By Anna Mercury
You have to love Neil Glazer. This dude is after Bronfman bucks and doesn’t care how he gets it.
By the way, I hope he gets them, lots of them.
When he wins the lawsuit, he will get a third plus expenses from every one of the 70 plaintiffs.
So, the guy will be the richest of all the NXIVM victims, him and the fat cats at Kohn Swift and Graf — who are not kin of Dewey Cheatem and Howe.
But I object to the chaos in my brain because I can’t wrap my head around one piece of his little 210-page lawsuit.
Sarah Edmondson and Mark Vicente are suing Nicki Clyne.
Forget that she’s broke. All the defendants are broke or pretty close to it, other than the Bronfmans.
All of them are in the lawsuit to make Bronfmans look bad, not to get dough from.
The defendants are:
Nancy Salzman in Hazelton Prison. May have cash hidden somewhere. But will anybody be able to find it?
Clare Bronfman in Philadelphia Detention center – $250 million
Dr. Danielle Roberts could do hottie yoga videos.
Nicki Clyne stands in front of a Lamborghini she does not own.
If Glazer’s allegations are true, Clyne should be suing Edmondson and Vicente, not vice versa.
Edmondson and Vicente recruited Clyne down the dark road of NXIVM, telling her how full of light it was.
Edmondson got out.
Vicente got out.
Clyne is stuck.
Yet somehow, Clyne is responsible for everyone’s suffering, even people like Nippy Ames, Edmondson’s husband, when, like Ames, Clyne was recruited by Vicente and Edmondson.
A plain reading of the complaint shows that Vicente and Edmondson are suing Clyne for things they did to Clyne like, for instance, enrolling Clyne in NXIVM, which is based on a “pseudoscientific hodgepodge of psychotherapeutic methods which, when practiced by unlicensed and unqualified lay-people, subjected its participants to an unreasonable risk of serious psychological injury and emotional distress.”
Edmondson sold Clyne, regaling her with the wonder that is NXIVM, and now, if the allegations are true, Clyne has the most severe psychological injuries and emotional distress of them all.
Like Nippy, Clyne “suffered serious emotional trauma as a result of being counselled by untrained and unlicensed individuals as part of the Defendants’ scheme.”
Like Nippy, Clyne “also spent thousands of dollars on curriculum and EMs.”
But wait a minute. Edmondson gave counseling, and the horrible result is that just as Edmondson once did, Clyne still thinks NXIVM is wonderful.
That’s proof right there that Clyne is the most severely damaged.
Let me compare:
If a drug dealer got a woman addicted, would the dealer sue the addict?
The drug dealer, Edmondson, made a lot of money off the addict, Clyne.
Clyne took lots of courses and paid for them, and Edmondson and Vicente got commissions off the money she paid for classes.
Edmondson recruited hundreds, maybe a thousand people into NXIVM. Clyne was terrible at recruiting. She did not recruit half a dozen people. Yet she got hooked on the NXIVM drug.
The dealer, Edmondson, was not just a dealer. She was a user, too, of course. She once loved heroin, [NXIVM], but then she quit and says heroin will cause injury and emotional distress.
So, what does she do?
She sues Clyne, the woman she got addicted.
Because Clyne is still an addict.
Clyne could switch sides tomorrow, and everything everyone else is claiming against the defendants, Clyne could claim too.
If I had been peddling the worst thing in the world and recruited all kinds of people into my addiction because, at the time, I believed it was good [plus I made money off of it] – and then later, I found it was terrible, but some of the people I enrolled, who would have never got into it but for me – people I profited from – not vice versa – still think it is good – because what I sold them mind-fucked them – I would not be suing them for what I did to hurt them.
That’s just me.
Edmondson and Vicente should be ashamed of recruiting Nicki Clyne – and should want to make amends and help her get out, not sue her.
It shows a callous temperament that undercuts everything in this lawsuit except Neil Glazer’s altruistic and honest tendencies.
Speaking of honesty, he never talked to Daniela and Nicole about a lawsuit before the trial of Raniere.
And I have a brand to sell you that looks like the four elements. All you have to do is give me a commitment to be my slave forever.
I can’t help but say, you know it is contagious, Viva Executive Success!
