OPINION: It took me a few days to get back to this and it ended up being a shiz ton longer than I anticipated but I believe revisiting the screenshot below is important based on what has happened since late last year. So here are my thoughts about it…
The other day I posted a small thread on Twitter reporting on how the @whopaysbiss account aka “Kaidinn” (seen above as “a sockpuppet princess in an evil troll kingdom”) has been defaming me online for an extended period of time. It seems to stem from the 2019 Fitzgibbon v. Radack case which was filed by attorney Steven Biss on behalf of Trevor Fitzgibbon. Myself, Kaidinn, and activist Ray Johansen have all been named in the case as cohorts of attorney Jesselyn Radack out to destroy Fitzgibbon’s reputation.
The Princess Troll
As of today, Kaidinn has posted easily over a hundred tweets about me in the last few months, many of them libelous in nature including a recent 72-tweet rant because clinical obsession appears to be her forte. Jesselyn Radack, the attorney being sued by Fitzgibbon, liked two of the tweets (among others) in the long-winded thread that the princess troll aptly titled:
“An ongoing thread throughout the night I’ll tag once showing JimmysLlama once again targeting Jesselyn Radack’s key witness Fox, blackmailing and threatening her, and basically admitting she’s working for lawfare terrorist Biss to target Radack’s case. #bunnysec #anonops”
Totally normal stuff. So here’s the kicker. Whether or not you believe Fitzgibbon was defamed by Radack and whether or not you believe Kaidinn has defamed me is beside the point. What’s important is the fact that no one is helping Fitzgibbon’s case more against Radack than Radack herself.
She’s being sued for defamation and the fact that she’s liking tweets about someone else that she knows are defamatory and the target (me) has publicly and repeatedly claimed that they’re defamatory (which they most certainly are based on the lunacy alone) could be used in court by Biss to illustrate a pattern of behavior. It doesn’t matter if you think “liking” a tweet should be protected under free speech or expression (which is should be) because liking them is one of the tactics Biss is using in court and the judge seems to be listening as evidenced by the fact they just ruled Fitzgibbon can file yet another amended complaint in this case. Has anyone tried to explain this to her?
Strictly Off Limits
Regardless of whether or not Radack is doing it intentionally to spite me, I’m not sure how any attorney would ever come to the conclusion that it’s a good idea to publicly back an account like @whopaysbiss that has tweeted crazed and defamatory things about virtually everyone at one point or another. The issue seems to be about Radack’s (friend? associate?) @PaxNomad who worked with Fitzgibbon “for years.”
I’ve published several articles that mention @PaxNomad in the context of a larger story because she helped Fitzgibbon do things like attack Radack online in the past — her words not mine which are essentially reiterated in Radack’s counterclaim against Fitzgibbon — in order to further Biss’ lawsuit. Although both Radack and @PaxNomad have taken zero issue with me mentioning Fitzgibbon in my articles, it appears that @PaxNomad is suppose to be off limits in terms of reporting her previous engagements with Fitzgibbon and millionaire Ed Butowsky as a client through a PR warfare firm she co-founded called Shadowbox.
Some background: @PaxNomad allegedly showed up on the doorstep (not literally) the day before Fitzgibbon filed his first lawsuit against Radack in 2018, allegedly to warn her about the case. And her alleged paramour, a relationship that @PaxNomad has vehemently denied, supposedly leaked the court documents although that story is up for contention. Regardless, in no way does it appear that @PaxNomad gave Radack sufficient evidence from her previous dealings with Fitzgibbon to get the 2018 case dismissed which ended in a hefty settlement.
Now here we are in 2020, and we’re all dealing with a second lawsuit that Biss filed against Radack and this time he wants the Twitter DMs of over twenty accounts including the parody account @DevinCow on behalf of U.S. Representative Devin Nunes (and no, the cow has literally nothing to do with the Radack case but those are the types of games that are being played). Radack filed a counterclaim in response but even that doesn’t seem to reflect any new evidence that @PaxNomad gave her to significantly damage Fitzgibbon’s claims because as of now the judge has refused to dismiss the case (it’s possible they’re holding onto explosive material in case there’s a trial). Even more strange, I have personal experience (and evidence) with people contacting me about Radack that would be helpful to her case but oddly, no one seems interested.
