘Doctor Death’ Gives Life to Gold Mines Dave Fennell chain-smoked and studied law while winning 6 Grey Cups. He sent 3 quarterbacks to the hospital in one game, becoming 'Dr. Death' and a household name in Canada. Next Dave turned to gold exploration, building 5 ventures worth ~$5 billion. He's never shared his story publicly—until now. After dominating football, Dave Fennell's Midas touch in Guyana could lead to his greatest victory. Mining legends Louis Gignac, Rick Rule and others weigh in. "I was capable of playing very violently," recalls Fennell. "If you're going to survive as a defensive lineman. The people who are opposite you, have to be afraid of you." He played 10 seasons for the Edmonton Eskimos (renamed Elks in ‘21), appearing in 8 Grey Cups (Canada’s Super Bowl). The Eskimos won 6, including 5 in a row 1978-1982. Fennell, who turned 71 Feb 4, is chain smoking Marlboros on a Zoom call with me Feb 5. He’s reflecting on a career that spans beyond the gridiron to golden ventures. His resume includes co-founding Golden Star (US $467M sale in ‘22) and Miramar ($1.5B sale in ‘08). Fennell was a tenured director of Sabina ($1.1B sale in ‘23) and Torex ($1.2B market cap). His Reunion Gold ($485M market cap) has rapidly discovered a major gold deposit after setbacks. Fennell's sons picked up his drive too. David Jr. played Michigan State football then turned engineer. John raced luge at the Sochi Winter Olympics, now he's a corporate analyst. – Raised in a middle-class Edmonton, Alberta family, Fennell was the second of four children. “I was taught very early on, you're not allowed to quit when you start something. It was not acceptable.” He completed a 4 year undergrad degree at U of North Dakota in 3 years. Fennell could have gone to the NFL, but chose to stay in Edmonton, joining the Eskimos on the condition he’d also go to law school. It's hard to imagine a pro athlete smoking, studying law, and winning six championships today. But Dave Fennell did it all. He planned to play pro for 10 seasons, and wondered, “What do you do when the cheering stops?” Joining a law firm next, the bosses leveraged his "Dr. Death" fame for networking. Fennell recalls, “They loved taking me to the Petroleum Club on Mondays.” His law practice worked with many small miners. After three years and a Guyana field trip, Fennell decided to get into gold mining himself. At 32, Fennell founded Golden Star Resources (GSR). He partnered with Roger Morton, a U of Alberta geology professor, to explore Guyana. GSR spent $20K staking the forgotten Omai gold deposit. “It was open ground.” Anaconda Copper explored Omai extensively in the late 1940s but stopped when the Korean War began. Secrets of the Anaconda Library A private detective helped Fennell find Anaconda’s geological data. They learned of a cavernous library in Montana, holding 100 years of records. A librarian, just laid off, liked Fennell and sold him the Guyana files for $30K. GSR hired SNC Lavalin, with their top supercomputer, to process this historical information. It showed a big potential mine. Placer Dome partnered on Omai in ‘87, before walking away. Fennell didn't give up. He invited Louis Gignac’s Cambior to visit Omai during a 3 day rainstorm. Cambior ended up funding construction for a 70% stake. It produced 3.7 million gold ounces from 92-05. Renowned mining investor Rick Rule says Fennell is easy to underestimate. "The physicality obscures a great intellect and a guy that's actually very kind. He's the classic entrepreneur. When he sees an opportunity, he can't not grasp it.” Next, GSR pursued Cambior to partner in Suriname. “If I had a mine each time someone told me a story about a property, I'd be a very rich man,” Gignac says. GSR’s Rosebel discovery was in region reeling after Suriname’s civil war. “David, why don’t you settle down, get married, do something easier than this,” Gignac advised him. Fennell persisted, inviting Gignac to tour Rosebel. It poured rain again on that trip, which Gignac saw as a good omen after Omai’s success. Cambior eventually built the mine. Rosebel became one of South America’s largest, yielding over 6 million ounces. Today, it’s operated by Zijin. GSR stock jumped 600% in the early '90s thanks to these wins. Investor Mike Halvorson says GSR’s work in the Guianas and Suriname put the area on the map for mining. “Back in those days, from a political point of view, it was considered high-risk to go into the Guianas,” Gignac remembers. “It took a lot of guts for [Fennell] to get involved, and a lot of guts to follow him there. We eventually mined about twice the [initial] reserves at Omai. By doing Omai, it was that much easier to do Rosebel. We were comfortable with the region and its people. There's a lot of advantages in these countries. It's simpler. Decision makers are easier to know and be in contact with.” Halvorson remembers Fennell throwing a 'chirping' analyst into a pool on one Suriname stay. The guy skipped on the water like a stone. Fennell and Halvorson connected in Edmonton in the 1980s through their love of migratory bird hunting. “Anything that walks, flies or swims, Dave has killed,” says mining engineer Bruce McLeod, who hunts and fishes with Fennell. A massive Anaconda snake skin once adorned the crown mouldings in Fennell’s Montreal offices. At 41, Fennell lucked out as the sole bidder for Sigrist House, once King Edward VIII's Bahamian villa. Fennell lived there 28 years before downsizing. In the late 90’s, Fennell clashed with GSR's board and was pushed out. Later, GSR refocused on Africa and was sold to a Chinese company. To avoid GSR conflicts, Fennell eyed new gold regions. BHP's Hugo Dummett offered him all their gold assets for $80 million. But with few flush bidders, BHP sold the portfolio in pieces. Ivanhoe got Mongolia and discovered Oyu Tolgoi. Randgold took West Africa, and Harmony got East Africa. "If you'd have kept that package together, it'd be the second largest copper company [today]. And you'd be arguing with Newmont about who was the biggest gold company," Fennell says. He bought the Canadian assets for US $20.4 million. It had Hope Bay, a 4 million ounce gold discovery in the high arctic. Fennell dealt through Cambiex Exploration (CBX), where he’d been appointed Chair and CEO in January ‘99, when CBX was a 15 cent stock with a $3.5 million market cap. CBX split the tab with Miramar, a modest gold miner sitting on cash. Miramar swallowed CBX in 2002, appointing Fennell Executive Vice Chairman. Miramar invested about $100 million in Hope Bay and led it through permitting. In 2008, Newmont bought Miramar for $1.5 billion. Every $1 invested in CBX’s equity funding when Fennell took over in early ‘99 was worth $19.50 when Newmont acquired Miramar 9 years later. CBX shareholders made even more money through a spinout company, Ariane Gold, acquired by Cambior in ‘03. Rob McLeod, a geologist at Hope Bay, admired Fennell's strong presence, humour, and optimism. Fennell built bonds with Inuit partners through fishing and Crib games, easing the permitting process. Fennell would need that optimism for his next venture. – In 2004, Fennell listed Nevada explorer New Sleeper. A name change to Reunion Gold (RGD) came in 2006, after recruiting former GSR colleagues and pivoting again to the Giuanas. The stock ran from 30 cents to over $2 in early ‘07 on the back of a Suriname gold find. It didn’t pan out. RGD crashed to 3.5 cents during the ‘08 financial crisis. “When you take your shareholder's money and you say you're going to do this, and if it's not successful, my job is to fix that and I'm not going to roll all the stock back. I'm not going to wipe shareholders out,” Fennell says, explaining RGD’s current 1.23 billion shares. Reunion roared back above $2 again after a Guyana manganese discovery. Then, metal prices crashed, cutting RGD to one penny by 2016. “You're going to fail a hundred percent guaranteed in both exploration and football,” Fennell says. “The real question is, what are you going to do after you fail?” A US $10 million sale of the manganese project provided a lifeline. In 2019, Barrick partnered with Reunion on exploration, committing $4.2 million. Reunion was a 7 cent stock in 2020 when they found gold at Guyana’s Oko project. But, Barrick quickly abandoned the alliance and skipped a $3 million commitment. They even sued Reunion after Oko's success. In 2023, Barrick and RGD settled, owing nothing to each other. Oko moved from a prospect to a major gold deposit rapidly. An initial 2023 resource estimate showed 4.3 million ounces (indicated plus inferred). Fennell believes Oko could be the best gold mine in South America. He sees a 300--400,000 ounce per year, low-cost mine, with a 12 year initial mine life. "It’s going to be much bigger and longer,” Fennell says, optimistically. “Whether we're going to live longer is a whole different question." Reunion aims to publish a PEA study on Oko before Summer. Fennell also looks forward to a feasibility study and final permits in Q1 2015, with construction to start soon after. "From a discovery to a tier one mine in [potentially] six years, it doesn't get any better," Fennell says. He’s in Georgetown this week, talking with the Guyanese government about Oko's future. Reunion’s looking at options: build, sell, merge, or partner up. Fennell wants RGD to avoid execution risk and debt. G Mining Services, led by Fennell's old friend Gignac, is advising on Oko. They've successfully built many mines, like Fruta del Norte in Ecuador (Lundin Gold - $3.7B market cap). Gignac's G Mining Ventures, doing well and on track in Brazil, could be a key player in Oko's future. “There will be a mine [at Oko]. There's absolutely no question,” says Gignac. “The size, grade, and gold content. That's going to be the next one to put on his record.” There’s a slight problem with Venezuela’s claim over Guyana’s Essequibo region, where Oko is. Fennell isn't worried. He says the US will protect it because of Exxon and Chevron’s huge oil investments there. Gignac says Fennell hasn't changed since they first met in the late 80s. "Always glass half-full, always enthusiastic. A track record as good as anybody at finding deals, doing exploration, and developing orebodies." Fennell is honest and a consummate salesman according to Rule. “I don't think in 35 years he ever lied to me, but he would polish the living shit out of the rear view mirror.” Some colourful highlights of my 2 hour Zoom with Mr. Fennell were published in raw video form below. It’s full of wisdom about gold exploration and football. “David is one of the most low key and commercially successful entrepreneurs in [mining],” Bruce McLeod wrote. “He has played a huge part in mentoring others too. Without David I wouldn't be where I am today.” Fennell says, "We always overcome challenges. I never give up." Reunion Gold (RGD-TSXV) is worth $485 million at press time, last at 39.5 cents. Fennell owns 61 million RGD shares. He has warrants and options to purchase 12.6 million more. B. McLeod, Rule & Halvorson all own the stock. All figures CAD unless otherwise indicated. Like, Share, & Follow me Tommy Humphreys for more Big Score stories!](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1756310764544197095/ext_tw_video_thumb/1756167133699141632/pu/img/HDmCXr4un9vC0uxD.jpg)
