Exposing a Disinfo Operation in One Twitter Thread Part I

Introduction

“So I’ve dealt with Micah and he’s an ass pure and simple…totally bought by Pierre.. he even came at me with an alt.” – Beth Bogaerts

Like most social media users, I have watched over the course of the last four years one destructive disinformation campaign after another being disseminated, digested by the masses, and blindly accepted by the rank and file. Qanon is obviously a perfect example but even though most of us were able to see the absurdity behind it from its inception, there have been subtle, perfectly believable operations that have fooled even the best of us, especially if they were initiated or instigated by individuals we were fond of, appreciated, or trusted. 

Take for instance Wikileaks’ most faithful supporter, Beth Bogaerts, who has conned a shocking amount of people over the years and her statement above that she wrote to a group of individuals back in 2018. She was referring to journalist Micah Lee from The Intercept who she claimed retaliated against her for statements she apparently made by creating a sock account and “coming at” her on Twitter. Emails from her suggest that the alleged incident was over an article that Elizabeth Lea Vos wrote for Disobedient Media criticizing an article that The Intercept had published about Assange. 

I sent the emails to Micah Lee and spoke with him about Bogaerts’ incredulous allegations:

“I didn’t create that sock account. I don’t really remember who Beth Bogaerts is but I just checked and I have her blocked. But I’ve actually never made sock accounts.”

Perhaps Mrs. Bogaerts would like to continue her defamation war against The Intercept in order to save herself from the ten millionth lie she’s been caught in, this time about a well known journalist who has worked with Edward Snowden in the past. Or maybe she should try her usual deranged spin after getting caught and accuse Lee and The Intercept of being hired, paid, or influenced by Thomas Schoenberger. That won’t sound crazy at all. 

Thanks in part to The Rabbit Files, after running subtle and manipulative disinfo and defamation campaigns for the last four years, the majority of that time being protected by individuals like whistleblower attorney, Jesselyn Radack, “hacktivist” Ray Johansen, other members of the hacktivist community, “Lestat” (@ATafoyovksky), and the Twitter account @AnonScandinavia, Bogaerts’ deceptive behavior is finally being exposed. 

Years of DMs and emails have shed light on how she operates: Quietly, privately, sweetly, and sometimes erratically. Pushing disinformation on those who fall prey to her act of innocence and victimhood. Whether her motives are to appear more important than she actually is in order to garner trust, to break up activist groups, or to disseminate derogatory (and usually false) information about activists and journalists, remains unknown. Throughout this article I will be revisiting some of the highly questionable things that she and her associates have been involved in or directly carried out with a specific focus on one of Jesselyn Radack’s tweets. This is also detailed further in the last section of Part 3 of this article. 

And so whether or not a social media operation is subtle or the goal is to influence U.S. elections, social engineer Assange supporters into believing fascism could save him, gain notoriety, infiltrate, censor speech and journalism, sway U.S. court cases, ruin reputations with false allegations, or destroy activists and their communities, these activities have only increased over time.

For the usual reasons that I find myself publishing most often nowadays, I believe that maintaining a historical record of what has transpired in the Assange-transparency movement, if only to keep new activists safe and aware of manipulative, bad actors and/or disinformation campaigns that are not only happening in their own backyard, they’re being run by their own colleagues, is important. Additionally, there is a massive endeavor underway to rewrite or whitewash history and perhaps my website can provide some clarity in the future. 

How It Started: The First Tweet

On September 26, 2021, whistleblower attorney, Jesselyn Radack, posted a tweet that stated, “Glad there’s proof now that in 2017 @CIA plotted to sow discord among #Assange & @wikileaks supporters. Guess who led that charge?” in reference to the Yahoo article that was recently published about Trump and the CIA allegedly plotting to assassinate Assange. She included an older tweet that she posted back in October 2019, which stated:

https://archive.md/h4vAM

What’s extraordinary about this is that Radack’s proxies like @ATafoyovsky, a disinformation agent in Mexico that Beth Bogaerts somehow knew previously and used to pay weekly, have been running interference for Suzie Dawson for almost two years now by falsely placing the blame for #Unity4J, a grifty, fashy, and abusive pro-Assange movement, on Trevor Fitzgibbon rather than on the appropriate individuals who actually co-founded and/or controlled it like Dawson, Kim Dotcom, Elizabeth Lea Vos, and WikiLeaks gatekeeper, @BellaMagnani.

Of course the motives behind this seem obvious: Radack has been sued twice by Fitzgibbon for defamation and her associate, Bogaerts, is currently being sued by him for breach of contract. It is because of these lawsuits that a tidal wave of malicious defamation and disinfo campaigns have engulfed social media.  

The Yahoo Article

If we re-read the Yahoo article and what was actually reported, Radack’s tweet is completely off-base for a myriad of reasons and because of the ongoing and unsubstantiated allegations against Fitzgibbon, she indirectly incriminated him. She basically took a 7,200+ word article and made it all about Dawson and Fitzgibbon using prevarications and inferences to spread disinformation that supports her personal agenda. Yahoo:

“Proposals began percolating upward within the CIA and the NSC to undertake various disruptive activities — the core of ‘offensive counterintelligence’ — against WikiLeaks. These included paralyzing its digital infrastructure, disrupting its communications, provoking internal disputes within the organization by planting damaging information, and stealing WikiLeaks members’ electronic devices…”

“Infiltrating the group, either with a real person or by inventing a cyber persona to gain the group’s confidence, was quickly dismissed…Sowing discord within the group seemed an easier route to success…”

“Sessions’ concerns mirrored the tensions between the ramped-up intelligence collection and disruption efforts aimed at WikiLeaks…”

First, a few observations about the article itself. Aside from most Assange supporters inexplicably failing to question why the former head of the CIA, Mike Pompeo, confirmed the story three weeks before the U.S. government is set to argue Assange’s extradition before a U.K. judge, how does one not see that the entire article basically excuses U.S. intelligence of any wrong doing. It’s not illegal for the CIA to discuss assassinating someone and I find it highly unlikely that a U.K. judge would see it any other way. It’s one thing if they had followed through with it and quite another for a media outlet to basically report on how commendable the U.S. system’s checks and balances are for preventing it. 