Well, well, well, “Anna”, Just a few small details you forgot to mention: Nicki Clyne was an enthusiastic advocate for the branding of innocent women, a dedicated collector and custodian of collateral, a deceiver of what the brand represented, an eternal apologist for a psycho paedophile, and a torturer. She’s had 5 years to reflect on what she did and apologize, yet she’s steadfastly refused to do so. Kind of puts a different spin on your feeble argument, doesn’t it? Are you sure your name is Anna?
I look at the top pic of Nicki Clyne and I think to myself – Suneel is such a lucky man.
I thought that was Suneel.
Yeh, ugly people all look the same…
The University of Buffalo needs to be fumigated.
It is infested with Communists.
U. of Buffalo Student ‘Hunted Down’ by Woke Mob for Hosting Allen West Speech
Leftist Mob Berates Conservative Students, Allen West Escorted Out By Police
Shadow, that was a false flag operation. White Supremacists pretended to be libtards at the protest.
BTW, if you equate Liberals with Communists, you have to call Conservatives Fascists.
Once again Shadow you show your racist tendencies. So let’s as you say “set the record straight.”
You show a video that you purport shows colored students attacking a fellow colored person. However, there was NO VIOLENCE in the video. It was a peaceful protest, only speech. You are a bigot and race baiter.
Blow your dog whistle, you old school KKK a’hole.
You said, “don’t play the race card with me”; that’s kinda funny, because you are the ONLY ONE playing the race card, you dumb “Karen”.
Here’s a song for you:
ShadowState is an Illinois Nazi!
ShadowState, here’s the song for you
Does anyone know if Clyne knew that the branding was her lover’s initials before all of the hoopla?
Yes, she knew and was recorded with KR while they were designing it. You can Google the recording.
100% Nicki knew it was Raniere’s initials and that the slave women were being deceived about the brand. Nicki knew the brand was not a symbol of the elements.
It’s on a recording.
Nicki Clyne was an active and enthusiastic participant in having women fraudulently branded near their genitals with her long-term shared boyfriend’s initials.
And Nicki is recorded conspiring and working to hide that fact and conceal Keith’s ultimate leadership position in what was sold as an all women organization from the DOS slaves.
Nicki Clyne does not look too upset for someone who is being sued.
What’s up with that?
L’heur d’or en Little Haiti ✨
#littlehaiti #magiccity #miami #goldenhour
And while we are on the subject how is it that “poor Allison” with supposedly a million dollars stashed away, gets a scholarship to college in California?
Does the average college student in California have a million dollars socked away?
Mindy Mack Pleads for Leniency for Her Daughter Allison in Heartfelt Letter
By Melinda ‘Mindy’ Mack
“She applied to the University of California at Berkely was accepted and received a scholarship.”
I never believed Mack’s Mom that Allie Wack got a scholarship to UC Berkeley. On what basis would she quality? None! I think Mom got confused when Allie told her she got a loan that she plans not to pay back.
This certainly raises some interesting points. Gotta wonder why no counterclaims have been filed in the Glazer suit. In that civil litigation is largely a war of attrition, it would’ve been relatively easy for a few of the defendants – even those appearing pro se – to exact a toll on the plaintiffs by countersuing.
“You serve me
And I’ll serve you
Swing your partners, all get screwed
Bring your lawyer
And I’ll bring mine
Get together, and we could have
a bad time.”
– George Harrison, “Sue Me, Sue You Blues” (1973)
Keith Raniere claimed that Mark Vicente is the reincarnation of Vladimir Lenin.
After due consideration, I believe that Mark Vicente is really the reincarnation of Leon Trotsky who was murdered in Mexico City in 1940 by an assassin sent by Joseph Stalin.
Picture of Leon Trotsky.
Picture of Mark Vicente
Picture of Vladimir Lenin.
Keith Raniere is a fraud!
You’re from history too ShadowState1958. You’re the reincarnation of George Wallace the former governor of Alabama. Please change your name to KKKState.
Well said Anna – it’s weird because I was beginning to think I was the only one to be thinking along the same lines.