Oh, the Lies…
And here’s where things get perhaps even more disturbing. @PaxNomad is a serial tweet deleter and I can name at least eleven (in total) different twitter handle changes and sock accounts she has used possibly in the hopes of making sure anything that might burn the “innocent victim” persona she likes to play both online and privately is erased. For instance, it doesn’t appear that she fled the United States because Youtuber Manny Chavez aka Defango or Thomas Schoenbeger threatened her as she has repeatedly claimed (I’m not saying they didn’t threaten her, I’m referencing why she left the country). On the contrary, her tweets alone reflect an entirely different story that could be easily proven (or debunked) with a subpoena.
Then there is her repeated denials that she had nothing to do with the Seth Rich story which has to be one of the most absurd narratives she’s ever peddled. Besides the obvious which is she and her associates took on Ed Butowsky as a client, one the most vocal (and powerful) individuals that promoted the Rich story, in order to improve his image literally because of the Seth Rich story, her Twitter activity, one example below, indicates otherwise. But rather than just owning up to her own activity (that, frankly, no one cares about), she’s attacked me who (gasp) wrote and tweeted about the story for one whole whopping week:
And yet, here she is two years prior to her attacks agreeing that Malia Zimmerman (an associate of Ed Butowsky who reported on the Seth Rich story via FOX News) was a “casualty” of “cyber propaganda warfare,” and stated that this would have a chilling effect on reporters who might want to publish a “dissenting” view on the Seth Rich case which is precisely this: Seth Rich was WikiLeaks source for the DNC emails.
Folks, we could be here for days so let me just end this with one more idiotic example. @Paxnomad claimed she had nothing to do with “Trish the Dish,” a former associate of George Webb and Jason Goodman, and her indie media outlet, US NewsCorp. Again, tweets suggest otherwise but what’s more disturbing about this is that it looks like she’ll lie about the stupidest shit ever. And make no mistake, below is the same Twitter account she uses today under the handle @PaxNomad. This is not the Twitter account she later claimed to have given over to Trish sometime in 2016-2017. And I can confirm that I was cc’d on this email filled with @PaxNomad’s denials:
Below is a screenshot when @PaxNomad was using the handle @foxfire2112 which can be confirmed with court documents. She writes, “My thread for @USNEWSCORPS1 on media and social media manipulation…,” the handle for NewsCorp in her bio:
And as you can see below, the NewsCorp thread is now a pinned tweet under yet another handle she used called “@welltraveledfox.” Notice the Cicada 3301 banner:
Perhaps there’s some reasonable explanation for all of this but until one is offered it appears @PaxNomad aka @FoxFire2112 aka @WellTraveledFox is willing to lie about just about anything, even about things that literally no one gives a rat’s ass about. The more important question here is why does she appear so desperate to blame everyone around her and remove herself from literally everything she was involved in, especially after directly inserting herself inside a prominent whistleblower attorney’s camp?
Accuse Them of Doing What You’re Doing
@PaxNomad contacted me several times about being attacked by Trevor Fitzgibbon, Manny Chavez, and Thomas Schoenberger between the fall of 2018-2019. Most of what she sent was gibberish to me at the time and her incoherent, disjointed narratives and screenshots made it virtually impossible for me to understand what was happening.
She would deliberately contact me to tell me that Fitzgibbon was behind certain troll accounts and when she said she was being threatened, I told her to contact the authorities. I also told her to block Twitter accounts that were harassing her, as did others, but it appeared to me that she refused to because the drama kept happening. Growing tired of the situation, I told her to bugger off.
At the time, I had the feeling that she wanted me to write a story about what was happening to her or at least drag me into her online troubles although those were just my thoughts in the midst of the situation and I grew disinterested as the drama continued. After cutting her off, she employed the brilliant strategy of accusing someone of doing exactly what it is you’re doing: Telling those around her that I was attacking and targeting her.