And honestly, I hate to be Debbie Downer at the neighborhood kool aid mixer but if they really wanted Assange dead, he would probably be dead. Have we already forgotten that the U.S. government helped cover up the slaughter of journalist, Jamal Khashoggi? 

The CIA is a spy agency and assassinations are part of what they do but apparently everyone forgot that they got this memo a long time ago. I don’t agree with it but let’s not act like this is terribly shocking news. A few years back we all bought the story that Hillary wanted to drone Assange, yes? If anything, WikiLeaks and supporters should be much more concerned about how often Vault 7 came up in the article and then they should read my article, “Understanding the CFAA Conspiracy Charge Against Julian Assange.”

While everyone is distracted by assassination plots and the Espionage charges against Assange, one CFAA conspiracy charge — which doesn’t seem that difficult to prove — is enough to get Assange on U.S. soil and sentenced to five years in prison (the exact length of time that U.S. prosecutors told the U.K. magistrate he would probably get if extradited), while they write up a new indictment for Vault 7.

But the Yahoo article wasn’t just about Vault 7, clearing the CIA of assassination plots, and other insane activities they contemplated. It reported that the spy agency decided against planting a “real person” or a “cyber persona” inside of the movement which is one of the most preposterous things I’ve read in a long time. If you believe that they’ve never done this, you need your head examined. With that said, take note, all ye Assange supporters.

If supporters, gatekeepers, and even Assange’s fiancé expect everyone to take this article at face value than no one, and I mean no one, can ever argue again that there are infiltrators or CIA collaborators within the movement. Yahoo quoted former U.S. intelligence agents who confirmed that they decided against the idea and surely they would never lie to a media outlet nor would a media outlet ever publish those lies, amirite? I mean, that’s what Yahoo, WikiLeaks, and Assange supporters currently want you to believe.

In addition, don’t forget that supporters can no longer accuse the CIA of having a hand in creating the online persona, Guccifer 2, because, sorry folks, you’re either on the kool aid or you’re not.

Radack v. Yahoo

As for how Radack’s tweet relates to the Yahoo article, although she got the year right when the CIA was allegedly hatching plans to provoke internal disputes with damaging information and run “disruption” operations, Suzie Dawson’s #Unity4J movement wasn’t even created until approximately May 31, 2018, over one year after the CIA supposedly started to contemplate such things (#ReconnectJulian started at the end of March 2018, which later morphed into #Unity4J). 

Perhaps even more sobering is the fact that the former Ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell, was already in talks with Ecuador about extraditing/arresting Assange in September 2018, meaning that #Unity4J was only in existence for approximately four months when the U.S. government was already taking steps to remove the WikiLeaks founder from the embassy in London.

And sure, one could argue that a fractured community contributed to the movement’s failure to build enough public pressure to free Assange or at the very least prevent his arrest but that failure rests on the shoulders of long-time gatekeepers and supporters who had almost a decade to put aside their ego, power trips, and attitude in order to create a healthy, powerful, working class campaign. They simply chose not to. 

WikiLeaks, Courage Foundation, and whoever runs Assange’s Twitter account are also to blame for supporting and promoting bad actors in the community. I realize now is not the time to cast stones with an appeals hearing on the horizon but the WikiLeaks community is like the gun lobby after a mass shooting — there’s never a good time to talk about it.

Additionally, the support community has done nothing but pander to politicians and the capitalist class under the incredibly misguided belief that they could save Julian knowing full well that it’s the capitalist class behind his imprisonment. I mean, let’s not pretend that if we would have united under this hierarchal bullshit that was constructed years ago and panders to the very class imprisoning Assange we could have saved him from imprisonment. Please. 

Worse still in terms of Radack’s allegations is the fact that it wasn’t Dawson who was running disruption operations or planting damaging information about WikiLeaks in 2017, nor did she acquire the influence to take over the Assange support community in a vacuum. Perhaps Radack should familiarize herself with history before posting disinformation that actually incriminates her own associates more so than Dawson or Fitzgibbon because if anyone was involved in these types of activities, including legitimizing Dawson during the timeframe that Yahoo laid out, it was her own friends.

How Dawson Jacked the Assange Movement

In 2011, Suzie Dawson claims that she became an “accidental activist” after joining the Occupy movement in Auckland, New Zealand. However, despite the fact that she became known to local activists and soon thereafter began covering news about Assange, Snowden, and Manning, by 2017, she was still fairly unknown in the WikiLeaks support community at large minus longtime gatekeepers, hacktivists, and others who knew her from Occupy. 

This, of course, begs the question how Dawson was able to acquire enough influence to jack the Assange movement a year later? Let’s take a trip down memory lane, shall we? 

In September 2011, Occupy Wall Street exploded in the streets of New York and the feverish pitch reached the shores of New Zealand a few weeks later. Dawson quickly assimilated into Occupy Auckland’s media team and for a full and fairly disturbing look at her involvement in the movement read, “The Gatekeeper Files: New Zealand’s Traveling Circus Act,” on my website. 

Anonymous

During this time period Dawson appeared supportive of the hacking collective known as Anonymous and tweets between Dawson and a self-proclaimed hacker named “Aaron Kesel” aka @An0nKn0wledge aka @Cens0red (a close associate of hacktivist Ray Johansen who, in turn, is Radack’s close associate), show that they’ve been communicating with each other since 2012, if not earlier.

In late May 2012, Kesel posted a story on Twitter that was sketchier than a 2 a.m. Waffle House about how he was allegedly “V&” (I totally lifted the Waffle House btw and you can read more about his claims here), and, while allegedly being tortured by the feds, his Twitter account was shut down. When the account came back online a few days later, Dawson tweeted to him, “wow just crapped myself when i saw u tweeting. wb, itns ;).”

At no point between 2012 – present day, has Kesel, a longtime activist and self-proclaimed member of Anonymous, ever publicly warned a single activist about Dawson’s propensity for lying, manipulation, and over-dramatization. Rather, he’s spent years threatening women online and telling the most obscene lies like he’s in the Mueller report, he’s on a no-fly list, he’s the most targeted journalist on the internet, he introduced Guccifer 2 to Protonmail, and he has “diplomatic immunity”” from the CIA. Put it this way, he and Dawson are like two peas in a pod. 

In 2018, he joined #Unity4J and was given access to the campaign’s social media account. Then he spent his time acting like their attack dog by trying to hijack other activists’ campaigns for Dawson’s fashy movement and attacking journalists like myself for questioning #Unity4J. He currently works for SoMee Social with Johansen.

