Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, Eduardo Asunsolo, and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of Frank Report or its publisher, editors, or writers. Frank Report readers’ responses to the article are welcome.
Evidence of FBI Tampering Allegations Can’t Be Ignored
By Eduardo Asunsolo
Many have referred to the Rule 33 motion Keith Raniere’s attorneys are about to file as false. Curiously, a motion about falsifying evidence has people proclaiming it false without looking at the evidence.
There might be reasons for this, such as ignorance or bias or perhaps a hidden motive to discredit something that should interest every American. But I know, people think Raniere is the Devil. So, they say his accusations of tampering cannot be accurate.
From A Man for All Seasons
ROPER: So! Now you’d give the Devil benefit of law!
MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
ROPER: Yes! I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
MORE: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast — man’s laws, not God’s — and if you cut them down — and you’re just the man to do it — do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?
Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!
Justice Because of Rage
Yes, due process is as significant as substance. The process matters as much as the facts.
If this motion is valid, this is a case of corruption. Through it, we may be able to unravel a whole system of embedded corruption. And immediately, there could be justice reform because the corrupt people will take a step back.
But rather than begin with facts and move towards a just conclusion, many begin their quest for justice from moral outrage, merely seeking facts to bolster their indignation.
Our Nation’s Founders established a justice system that is based on the presumption of innocence. Rather than the accused, the accuser bears the burden of proof. And procedural rules are as critical as criminal statutes.
The Fifth Amendment states: “No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
Vigilance Against Cover-up
What will the prosecution do? What will the judge do in the face of overwhelming evidence?
A prosecutor must not exclaim, “We don’t believe it,” without looking at the evidence. A prosecutor with a magnificent prosecutorial spirit pays attention to how they convict. It’s not about winning or losing.
Since the Magna Carta, common law has enshrined the individual’s rights against the government.
Prosecutors Cannot Simply Deny
The government, I assure you, must know our experts are credible. They realize we have competent attorneys. These aren’t minor-league attorneys or Podunk experts spewing, ‘Oh, there’s a fraud, tampering, and this and that.’
These are significant people who agree this is tampering. So, the prosecutors must not merely dismiss it by saying, “We don’t believe it.”
A prosecutor is closest to a scientist.
Someone says to the scientist, “We have counter-evidence for your experiment. We did experiments, and it is contrary to what you say.”
The scientist doesn’t reply, “I don’t believe it.” He examines and tests in the laboratory of truth.
The prosecutor should likewise test the evidence.
Burger, a Different Kind of Prosecutor
We may have to descend into television drama.
In 1963, California Governor Edmund Gerald Brown complained that TV prosecutor Burger was a perennial loser. In response, the actor replied, “Does he want me to convict innocent citizens?”
Talman also said of his role as a prosecutor, “How can a [prosecutor] lose when he fails to convict an innocent person? Unlike a fist or gunfight, in court, you can have a winner without having a loser.”
Then Talman made a statement that I once believed was true but now have serious doubts about, “Like any real-life district attorney, justice is [the prosecutor’s] main interest.”
The Federal Prosecutor
The prosecution’s duty is not to win but to ensure the fairest trial possible. Instead, we find that prosecutors bend the truth to achieve their goals.
They don’t believe truth can protect society against the evil they confront.
They assume the basis of right is based on power, not truth. Power offers them an opportunity, they think, to improve society.
And power corrupts by convincing prosecutors that the most significant thing is to be effective.
Prosecutors might admit they have little regard for due process if they are candid. Due process is an administrative inconvenience. They might prefer a system that does not bother with due process.
Our system of law presupposes people have the means to control and limit government. However, prosecutors know this is insufficient for dealing with their power to determine an individual’s liberty. In this effort to manifest power, a prosecutor will insist that the defense be truthful. But impose no duty on themselves. While lying, prosecutors insist that defendants’ protestations of innocence are proof of lying.
They seek to construct a world built on fear. To create a federal court where people cannot be sure there are any grounds for hope or justice.
To achieve their goal, prosecutors suspend fundamental beliefs that most people cherish. Instead, they do things officially that they would not do privately. For example, accusing people of crimes they are uncertain they committed or overcharging individuals, knowing the defendant will capitulate and accept a plea bargain. Personal integrity is not a public duty.