I started receiving emails or DMs from sources and trusted colleagues who would mention how I was essentially at war with @PaxNomad, how I hated her, or that they understood my reservations regarding her truthfulness because, you know, I had this beef with another women so surely that negated my common sense. Any woman who has had to deal with this toxic “Meeeeeow, catfight!” sexist, bullshit knows exactly what I’m talking about. As a female writer, I found the entire situation to be nauseating, demeaning to my work and ethics, and completely unhinged.
Of course my reporting has touched on @PaxNomad, sometimes a mere sentence or two (and sometimes more) about how she was involved in certain activities in the context of a larger story, but never has she been the main topic of anything I’ve written. Twitter threads I published about stories in the public interest would reference her sometimes only once which would generate such an explosive response that it boggled the mind. She would comment on my Twitter page, block me, unblock me, comment again, wash, rinse, and repeat, until I was finally forced to block her myself to stop the insanity. And then she would take it private with other people.
She has told her followers repeatedly that I wrote something about her that I absolutely did not and she’s done these things repeatedly and yet, collectively, all of my articles about Cicada, Seth Rich, Shadowbox, etc. barely touch on her and she has never actually pointed out anything that I represented as fact that wasn’t. And whether she likes it or not, @PaxNomad along with her former associates took on Ed Butowsky as a client, the most vehement Seth Rich narrative pusher in history (okay Kim Dotcom might have him beat), in order to clean up his image which basically means they were trying to legitimize his narrative about the Seth Rich story.
Additionally, what happened during the life of Shadowbox is absolutely in the public interest as demonstrated by the fact that outlets like the Daily Beast have also covered the story, not just indie writers like myself and Steve Outtrim. Full stop. I’m not sure why only rocket scientists understand this.
Attacks On Journalism
Publicly defaming writers/journalists by promoting propaganda or conducting whisper campaigns because you don’t like a particular story that was published is really just par for the course under a Trump administration, isn’t it? Even WikiLeaks gatekeepers like @greekemmy, a fanatical well-known Julian Assange supporter, was so crazed over the fact that I called one of her associates “a cunt” for defaming my work that she contacted a media outlet that had been publishing my pro-Assange articles, ordering them to take them down.
Then she campaigned against me to a UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Stefania Maurizi, an Italian journalist I greatly admire, because both had retweeted articles I had written about each of them. These are the very activists that preach free speech and free press every single day of their lives but fail miserably to live up to their own ideals they shove down other peoples’ throats.
It should come as no surprise that @PaxNomad liked @GreekEmmy’s tweet nor that @GreekEmmy liked the tweets that followed hers from @PAA_Asile who reported that I’ve apparently resigned myself to attacking people privately with sock accounts. I could go on about how @PAA_Asile seems to be tied to another Twitter account @Gerge42, both of which have also attacked Jesselyn Radack and activist Raymond Johansen, and the latter (Gerge42) having longstanding ties to @GreekEmmy. But we’ll revisit that shit show another day.
What’s Really Going On Here?
Posting this level of damaging defamation online is not what normal people do. And I have hundreds, literally hundreds of screenshots defaming me (and others) not only from so-called WikiLeaks supporters but from those who used to do work for Steven Biss. Here’s @PaxNomad accusing an indie writer (me) of manufacturing drama:
Here’s @PaxNomad telling her followers that I connected her to Erik Prince, Lee Stranahan, Cassandra Fairbanks, Jack Posobiec and others which literally never happened at any point in any universe or alternative dimension in anything I’ve ever written. In fact, I’ve steered clear of the Erik Prince/Shadowbox/Fitzgibbon rumors so why exactly is she promoting such egregious lies?:
Here’s @PaxNomad accusing me, a writer who has been published by independent media, of trying to “harm” and “intimidate” her. These are serious accusations she’s throwing around. Why?
And when she doesn’t like the response she gets from an account going by @MasonBee1, an associate of mine, she then makes another serious accusation that I sent @MasonBee1 to attack her.
I have to ask, do most of you out there send your friends and associates to “attack” people on social media, like, am I just not hip to this paranoia train because I’m happy to board if ya’ll think I should.
