Nancy Salzman on Age of Consent – ‘Does the 12 Year-Old Understand the Choice She Is Making? – That Determines Whether It Is Abuse or Not’

Nancy Salzman, AKA the Prefect made certain claims about NXIVM that some thought might best be omitted from discovery.

At the trial of Keith Alan Raniere, the following document was admitted into evidence as Government Exhibit 1005T. It has not been published to date as far as I know. It is a transcript of portion of a video of Nancy Salzman teaching a class, quite possibly a Jness class.

Her topic is the age of consent and sexual abuse of children. Her teachings mirror Keith Raniere’s on the topic. This suggests there was accord among Raniere and Salzman on the idea of sexual abuse of children and that this was taught to some students of Nxivm.

Here are Nancy’s teachings:

Nancy Salzman:

Most people scream abuse and they have no idea of the morality of what they are talking about, a lot of times the screaming of abuse is abuse in itself.

Because we are talking about abusing abuse, because they have no idea what they are talking about, there is some inconvenient thing happening and they wish it were different and they yell abuse.

It is not necessarily abuse so they abuse abuse right, so one of the women noted that women can’t see how they are participating, but when they get the effects that they don’t like, which are directly related to their choices and causes, they scream abuse. Right, she thought that women were confused while causing the whole thing.

Does this make sense?

Other Women in the Class:


Nancy Salzman

Ok, Ok, um it seems abuse is inconsistent depending on where you are, what culture you are in and things like that, which doesn’t mean the person is automatically abusive. They are abusive by some standard. Abuse has a standard too right, um and you have to understand not only what the standard is but the morality behind the standard. How does it relate to human conduct in the world? If you look at sexual abuse, there are different ways to determine if it’s abuse um, and one of them is the age of consent. OK, sexual abuse age of consent. In some states in the United States, the age of consent is 17, in some parts of the world the age of consent is 12.

Other Women


Nancy Salzman

Yes, so what’s abuse in one area is not abuse in another. But what is sexual abuse really? Is the person a child or is the person adult-like? Does the person have a certain type of understanding or cognition of morality to make such a choice?

In other words; when you are talking to a 12- year-old does the 12-year-old understand the choice she is actually making and that determines whether it is abuse or not.

Because that choice has effects potentially on her physically but also has effects in society later.

Often when you counsel people who are children, of what you might call abuse, some little children are perfectly happy with it until they find out what happens later in life.

In other words, at the time they didn’t know it was bad. They didn’t know anything about it was bad. Later they grow up and they find out that it was actually something that was bad. In that case, is it more society that’s abusing them? Because society says it’s bad but they didn’t know it was bad, right, so society is abusing them.

It’s an act. Then actually the adult then actually so more society abusing them than the adult because they didn’t even know it was bad, but society tells them it’s bad, therefore they’re bad.

Something bad was done to them. So was it the adult or was it society?

Because in some societies it might not even [be] considered bad, does that make sense? Ok. So, in other societies in the past like in Rome, standards were completely different, but we are not in Rome.

About the author

Frank Parlato


Click here to post a comment

Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us! (Email & username are optional. To leave a name, click on the email icon)

  • “… Penza, now a partner at the firm of Wilkinson Walsh + Eskovitz in Manhattan, told the Times Union that some of the girls attending the so-called school took courses at Jness, a purported women’s group in NXIVM. There, they were “exposed to Raniere’s pedophilic and misogynistic teachings, and, I believe, being groomed to have sex with Raniere,” the former prosecutor explained.

    “I believe the girls from the LeBaron community were targeted specifically because, having been raised in a polygamist sect, they were more vulnerable to Raniere’s teachings on sexuality, including that it is natural for women to be monogamous and for men to have more than one partner—a philosophy that served Raniere’s own sexual preferences,” Penza said.

    At a Jness meeting in Apropos, a former Halfmoon restaurant on Route 9, NXIVM president Nancy Salzman parroted Raniere’s words that some children are “adult-like,” mentally capable of experiencing sex with adults and “perfectly happy” doing so. …”

  • Using their warped logic, let’s throw these pedophiles into a pen with hungry lions as the Romans did to entertain the populous.

    I worked in a Sex Crimes Unit for a DA and saw the victims of pedophilia. Children with STDs and pregnant at the age of 11; and victims of abortion. They do NOT like it, Nancy! They are emotionally and physically damaged for life!