Kazakhstan, Abduction Attempt, and #JA4Me

Two years after Kesel’s claims that he was basically abducted by the feds (which, btw, no one seemed to believe), Dawson alleged that she fled New Zealand after spooks tried to assassinate her and her children multiple times, a story (among many) that she has successfully told for over six years now to manipulate supporters into trusting her and sending her money. However, her online journal entries show that rather than fleeing, she took a 3-month vacation and then after appearing to make a pit stop back in Spooksville, New Zealand, she headed to Berlin, Germany.

In March 2016, she started making public statements about how she was trying to get asylum *somewhere* after Germany apparently didn’t work out. She traveled to Belarus and Kazakhstan, a former Soviet Republic where Dawson claimed that she found an intelligence-planted tracking device in her travel items and nameless adversaries tried to abduct her.

And yes, she actually made these claims despite the fact that based on a picture Dawson herself posted, this so-called tracking device was one of those tags you put on store items in case someone tries to shoplift it an alarm will sound. Naturally, I’m now under the impression that Dawson either shoplifted or purchased these tags off Amazon to keep up the charade that she was being targeted. In Kazakhstan. By former Soviet spooks.

After barely escaping the evil clutches of Kazakh operatives, Dawson started a pro-Assange campaign called JA4Me and if you’re wondering who promoted it despite the fact that she appeared to be a delusional and paranoid charlatan, look no further than longtime WikiLeaks support gatekeepers @BellaMagnani and @GreekEmmy.

John Kiriakou and Ray Johansen, both longtime associates of Jesselyn Radack, also supported the campaign even though Kiriakou is a former CIA agent so you’d think he’d be smarter than this but, alas, curiously he was not. Nor was Johansen who claims that he was working long hours hence his own failure to warn and/or keep other activists/hacktivists safe and aware…for years.

Of course, Johansen’s explanation appears to be just another lie on a long list of his based on his own tweets. He wasn’t too busy during Dawson’s #AntiSpyBill (see next section) to target Penny Bright, an activist from Auckland whose reputation Dawson completely destroyed during Occupy with her usual unsubstantiated accusations, “She’s an infiltrator and intel snitch.”

Johansen not only defended Dawson’s Russian asylum story to Penny, he told her that Dawson was basically so humble that she “understates her track record,” and then he called Penny a “butthurt activist with a personal grudge.” Penny Bright passed away 11 months later after a battle with cancer. So yeah, that’s how “busy” Johansen was.

Below is Radack’s ridiculous explanation in 2019 as to why former CIA agent, John Kiriakou, was such a witless lemming he also couldn’t figure out that Dawson is a narcissistic fraud. And don’t get all offended on me. Anyone who has followed me for a hot second knows exactly how I feel about this guy:

Loool is that so? After legitimizing her lies for four years, submitting a letter on her behalf to the Russian government two months before you posted this farcical tweet, and as a former CIA officer who recruited foreign agents for a living he just couldn’t figure it out? Yes, that makes perfect sense, thank you. While you’re here do you have an absurd explanation as to why all of Kiriakou’s devices were seized by the authorities on behalf of a defense contractor and then he failed to warn all of the activists and journalists he had been in contact with? I’ll wait. 

In the meantime, we’re now at five longtime activists (“Aaron Kesel,” @GreekEmmy, @BellaMagnani, John Kiriakou, and Ray Johansen) who not only said NOTHING to warn others about Dawson’s highly questionable behavior, they encouraged activists to trust her by legitimizing both Dawson and her work. 

This, despite the fact that even WikiLeaks had a problem with her because she was making claims during the JA4Me campaign like President Obama stole her words from an obscure radio interview she did and then used them in one of his speeches.  If anyone should be held wholly responsible for promoting Dawson after this, it’s everyone that was in the chat room when WikiLeaks pointed out her disturbing behavior.

The #AntiSpyBill, Pursuance Project, and the Pirate Party

Fast forward to the fall of 2016. Dawson’s now in Russia looking for asylum and apparently none of these super intelligent, “We know better than you ever will,” longtime activists questioned this story either which was (and still is) sketchy AF (Yup, I got you covered there, too. Read this and this).

In January 2017, she was named president of Kim Dotcom’s Internet Party (why has he been largely ignored in this story??) and that summer Ray Johansen assisted with onboarding her into Barrett Brown’s Pursuance Project. No questions asked.

Dawson also started an #AntiSpyBill for the Internet Party and all the usual suspects promoted it including Johansen and Radack’s other close associate, Beth Bogaerts, despite all of these completely unhinged things that Dawson had said or done. And no, it’s no one’s fault but your own for failing to do your homework.

Yes, Trevor Fitzgibbon also promoted Dawson’s #AntiSpyBill but if you’re looking for who introduced him to #Unity4J co-founder, Elizabeth Lea Vos, which led to Vos introducing him to Dawson, look no further than Bogaerts who was 100% responsible for hooking him up with these people–only for her and her associates to target him years later for it.

As another side note, if you’re wondering how the whole Lara Logan/Ed Butowsky side got hooked up with the Steve Biss/Thomas Schoenberger side, again, look no further than Bogaerts who introduced Fitzgibbon to Biss. Bogaerts and Schoenberger are also the reason that Fitzgibbon got involved with doing a short PR stint for Robert David Steele because at the time they were both doing research for his lawsuit against Jason Goodman. 

And after all of the introductions that Bogaerts made over the years, those same introductions are now being used against the very people she introduced. I’m sure Bogaerts’ and Radack’s mouthpiece, Lestat, will spin that story into something incredible (oh wait, he already has) which is funny because my understanding is that it was also Bogaerts who knew Lestat first out of this group of online disinfo/defamation agents.   

After being onboarded to Pursuance Project, Johansen then moved to have Dawson’s Internet Party join the Pirate Party because why wouldn’t you do something like that with a fledgling political party founded by a snitch who was convicted multiple times for basically stealing from innocent people and run by a manipulative fruit basket who used it for her own personal gain until she ran it into the ground?

And just for the record, Dawson’s invitation to join the Pirate Party and Pursuance Project came after she fully supported Kim Dotcom and the disgusting role he played in the Seth Rich conspiracy. So there’s that.

