Hi again Charles. I know I'm new to leaving comments. It's amazing but I first discovered the pleasure of reading your blog the very day Musk banned you on Twitter. Which was ironic and frustrating as I found your feed very interesting-a friend of mine had recommended it to me. I knew of course of your reputation-which precedes you and I recall your feud with Roger Stone on whose idea it was for Trump to bring the Clinton accusers to that 2016 debate. I would be happy to be a paying reader and may do in the near future but at present alas I'm one of the 60% supermajority of Americans living paycheck to paycheck
Again as I noted in my first comment a few weeks ago I remain obsessed with that time you were able to release 20 months of correspondence with Vance-anyone who'd read what he said to you in those texts would not have been shocked by the way he and Trump ambushed Zelensky in that oval office setup-I know you've become more positive on Trump again but even people who like Trump saw that moment as shameful. While it seems that you've kind of gone back to being loyal to Trump I've also thought you're the kind of guy-if you were ever interested that the Democrats could use on their team as I suspect you know where a lot of bodies are buried on the GOP oppo research side of things.
Obv you're under no obligation to answer this but I'd never realized you actually worked for Dershowitz in high school-think you might have mentioned it but went right over my head. Just wondering have you since lost touch with him or do you still correspond now and again? And would you consider yourself a fan of his today?
I don’t really see it as red team blue team. I try to do the right thing as far as concerns our country. I’m loyal to the office of the president, whoever happens to occupy that seat. I had hoped for another outcome in November but you don’t always get what you want and if you try sometimes you might just get what you need. 😉
I can respect that-I think I understand. Just being honest though no bs I find you a fascinating public figure. Like I feel like you know where a lot of the bodies are buried so to speak-not to even mention the late GOP operative Peter Smith-LOL. And I'll admit I am kind of racking my brain trying to figure out what your future angles will be-I feel like you're a guy who is always playing 11 dimensional chess-am I right in this or am I overthinking it? LOL While I can understand rooting for the Presidency regardless of occupant, I know you had these concerns about folks like Vance and Musk-or Thiel for that matter. How do you feel about those folks at this point? Do you still see Vance in particular as a national security threat?
Giuffre spun a yarn about an elite pedophile ring that appealed to a credulous population desperate for wild stories of elite misconduct, truth be damned.
She was both victim and victimizer. She trafficked far more young women to Jeffrey Epstein than the government accused Ghislaine Maxwell of, and victimized the many people, men AND women, who got caught up in her imaginative conspiracy theory.
Virtually every aspect of the Epstein conspiracy theory is based on her shaky word. The elite pedophile ring with the politicians and princes, the pedophile island, the secret video tapes, the supposed blackmail? It all originated with Giuffre, who made it all up.
Had she never existed, what would be left of the Epstein case? Not much. Some rich and mostly unknown pervert paid high school girls $300 for sexual massages in Florida. His arrest in 2006 never even made it to the front page of the Palm Beach Post.
In 2015 Cindy McCain partnered with my team to work on an anti-trafficking data project before the Super Bowl. (We'd partnered with Ashton Kutcher's project before...) McCain panicked when our data started getting too good, and defanged us to an "awareness campaign."
---
(I'm not sure if this is a no-go zone, but I can't help but notice how many of these players (Virginia, Prince Andrew, Ashton, Cindy McCain, Epstein, Maxwell) have data points signaling they may have been born into The Chalice and Blade Club.
And I can't help but wonder if that's a throughline of your interest in genetics, reducing IVF, paying attention to Breeding Cults and Oprah's real job, why CIA-friendly Dave Chapelle wouldn't perform the ritual of wearing the dress, who Prince Harry's real dad is, how you knew Meghan Markle was a princess via her mom, part of what you meant with Peter Thiel being able to clock Nazis worth shaking down, and part of how you were suspicious of the MSM narrative of Andrew/Virginia. I mean no judgment to those born into the Club as I suspect I'm just starting to see through it here and learn the subgroups.)
--
Thank you for your generosity of teaching (writing & Spaces both).
I had a phase where I realized how many "basic university facts" I used to teach were a scam and pendulumed Full Woo. You respectfully told me via email you don't entertain those conversations. That was helpful when I was learning how "a lot of what I 'know' just ain't so." None of my formal PhD methods & lenses have held up to real-world scrutiny the way your methods and lenses have. I'm doing my best to pay it forward.