    Nancy and her daughters need to be incarcerated for a long, long time – and anyone that taught and promoted this Nxivm abuse and labeled it Societal Abuse.

    I feel complete disgust that these people were allowed to avoid prison.

    Get them all off the street: those convicted and also all the phony victims like Mark Vicente, Sarah Edmondson, and her husband…anyone that was taking Jness and following SOP, all enablers of pedophilia!

  • If Nancy is in a women training, maybe this should be Jness.

    If so, while exploring the many aspects of being a better woman, sex is a very relevant part of any human being.

    Many years ago, in ancient China, they understood the powerful energy force that sex is, capable of a new human being and relevant part of a healthy and long life if used properly. Men and women alike. So, it makes sense that sex was a very important subject in this context.

    Taking Nancy´s teachings out of context, just the part that is prosecution convenient, who and why? Who stands behind the scenes?

  • Seems to me that questioning and analyzing some cultural rules and beliefs in this country is monstrous by itself.

    Sex, in particular, is charged with religious guilt, dirty, hiding, and so on. On the other side, it is promoted, commercialized, and used to sell anything.


    Rational thinking requires comparing, boys in some places had the right of passage and many did not and die in the process, was it wrong? In the same token
    girls married or had children early in life.

    To compare different practices in other parts and times of the world for the same subject, help us to clarify the morality

    We need to address even difficult topics in order to have a better understanding and to coexist as civilized human beings.

    To blame and crucify Nancy for questioning this topic illustrates how opposites use to external their hate and justify the “right” position.

    Teaching how to think is dangerous because it brings light to obscurity, and some are interested in keeping us blind.

    As an example Mr. Raniere way out of common sentence. Punished hard for being true to his beliefs.

    Just saying.

      • Okay… “crucify” is way over the top.

        Nancy is not initiating an objective discussion. Nancy is their “Prefect”, not a peer. As their teacher, she is putting this point of view out there as “correct”. Nancy’s sentences are loaded toward the conclusion that she has drawn for them already.

        In one of your final incoherent sentences, arrow, you utilize the term, “teaching” yourself.

        Finally. Sex may be a part of being a woman as you state. But it is not a part of being a little girl.

        It is “little children” that Nancy herself says who are being addressed.

        Thanks for playing.

  • OMG! What the f*ck is wrong with this woman? She has two daughters of her own!!! This is some really sick sh*t!

    And talk about word salad …and yet a chorus of NXIVM culters shout “Yes!” and “Wow!”

    • Nan is being rebranded as a visionary who only wanted the best for humanity’s rich! Especially Mexican riches. The Nx prosperity gospel. It isn’t for us peasants to question.
      What did Keith say? Nan knew, but yes, we lied to you so you did not know, sweet summer child Nancy. And the rest of the Old Lady Gang. Ok. Sure. Eyes were not keeping tabs. Yes, *as if* the women did not hang out at Uncommon Grounds, that Other Place, and chat. All with their encrypted chat messages.

  • There is an ocean of data from decades of study of sexual abuse to show that kids who are molested are deeply, deeply damaged. Not because of society’s assessment of abuse, but because molestation is traumatic. Look at the Catholic Church. Ever heard of PTSD? Are we really having this conversation?

  • Most 12-year-olds and younger are not happy with it – that is her mistake. I accept if you were in a tribe where all girls marry at 12 or 13, then you might be happy particularly if your husband is about your age. But in so many other cases, the girls (or boys in cases such as boarding school abuse) are not happy with it.

    I don’t have a problem with people discussing how historically things like age-of-consent have changed and how they differ around the world but she is treading on very dangerous ground here. Scientology treats children as mini-adults in a way that is damaging to children – it does not recognise their immaturity and does not protect them enough. The extremist group Lev Tahor reportedly had 12 or 13-year-old girls marrying 15, 16-year-old boys, the FLDS had girls of 13, 14, 15 getting married to much older men.

    Having an age of consent protects boys and girls. It makes it easier for them to say no.

    It would not have been hard for NS or KR to avoid ending up on the wrong side of the law. Including this kind of topic is never going to go well for an organisation particularly when it’s found their leader might well have had a pattern of abuse of young teenage girls who were too young to consent.

  • “Some little children are perfectly happy with it”

    Nancy is talking about being raped. Sexually assaulted.

    “Some little children are perfectly happy with it”

    Photographed nude? Trafficked?