!["Triangles are a result of reverse engineering and sometimes piloted by 'them' and other times piloted by 'us AND them.'" 👽🤝👨🏻 Agreements, and Humans Working Alongside Non-Humans? 🛸▽👽 (This is relatively interesting, and I think you guys are going to like it. It's a little bit long. First, Matt on with Jesse and the clip below.) Matthew Brown (Matthew): "At this point in time, it's possible that, you know, the United States and others have some sort of derivative technology that looks like the big, black triangle, right? There's that famous NIDS study done in the, I think, late '90s or early 2000s where they correlate triangle sightings to naval bases in the United States." ~Lacatski!~ (I can't write about triangles without including the words of Dr. James Lacatski on Weaponized, with George Knapp and Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell. Lacatski ran the AAWSAP UFO program for the DIA.) Corbell: "We hear about all these people on military bases seeing triangles, and you're doing this study, AAWSAP, to try to figure out the physics of how to do that. Do you think it's already been achieved by the U.S. government, or it hasn't, and that's why AAWSAP had a lot of value." Lacatski: "It hasn't been achieved to its full extent." ~D'Amato~ Dick D'Amato was a longtime (18 years) senior staffer for Senate Democratic Leader Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia.) "Dick D'Amato has returned from Belgium where he met with Colonel De Brouwer, a 'very interesting fellow.' Dick’s conclusion, again, is that the triangular objects are very plain human craft. ~Jacques Vallée's Forbidden Science Volume 4 - November 1992 ~ Brown: "So either, what's going on is, you know, there's some sort of recurring exchange or...and use of our facilities by whatever is piloting these big black triangles. Or, we have some sort of derivative technology ourselves that operate from these bases. "Jeff Nuccetelli (Jeff Nuccetelli) also described, you know, a big , black triangle coming out of the Pacific Ocean, flying into Vandenberg, basically hovering over the runway at Vandenberg Air Force Base and then disappearing." ~ Nuccetelli at the Congressional Hearing: "I talked to five shaken witnesses who described a massive triangular craft, larger than a football field, that hovered silently for about 45 seconds over their entry-control point before shooting away at impossible speed." ~ Jesse Michels - Jesse Michels: "Dylan Borland, also at Langley in 2012." Brown: "Exactly." ~ Dylan Borland at the Congressional Hearing: "At approximately 01 30, I saw an, approximately, 100-foot equilateral triangle take off from near the NASA hangar on the base." ~ Michels: "He sees this triangular craft, seemingly, kind of come out of, or maybe it was hovering around a NASA hangar at the Air Force base, and then it flies at his head. And then it flies off." ~My Tweet from October 2025~~~ Daniel Gockerell on Weaponized, and My Comments 2006, Eglin AFB... Murgia 2025: "This sounds similar to what Dylan Borland says he saw at Langley AFB. If this stuff is so secret, why do they seem so lax in allowing others, who are not cleared, to see it? "If this craft exists... "Is it ours, that we developed own our own? "Is it craft that we constructed and reverse engineered, based, in part, on technology of unknown origin that we have acquired? "Is it a craft of unknown origin that we acquired and learned how to fly? "Are 'they' working with us and showing us how to fly 'their' craft?" ~ Daniel Gockerell: "I step outside, and I look to my left...and I see hovering, about 15 to 20 feet off the ground, this giant, maybe 300 or so feet in length (size of a football field. ~Joe), aircraft. "This just goes straight up and it's dead quiet, nothing, not a sound. I could hear the buzzing from the generator lights, right? So, this gets about to the canopy, like, height, a little over the canopy, and does a slight bank, and takes off. "This aircraft, when it banks, I can see that it's a perfect triangle, and it's gigantic, and it has a white light at each apex of the triangle and a large, white light in the center. And it takes off, and it zips out of sight. I mean, Mach something we don't know." Full transcript and video clip... ~End Gockerell Transcript~ (And let's not forgot my friend, Michael Via, who says he saw a "majestic," silent black triangle in 1992 in the Persian Gulf. Watch him talk about it here. ⬇️) ~ Brown: "Yeah, I'd be pretty freaked out if that happened to me. Yeah, so, you know, these are all examples of the United States having some sort of relationship with these craft, whether it's our own, gifted tech, or truly a third party, can only speculate. But, you know, I have some good guesses." Michels: "What's your best guess?" Brown: "That there is an exchange or some sort of arrangement with whatever is piloting the black triangles that are not ours? I believe we do have a derivative version at this point, but that is, again, derived from the real thing. And the real thing, there is some sort of ongoing contact and communication, clearly, not just the United States, but other governments as well. That's my opinion." (An agreement between some aspect of our government and an anomalous intelligence that flies the triangles that are NOT our reverse engineered craft? Are there multiple governments in contact with a non-human intelligence and working side-by-side with "them"?) Michels: "And when it flies in the vicinity, there's like, some sort of download that occurs. There's like a transmission of information." Brown: "That's what some people have reported. Again, I did not come across official information. Well, I did not come across information on that in the Immaculate-Constellation briefing." (In other words, Brown is suggesting that he may