I mean, longtime activists and hacktivists have consistently acted like they know better because they’ve been around longer and they’ve ignored, humiliated, abused, and demoralized newcomers, or worse, called them feds. They also actively seek to intimidate, threaten, de-platform, defame, and censor their speech if they dare to expose this behavior. 

And they rarely, if ever, stand up for lesser known activists and journalists who are being attacked because they’re expendable or not worth it in terms of bolstering their own agenda, ego, and image. Meanwhile, newcomers like myself who came along and started exposing all of this are obviously CIA agitators working for a paycheck. 

Oops, Yahoo said that’s wrong. Sorry.

It’s Never Been About #Unity4J

In December 2017, things came to a screeching halt after Dawson went berserk on Twitter over Pursuance Project and purposely dragged Julian Assange into the fray. Yes, I have you covered about this incident, as well, although you’ll never see Johansen and Radack retweet it now despite the fact that this article is the only one in existence that covers the situation in detail. You’re welcome.  

But keep in mind that Johansen, Radack, Bogaerts, and other associates have consistently called me a liar since last year (mostly because of their sad feelings) and because they’re so trustworthy and honest, please note that the article above must be filled with misdirection and dishonest reporting meaning that Johansen and his Pursuance Project pals actually did screw Dawson over because of Julian Assange. 

So consider this my public apology for misleading the public, Mr. Johansen, and I fully retract this article on my website because I guess you are actually the type that demonizes people for supporting Assange. You’re also welcome.

As for what Dawson did on Twitter to Brown’s project, it was too late. WikiLeaks gatekeepers and longtime activists and hacktivists, including Radack’s close friends, had bolstered Dawson’s credibility over the course of the previous two years to the point where it appeared that Assange believed Dawson’s allegations.

Dawson’s outburst became the catalyst for everything else that followed. Radack and Johansen’s opposition to her and #Unity4J was never about fascism, Cassandra Fairbanks, Jack Posobiec, abusive behavior, or grifting, like the rest of us who opposed the movement. Radack has made #Unity4J almost entirely about herself and she never stood up for the rest of us while we were (stupidly) supportive of her.

Radack wasn’t called a fed, we were. The journalists who exposed #Unity4J. And she said nothing but use our work to cry about how she was being targeted.

The deeply concerning issues within the #Unity4J movement were simply tools that Radack and Johansen used to put Dawson on blast. Put it this way, Johansen, Radack, “Lestat,” and @AnonScandinavia have never called out Kim Dotcom the way they have with Dawson (with regards to #Unity4J) despite the fact he literally helped co-found it.

They’ve also never gone after @BellaMagnani who was involved in its creation nor have they ever gone after Johansen’s besties, Kitty Hundal and “Aaron Kesel,” for being heavily involved in Unity4J. Let’s not forget how they’ve also ignored Bill Binney and Ray McGovern’s consistent support of Dawson. Oops, of course. Isn’t Binney one of Radack’s clients?

Interestingly though, Radack’s disinfo agent in Mexico has consistently attacked NSA whistleblower, Bill Binney, going so far as to accuse him of being involved in/creating Qanon. Then he targets anyone who calls out his disinfo. Obviously, Fitzgibbon is his #1 target.

Curiously, Radack has never targeted “Lestat” over these unsubstantiated (and what most mentally balanced people would call ludicrous) allegations. Like her friends, Bogaerts and Johansen, Radack appears to enjoy the fact that “Lestat” acts as their mouthpiece against Fitzgibbon, anyone they’ve dealt with in court, or people like myself who have exposed their operations, more so than standing up for her own client.

Again, this goes back to Suzie Dawson and Pursuance Project. Binney has supported Dawson for years hence the reason why he’s been dragged into this giant, internationally-created conspiracy theory which I’ll get into more in Part 3 of this article. You should also take note of Radack’s clients that she does publicly defend or that her proxies don’t defame like John Kiriakou, a so-called whistleblower that was knee-deep in Dawson’s #Unity4J.

So in regards to #Unity4J and the actual people who created and controlled it, the only person that Radack, Johansen, Lestat, and @AnonScandinavia have actually targeted is Dawson. Publicly, @AnonScandinavia went after Elizabeth Lea Vos one time about an article she published, not #Unity4J, and I’m told it was because Bogaerts was infuriated that Vos cut off communications with her over her questionable behavior. 

Only on very rare occasions have some of them gone after Fairbanks which is extraordinary because Fairbanks has long been linked to at least one fed snitch and has always been more problematic in terms of fascism and Assange’s safety than Dawson. In fact, her close ties to the Trump administration meant so little to these actors that after she testified in the Assange extradition hearing specifically because her friends are fashy Trump insiders, Johansen was quick to point out on Twitter that “Cassie” had done nothing wrong.

Fairbanks’ tweet one day after Julian Assange was arrested.

It wasn’t the #Unity4J movement per se that they had a problem with, it was Dawson because of the Pursuance Project fiasco and then they tied their two greatest enemies, Dawson and Fitzgibbon, into one neat, little conspiracy. A simple observation of what transpired–virtually all of these people or Twitter accounts openly supported Dawson up until the Pursuance Project incident–seems to prove that. 

And if you’re wondering why Johansen et al have recently become vocal against Dawson it’s because she started a social media platform last year that apparently rivals SoMee Social where both Johansen and Kesel work. I mean, you couldn’t pay me to sign up for either and if you’re wondering where the latest disinfo campaigns are being bred and newbie activists are being social engineered my bet is on these two social media platforms, especially SoMee Social.

So there it is. That’s how Dawson gained enough influence to jack the Assange movement in 2018, during the timeline that Yahoo laid out. She did it with the help of John Kiriakou (Radack’s client); WikiLeaks gatekeepers and insiders; and Radack’s other associates like Ray Johansen and Beth Bogaerts. Spin that, Radack.

The CIA and Damaging Information Published in 2017

Yahoo‘s claims about “provoking internal disputes within the organization by planting damaging information,” could very well be in reference to MSM articles published throughout 2017 to incite political division because at no point does it appear that Dawson did any of this in 2017, again, aside from her support of Kim Dotcom over the Seth Rich conspiracy. In my opinion, was she behaving like a delusional freak and grifting after seeking asylum in Russia? Yes. Planting damaging information about WikiLeaks? No.