    “Some little children are perfectly happy with it”.

    Now, where are those pro-Nancy commenters?

  • With Nancy Salzman still not having her sentencing date set and now AUSA Tanya Hajjar not objecting to Nancy getting a break from her ankle monitor, I’m wondering if The World’s Smartest Child Rapist™ is worried that she’s participating with the feds to bring additional charges against Keith or other NXIVM scumbags.

    Might this explain his attempts to manipulate Nancy first and foremost with his recently published writings?

    Or is he only trying to keep her from denouncing him during her sentencing?

    This transcript is a good reminder of just how much of a danger she poses to The World’s Smartest Child Rapist™ and others if she tells even a small part of the truth.

    Nancy’s sociopathic tendencies that she directed towards young girls would be deadly if redirected towards deserving miscreants.

  • With Joe Biden the age of consent will drop to 10 years. The left is a pedophile by nature. Their gods are the anus and the vagina.

    • Gee, I thought you weren’t covering politics at FR.

      Or is this comment just covering an anus – like your “dear friend” Roger Stone for one – and are you entertaining any rebuttals as to the Epsteinian proclivities of certain RepubliCONS, including the serious allegations of statutory rape against that party’s on-going heir apparent, Donald J. Trump?

    • PUTA!

      (I learned “PUTO” from Frank’s phone conversation with some Mexican gentlemen who were texting death threats against me and one of my young cousins from Albany, NY and I’ll assume the Spanish feminine applies to Nancy.)

  • I’ve noticed how Keith’s cheering squad shuts up and has nothing to contribute to the discussion when Frank posts objective data like this, other than to try to distract by changing the subject (which never works).

    The silence of the guilty.

    They still haven’t said one word about the data of Keith’s “rapable babies” and “mother-infant blow jobs” statements.

    It is important never to forget just how sick these NXIVMites are.

  • We now know that everything Keith said/did was either a lie or a secret angle he was working.

    This is Exhibit A.

    Shame on Nancy for not only buying into this bullshit, but then putting her name on it.

  • Nancy is definitely quoting KAR verbatim in places here. Especially the “but we are not in Rome” part. No shit, lady! We’re in Albany!

  • Putting aside the completely false and reprehensible lecture that any decent soul can see is disgusting and very dangerous…


    What (from the Nxivm perspective) was the goal of teaching this point of view to a woman’s group?

    Why? Why?! Why?

    Why was this considered an important topic?


  • “Often when you counsel people who are children, of what you might call abuse, some little children are perfectly happy with it until they find out what happens later in life.

    In other words, at the time they didn’t know it was bad. They didn’t know anything about it was bad. Later they grow up and they find out that it was actually something that was bad. In that case is it more society that’s abusing them. Because society says it’s bad but they didn’t know it was bad, right, so society is abusing them.”

    Ok. Who are these “some little children”? Where is the study, Nancy? How many 12-year-olds were happy with abuse until they found out it was not?

    For a place that talked about “data” all of the time, they seem to love presenting absurd general statements with absolutely nothing to back it up.

  • Silence Equals Consent!

    Nancy Salzman knew Raniere is a Pedophile!

    Lauren Salzman knew Raniere is a Pedophile!

    Allison Mack knew Raniere is a Pedophile!

    Nicki Clyne knew Raniere is a Pedophile!

    Clare Bronfman knew Raniere is a Pedophile!

    Sara Bronfman knew Raniere is a Pedophile!

    Pam Cafritz knew Raniere is a Pedophile!

    They are all perpetrators.

    No more of this crap about these women being victims!

  • Here’s my interpretation:

    She is shifting blame of “sex with a 12-year-old who may feel victimized” from the victim to society
    — because society drew the line of consent.

    Basically, “if you lived where the age of consent is 12, you wouldn’t feel victimized. ”

    This is twisted logic. The TRUE logic is:

    “No matter what age you had sex, if you feel victimized, you probably were.”

    You could be ANY age and be victimized by non-consensual sex.

    NOW–IN AGGRAGARIAN societies, including in America, centuries ago, wives were YOUNG, of childbearing age, to have kids to work on the farm. May still apply in rural Mexico.

    But we are past that, and I doubt Vanguard was advocating a return to an AGGRAGARIAN society when he was perhaps the impetus behind this lesson plan.

  • Did the dopes in these Nxivm “classes” ever raise their hands and disagree? I mean, here you have the instructor saying several pretty immoral things, and they all just sit there like lumps soaking it in.