And the pattern of accusing other people for doing what you’re actually doing should be obvious to anyone paying attention: Biss and his wife have been accused of using trolls since 2017 to attack people online in order to provoke targets into saying something that would add to their lawsuits. @Paxnomad also did this with Trevor Fitzgibbon to further his case against Radack. So what does @PaxNomad do? After trying to provoke me, she gets caught by a Twitter user who made an astute observation so she accuses them of doing exactly what she herself, Biss, and his associates have been doing. All because @PaxNomad got burned and she knows it.
More Tactics Are Deployed
My outrage at being libeled to such a degree has merely prompted the @whopaysbiss account to carry on with business as usual such as telling her followers on Twitter, which includes Jesselyn Radack, that I’ve been threatening and blackmailing Radack’s “witness.” Meanwhile, this so-called witness aka @PaxNomad filed a lawsuit last month deliberately inferring in court documents that I work with Trevor Fitzgibbon and other former associates of hers. As of now, no witness list has been submitted in the Fitzgibbon v. Radack case and apparently lying in court documents has become shamefully acceptable across a spectrum of so-called activists.
And yes, for those of you keeping track at home this means that Fitzgibbon has accused me and others of conspiring with Jesselyn Radack while @PaxNomad has accused me of conspiring with Fitzgibbon — all in a court of law. It’s hit that level of absurdity and I have to hop on Twitter everyday to find out who I’m currently working with or for because even I can’t keep track.
As it stands now, according to @whopaysbiss, I am working for Fitzgibbon’s attorney Steven Biss and activist Kevin Zeese to sideline Jesselyn Radack in the lawsuit. As a side note that will probably make @whopaysbiss’ head explode, I actually have met Zeese (and Fitzgibbon), once, at a D.C. rally in support of Julian Assange. Zeese was actually pretty funny and helpful, and did more to support Assange than media whores Lee Stranahan and Cassandra Fairbanks who made only a brief appearance. Although I don’t particularly like some of Zeese’s associates, that’s literally all I can say or know about him.
Aside from her accusations, this week @whopaysbiss also changed her Twitter name to “I SE’d JimmysLlama to throw Raymond under the bus!” “SE’d” stands for “socially engineered.”
So just to be clear, this is a grown adult — not a toddler — running this account that a whistleblower attorney seems to think is credible on some level. And yes, this is real life.
This brings us to Ray Johansen, an activist who has also been targeted and is referenced in the @GreekEmmy/PAA_Asile’s tweets posted earlier and @whopaysbiss’ new Twitter name. @whopaysbiss or rather, Kaidinn, has multiple sock accounts and every single one of them that I’ve come across that was actively being used at the time is deeply obsessed with Johansen who I reached out to in early 2019 for a quote regarding this story about WikiLeaks, illegal surveillance that took place at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and how they had been recently blackmailed.
It’s unclear why this woman has latched onto Johansen like she has but hundreds (seriously) of tweets show her lashing out not just at him and myself but at another woman (@kittyhundal) simply because Hundal worked with Johansen previously. When Fitzgibbon filed a revised complaint against Radack in December 2019, Kaidinn publicly accused both Radack and Johansen (who is also named in the lawsuit) of sending me court documents while withholding them from her.
Kaidinn is clearly unaware that the entire Fitzgibbon v. Radack case is available online to literally everyone in the world via Pacer or Court Listener which is precisely where I obtained the court documents she was referring to because at no time did anyone involved in this court case send them to me.
Since that time, her tweets have taken wild turns from bashing Johansen one day to praising him the next. In the screenshot below you’ll notice at the top that one of her Twitter names used to be “Raymond is a sociopath! He sets out to destroy!”
One day she’ll promote the narrative that I’m obsessed with and threatening @paxnomad while working with Johansen (what does that even mean?) only to quickly change course and accuse me of being in cahoots with Team Fitzgibbon to take down Radack—oops, I mean, Team Biss/Zeese who I’m apparently now funneling information while throwing people under the bus (like is this even a serious statement under the circumstances?).