Truth’s demand that power faces its powerlessness is an impossible goal for the prosecutor. Therefore, a prosecutor must never admit the face of powerlessness. We are not to see as pretension their pretensions to infallibility.
The prosecutor does not insist on the truth. They do not believe that untruthfulness is dangerous and corrupt. They encourage their targets and their community of friends and relatives to distrust one another. The prosecutor creates organized despair. They seek to impoverish their targets.
They believe their power transcends truth in the courtroom. So, they fight to have juries uninformed.
For these reasons, a fair trial failed to occur in USA v Raniere.
So, if we have correctional institutes for those convicted, we must implement corrective plans to correct what happened.
We need this to be the last time.
Jonathan Turley remarked, “before we cut down the trees so carefully planted by the Framers, I hope you consider what you will do when the wind blows again.”
The EDNY Was Sloppy
You might be sloppy if you’re doing experiments in your garage. But if you’re experimenting before the world, you’re extremely careful.
This prosecution tells the world that this is as careful as they get at the EDNY. Unless they act transparently and vigorously to find the truth, this is a widescale cover-up.
Keith Raniere is in prison. As soon as the evidence of tampering is revealed, every moment he remains incarcerated is a further violation.
If those in charge of deciding his fate plan to take time to try to decide things or make delays, then he should be released on bail.
Otherwise, they’re committing further violations. A brand-new crime, if you will.
If you find someone who might be innocent, or there was criminal activity by the government, you don’t hold him in prison and remark, “Okay, we will investigate this for the next two years.”
The Judge Seems Biased
Does a judge who has presided over a trial involving the tampering of evidence have a duty to recuse himself on hearing evidence of tampering?
The judge has a bias against recusal. I don’t think he’s ever recused himself. And that’s probably inappropriate for a judge who has been on the bench for 30 years.
Looks like RICO
The allegations against Raniere were that he and his inner circle conspired to a RICO Enterprise, and committed crimes to promote him.
Evidence of tampering reveals another RICO enterprise, a conspiracy of government officials. Their enterprise was to defame Raniere and ensure his conviction.
How far does it go? If there are officials in Washington DC that approved the tampering, they are part of the RICO. This could be broad corruption.
Once it is exposed, you’ll have people wanting to run away from it. They don’t wish to look like they’re part of it.
But we have to be vigilant because we are dealing with an organization that extensively tampered with evidence. They have the devices in their possession. If they tampered, do you doubt they won’t try to tamper again or lie any way they can?
They will try to redo the evidence to negate our experts’ findings. Clean up crime scenes. Try to wipe away digital fingerprints.
They will try to make things look okay, which is impossible, but they’ll do their best to obscure the truth. But the old art of deviousness will be futile now.
But an honest government will seek to prevent this, not cover it up.
Raniere Should Be Released
Once this is proven, the government should dismiss Raniere’s conviction and prosecute the bad actors in the government. That should be the gold standard. That’s what the constitutional forefathers wanted. And we’ll see how they live up to that.
Are they willing to do things immediately?
Or are they going to state, “People are out of the country? We can’t get to this. It’s going to take another 90 days. We have to find the devices in our evidence room. It’s an enormous evidence room, and it’s such a teeny device.”
Maybe the devices will get lost.
The commission of criminal acts makes this a case of government corruption.
Standard Procedure Until One Is Caught?
Far more consequential than anything that happens to Raniere is that this may be how our government functions.
Some high-level government officials put together the Steele Dossier to convict Trump. It didn’t work. Some of the culprits have plausible deniability.
“I signed that thing, but I didn’t know it was false, I assume, because I’m head of the FBI, and this is the FBI. So, I signed it, etc., etc.”
But, in the Raniere case, you have people who tampered and committed forgery of evidence used to convict him to 120 years in prison.
I submit we will catch the small guys red-handed. We have to start with those whose digital fingerprints are on the devices.
But were they alone involved?
Did a few agents go rogue? Or did they get approval? Were they told to do what they did?
If you try to implicate the big guys, they have plausible deniability.
It’s preferable to catch it by the toe, grab the foot, then grab up the leg like a boa constrictor. We must start with the small guys. But we are trying to get at the head.
There’s too much politics, too many things, not enough evidence to get at the head.