    I mean, in every class I’ve ever taken, there’s a bit of back-and-forth. Y’know, the Socratic method and all. Especially when discussing subjects like Ethics.

    Seems none of these drones piped up with “Hey wait a minute, just because they thought it was cool in the Middle Ages doesn’t mean it’s okay now.”

    Which gets me back to my old argument\: the people who joined Nxivm were mostly a bunch of fools. Spineless suckers incapable of thinking for themselves. Who else would sit through a stupid lecture like this, without comment?

    • In every NXIVM training I’ve seen, the most common crowd response is “Wow!”

      They are like a bunch of trained seals.

    • I did hear an eyewitness account about one young woman who disagreed at least twice – once during a module led by Keith Raniere himself that she stormed out on in a bitch fit and another time during a rape justification module led by a chiropractor (Ed Kingsley sp ?) that this young woman voiced disagreement with saying, “how would a man know anything about a woman’s perspective on rape?”

      That young woman’s name was Kristin Snyder. She “disappeared” 4 mos. after my own sister’s alleged suicide.

      (Snyder was, however, purportedly spotted in Florida in 2019 about the same time a woman greatly resembling my sister – aged about 17 years from her date of death – was seen in Oxnard and, later, Palm Springs, California.)

  • This lecture is manipulative from the start. It begins by framing the sex act as a choice made by the child. She says “choice” multiple times. But there is no choice for these young victims. Especially due to the fact that they are being abused by an adult who many times is someone they and their family know.

    I would be hard-pressed to find a 12-year-old child who would affirmatively engage in a sex act with an adult without provocation by that adult. I would think they are far more interested in playing with their dolls or friends.

    It really is disgusting how utterly twisted Raniere’s “teachings” were. And telling, in that they mirror what he would tell his adolescent victims about their maturity before molesting them. I am curious if this lecture was before or after the damning Times Union series. This tactic of Raniere’s was stated clearly in that article. If it was after, it reveals the depths of his followers’ willful ignorance of the true nature of their guru, and their complicity through following Raniere’s lead and normalizing that conduct within the community.

    Unlike many others, this post demands a response from the left-overs. I would like to hear what they have to say about these vitally important lectures that taught them how to save humanity. Please, Nxians, tell us about your beautiful, peaceful community that the “haters” destroyed. Do you still think it was beautiful to the young girls and women in the community whose lives were destroyed by Raniere?

    Joshua? Anthony?

    • Raniere and his NXiVM co-conspirators systematically trafficked, groomed, molested and raped pubescent girls.

      Raniere got off lightly. He deserves a 1000 year sentence.

      Salzman deserves to spend the rest of her life in prison too.

    • Anonymous 2/21/21 @ 12:25pm

      Trying to derail the conversation away from the damning data and shift to a vague abstraction doesn’t work well outside the cult bubble.

  • It was apparently essential to ‘normalize’ Keith’s pedophile crimes among their acolytes for both underage recruitment and to protect themselves against prosecution for those crimes, which, in fact, they have so far managed to accomplish.

    Behold the genius of trafficking Mexican girls from a place where, purportedly, it’s OK for an adult or parent, even, to fuck a kid as young as at least 12 years-old – just like Rhiannon was when Keith schooled her — and Lordy knows how happy and cancer-free Rhiannon would be to this day if only all those interlopers hadn’t told her “the act” was “bad.”

    I note that ‘Nurse’ Nancy relies on her own alleged clinical observations from ‘treating’ sexual abuse victims herself in her lecture.

    The timing of this would be most interesting. Wonder if this module was delivered before or after Nancy ‘treated’ and lost such alleged ‘abuse’ patients as Kris Snyder and my sister. Or if those were the cases she cites as evidence to substantiate the morality of statutory rape.

    Thank you, Frank, for bringing us this report.

  • Everything seems to lead back to there was no abuse until society or, in Keith’s case, the prosecutors say it’s abuse and then the victims change their minds by being convinced it’s abuse. He has said this with regard to the people testifying against him and the victim impact statements. He clearly believes his own bullshitand it appears Nancy does by regurgitating this nonsense. It is laughable they think his ramblings are profound teachings. Delusional.