have come across information about that from sources other than the Immaculate Constellation files.) Michels: "Okay, all right. We'll read between the lines there." ~ (Murgia 2026: Now the interesting part. Does anybody remember when I shared this from Jeremy McGowan? I have posts about it that go back to 2021. This one is from 2024 and I edited it very lightly for grammar and clarity.) Murgia 2024: "A few years ago, in some private group, [Jeremy McGowan] said he was at Lue's place in Wyoming. "Someone shared his comments with me and here they are..." McGowan: "From Lue's mouth to my face while I was at his place for a week back in January [of 2021]. Lue (allegedly): "We know who's in the saucers. We know who is in the triangles. We don't have a clue who is in the Tic Tacs." (I asked a source about that and they said the information (in those three sentences) was accurate. But there's no evidence to back it up so, as with everything here, remain skeptical. More on what Lue allegedly told McGowan in 2021... 👇🏼 ) Q from a Group DM: "So saucers and triangles are terrestrial and Tic Tac aren't?" McGowan: "Not exactly. Saucers are 'ultra-terrestrial.' Triangles are a result of reverse engineering and sometimes piloted by 'them' and other times piloted by 'us AND them.' And the Tic Tacs are a complete enigma." ~ Murgia 2024: "Are triangular UFOs sometimes piloted by us and them, with them being NHI? Do some NHI work alongside us in classified programs? I don't know." ~End 2024 Tweet~ (Murgia 2026: That source who told me those first three sentences were accurate? They backed down from that a year or so later. Did they misunderstand what I was originally asking? Or, did they realize they shouldn't have shared that with me because it was "sensitive" and they wanted to do some damage control? I don't know. I also put out a long tweet a few years ago about OG remote viewer, Lyn Buchanan, talking about seeing what he thought were non-humans working alongside humans.) Buchanan: "I'm 𝑠𝑎𝑦𝑖𝑛𝑔 that I have seen extraterrestrials working 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ humans in black op areas. In human, black op areas." You can read the full post here: ~ (Murgia 2026: Here are the names of folks who have spoken about possible agreements between human governments and a non-human intelligence, and/or...Us working with "Them." David Grusch Lue Elizondo (allegedly, since it's second hand) Dylan Borland Matthew Brown Lenval Logan - Try.ThePhenom.App (A month or so ago, on a podcast, he said someone told him to look into "agreements," but he didn't say who told him.) Lyn Buchanan And, a contact of mine who brought it up out of the blue a few months ago. It caught me off guard. 👀 Several years ago, in an interview with Project Unity, Sean Cahill (who was there when McGowan spent time at Lue's in 2021) was asked about the "we-know-who's-in-the-saucers" claim. He said, "That's bullsh*t... That is the outline of a fiction story." I'm not so sure. One more thing: I asked Lue about it when he did a Clubhouse event in July of 2021.) Murgia: "If we believe that the Mussolini craft retrieval took place, we may have data from 90 years ago, all the way until now. Is it valid speculation that we know who's inside of some of these craft? And I know you may not be able to answer that. But if this information is classified, like, who's in the saucers, who's inside the triangles, why would that be classified? It's not sources and methods." Lue: "Exactly right. That's my concern. You can only classify information to protect sources and methods, and you cannot...it's illegal to classify information just because something is embarrassing." (I tried again. 🙂) Murgia: "Do we have any idea who's inside some of these craft?" Lue: "Uhh, you know, I prefer not to answer that question right now simply because, umm, I don't have a good response for that. I think we've got a lot of ideas, and I think there's a lot of anecdotal information out there, but at the end of the day, we still don't know entirely what we're dealing with and that's problematic." (We'd all like to know how Brown and the others came to form these opinions about Us and "Them." Did the alleged comments from Lue in 2021 have anything to do with it? Did any of them read about that? Is any of this true? Again, I don't know. But if it IS, I'd say it would constitute a BOMBSHELL. And I rarely use that (overused) word.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2094684600530612451/amplify_video_thumb/2094612914275807232/img/ZFaAC5u3EJ3TN779.jpg)
!["I have graphs, I've looked at the Google Analytics, the data does not lie. Every single time, starting in April 2024, that Jen McCabe would become the subject of public attention --It happens at specific discrete moments on the timeline-- you see a bump in the attention paid to Lindsey Gaetani." "And there's no doubt in my mind that Brian Tully's MSP unit --when they had Michael Morrissey make that video, when McCabe's friends or family or whatever, when they all got him to make that video, and that didn't work, and when Morrissey had to recuse, when things got so bad that they had no other out, and the TurtleRiders would not pay attention to anyone but those Karen Read and John O'Keefe witnesses-- Tully, Kate Peter and their people said, "all right, we're left with no other option. Lindsey Gaetani looks like a good distraction. Let's release her phone." And then that cycle repeated over and over and over and over again. And Lindsey's not the only one who's been subject to this. You wanna talk about what's going on to Estey? Even what's going on with Deanna? With Meredith?" TRANSCRIPT: And people wonder why I get so passionate about this. This