The Godfather Buffers
Like the Senator asked the lower ranking mafia member, “Was there always a buffer involved?
Willi Cici: A what?
Senator Pat Geary: A buffer. Someone in between you and your possible superiors who passed on to you the actual order to kill someone.
Willi Cici: Oh yeah, a buffer. The family had a lot of buffers!
Beyond the Buffers
If you start at the bottom, get the next higher level, then get the next higher level, now you have three levels, all pointing to the top. It becomes undeniable.
So, we’re on an alluring quest. We are protecting each other from the excesses of government.
One of the most pertinent things is the massive picture of government corruption. The FBI might have worked outside the agency.
These might include private citizens, lawyers, foreign nationals, witnesses, the state of New York, and the head of the Eastern District.
Maybe higher up than that.
If the FBI really wanted to frame Raniere for child porn, why not plant thousands of photos of child porn on a file of other guys that had been busted over the years?
Why would they tamper with photos of the person they had text messages of he had sex with?
Come on, Raniere is just trying to drag out his appeal process.
He is never going to win any of this or get out of prison
Frank, you’re not winning any favors either
Are you doing all this so when you lose your case, you can yell, not fair, they were against me because I stood up against the FBI in the Raniere case?
Maybe you won’t go to trial…Maybe you will take a plea deal
I won’t lose my case.
Frank. ” Almost certain” = uncertain.
“Almost preganant” = not pregnant.
If you claim to be “Almost certain” than you are actually, “not certain”. Or even “uncertain”.
The word games are really rubbing off on you from the dead-end cult followers defending a pedophile.
If you are “Almost certain” about the alleged tampering that is a suoer cagey way of admitting that you aren’t certain but are still hedging for your friends.
Lame.
Is it like the Intelligence Community saying something with “high confidence”?
No.
It’s like Damon Brink writing that he is “certainful” that there was tampering in Raniere’s case.
Exactly there’s so many holes in the cult followers logic.
ALLEGEDLY the FBI plants or tampers with child porn. BUT FBI draws the line at lying on the witness stand. They admit there was an access while in FBI custody that isn’t clarified.
WHY? Why not just say, ” Oh. That was me.” Or ” Carl opened the file.” Or ” That never happened”.
Or any of the other million excuses or justifications they could have very easily come up with? And would be FINE.
This “evidence tampering” tale is absurd.
If the FBI wanted to frame Raniere why wouldn’t they have planted evidence pertaining to one of the crimes he was actually being charged with?
He wasn’t charged with possession of child pornography. That was just one of a dozen predicate acts under RICO. These photos were peripheral to the case against Raniere.
If the FBI planted the evidence, where did they get the pictures of 15 year old Camila posing nude in one of Raniere’s special “studies” poses? Do they have a time machine? Are these drawings made to look like photographs?
Camila said in open court before Judge Garaufis that Raniere took the photographs. Hell of a coincidence that, if the FBI concocted the photographic evidence.
The whole argument is unbelievably ridiculous. It doesn’t bear up to a moment’s scrutiny.
So Eduardo, you became a citizen to become a benefactor of “A government for the people, and by the people” ?
90% of your argument is solid. But that 10% is troubling! And if one accepts your 10% premises is true, that there is a GIANT conspiracy to convict those that disgust the public one also has to assess that each participant in the conspiracy is a hypocrite. Enforcing the law and violating the law to get your vanguard.
Maybe one, maybe two bad actors and the others just go with the argument for it’s strength is not a governmental conspiracy. But when all parties from the discovering government agent, to the jury find the evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt” maybe you should to, Eduardo.
Could every case be better? Yes!
Their is probably 50 or more people that have reviewed this evidence for the government under penalty of criminal prosecution and loss of theirs profession for failure to do their jobs honorably.
I am sure this is why there is a rule 33.
And this imperfect system is why you became a citizen, and the right to question the government agents, judges, and jury.
It even allows people to advocate crazy ideas like KAR does not belong in jail, and his trial was unfair.
Eduardo,
—The government, I assure you, must know our experts are credible. They realize we have competent attorneys. These aren’t minor-league attorneys or Podunk experts spewing, ‘Oh, there’s a fraud, tampering, and this and that.’
Sorry Eduardo, I’ve reviewed your experts and highlighted their many deficiencies. I posted it all in the comment sections.