  • Neither a twelve year old girl (nor boy) are emotionally, mentally, biologically, psychologically, experientially etc., prepared for the ramifications of the primary purpose of the sex act–pregnancy and the raising of a child–nor any secondary ones. Therefore, a child believing “nothing is wrong” or its like is irrelevant since the child lacks the qualifying maturity and capabilities to assess them from these various perspectives. Puberty is a temporal stage that merely biologically prepares a growing child from their pre-teens into their teens for the possibility of conception. That is all. It takes into consideration no other factors that make us full human beings.

    Only disturbed and morally sick individuals attempt to justify adult sex with minors and children. It’s an intuitive and glaringly gross abuse of authority, and becomes more repugnant the younger the minor and the larger the discrepancy in age between minor and adult. For example, a thirty year old man manipulating a twelve year old girl into having sex with him over sixty times when her mother only trusted him with her daughter to teach her mathematics.

    That some idiots in the past (and currently) allow such a low age of consent de jure or de facto doesn’t morally justify anything. Moral relativism due to free choice has never been a justification for it. Otherwise, everything is allowed, including murdering and stealing. The error of moral relativism is in taking the uninhibited nature of free will and the possibility of human error in moral epistemology as indicative of the non-existence of an ontological ought. This is a non-sequitur.

    • Just Sayin’a-

      Oh, Christ! Why did you say that?

      ….Our favorite Texan and Chicagoan just booked flights to Mexico.

          • Do you know Gary Glitter? Your description seems to fit this man pretty well. He was also in Vietnam.

            Gary Glitter
            From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

            Paul Francis Gadd (born 8 May 1944),[3] known professionally as Gary Glitter, is an English former glam rock singer who achieved success in the 1970s and 1980s, known for his extreme glam image of glitter suits, make-up and platform boots, and his energetic live performances. He sold over 20 million records, had 26 hit singles which spent a total of 180 weeks in the UK Singles Chart; twelve reaching the Top 10, with three charting at number-one.[4] He is listed in the Top 100 UK most successful chart acts.[5] He was imprisoned for downloading child pornography in 1999, and child sexual abuse and attempted rape in 2006 and 2015. In 2015 Glitter was described by Alexis Petridis of The Guardian as a “public hate figure”.[6] His performances on the BBC’s Top of the Pops are not repeated.

            Sex offences
            In November 1997, Glitter was arrested after a technician discovered pornographic images of children on the hard drive of a laptop that he had taken to a computer retailer in Bristol for repair. Further images were discovered by police in searches of his homes in London and Somerset.[52] He was castigated in the media over the allegations; additionally, his appearance in the Spice Girls’ musical comedy film Spice World was cut, though a truncated edit of the scene, featuring a version of Glitter’s “I’m the Leader of the Gang (I Am)”, was left in the film.

            At Bristol Crown Court on 12 November 1999, Mr Justice Butterfield sentenced Glitter to four months in prison and placed him on the sex offender register in the UK after he admitted downloading more than 4,000 items of child pornography.[10] He was cleared of a charge of having sex with a 14-year-old girl who had had a relationship with him for some years in the late 1970s.[16] It was later revealed that she had sold her story to the News of the World and stood to earn more money from the newspaper should Glitter be convicted.[53]

            Following rejection by the British public and facing scrutiny from the press following his arrest and conviction, Glitter fled on his yacht Voyageur to Spain.[54] He lived in Sotogrande for six months, in his yacht which was moored at the marina. He told the locals his name was Larry Brilliante, and spent his time frequenting local bars and surfing the Internet. After his real identity became known in Sotogrande, he moved to Cuba and later to Cambodia, where he rented an apartment in Phnom Penh. In late 2002, he was detained over his previous sex offenses and spent four days in jail before being released on bail. In January 2003, he was deported from Cambodia to Thailand on a flight to Bangkok.[55][56][57][58] He subsequently settled in Vietnam.[59]

            From March 2005, Glitter resided in Vũng Tàu, Vietnam, where he rented a luxury seaside villa, and applied for permanent residency in the country. He came to the attention of Vietnamese authorities after being banned from a nightclub for allegedly groping a teenage waitress; eyewitnesses also reported seeing him take two young girls into his home. On 12 November 2005, he fled his home. A 15-year-old girl was found living in his flat and questioned by authorities. Police began searching for Glitter. He was arrested on 20 November at Tan Son Nhat International Airport in Ho Chi Minh City while trying to board a flight to Bangkok. Six Vietnamese girls and women, aged from 11 to 23, claimed that Glitter had had sex with them.[60][61][62]