There are as I see it three groups of victims here. In order of least affected:
1. People formerly in NXIVM who got ripped off.
2. People directly recruited into DOS who suffered various degrees of psychological, physical and emotional abuse whilst there, particularly to towards the end, but who mercifully escaped after the scandal broke – we should also remember we have Sarah Edmondson to thank largely for that. This group also includes Sarah; luckily for them they never completely bought into its philosophy, if you can call it that.
3. The converts, who totally bought into it, and whose lives, to varying degrees, have been seriously affected as a result. Principal amongst this cohort are Allison and Nicki, 2 aspiring and talented young actors whose careers where cut short by a monster who was able to prey upon their deepest vulnerabilities to satiate his demonic lust. They poured their money, lives and souls into a dream, or rather nightmare, a Potemkin life coach program that systematically defrauded its clients through deliberate and duplicitous indoctrination techniques, rendering them initially acquiescent, and by degrees increasingly complicit in its machinations, a self perpetuating evil.
What did they get out of it? Bankruptcy, public condemnation and hatred, sniping and ridicule from the media, criminal investigation (of course in Allison’s case a criminal conviction); they lost friends, the opportunity to work, and even their ability to rationalise the maelstrom of everything that had happened to them.
What is fascinating is when you actually watch some of the recent “Dossier Project” (the remnants, rump of DOS) broadcasts on Youtube. Headed by Nicki, they are 6-8 women who are unapologetic apologists for their NXIVM perspective on the world, covering topics such as ‘the Narrative of Victimhood”. Quickly you detect the influences of second hand Rand (Ayn Rand, the right wing of the 40’s to the 60s) – they talk about experience being purely subjective and therefore not always reliable (Rand’s notion of objectivism) in an attempt perhaps to preemptively undermine the recollection of those many women DOS plaintiffs in their, as well as testimonies in Raniere’s criminal trial. For a group of women claiming to be seeking female empowerment, their notions of the underlying nature of women are surprisingly negative to say the least. Women’s nature is variously described as being entitled, lacking accountability and discipline, spoilt, selfish, grasping and weak, partly perhaps as the result of their liberal middle class indulgent upbringing, no doubt reflecting the values of the “mainstream fake news media”. Boys are not mentioned. Such blanket scorn for their own sex is a constant theme emerging from all of them and likely stems from the teachings they endured during relentless intensives and EM (exploration of meaning) sessions covering the wisdom of Aristotle. Im not sure Rand would have been a big fan of DOS either. Rand argued:
“the initiation of physical force against the will of another is immoral, as are indirect initiations of force through threats, fraud, or breach of contract. The use of defensive or retaliatory force, on the other hand, is appropriate.” So much for readiness drills, coercive dieting and penances.
So who is Nicki Clyne? Is she the evil, malevolent, manipulative, dishonest person portrayed in some sections of the media, the kind of person you wouldn’t feel safe leaving alone with your children? The truth I believe is the exact opposite. From what I have read and seen (including the entire Frank Report) I see her as scrupulous, sweet natured, honest (i’ll come to that), moral, hard-working, loyal, courageous and protective of others. She took time to look after both her father and her friend, the actor Richard Hatch, in their dying days; she was clearly one of the few approachable people in NXIVM (see Sylvie’s testimony); I believe she looked after and tried to protect her “slaves” in DOS, sometimes even taking punishments for them. Though misplaced, loyalty is usually considered a virtue, and we need to respect that whatever we might personally think, Nicki believes in many of the teachings she experienced. Finally, I believe there’s a possibility (and I might be wrong) that in the end NIcki reappraised her view of Raniere and some part of her began to suspect he was not quite the person she had always believed him to be.
Let’s turn now to the issue of honesty. In a recent discussion with Keri Smith and Brian Edwards on Youtube, Keri quizzes Nicki on her approach to acting. I believe the interest here may have stemmed from Nicki’s various online denials and understatements of what went on in DOS, which the dogs in the street knew to be at best misleading. Keri asks Nicki about the techniques she uses when acting to make for a convincing performance. Nicki talks about the techniques of method acting where, in a psychologically real sense, you become the character. She then goes on to talk about her style of just remembering similar real life situations and applying those memories to the relevant scene.