One has to wonder how exactly I’ve thrown a Norwegian activist under a bus whose circles — outside of support for Julian Assange and a mutual disgust for this lawsuit — generally do not intersect with mine. But of course it’s not clear because Kaidinn rarely posts anything that remotely resembles something of substance to back up her accusations or her outlandish view of the world and the people she stalks online. These tweets are merely a tool to try and divide people. Maybe next time, Kaidinn.
In the tweet below Kaidin (using yet another Twitter name), unleashes on Johansen, calling me a bitch, accusing me of threatening a witness aka @PaxNomad, and working with Fitzgibbon and Steven Biss:
Here she just flat out says I was paid by Fitzgibbon and Biss to threaten a witness:
Note that this tweet isn’t just an attack on my reputation, it’s a serious accusation lodged at attorney Steven Biss that he paid someone to intimidate one of Radack’s alleged witnesses. Now, how do you think this is going to play out down the road if this is brought up in court? It’s a lie so there won’t be any evidence to back it up giving Biss the perfect opportunity to supplement his argument that Radack’s alleged cohorts are working together not only to take Fitzgibbon down but his own attorney, as well.
Again, this isn’t fucking rocket science that these people are not your friends.
And here’s the tweet I published that Kaidinn uses over and over again to accuse me of threatening @PaxNomad. Again, a witness list hasn’t even been filed yet with the court so how would Kaidinn know if @PaxNomad is a witness or not in the Fitzgibbon v. Radack case? @PaxNomad is also the same individual who filed a complaint in a California court of law last month naming my website as some sort of malicious dumping ground against her on behalf of Fitzgibbon and her former associates at Shadowbox:
My point being in the tweet above is that if @PaxNomad is going to continue accusing me of being some sort of cohort of Fitzgibbon and Radack’s attorneys decide to use that in court, I hope @PaxNomad can pony up some evidence for her lies. Threatening? Sure, if you’re mentally ill or high on LSD. I’m kidding, I have no idea what drugs, if any, Kaidinn and @PaxNomad are on. That’s a joke too, folks. Everyone calm down.
The pattern with @PaxNomad and @whopaysbiss is almost comical. Defame a target online to provoke them or their associates and if anyone calls you out over it, claim that the target sent them. If the target writes an article or posts a tweet bemoaning the large-scale attacks and defamation because (gasp) you should probably be arrested for such a crime, make sure it doesn’t tie back to the attorney, and then use it in court. I mean, this is just a working theory by an poor victimized “blogger” with a mere 900+ followers on Twitter…
It’s at this point that I have to seriously wonder if anyone is giving Radack good advice because it’s unfathomable why anyone would put all of their eggs in the basket of these two women, one who seems disingenuous at best about events that have happened, the other a prolific liar. Both of whom have done just as much damage to the community as that Moscow Mule who’s been hanging out in Russia.
Someone Lost the Plot
At the end of the day it seems like quite a few people have lost the plot which I thought was about uncovering how Steven Biss and his wife allegedly use social media to launch and/or further defamation lawsuits against people. That, and of course using one lawsuit to unmask Twitter users from a totally different lawsuit (i.e. the Twitter cow) and filing cases simply to use the discovery process to sue even more people. Most importantly this:
“In the last couple of weeks, however, events are threatening to make our world even worse. Steven Biss is a defamation lawyer who throws lawsuits at everything that moves. Civil law suits, often in the Eastern District of Virginia. A few days back he subpoenaed 22 Twitter accounts frivolously abusing the discovery process in a suit between Trevor Fitzgibbon and Jesselyn Radack…
Among them you will find @YourAnonNews, a 1,7 million or so account central to the Anon collective that on any given day gets dozens or more DM’s. Some from people that would be in peril in their home countries if their comms ended up in a public court document. Countries where they arrest and torture people. Let that sink in. Its not an account anyone, especially someone pretending to be a part of the transparency movement, should seek to gain access to. Furthermore, and maybe even more importantly, there are journalists and researchers among the accounts subpoenaed.”