is nothing I haven't talked about before, but you are not gonna tell me, me, of all people --I'm not gonna speak for Lindsey-- but you are not gonna tell me that the release of Lindsey Gaetani's cell phone extraction did not have serious, serious ramifications. Like, I can't even conceptualize what the impact was on Lindsey and her family's life. I don't think my life was ever the same again after April of 2024. As traumatized as I was from that December 2023 court hearing, what happened in April of 2024 was the worst thing that I have ever seen happen to any human being in my entire life. [Speaking to chat] Oh, hi Lindsey, how are you? I've just never seen anything that horrific, the leak of that cell phone extraction, the impact that it had, the fact that no one even understood how severe it was because people were so distracted by the polemics of it. People were so "excited" to be able to smear Lindsey and the distraction was so powerful that no one asked, one, why did this happen? Or two, what was the impact? And that's what really got me so passionate and furious about this. It wasn't an issue of substantive guilt or innocence about anyone. It was that I was seeing the same exact stuff happen in this situation to people without political connections that I saw happen to the staff of the CCC when really powerful men started getting very, very, very close to each other in positions of power and then when they would do bad things to women, they would just talk to each other. One guy would run the HR department, the other guy would run the executive director position, and somebody else would have a connection to the appointing authority. And so any complaint would just be what's called "caught and killed." And I said, there is no way that this is gonna happen again. When it was happening in the CCC, it was an administrative regulatory agency. At least there was some sort of semblance of check and balance. It wasn't egregious because everyone had a lot of influence, even the people who were staffers. This situation, we had state police officers, people who, if you were listening to the just the narrative of the people who were supporting the Justice for John O'Keefe movement, you would think that Michael Proctor's infallible. You would think Brian Tully's infallible. You would think Kate Peter's infallible, which means incapable of fault. That's nonsense. I'm telling you right now, that's nonsense, and that's why it was so easy for this stuff to manifest. And that's why I became so personally concerned. Forget about what developed from April to April of 2024 until now. That's why I was so upset because I watched what happened from December of 2023 through to April of 2024. And that enough was so egregious, so wrong, such an abuse of trust, such an abuse of the justice system that I said, there is no way that I can just stand by and be apathetic about this, no matter what the price, no matter what the obstacles, no matter what the pressures. And I can't tell you how bad it was --it tore families apart, these cases-- if you didn't live through it. It tore communities apart. I don't believe anyone in Massachusetts around this area, 128 or Dedham or whatever, was able to live a life that was not impacted in some way by this case. Okay, these cases, the TurtleBoy case, Karen Read case, et cetera, et cetera. It frustrates me to no end that somehow within that high-profile situation, there were people who started to control the narrative because they had things to hide. And that's why I started this space, because I truly believe that the real secrets lying beneath what was really going on with Michael Proctor and Brian Tully and Kate Peter and the PI, Marty Kraft and Jen McCabe and Yuri Bukhenik and John Fanning and Nick Guarino. What I really believe was going on was that they were worried that the attention brought onto that unit by the John O'Keefe and Karen Read case was gonna spill their secrets about Birchmore. And it led them to double down and commit even more egregious acts in the context of some of this other behavior, like leaking Lindsey Gaetani's cell phone extraction. And that's, again, you wanna talk about the timeline from April 2024 until now, we can do that too. But what I'll tell you is the story ends up being the same. I have graphs, I've looked at the Google Analytics, the data does not lie. Every single time starting in April 2024, that Jen McCabe would become the subject of public attention. It happens at specific, specific discrete moments on the timeline. You see a bump in the attention paid to Lindsey. And there's no doubt in my mind that this unit, when they had Michael Morrissey make that video, when McCabe's friends or family or whatever, when they all got him to make that video, and that didn't work. When Morrissey had to recuse, when things got so bad that they had no other out and the TurtleRiders would not pay attention to anyone but those Karen Read and John O'Keefe witnesses, Tully and his people said, "all right, we're left with no other option. Lindsey Gaetani looks like a good distraction. Let's release her phone." And then that cycle repeated over and over and over and over again. And Lindsey's not the only one who's been subject to this. You wanna talk about what's going on to Estey? Even what's going on with Deanna? With Meredith? What's going on with a lot of these people, right? There were PIs and moles in the internet saying that Lindsey was that and separating that. There were PIs, moles and various people in the end, just sort of people who were trying to either support Karen or support a movement that they could believe in or whatever it was, who got exploited, who got ran by various people