Keri then outlines a psycho-social experiment: a volunteer is told that a dice will be rolled and whatever number comes up they will receive the monetary equivalent – if it’s a 6 they’ll be given $6, if a 1 then only $1. As part of the experiment a polygraph is attached to the volunteer to determine their honesty, though they are told this is only to measure their excitement level. The trick is that after the dice is rolled and lands on a 1 facing up and a 6 facing down, the controller apologises to the volunteer that they did not specify which side the number should be facing, and asks the volunteer what their understanding was. In the example just given many volunteers said they understood it was ‘down’ and claimed the 6 bucks. Not surprisingly, if the 1 was facing down, they all naturally said ‘up’. The polygraph was easily able to determine those many volunteers in the first instance were lying. However, and here’s the interesting part, when the volunteers were told that the money was for charity, i.e. a ‘good cause’, the polygraph was not able to determine any difference in those who were lying and those who were telling the truth. As Nicki says, “oh so if they have a good justification, and it’s not self-serving….oh wow.” Her facial expression not only reveals her amazement at this, but also perhaps a dawning realisation of her own power – the reason she’s able to lie so convincingly is because she still believes what she represents is a good cause.
So, to answer the question, should Nicki be held liable to compensate the plaintiffs, I really think the answer is a resounding no, and would urge the plaintiffs to remove her from the list. The poor girl has suffered enough, and by continuing to hound her, what does this say about our humanity? It drives her further into the defensive position of maintaining the company of those friends who share convergent world views, making it more difficult to meet other people and getting on with the rest of their lives. We should also remember that one day there’ll come a moment whn Nicki herself will begin to go through a dawning realisation that things she experienced may not have been as he has so long believed them to be. I only hope that when that happens she’s with someone who really loves her for who she is, underneath all the bluff and bluster, the nightmare that was NXIVM and DOS.
— the reason she’s able to lie so convincingly is because she still believes what she represents is a good cause.
But this no excuse, the propensity for self-delusion. This presupposes that we don’t have the capability to objectively discriminate using the discoverable laws of logic, which we do (when heakthy).
If we didn’t, if we weren’t able to tell the truth from falsehood or error, then anything could be denied on such a rationalization, i.e., believing it “too much”.
This is just an example of confirmation bias, which actually obscures disinterested thinking. Also, if Nicki, et al, believe that experience is “purely subjective and not always reliable”, then that is a self-defeating world view that is antithetical to the latter, and can be just as much applied to themselves as others. For it is only in the idea of objectivity, where there is a presupposition of the existence of truth, that there can be the existence of error. This is why Relativism defeats itself. It incoherently and implicitly special pleads for itself.
The professed goal of the NXIVM/DOS project was never really about critical thinking or ethics.
It was just about maintaining the subjective values of its participants as long as they didn’t contradict that project and kept them in it. And even more devious was its underhanded one, that which was (bad) intended by Raniere, i.e., to get others that he was interested in either sexually, financially, etc., to conform their values to his. He was to use others for himself without making them feel like victims, because there is no such thing as an ultimate victim, a foundational principle indoctrinated by NXIVM. This implies that even if you were to be deceived via an unscrupulous hidden intent towards a particular action, you would always be responsible for being “at cause” falling for it.
This is either true or false. Whether we epistemologically know it with certainty or not won’t deny this fact.
— Nicki is sweet natured.
Yes, she sure is! Unless, of course, you piss her off and then she’ll turn your any DOS slave) collateral over to
Suneel Chakravorty, Michelle Hatchette, or anyone else she deems appropriate, who will use it against you.
The word for today is “brevity”. Practice it!
So many broke and miserable people. Who would have thought that Edgar would leave his ugly ducklings such a nest egg.
Is this the reason why Vanguard claimed his sexual partners saw a blue light?
I guarantee the two Frank Report miscreants from *Illinois tried the experiment out, with any luck they’re both sterile.
RE Vicente the Groomer:
Good article. I have to say I don’t believe Edmondson and Vicente should be able to sue Nicki Clyne.
Vincente, in particular, doesn’t deserve a dime. Vincente lied to the police about John Tighe, wrongfully claiming John assaulted him. Vincente also has perjured himself a number of times.
In a nutshell, Vicente is a weasel.
India Oxenberg should sue Vicente for bringing her into a sex cult.