What seems to be clear is that the tactics used (allegedly) by Biss, his wife and their (former?) associates, like targeting individuals online to provoke a response that can be used against them in court, are still happening in real time to myself and to others like Jesselyn Radack and Ray Johansen. When a former associate of Biss creates a six-hour Youtube video focused solely on attacking me or when you see the exorbitant amount of time that @PaxNomad, another individual who helped Biss in the past, has spent on disparaging my reputation — not dissecting, criticizing, or correcting my work in any sort of meaningful way — one has to wonder what exactly is the agenda here?
A month ago, Johansen published an important piece about the chilling effect and legal precedent Biss’ court cases will have on the freedom of speech, press, and expression, as well as the right to anonymous speech. I recommend everyone read it (here):
So maybe everyone can get their heads out of their asses for lack of a better term and start concentrating on the bigger picture instead of attacking indie journalists or promoting (what I perceive as) some really sketchy characters that have been whispering lies in everyone’s ear.
That bigger picture is about free speech, free press, the right to expression, protecting activists, journalists, sources, anonymous users and more. It’s about the government using lawfare to stop dissent and YOU from speaking out and it’s definitely about class warfare. You’re not a hero for trying to crush independent journalism, suing people for “liking” tweets, or supporting false claims filed by a so-called witness in a pursuit for misguided justice or free speech and a free press — I mean, are you even listening to yourselves right now? Please. Do better. There’s a lot riding on this.
Disclaimer: Ten thousand more pages of disclaimers to follow.
If you were mentioned in this article because your associate(s) did or said something stupid/dishonest, that’s not a suggestion that you did or said something stupid/dishonest or that you took part in it. Of course, some may conclude on their own that you associate with stupid/dishonest individuals but that’s called having the right to an opinion. If I’ve questioned something that doesn’t make sense to me, that’s not me spinning the confusing material you’ve put out. That’s me trying to make sense out of something that doesn’t make sense. And if I’ve noted that you failed to back up your allegations that means I either missed where you posted it or you failed to back your shiz up.
If I haven’t specifically stated that I believe (my opinion) someone is associated with someone else or an event, then it means just that. I haven’t reported an association nor is there any inference of association on my part. For example, just because someone is mentioned in this article, it doesn’t mean that they’re involved or associated with everyone and everything else mentioned. If I believe that there’s an association between people and/or events, I’ll specifically report it.
If anyone mentioned in this article wants to claim that I have associated them with someone else or an event because I didn’t disclose every single person and event in the world that they are NOT associated with, that’s called gaslighting an audience and it’s absurd hogwash i.e. “They mentioned that I liked bananas but they didn’t disclose that I don’t like apples. Why are they trying to associate me with apples???” Or something similar to this lovely gem, “I did NOT give Trish the thumb drive!” in order to make their lazy audience believe that it was reported they gave Trish the thumb drive when, in fact, that was never reported, let alone inferred.
That’s some of the BS I’m talking about so try not to act like a psychiatric patient, intelligence agent, or paid cyber mercenary by doing these things. If you would like to share your story, viewpoint, or any evidence that pertains to this article, or feel strongly that something needs to be clarified or corrected (again, that actually pertains to the article), you can reach me at firstname.lastname@example.org with any questions or concerns.
I cannot confirm and am not confirming the legitimacy of any messages or emails in this article. Please see a doctor if sensitivity continues. If anyone asks, feel free to tell them that I work for Schoenberger, Fitzgibbon, Steven Biss, the CIA, or really just about any intelligence agency because your idiocy, ongoing defamation, and failure as a human is truly a sight to behold for the rest of us.
If I described you as a fruit basket or even a mental patient it's because that is my opinion of you, it's not a diagnosis. I'm not a psychiatrist nor should anyone take my personal opinions as some sort of clinical assessment. Contact @BellaMagnani if you want a rundown on the psych profile she ran on you.
This is an Op-ed article. The information contained in this post is for general information purposes only. While we endeavor to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information contained on the post for any purpose. The owner of this blog makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site or found by following any link on this site.
The views or opinions represented in this blog do not represent those of people, institutions or organizations that the owner may or may not be associated with in professional or personal capacity, unless explicitly stated. Any views or opinions are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual.
The owner will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information nor for the availability of this information. The owner will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or use of this information.