Your experts are disingenuous clowns.
Care to debate the fact? I doubt it.
Excellent work and thank you!
You have uncovered important FACTS that are crucial to this so-called investigation into supposed evidence tampering. I think the Frank Report should run these FACTS you have uncovered as a featured article. God knows the unfounded allegations of the Raniere Cultists have been featured prominently enough.
Is the Frank Report interested in balance? In facts? Or just spicy allegations from Crazytown?
The Raniere Cultists have gone on and on about how they have devastating FACTS to prove evidence tampering. Yet they are unable to produce a single one. Instead, they cite the opinions of their hired experts.
Well, it turns out their so-called experts are “disingenuous clowns”, as Nice Guy so eloquently puts it.
This rather kicks the props out from under the Raniere Cult’s argument, doesn’t it?
Hi Eduardo,
Have you taken any other magical car rides with Emiliano or other men or did COVID ruin all the magical fun?
I bet Allonzo wants to take a car ride with you awful bad.
To Everyone & Eduardo,
Once again, I’ve investigated one of Suneel’s experts — Suneel has hired another joke expert.
********************************
RE Steven Abrams Suneel’s 2nd Computer Forensic Expert:
********************************
Mr. Abrams has legitimate collegiate degrees, UNFORTUNATELY, they have nothing to do with Computer Engineering. Instead, in lieu of IT degrees, he has certifications, which he acquired by taking weeks long courses in how to use 3rd party software, to perform computer forensic analysis.
It’s a joke!
I doubt Abrams could read a lick of machine language or understand the intricacies of MSFT OS registry, IO, etc.
I’m not kidding.
/////////////////////////////
Let me reiterate: Abrams possesses an abysmal level of computer IT competency, which should preclude him from ever testifying in a court of law!!!!!
///////////////////////////////////////
The attorneys who’ve cross-examined Abrams in pre-trial depositions and at trial never did their due diligence.
Abrams should have been torn apart on cross examination!!!!!!!! It’s a DISTURBING joke that a man with crap credentials can testify as a credible expert.
Here’s Abrams’ résumé:
https://abramscyberlaw.com/steven-m-abrams-jd-cv
*Please Note: Abrams does not list date of attendance for the certifications courses , because they’re weeks long courses. Most likely under 10 total course hours. Attendance is not mandatory.
***
At this point, if you feel like laughing at Suneel, please do.
Apologize for the double post.
To Everyone & Eduardo,
Once a again, I’ve investigated one of Suneel’s experts — Suneel has hired another joke expert.
********************************
RE Steven Abrams Suneel’s 2nd Computer Forensic Expert:
********************************
Mr. Abrams has legitimate collegiate degrees, UNFORTUNATELY, they have nothing to do with Computer Engineering. Instead, in lieu of IT degrees, he has certifications, which he acquired by taking weeks long courses in how to use 3rd party software, to perform computer forensic analysis.
It’s a joke!
I doubt Abrams could read a lick of machine language or under stand the intricacies of MSFT OS registry, IO, e.t.c.
I’m not kidding.
/////////////////////////////
Let me reiterate Abrams posses an abysmal, level of computer IT, competency, which should preclude him from ever testifying in a court of law!!!!!
///////////////////////////////////////
The attorneys who’ve crossed examined Abrams in pre-trial depositions and at trial never did their due diligence.
Abrams should have been torn apart on cross examination!!!!!!!! It’s a DISTURBING joke that a man with crap credentials can testify as a credible expert.
Here’s Abrams’ résumé:
https://abramscyberlaw.com/steven-m-abrams-jd-cv
*Please Note: Abrams does not list date of attendance for the certifications courses , because they’re weeks long courses. Most likely under 10 total course hours. Attendance is not mandatory.
***
At this point, if you feel like laughing at Suneel, please do.
So you copied and pasted off the internet things about US history.
This is supposed to mind bend us into believing you have a case that the FBI, EDNY and Judge Garaufis were all in this together to lock up an innocent, misunderstood man
Bahahahahahaha
You don’t even make a good comic, let alone a good cult member.
Shit or get off the pot.
File this mysterious Rule 33 motion and let the chips fall where they will.
Stop these stupid meaningless stories.