Hi again Charles. I know I'm new to leaving comments. It's amazing but I first discovered the pleasure of reading your blog the very day Musk banned you on Twitter. Which was ironic and frustrating as I found your feed very interesting-a friend of mine had recommended it to me. I knew of course of your reputation-which precedes you and I recall your feud with Roger Stone on whose idea it was for Trump to bring the Clinton accusers to that 2016 debate. I would be happy to be a paying reader and may do in the near future but at present alas I'm one of the 60% supermajority of Americans living paycheck to paycheck
Again as I noted in my first comment a few weeks ago I remain obsessed with that time you were able to release 20 months of correspondence with Vance-anyone who'd read what he said to you in those texts would not have been shocked by the way he and Trump ambushed Zelensky in that oval office setup-I know you've become more positive on Trump again but even people who like Trump saw that moment as shameful. While it seems that you've kind of gone back to being loyal to Trump I've also thought you're the kind of guy-if you were ever interested that the Democrats could use on their team as I suspect you know where a lot of bodies are buried on the GOP oppo research side of things.
Obv you're under no obligation to answer this but I'd never realized you actually worked for Dershowitz in high school-think you might have mentioned it but went right over my head. Just wondering have you since lost touch with him or do you still correspond now and again? And would you consider yourself a fan of his today?
I don’t really see it as red team blue team. I try to do the right thing as far as concerns our country. I’m loyal to the office of the president, whoever happens to occupy that seat. I had hoped for another outcome in November but you don’t always get what you want and if you try sometimes you might just get what you need. 😉
I can respect that-I think I understand. Just being honest though no bs I find you a fascinating public figure. Like I feel like you know where a lot of the bodies are buried so to speak-not to even mention the late GOP operative Peter Smith-LOL. And I'll admit I am kind of racking my brain trying to figure out what your future angles will be-I feel like you're a guy who is always playing 11 dimensional chess-am I right in this or am I overthinking it? LOL While I can understand rooting for the Presidency regardless of occupant, I know you had these concerns about folks like Vance and Musk-or Thiel for that matter. How do you feel about those folks at this point? Do you still see Vance in particular as a national security threat?
Sorry Charles, you've been bamboozled.
Giuffre spun a yarn about an elite pedophile ring that appealed to a credulous population desperate for wild stories of elite misconduct, truth be damned.
She was both victim and victimizer. She trafficked far more young women to Jeffrey Epstein than the government accused Ghislaine Maxwell of, and victimized the many people, men AND women, who got caught up in her imaginative conspiracy theory.
Virtually every aspect of the Epstein conspiracy theory is based on her shaky word. The elite pedophile ring with the politicians and princes, the pedophile island, the secret video tapes, the supposed blackmail? It all originated with Giuffre, who made it all up.
Had she never existed, what would be left of the Epstein case? Not much. Some rich and mostly unknown pervert paid high school girls $300 for sexual massages in Florida. His arrest in 2006 never even made it to the front page of the Palm Beach Post.
In 2015 Cindy McCain partnered with my team to work on an anti-trafficking data project before the Super Bowl. (We'd partnered with Ashton Kutcher's project before...) McCain panicked when our data started getting too good, and defanged us to an "awareness campaign."
---
(I'm not sure if this is a no-go zone, but I can't help but notice how many of these players (Virginia, Prince Andrew, Ashton, Cindy McCain, Epstein, Maxwell) have data points signaling they may have been born into The Chalice and Blade Club.
And I can't help but wonder if that's a throughline of your interest in genetics, reducing IVF, paying attention to Breeding Cults and Oprah's real job, why CIA-friendly Dave Chapelle wouldn't perform the ritual of wearing the dress, who Prince Harry's real dad is, how you knew Meghan Markle was a princess via her mom, part of what you meant with Peter Thiel being able to clock Nazis worth shaking down, and part of how you were suspicious of the MSM narrative of Andrew/Virginia. I mean no judgment to those born into the Club as I suspect I'm just starting to see through it here and learn the subgroups.)
--
Thank you for your generosity of teaching (writing & Spaces both).
I had a phase where I realized how many "basic university facts" I used to teach were a scam and pendulumed Full Woo. You respectfully told me via email you don't entertain those conversations. That was helpful when I was learning how "a lot of what I 'know' just ain't so." None of my formal PhD methods & lenses have held up to real-world scrutiny the way your methods and lenses have. I'm doing my best to pay it forward.
Let’s talk soon.