First, it’s important to note that WikiLeaks had already damaged their own reputation by climbing in bed with the alt-right/far-right before the 2016 election after Pompeo implemented what I like to call an intelligence “trust-building” operation:

Pompeo’s social engineering stunt eventually morphed into Trump’s other campaign slogan, “I love WikiLeaks,” and the CIA may have used these political dynamics to sow discord in 2017. Of course, let’s not forget about Russiagate. Here are some of the more prominent headlines from that year:

“CIA Identifies Russians Who Gave DNC Emails to WikiLeaks,” January 5, 2017

“The WikiLeaks-Russia connection started way before the 2016 election,” January 6, 2017

“How Wikileaks’ Julian Assange became an enemy of the truth,” January 6, 2017

“WikiLeaks will give tech giants CIA zero-day exploits after they meet mystery demands,” March 17, 2017

“CIA Director Pompeo Calls WikiLeaks a ‘Hostile Intelligence Service,'” April 13, 2017

“CIA Chief Says Wikileaks Was Used By Russian Military Intelligence,” April 13, 2017

“Did Trump really mention WikiLeaks over 160 times in the last month of the election cycle?,” April 21, 2017

“Wikileaks Documentary Makers Accuse Assange of Censorship,” June 16, 2017

“GOP Congressman Sought Trump Deal on WikiLeaks, Russia,” September 15, 2017

“WikiLeaks founder Assange claims he made 50,000% return on bitcoin thanks to the US government,” October 16, 2017

“The Secret Correspondence Between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks,” November 13, 2017

“How did WikiLeaks become associated with Russia?,” November 15, 2017

“Free Press Group Ready to Cut Off WikiLeaks,” November 16, 2017

“Julian Assange’s Hatred of Hillary Clinton Was No Secret. His Advice to Donald Trump Was.,” November 15, 2017

There’s no doubt that U.S. intelligence agencies influenced some of these articles in an effort to sway public opinion and cause disruptions in the community over Russiagate and WikiLeaks’ seemingly close ties to the alt-right/ Trump administration.  However, if you honestly believe that Dawson and Fitzgibbon were involved in writing and publishing these stories, like all of these media outlets just slapped on some random journalist’s name on the story in order to cover up for their CIA gig, you have lost your goddamn mind.

Disruption/Disinformation in the Assange Support Community (2017)

So let’s look at the smaller picture: The Assange support community, actors in the periphery, and the events that transpired in 2017, that one could easily construe as “disruptive activities” or “damaging information” that was planted. These events have been detailed extensively throughout The Rabbit Files.

Anonymous Scandinavia, Warren Flood, Cicada 3301, and Qanon

In early March 2017, Radack’s associate, @AnonScandinavia, became one of the first accounts to promote an erroneous story about DNC employee, Warren Flood, being identified as the actor behind the online persona, Guccifer 2. @BellaMagnani quickly followed suit and heavily promoted it until WikiLeaks finally retweeted the misinformation that, ironically, implicated an innocent man. 

But it wasn’t just that the story was wrong, the name “Warren Flood” played directly into Cicada 3301’s 2017 puzzle release which stated, “A Fludd Approaches..,” leading some people to believe that WikiLeaks, Assange, and the international puzzle might be related. 

Coincidentally, @AnonScandinavia’s close associate, Beth Bogaerts, had been involved in Cicada 3301 possibly as early as August 2016, she was promoting it on Twitter by November 2016, and in 2018, she told attorneys and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that she was the owner of the puzzle.

At the same time that the Warren Flood story was being pushed, during early March 2017, WikiLeaks dropped multiple hints about Vault 7 in the form of questions (Who, what, where, when, why, how is Vault 7?), very similar to what the #FollowTheWhiteRabbit (Qanon) campaign did 8 months later.

Immediately after WikiLeaks started dropping the Vault 7 questions, @AnonScandinavia appears to have hijacked Cicada’s methods by dropping clues about WikiLeaks’ upcoming publication in the form of hints and puzzles.

Twitter accounts that were directly involved with Cicada 3301, or associated with its members, as well as online personalities like Tracy Beanz, a Youtuber that @AnonScandinavia actively encouraged everyone to follow and claimed that WikiLeaks was “compiling” all of her videos, tried to convince their audience that the people behind the esoteric puzzle were working directly with Assange. 

Not once did the self-proclaimed WikiLeaks loyalist and “owner” of the puzzle, Beth Bogaerts, speak out against this disinformation campaign during this time period.

And then there’s this spin story below from Radack and Bogaert’s associate, Lestat, who is currently trying to cover up the fact that Anonymous Scandinavia is 100% responsible for bringing Tracy Beanz to the attention of the “Vault 7 community,” legitimizing her by telling everyone that Wikileaks was “compiling” her videos, and encouraging Wikileaks supporters to follow her at the same time she was promoting Cicada 3301 being tied to WikiLeaks. 

Beanz isn’t to blame for believing this absurd LARP, the people who ran the LARP with the specific goal of getting people to believe the LARP are to blame. This isn’t rocket science. Lestat has also used this video to prove that I was somehow involved with Qanon despite the fact that Qanon started six months later, I’ve never promoted it, and I had cut all ties with Beanz months earlier. 

It’s usually fairly easy to debunk Lestat’s lies but bad actors, disinfo agents, and infiltrators are fully aware that a large number of people have no discernment between fact and fiction, or actual evidence that proves something vs. disinformation. They also know that far too many people are addicted to kool aid-induced mob mentality and cult behavior. 

For instance, Anonymous Scandinavia knows full well that there are DMs between myself and their account regarding Tracy Beanz that completely debunk Lestat’s fantasy island story time but this will never stop him from spreading disinformation because he knows that there is a segment of the population that will believe him regardless of the fact that a large majority of the time he is unable to produce actual proof that supports his allegations. For example, on July 5, 2017, Anonymous Scandinavia wrote to me:

“BTW…Were contacted today by Tracy Beanz. She just wanted to chit chat. Did not tell her anything as she did not ask…but she will revert and ask. Most likely.”

I responded:

“[W]ithout getting into all the details of what she has said and done in the past, let’s just say I was pretty surprised she reached out to me–she should have known better than to ask me to ‘toss around anonscan info,’ or at that point, any info about literally anything with me at all. I don’t follow her anymore and it seems she has her own agenda.”