for intel purposes to feed information back to their various handlers. And when they became expendable, they got burned. You watch, look at these emails sent to all these people's schools, the mass emails. That can't be a coincidence. Whoever it benefits can't be a coincidence, all right? It's a coordinated tactic. It's designed to put public attention on very specific people when otherwise damaging information gets released. And what have we seen over the past, let's say from April 2024 until now, what have we seen? That over and over and over again, all right? Every time something would happen, there'd be a new distraction. And then as we got through the end of the Karen Read and John O'Keefe case, what did we see? Yes, there were some real, real secrets lying beneath in terms of this case. And I mean it, I mean it with every bone and fiber in my towel body. There were secrets about the Birchmore case. There were secrets about that phone extraction. There were secrets about the inside baseball and the communications between Tully and Kate and Tully and Jen McCabe and Michael Morrissey and Kate and Michael Morrissey and Jen McCabe. And as it all started to come out and as it crescendoed folks over the past few months to the point where Michael Proctor's own attorney was basically making misrepresentations to the court about the existence of 12 years of cell phone records. When he had Kate Peter deleting evidence from Google Drives that were submitted as formal records to grand juries in the Kearney proceedings. When you have a special prosecutor statute that is so broken, it allows a DA rather than complying with the court order to appoint a new special prosecutor to just no-cross cases. So that stuff like what we've been talking about doesn't come out. It's indefensible. But what is the karmic justice here? It is that for whatever reason, Michael Proctor's cell phone records which I truly believe were captured and swept up by the feds during their federal probe of either Farwell or Tully's unit or John O'Keefe's death, whatever it was, exposing a lot of this. It's not just the Rule 14 discovery related to Kate Peter and otherwise and Tully that was turned over in the Aidan Kearney case, the 5,000 pages of material. Initially 4,000 pages of it was mysteriously just blank. It's not just that folks. It's also the, hey, Michael Proctor's cell phone until months ago, August of 2025 was hidden from the public. It was hidden from criminal defendants until someone somewhere must have informed Michael Proctor that a full copy of that cell phone already existed so there was no point in him continuing to hide it. What does this speak to? Well, it speaks to why I started this space today because in light of everything I just laid out from memory. I wanted to see if there was a single person who would be willing to stand up here and defend Michael Proctor's state police unit, Ryan Tully, John Fanning, Yuri Bukhenik, any of them or Kate Peter or Jen McCabe. Not because of their actions necessarily in the John O'Keefe and Karen Read case but because of everything I just laid out and the silence would let it speak volumes because how are you possibly going to counter any of that? This is what I'm doing from memory sitting here while trying to challenge people to a debate. That is just a part of the historical record. I cannot put into words how much more expansive in scope some of this story is and it's not any one person's story to tell. Let me also go on a rant about this. I'm getting so frustrated with the possessive approach that some people take to some of this coverage. Do you care about what was done to the most vulnerable? I don't care if you think of Karen as vulnerable, Lindsey is vulnerable, Sandra Birchmore is vulnerable, whoever you think of as vulnerable. Do you care about what happened to them? Do you care about righting the wrongs? Do you care about actually talking about the misconduct or are you trying to make a polemical point in furtherance of some specific platform that either you run or you support? What are you trying to accomplish? And I think a lot of us recently have been forced to have some very difficult moral reckoning. Okay, because a lot of us were tricked. I felt absolutely tricked into supporting Michael Proctor. If I knew, I'm not saying about the merits of the John O'Keefe investigation. If I knew then, back in 2023, 2024, what I know now about what's on that phone and about what that unit was willing to do, I never would have supported them. We supported Lindsey, but I never would have supported that unit. I'm sorry. Nope, never would have done it. And that's why I want to talk about people became very possessive about coverage of this case. Reporters are supposed to fade into the background. It's not supposed to be about us. Yes, maybe you have some skills. The reporter, people are interested. You use those skills to get a following so you can tell a story and get the facts out there, but it's not supposed to be about us. If a reporter is the centerpiece of a story, they have failed. Okay, you just blend in the background. We make sure that the people who are the most harmed, their voices are centered. And then we make sure these predatory vultures, like Kate Peter, are unable to manipulate public narratives to protect entrenched systemic power structures. That's what it's all about. So for me, that's why I get so frustrated. That's why I wanted to do this space because I wanted to make a point that when forced to actually debate on merit, all the propaganda mouthpieces will run from the chance. They're happy to get up and shit talk other people when it's a space they control, and they don't have to address