            After his arrest, Glitter was turned over to provincial police from Bà Rịa–Vũng Tàu and returned to Vũng Tàu and held on suspicion of having sex with the two underage girls. Glitter was held in jail throughout the criminal investigation, which was completed on 26 December 2005. The charge of rape was dropped for “lack of evidence” (according to Glitter’s lawyer), although the singer admitted that an 11-year-old girl had slept in his bed. Glitter could have faced execution by firing squad if found guilty of child rape.[63] After having received compensatory payments from Glitter, the families of the girls appealed for clemency for him.[64]

            On 2 March 2006, Glitter was tried on charges of committing obscene acts with two girls, aged 10 and 11, facing up to 14 years in prison if convicted. The following day he was found guilty and sentenced to three years in prison. The sentence included mandatory deportation at the end of his sentence, and payment of 5 million Vietnamese đồng (US$315) to his victims’ families.[65] Judge Hoàng Thanh Tùng said “He sexually abused and committed obscene acts with children many times in a disgusting and sick manner.”[20][64][66][67][68][69] Glitter continued to deny any wrongdoing, claiming to have been framed by British tabloid newspapers.[70]

            Glitter, in an interview with BBC News in May 2006, denied he was a paedophile, and claimed not to have knowingly had sex with anyone under 18. He said that he had hoped he could put his life back on track and have a career after he left prison in England. He continued to blame the press for his downfall and called them “the worst enemy in the world”, alleging ‘entrapment’ by them by paying local girls in a bar to arrange a photo-scoop. He did not comment about his previous conviction for downloading child pornography several years earlier.[71] Christine Beddoe, director of End Child Prostitution, Pornography and Trafficking, criticised Glitter and said he was trying to “minimise what he has done”, and added, “We must allow children to tell their story and not just have the words of Gadd.”[71]

            On 15 June 2006, in a closed hearing, a three-judge panel of the Supreme People’s Court of Vietnam heard Glitter’s appeal for a reduced sentence. The appeal was rejected four weeks later.[72][73][74][75] Although he was calm throughout the 40-minute reading of the verdict, upon leaving the courthouse, he shouted angrily to reporters and denounced Vietnamese justice for not hearing the defence arguments.[76] On 7 February 2007, it was announced that his sentence had been reduced by three months.[77] In anticipation of his release, the Philippines barred Glitter from entering that country as of 16 May 2008.[78]


    • But the LeBaron girls trafficked from Mexico were all already teens — not a one young enough to match Keith’s taste of true child-virgin blood he voraciously enjoyed with the likes of Rhiannon.

      • I don’t have ” the facts”. I’m just saying, I am highly suspicious of Vanguard and his work in Mexico.

        We all love Senioritas. But you can go on a date in Miami, too. And yes, parts of Mexico are beautiful and the people are amazing.

        But honey draws flies…..and I bet there’s more to this story.

        My opinion.

        • I bet you’re right on the money, Just Sayin’ and I was being a bit snide, but generalizing can translate to trivializing even normalizing, especially when you bring in prejudicial overtones and that’s exactly what Keith and Nancy use to justify this perversity.

          Again, the origins of Keith’s “baby fucking” philosophy were, as I recall, his observations on how desperate, compassionate mothers in 3rd world Countries supposedly comfort painfully hungry infants with fellatio.

          “When in Rome…”

          Btw, “When in Rome do as the Romans” was another one of our own mother’s favorite cliches — but she was talking pasta not underage pussy.

          • I read he preached Japanese mothers ‘comforted’ their sons during exams. There’s mixed ‘data’ on if this is true or not.

            But in my book, TMI. I only care if they kill whales in Japan.

            If the most ethical man gave a shit about ethics, he’d care about baby whales and not mommy blowjobs.

  • To call our Prefect white trash would be allotting her false and unwarranted praise, and may potentially serve to disparage the many positive qualities of Appalachia.

  • There is a lot to unpack in this, but this is familiar territory to me. I knew of someone who has numerous NLP “qualifications” who was a recruiter for at least a decade for another NLP-based cult (Samudra mentioned here ) who has NPD (I can 100% vouch for this), who was dismissive of child-sexual-abuse victims (again, I can vouch for this).
    What is it with NLP and going against accepted wisdom for chlld-sexual-abuse victims within a cult environment?