Three months later, on October 2, 2017, they wrote to me:

“We were contacted briefly some days ago by Tracy Beanz via DM. Haven’t responded yet. She was a bit hyped up due to the YT video. Don [sic] really know what to write back if at all.”

And I responded:

“Well, there’s a little more to my story with her that I didn’t share with you because I chalk most of it up to Twitter drama…Needless to say, I steer clear these days. Just my humble opinion.”

So if anyone was still in contact with Tracy Beanz well after I cut ties with her, it was Beth Bogaerts and Radack’s friend, Anonymous Scandinavia, which makes Lestat’s inferences about me even more comical and absurd. It’s just another great example of how Lestat is actively being used to rewrite the past, run defamation campaigns on behalf of others who have an agenda to sway U.S. court cases, and discredit journalists like myself for exposing this god forsaken story

And FYI, I’m literally recorded in the Tracy Beanz video saying that Cicada 3301 and WikiLeaks weren’t connected but god forbid Lestat ever be truthful with his audience. It’s like this is payback for me refusing to buy into their idiotic LARP four years ago.

Public and private feuds between the people involved in Cicada 3301 like Thomas Schoenberger, Beth Bogaerts, “Lestat,” and Defango, the first two of which started a PR firm called Shadowbox with Trevor Fitzgibbon in August 2017, would become the longest running and single most repulsive disinformation and whisper campaign to disrupt the Assange support community aside from Jesselyn Radack’s feud with Trevor Fitzgibbon and eventually #Unity4J.

For more background information read The Rabbit Files 5.0 Series here, here, and here.

AnonIntelGroup

Two weeks after WikiLeaks started publishing Vault 7, a hacking group called “Anon Intel Group,” which included members like Ray Johansen, Aaron Kesel, and allegedly Kaidinn (although I personally believe she’s covering for Bogaerts whose old Twitter handle was quite similar to an Anon Intel Group handle), started a campaign called #QuestionWikiLeaks.

The #QuestionWikiLeaks campaign essentially accused Assange of working with Russia, deliberately helping Trump get elected, and holding zero-day exploits ransom, all of which were listed in the 2017 headlines mentioned previously. Golly, Jesselyn Radack, could this be one of those 2017 moments where the CIA was planting derogatory material about WikiLeaks? I mean, if we’re accusing everyone of being CIA and stuff, right?

The campaign was started a few months after they posted a Your Anon Central video on their website which shredded Assange’s character:

The activists promoting the campaign like Ray Johansen and #Unity4J’s Kitty Hundal, basically described AnonIntelGroup as an oversight group for WikiLeaks… 

And a few weeks later, Beth Bogaerts described the group as her “amazing friends,” despite the fact that she’s weirdly hypersensitive about being portrayed in a light that might question even in the slightest her undying devotion to WikiLeaks and Julian Assange.

Regardless, none of this is terribly surprising since it appears that Bogaerts (aka “Foxfire2112” and “WellTraveledFox”) has been involved with the hacktivist community, #FreeAnons, and Johansen’s friend since early January 2017, if not earlier, based on events that transpired during this time period and the likelihood that her involvement was discussed privately before they happened.

It’s been recently suggested that the founder of Anon Intel Group is a former U.K. intelligence police officer although I don’t believe that this has been definitively proven yet. For more background information read The Rabbit Files 5.0 here and The Gatekeeper Files: The Beginning of the End (Page 2) here.

Trevor Fitzgibbon and Jesselyn Radack

At the same time that #QuestionWikiLeaks was running their campaign, Trevor Fitzgibbon was cleared of sexual allegations that Jesselyn Radack filed against him in early 2016. Radack initially hired Gloria Allred but my understanding is that Allred dropped her as a client after incriminating text messages came to light that allegedly showed Radack as being less than honest about what had transpired between her and Assange’s former PR representative. 

Fitzgibbon publicly apologized for any harm he caused to accusers/victims from his PR firm (Radack didn’t work there) but Radack, a whistleblower attorney who has refused to accept the fact that he was never charged for her allegations, the most serious of which he faced, has dished out her own form of never ending, rage-fueled, extrajudicial punishment against him for the last five years while also refusing to testify under oath in two defamation cases he lodged against her. 

The significance of these events cannot be overstated in terms of causing disruption and turmoil in the Assange support community. Radack and Beth Bogaerts have both spent years deliberately dragging Assange supporters, other activists, and journalists into their alleged problems with Fitzgibbon, virtually none of which they’ve backed up with any legitimate evidence.

Their ongoing drama and disinformation campaigns have detracted activists and journalists from their work, some of which has obviously focused on Assange, and there doesn’t appear to be an ending in sight.

The manipulation and thousands (literally) of obscenely defamatory and threatening tweets posted by Radack, Johansen, Bogaerts, and their proxies like Lestat, Kaidinn, and LizActivate about Fitzgibbon or anyone they can link to him through sheer fantasy, mental illness, Lestat’s mind numbing and scurrilous charts, or by the unlucky chance that you ended up in line behind him at Starbucks, has contributed to a level of vileness unrivaled in the Assange support community.

More Disinfo Ops

The other day, Radack posted a tweet clearly in reference to Fitzgibbon in which she inferred that he is a sociopathic sex pest working for the FBI and was no more important to WikiLeaks in terms of work than Siggi Thordarson, an unsubstantiated narrative that Bogaerts has been pushing for years. 

https://archive.md/RKcC7

First and foremost, this looks like a deliberate operation to continue tying not only Assange, but the WikiLeaks community at large, to sexual violence based on the fact that Fitzgibbon’s PR firm DID in fact represent him, so much so that his former employees went public and openly complained about it, calling Assange “scum.” Radack and Bogaerts’ wholly inaccurate statements are simply a means to keep their hands clean while pushing this narrative.

Exactly how do these two women explain what former employees at Fitzgibbon Media said about the firm and Assange? Or how Radack had two opportunities to tell her story under oath but cowered under the prospect, settled instead, and then continued to accuse someone of a serious crime he has never been charged with–or even accused of aside from Radack’s own questionable story–from the comfort of a Twitter account? 