the merits. But you put them in a position where they don't control the space and they're forced to debate on merit and they'll run from it. So in some sense, I made my point. But I also think it's an important exercise in telling this story, in explaining where I'm coming from. I think there are a lot of us that are all coming to the same position, which is it doesn't matter what various camp we may have been in or what not. We're not defined by that. We are just individual humans who have a bunch of views on different cases. And at the end of the day, a lot of us, more so, I think than people realize, actually care about systemic reform. We're not in it to protect Kate Peter or Jen McCabe or Brian Tully or anybody. We're here to hold people to equal standards and ask that the justice system do the same. And I think that's a noble goal. That's something that I can believe in. I wish people would be willing to debate it, though. It frustrates me. It really frustrates me. And, you know, maybe that's the nature of it. Maybe it's that making this point requires showing the litany of evidence, showing the sort of timeline, showing the overlapping concentric social circles, talking about these people, talking about what they did, talking about the implications, talking about where this is going. That's what cuts out the propaganda. To me, everyone is capable of fault. I said this the other day. If there are people out there in your orbit who are telling you that they are incapable of fault, they're a threat to the United States. They're the most dangerous, pernicious force we can imagine. Everyone's capable of fault. And we should look to the people who, in spite of their faults, try to leave the world a better place than what they found when they arrived. I think there are those of us. In spite of absolutely inculcating incredible odds who have somehow managed to get to a point where we've centered the voices, we're not there yet, where we're centering the voices who are actually impacted by all this. And if that happens, mark my words, it will not be because of any large media platforms or networks or anything. It will be in spite of them. It will be in spite of their impact inside dealing in spite of the documentary contracts, in spite of the news networks. It will be because a small group of well-meaning people were willing to band together and say, everything else aside, we can stand behind what's right. It may not be a form of right that we all agree on, but starting from that place, instead of from a place of hatred or otherwise, is a good step. I don't know where this is going. I don't know where it's going. I know that no one will stand up here and defend Kate Peter and Brian Tully, at least in a debate with me where I control the playing field. Can you blame them? But I don't know where this is going. You're on my prediction. As someone who's, I think I've not lived this as much as some other people, but I've lived it a lot. It's been a lot. And I'm never gonna understand the impact that this had on the people who had directly impacted, but it's been a lot on a lot of people. The story has impacted many lives. Even myself, with the perspective I have, kind of sitting back here on my veranda, you can call me Thomas Jefferson Towel. I don't have any hemp though, or do I? Sitting on my veranda, kind of looking forward, right here, all right? I got my public records request back today. I know when a public records request denial is like, oh, we want to stonewall this because there's something there. And I'm getting that vibe related to the contacts between the Norfolk DA's office and the Mass AGO's office between September 25th and October 24th of 2025 related to whether the Norfolk DA reached out to appoint a new special prosecutor in the Lindsey Gaetani and Aidan Kearney cases. But as I'm sitting here on my veranda with my eyes closed, I don't have a veranda. I have a desk. I'm a little towel. As I'm sitting here with my eyes closed, I can see the future materializing, okay? There's only certain roads that this can go down. There are only so many pathways left. There's a reckoning coming, folks. Whether it's a reckoning by way of the Sandra Birchmore cover-up, whether it's a reckoning by way of Michael Proctor's attempt to hide a substantial amount of evidence across a substantial number of criminal cases, whether it's related to Kate Peter's involvement in the handling of evidence in the still remaining Aidan Kearney cases. You can sense the anticipation. You can sense the apprehension and anxiety. And you can sense imminent closure. I'm not saying that is gonna be an easy process. I'm not saying it's gonna be a short process. But I'm saying there's something in the air. It's undeniable. There's little left to defend. There's not a single person, troll or otherwise anonymous account or whatever, who would stand up here today right now and with me and try to defend Kate Peter and Brian Tully. I gave you the chance. There's a time, if I had done this space a year ago, oh, people would have been jumping at the bit. No one will do it. No one. Why? Because we're at the end of the road. What Proctor did was indefensible, not in the Read O'Keefe case, although he should never have used those words about Karen. I'd critique him if he was a private citizen, although obviously I'm protective of women, right? But say what you will about that. I wouldn't use those words in private. That man used them in his capacity as a police officer. Right? Not to mention the other defendants' cases that were impacted by whatever Proctor and Sean Goode and whoever else was on that text chain and whatever else is on that phone is gonna lead to. You can