      • Very insightful, Anonymous. I read this today and I’ve always had an unsettled reaction to NLP as I first encountered it from the Tony Robbins fanboy 20 years who is now an Educo recruiter.

        What I am hinting at, Anonymous, is how NLP is suited to being used as a tool to reduce people’s barriers and, thus, make them more malleable to being in a high-demand group.

        I know this Educo recruiter’s sister, who has spent 20 years now studying NLP, suffers from narcissistic-personality-disorder, and instead of seeking answers in traditional medicine, they have rejected that and looked for answers to their void-of-a-personality within NLP.

        I’d really like to explore this nexus of NPD, NLP, and cults. I found this video Interesting, especially the anecdote of the Psychology-Cult leader who encouraged recruits to break ties with their family because it was uncovered that this person witnessed the murder of their parent. There is more on this Traumatising Narcissist concept from the speaker here: It also addresses how the Traumatising Narcissist ensnares Covert Narcissists.

    • Good question. Personally, I’d remove the presupposition of NLP being involved in this coincidence and blame the cults.

  • Of all the problems on this planet, Nancy chooses to zoom in finely on discussions with a 12-year-old before screwing that 12-year-old… Wow… iIt goes to show what’s playing right at the top of Nancy’s mind…

    How about we discuss how many backhands it takes to Nancy’s face – and to both her daughters – before we start removing living tissue off their craniums to the extent that not even a plastic and reconstructive surgeon can restore them to a recognizable state to their social environment?

    Yes, I know, I know. Lauren is almost innocent and her sister is innocent, oh my god, oh my god what a crime to contemplate… No, no, we mustn’t use the backhand. Better a pickaxe… Nah, that’s too fast…

  • No, Nancy, we are not in Rome. We have evolved into understanding the physiological implications of human development, and as such, intelligent, thoughtful human beings understand that having sex with a kid is freaking WRONG no matter if the law says it’s ok or not. The human brain does not fully develop, or at least the critical and deductive reasoning part, the frontal lobe, until around age 21. So no, Nancy, you enabling twat waffle, a 12-year-old will never have the mental capacity to consent to Keith Raniere’s perversions. This woman is supposed to be brilliant? She is brilliant in the science of manipulation, that’s about it.

    • It’s hard to chew New York strip so I prefer ribeye. Nancy (twat waffle) is it okay to chew my meat and then give it to a baby say around new born? Bottle feeding and titty milk are so cleche. Thanks

  • Waiter! This soup sandwich…is it a very soup sandwich or just a soup sandwich, like the kind they serve at the place, with the thingy, that had the stuff on it?

  • This is HORRIFYING! The worst thing about all this was his option about abuse…everyone involved – Mark Vicente et all – is responsible for not shutting this subject down flat.

About the Author

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist.

His work has been cited in hundreds of news outlets, like The New York Times, The Daily Mail, VICE News, CBS News, Fox News, New York Post, New York Daily News, Oxygen, Rolling Stone, People Magazine, The Sun, The Times of London, CBS Inside Edition, among many others in all five continents.

His work to expose and take down NXIVM is featured in books like “Captive” by Catherine Oxenberg, “Scarred” by Sarah Edmonson, “The Program” by Toni Natalie, and “NXIVM. La Secta Que Sedujo al Poder en México” by Juan Alberto Vasquez.

Parlato has been prominently featured on HBO’s docuseries “The Vow” and was the lead investigator and coordinating producer for Investigation Discovery’s “The Lost Women of NXIVM.” Parlato was also credited in the Starz docuseries "Seduced" for saving 'slave' women from being branded and escaping the sex-slave cult known as DOS.

Additionally, Parlato’s coverage of the group OneTaste, starting in 2018, helped spark an FBI investigation, which led to indictments of two of its leaders in 2023.

Parlato appeared on the Nancy Grace Show, Beyond the Headlines with Gretchen Carlson, Dr. Oz, American Greed, Dateline NBC, and NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt, where Parlato conducted the first-ever interview with Keith Raniere after his arrest. This was ironic, as many credit Parlato as one of the primary architects of his arrest and the cratering of the cult he founded.

Parlato is a consulting producer and appears in TNT's The Heiress and the Sex Cult, which premiered on May 22, 2022. Most recently, he consulted and appeared on Tubi's "Branded and Brainwashed: Inside NXIVM," which aired January, 2023.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

Contact Frank with tips or for help.
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083