Or this below? Are we to believe then that Siggi was so knee deep in WikiLeaks that he was managing their press conferences for the Snowden affair?

https://wikileaks.org/IMG/pdf/transcript.pdf

I’m not saying that Fitzgibbon was all things WikiLeaks/Assange PR in the United States and I found Suzie Dawson’s article describing him as the third pillar of WikiLeaks or whatever beyond absurd. I’ve also found articles that have reported Fitzgibbon’s side of the story disrespectful at best towards alleged victims by painting the entire situation as some sort of covert CIA operation.

However, the narrative that Radack and Bogaerts have been painting is just as absurd as Dawson’s 3-pillar story. Claims that Fitzgibbon Media was some sort of coffee boy to Assange are patently false and easily debunked lies so what exactly is this all about because it sure AF isn’t about some sketchy allegations Radack filed almost 6 years ago unless she’s become concerned that she might be charged for lying to the feds. 

Beth, are these “facts” about Radack no longer true ?

https://archive.is/0DPkx

Fitzgibbon’s career was destroyed and yet Radack continues to go after him like a deranged harpy despite the fact she and her associates have also essentially taken away any means for him to make a decent living for his family. I am legitimately asking what exactly this woman is hoping to achieve? Does she want to make sure his children go hungry every day? Does she want to make sure his children have a completely messed up childhood and no place to live?

And how long does she plan on doing this for? Another 6 years? The next 20 years? Like get some f*cking therapy already instead of thinking you’re above the law and judge and jury of a criminal case that doesn’t exist. Nobody cares.

Coincidentally, directly after Dawson slammed Pursuance Project in December 2017,  Bogaerts changed her entire story from the above tweet to the narrative we’re all familiar with today: Fitzgibbon attacked and harassed her with sock accounts and that’s why she leaked his lawsuit to Radack. And yet she has never provided any evidence that he actually did this.

And as we all know now, Bogaerts has been caught using these same exact tactics before: Deliberately accusing someone of harassing her with sock accounts despite the fact that she knows full well that the allegations she’s making are entirely false i.e. Micah Lee from The Intercept

These types of allegations that Bogaerts consistently makes begs the question why anyone would believe her? Unless she’s openly admitting that she’s been hacking Twitter or she’s been provided with a confession from the operators of these sock accounts, how in the world would she know who’s running a gazillion sock accounts? I mean, no offense, but how low does your IQ have to be to believe this stuff? 

Also strangely coincidental is the fact that Ray Johansen told me via Signal that he and Bogaerts were basically cheating on his girlfriend/her husband by sexting with one another during this exact time period when Dawson targeted Pursuance and Bogaerts changed her story shortly thereafter. Although Bogaerts later accused Johansen of lying about “everything,” she legitimized his Signal messages to me as being truthful by filing one of them in court earlier this year as so-called evidence that she’s perpetually suicidal. 

All roads lead to December 2017.

Erik Prince and Military Ops

And for those of you who are familiar with the following, I am not up for debating the merits of Radack over Fitzgibbon because he supposedly worked with Erik Prince because there are none. That was a blatant disinfo campaign Bogaerts started against him and when I cornered her about it, she admitted that she had no idea if the rumors (she started) were true or not. 

She also admitted that Radack told her that Fitzgibbon was a nobody who didn’t work with anyone important which, again, begs the question then as to why they’re obsessed with publicly painting him as some sort of infiltration demigod capable of Jedi mind tricking everyone in WikiLeaks and the support community?

I mean, seriously, wtf is this all about? And based on Radack’s Siggi tweet (above), she clearly has no concern whatsoever about violating her second settlement agreement with Fitzgibbon and being sued for a third time. Yet she claims she has no money to take these cases to trial so she can tell her story to a jury…while deliberately trying to get sued again? 

Who’s paying Radack’s legal fees?

Lastly, I’m also not up for debating the merits of Fitzgibbon working with a former military contractor who used to plant disinformation in Iraqi media. At no time have I ever nor would I ever condone that kind of relationship for someone working closely with or inside an activist community. Have you lost your mind? But more importantly, let’s not play the “Trevor’s bad and I’m just a ditzy victim” game.

Radack’s friend, Beth Bogaerts, directly told an associate/member of Shadowbox that it would be advantageous for their PR firm to implement the military tactics, including PSYOPS, that were outlined in a presentation that the former contractor sent her. Full stop. And that was after she tried to peddle White Rabbit’s “Seth Rich” files to his wife, investigative journalist, Lara Logan.

So yes, the allegations against Fitzgibbon and Radack’s never ending spin stories, manipulation, gaslighting, and endless victimhood has affected and divided the Assange support community since at least 2017. It’s one thing for people to decide who to believe in this story and leave it at that but it’s quite another thing for Radack and her associates like Ray Johansen and Beth Bogaerts to use Fitzgibbon as a means for massive, targeted defamation campaigns and a stepping stone to take down legitimate journalists and activists, harass, threaten, defame, falsely accuse people of criminal activity, censor speech, terrorize innocent families, and pervert the U.S. legal system–all of which they’ve done.. 

Seth Rich

First and foremost, let’s not forget that WikiLeaks played their own role in damaging their reputation over the Seth Rich conspiracy. Second, I don’t want my readers to think that I’ve forgotten about #Unity4J’s Kim Dotcom and his appalling involvement in the Seth Rich conspiracy theory. I haven’t and I think what he did, making wild claims that hurt Seth’s family and then never backed up any of his statements, was profoundly disgusting. I find him to be a self-absorbed fraud and opportunist, and Dawson was complicit in legitimizing his dishonesty.

But then there’s Ed Butowsky who went so far as to meet officials in Washington D.C. about the conspiracy and emails show that his associates were hoping that it could exonerate Trump over the Russian allegations, not because they had any special interest in helping the Rich family find their son’s killer. 

By early May 2017, Butowsky had landed meetings with both the White House and Devin Nunes’ top assistant, Kash Patel, about Seth Rich and in mid-May, he and his associates were able to successfully convince Fox News to run a story about it. 

Despite Fox retracting the story one week later, a close associate of Bogaerts’ using the name “White Rabbit,” resurrected the conspiracy within approximately a week of the retraction by peddling worthless Guccifer 2 files under the guise that they were the “Seth Rich files.” 