sense it. You can sense the reckoning coming. The question is, back to Watergate in the '70s, there was a member of the House of Representatives during the impeachment hearings in '74. We had a very famous phrase. "What did the President know and when did he know?" Folks, the phrase of our era will be, "What did Michael Morrissey know and when did he know it?" This cannot start and end with justice for any single person involved in this. This is not about any one person at this point. This is about a system of justice in Massachusetts that I suppose was not about justice long before any of us realized it was teetering on the brink of collapse. Annie Dookhan was a warning that we all ignored to our peril. I should have seen it when they somehow got Lindsey that same lawyer that Annie Dookhan had. I should have seen it. It's not—I didn't realize until last week that lawyer George was a handler. Dookhan could create a huge—it could have created huge exposure for some people in the state police. It's incredible. If somebody painted the picture of the power structure that was at play here. Karen Read, when she said she was afraid of these people, I didn't—when she said it in the text or something and somebody leaked it. When I first started covering this case, I would not have got it. I don't know what it had been like. What do you mean? They're a state police unit. Like, yeah, they're paramilitary. Like, if you're a criminal, you should fear them, but they're not scary. Right now, after some of the stuff, and I'm talking about half the stuff I've seen as people pull, they horrifying. I think they're cornered, by the way. I don't think there's much they can do. They're getting a little desperate, burning a lot of their agents and their moles. And that's why I sense some kind of reckoning coming. You don't burn deep cover moles. I think Deanna was a mole for Kate for a while. You don't burn somebody like that unless it's almost over. Same thing with Kristy, the way Kristy's been burning everybody. I don't know who the hell she was working for, but whatever she's doing has got to be close to over because you don't burn everybody down unless it's almost over. So why is it almost over, folks? Why? What's coming? Some combination of all of this stuff. And if you want my fundamental prediction, let me give it to you like this. I don't like that it's coming to this, but it's a political question. It's a question of what the narrative is going to be. You don't just, as everyone now knows, you don't just prosecute people because they do things wrong. There's always a decision tree. So what do the feds want out of this? The people who were involved in the cover-up of Sandra Birchmore's murder, whoever was the father of Sandra's unborn child, you know, it's not that Matt Farwell. Well, and then they obviously want this MSP unit. Okay, Michael Proctor, that cell phone, didn't just get cloned. It was a setup. They let Proctor lie to the judge about all those cases and all the cell phone records. And as soon as his lawyer filed the document, they moved on him. He must be under federal investigation. How did Aidan Kearney get those text messages from Jen McCabe to KF and Allie McCabe? Those were removed from Jen McCabe's extraction. The feds cloned her phone too, just like Aidan told Lindsey in those text messages as part of Exhibit O from November 28, 2023. Why did the feds clone Jen McCabe's phone? To see what Jen would withhold in the Rule 14 process. She didn't get banged up on charges federally, so she must have not done anything that bad. Something, however, is going to happen to Proctor, in turn, legally on the federal level. You can sense it. You can sense it. They're going to indict him. But for what? But then it leaves Tully, which was what this whole stream is about. We have the email from Tully. Forget about whether it's normal procedure for Tully to instruct Proctor to look into all the defense witnesses. We now know that Proctor was not running that case. It was Tully. It was all Brian Tully. What was the meme that I put up today? I really like this one. It says, the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, "I'm Brian Tully and I'm here to help." Attributed to Ronald Reagan. My point is though, it was Brian Tully. Look at it. Kate was his little, I don't know, what do we want to call, how can we say this nicely? You know, I'm trying to rise above and encourage more reasonable, respectful discourse. So Kate was his little, this is so hard. All right, let me, let me say a prayer here. Come on, now you can do this. Okay. So, there are so many words I want to use. Kate was his little assistant. I know, I know. You were expecting something wonderful. Every single thing that I was going to say there was going to be cruel, so I'm sorry. Kate was his little assistant, his little PI there. And then, I'm going to turn it around, nightmare PI Moms, version 2, Kate Peter, Jen McCabe, let's go down the seaport. Kate Peter was his little PI until he was quarterbacking all this. I think it was Morrissey who was even cut out of the loop a little bit, although I'm not sure he wasn't more involved than I'm willing to say right now. And you can see why it happened. Because when Morrissey recused in October of 2023 from the Aidan Kearney cases, and what became the Aidan Kearney and Karen Read investigations that are still ongoing, he didn't really recuse. He just had Tully and Kate running it. I started to wonder if Jen McCabe was like a PI for a case she was a witness on. I'm really starting to wonder that.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1987503776723320894/amplify_video_thumb/1987502597427662848/img/rCXN6v-5U_9-ODTv.jpg)