There’s something cold-blooded about Sarah Edmondson and Mark Vicente and I’m actually shocked India Oxenberg hasn’t attached herself to this because all three of them are convinced they’re blameless victims who live their lives without a hint of self-awareness. I also do appreciate that you posted a pic of Kristin Kreuk — because as much as she wants people to think she “only took a couple of classes,” there’s proof that she was a coach on the stripe path and that she was deeply involved in the cult. Never let the public forget that.
“Kristin Kreuk was deeply involved in the cult.”
As a victim or perpetrator?
She said she took a course to help with her shyness. She thought it did so she continued with the program, implying she did so for six years. She only left out the fact that she was a coach. She was in deep but not deep enough to be hooked for her money and other things, so she smartly left. She didn’t get in trouble with the law. She didn’t hurt anyone. She didn’t pull down her pants for Raniere. Why would the public care?
“Kreuk was not deep enough to be hooked for her money and other things, so she smartly left. She didn’t pull down her pants for Raniere.”
Then maybe she was too smart for us to call her Kook.
Anna Mercury struck a bullseye here:
If this claim in SuperStar Neil’s BigPayDay® lawsuit is true, then Nicki would be suing Sarah, Nippy & Mark – not the other way around.
But the use of metaphors, such as heroin addiction, only serves to obfuscate the truth here: Anticultists hide behind this symbolic language after making these claims of damage.
What, in objective reality and without the use of symbolic language, is damaged by believing non mainstream ideas?
How exactly is it damaged? Can we see the damage on x-rays?
How will Philly Neil prove this?
……Something Alonzo will never experience, besides sex with a woman, a BigPayDay®
Neil has had big paydays before this case and will have big ones afterwards….
They shifted and hid money with family. They all have money.
Excellent post. This would be very good questions to ask Edmondson on her podcast “a little bit culty”.
Perhaps Frank could ask her to give her opinion on this.
Nicki Clyne knew early on that Keith Raniere was sleeping with more women than just her.
She didn’t care, nor did she leave.
Clyne also knew he was a criminal long before NXIVM shut down.
In 2012, the Times Union newspaper did a full report on Raniere’s sexual abuse of underage girls who had come forward from his days with CBI.
Clyne chose to believe they were after money, even though there was never a payoff. She never did her own investigation.
In 2009, nine women left NXIVM saying there was criminal activities within NXIVM. Clyne choose to believe her master’s story that it was the women who, once again, were after money and it was them who were the criminals. Even though no criminal charges were ever filed against them nor was there ever a payment made to them by NXIVM.
Sarah Edmondson might have enrolled Clyne into her first NXIVM course, but she certainly didn’t enroll Clyne into Vanguard’s bed for LIFE.
Had she woken up and denounced Raniere, Nicki Clyne could be benefiting both from the criminal and civil settlement (if there is one).
Instead, she remains loyal to her lifetime partner, Keith Raniere.
When you sleep with the devil, you work by his side, and you get pulled into these kinds of things.
Clyne has to be making some kind of money from doing something these days. She isn’t homeless. Maybe she gets a cut from BSG reruns?
In her settlement, she will be responsible for paying a percentage of her income for so many years out through the court system. The court will pay this out to those who win, if the case is won.
Same goes for those who say they don’t have any money.
It’s the karma of standing by your man.
I don’t know if Nicki is “mindfucked”, but she’s likely still smitten with her lover (normal people are puzzled as to why) and feels guilty in being partly responsible for him being caught (that same lover’s manipulation and “coursework” likely also has something to with that so that could be the “mindfuck”).
By the way, that picture is kind of creepy looking, and bangs on women mostly look awful.
—I don’t know if Nicki is “mindfucked”,
She’s fucking Suneel, what other proof do you need ?
Finally a post that shows maybe this case isn’t beneficial to anyone.
When all is done, the Bronfmans should buy Nicki a new car.
Alonzo eats his corn the long way.
I am assuming this is Nice Guy because he has the hardest hard on for the ex-ex-Scientologist. Why do you sink to his level? It makes you look like you are in an “idiot competition”?, btw…it’s a tie.
Glazer is a fool to have Vicente and Edmonson in the lawsuit. He loses all credibility and shows the case to be a money grab for himself as well as those who should be defendants – not plaintiffs.
Glazer ruins it for any true victims by representing Vicente and Edmonson.