Robbin Young and “The Seth Rich Files”

White Rabbit’s files, also known as the .7z files in The Rabbit Files series, were released during a 2016 cyber conference and at no point has anyone from the conference been willing to confirm that the files actually came from Guccifer 2. I’ve personally reached out to them for comment with no response. Bogaerts promoted the conference on Twitter and Anonymous Scandinavia became the conference’s key speaker for two years running after these absurd files were released.

What’s interesting about this situation is that in April 2017, one month before Fox ran the story and when Bogaerts was telling everyone about her “amazing friends” in Anon Intel Group, former Playboy model, Robbin Young, released her 2016 DMs between her and Guccifer 2 in which he claimed that Seth Rich was their source.  However, online researchers later posted evidence that seemed to show Young’s DMs had been manufactured.

During this time period, Young appeared chummy with Anonymous Scandinavia and that continued well into the start of this year until they shut down their old account (@AnonScan).

The point being is that White Rabbit allegedly reached out initially to Manny Chavez (“Defango”) about the bogus .7z files in April 2017, and so it appears, in my opinion, that he was initially interested in running a “Seth Rich files” LARP in conjunction with Young’s claims about Guccifer 2 and Seth Rich. This would make sense since Guccifer 2 allegedly told her this in late August 2016, and a few weeks later the U.K. cyber conference dropped the .7z files.

Messages that Bogaerts sent to Chavez (that he released) also show her admitting that she tried to peddle the files to multiple people including Lara Logan and attorney, Jared Beck, during the month of May and before independent journalist, Trish Negron, unfortunately took the bait.

However, a few days after Fox retracted the Seth Rich story, Young claimed that her DMs with Guccifer 2 had been mysteriously deleted but apparently this didn’t stop White Rabbit. A few days later, Bogaerts introduced Negron to White Rabbit specifically so she could get the files and amplify them for Bogaerts.

Indeed, White Rabbit handed Negron the worthless files under the guise that they were the “Seth Rich files,” and then he, Defango, and Bogaerts shockingly destroyed her credibility for posting the files (despite the fact they had already been released 8 months earlier) and for mentioning to George Webb and Jason Goodman that they might be the Seth Rich files.

White Rabbit had repeatedly stated both privately and publicly that he thought they were the Seth Rich files but rather than call him out, Bogaerts spent years covering up for him and destroying Negron’s reputation i.e. accusing the journalist of hacking her accounts.

Shadowbox and Ed Butowsky

In August 2017, the PR firm, Shadowbox, that Bogaerts, Fitzgibbon and Schoenberger co-founded was hired by Butowsky to salvage his image over the failing Seth Rich conspiracy by publicly disparaging other actors involved in the debacle like D.C. private investigator, Rod Wheeler, among other things.

And then in January 2018, only one month after the CIA started installing special surveillance equipment with audio inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London to spy on Assange with the help of Sheldon Adelson, one of Trump’s largest donors and allegedly an associate of Ed Butowsky (he’s now deceased), Shadowbox members Schoenberger and Chavez were put up in a hotel in Texas by Butowsky, who is also a close friend of Devin Nunes. 

During this time period, tax documents were filed for Shadowbox that listed Bogaerts as the company’s vice president, something she indisputably acknowledged in email. It’s absurd that she tries to play dumb about anything pertaining to this company. Fitzgibbon isn’t listed in the email because he left the company in December 2017, but you’d never know that based on the lies that Bogaerts’ and Radack’s proxies post online. A month after the tax documents were filed, Bogaerts told attorneys that she was one of the owners of Cicada 3301.

Publicly, Bogaerts and her proxies have pinned the entire Shadowbox debacle on Schoenberger and Fitzgibbon despite the fact that Bogaerts is the one who funded the company, she clearly knew what was happening and was involved, and Fitzgibbon had left in December 2017. Bogaerts has also claimed repeatedly over the years that Shadowbox did nothing and yet they took a $20,000 payment from Butowsky for “doing nothing” and let him put up two members in a Texas hotel for a few months.

Totally normal stuff working for a wealthy Texan who has powerful, direct ties to U.S. intelligence (Nunes, Patel) and then four years later pretending that it never happened, you didn’t know it was happening, or you were somehow tricked into making it happen. My god, I’m so exhausted of these people.

As for the pro-Trump Seth Rich conspiracy, just to be clear, in no way am I suggesting that Shadowbox had a greater impact on the conspiracy than other people like Cassandra Fairbanks and Matt Couch, both of whom played a much more significant role in promoting the conspiracy than virtually anyone else besides Butowsky, Fox News, and Kim Dotcom.

And one could argue that the conspiracy divided the community in 2017, but it was really just one more thing to add to the discomfort and division that WikiLeaks’ relationship with the far-right had already created. Basically anyone that kept promoting the conspiracy or trying to legitimize Butowsky was contributing to an already damaged image of WikiLeaks. 

Full disclosure: Yes, at the time that Fox News ran their story, I published four articles about Seth Rich that week, the last of which was a deep dive on Kim Dotcom’s sketchy background, his claims about Rich, and how I didn’t believe the story he was selling. Bogaerts likes to claim that this somehow made me more complicit in promoting the conspiracy than, say, oh, I don’t know, accepting $20,000 from Ed Butowsky, the king of the conspiracy, to improve his image…over the conspiracy.

In Summary

Before we move on to Part 2, a quick summary of what we’ve learned. First, Radack’s tweet that implied Dawson, or even Fitzgibbon, were working with the CIA to plant damaging information in the WikiLeaks community during the time frame that Yahoo laid out is simply not true. In fact, it was Radack’s own associates involved with Cicada 3301 and the Warren Flood story; promoting Tracy Beanz; and the Anon Intel Group who, hands down, published derogatory material about Assange in 2017, that were involved in these types of activities.

There’s no doubt that #Unity4J was a god forsaken idea with Dawson at the helm but it would have never happened had WikiLeaks support gatekeepers, WikiLeaks insiders, and Radack’s own friends not boosted her credibility for years prior. By the time that Dawson targeted Pursuance Project, it was too late and even Assange seemed to think that she was credible.

Since that time, Radack, Johansen, and their associates have neatly rolled up Dawson and Fitzgibbon into the same disinfo operation, taking with them anyone whose credibility they want destroyed.

PART 2 —> Exposing a Disinfo Operation in One Twitter Thread


Liked it? Take a second to support Jimmysllama on Patreon!
Post Disclaimer

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 jimmysllama@protonmail.com 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.

Leave a Reply