Who feels like they are watching a bad version of the movie Airplane?
I read these articles and I want to light myself on fire for a split second.
Eduardo, your man Keith is guilty of raping a child and it wasn’t the first time he did it.
Rhianna at 12 and Gina at 15. Are you OK with that? Camilla was just the first time he was caught.
He is a pedophile, and you want him out on bail? Keith is a predator and is exactly where he belongs.
His Rule 33 motion is going nowhere.
I suggest you give it up and get a life without Keith the sexual pervert.
Get yourself some good therapy.
The damage to sexually abused children is never healed and that is why Keith is where he belongs until his death.
Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Let’s tell the real truth about William Talman, aka Ham Burger.
https://i0.wp.com/frankreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/perry-mason-talman-1-1.jpg?resize=768%2C463&ssl=1
In real life Ham Burger was more interested in playing with Hot Reefers and Hot Dames!
Let’s dive into this mess.
It seems that in 1960 when Keith Raniere was still in his mother’s womb, William Talman was already serving as a role model fort the future cult leader.
When TV D.A. William Talman Got Busted For Narcotics and Lewd Vagrancy
In 1960, Talman engaged in a scandalous act that got him temporarily fired from his sweet TV D.A. job.
Raid on 1156 N. Curson Ave.
On March 12, 1960, Talman and seven others were arrested at 1156 N. Curson Ave., West Hollywood on narcotics charges after officers found marijuana.
It was a Saturday, so unlikely that Talman would be filming any of the Perry Mason shows that day. Talman lived over the hill in Sherman Oaks. at 15426 Valley Vista Blvd, a convenient place to hop onto the San Diego Freeway to the studios.
It wasn’t just any marijuana party but a “nude marijuana party,” according to the Los Angeles Mirror-News, March 14, 1960. Plus, officers found “dirty movies, spicy books, and lewd photos.”
The N. Curson apartment, part of a building supposedly built by Charlie Chaplin, was rented by ad exec Richard Reibold.
Besides Talman, the group consisted of Reibold, Talman’s friend, James H. (Jimmie) Baker, Peter and Suzanne Hespelt, and three women, in their twenties or thirties: a Mrs. Peggy Louise Flannigan, a Mrs. Willie Donovan, and all-around bad girl, Miss Lola DeWitt.
What Happened That Night
One news account was very tabloid-ready, with Sheriff’s Capt. Richard B. Brooks stating:
We found seven people, all nude, in one bedroom. Some were on the floor and some were on the twin beds. When we saw the nudes we summoned the vice squad and officers from there helped us.
Knoxville News-Sentinel, March 14, 1960
According to the Mirror-News account, Mr. and Mrs. Hespelt were “fraternizing” with Miss DeWitt.
(Did the members of NXIVM do a lot of fraternizing with one another? Shadow State)
James H. Baker was “paired” with Mrs. Donovan. Talman was with Mrs. Flannigan.
Talman was fired from the Perry Mason show. But after lobbying from Mason producer Gail Patrick, he was eventually hired back.
Charges were dropped against the entire group.
https://www.invisiblethemepark.com/2021/07/william-talman-narcotics-bust/
(Actually Raymond Burr, who was from Vancouver like many NXIVM members, played a major role in getting the Ham Burger rehired.
In real life Raymond Burr was gay.)
Hiding in Plain Sight: The Secret Life of Raymond Burr (Applause Books) Paperback – September 1, 2009
by Michael Seth Starr (Author)
Here is the skinny on Lola Dewitt.
Lola herself could have been perfect for NXIVM.
Lola DeWitt Stewart
A colorful character with a shady past, Lola DeWitt was typically identified in the news as an actress. Lola DeWitt was a notorious stripper, model, prostitute, child murderer, and yes, also an actress and a singer.
Hoo Ray for Hollywood!
Hooray For Hollywood – Stereo-ized Pre-recording/Colorized Video – Hollywood Hotel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8NOPFz_k30
Perry Mason only lost one case.
Shadowstate1958-
Awesome and interesting post! I wish you posted this kind of stuff more often. Raymond Burr, as most fans of the show know, was a closeted gay man, which at the time could get you fired. It’s nice that Burr helped Taslman, although I do wonder of Burr was worried about being outed.
It’s rough to find any information on Lola DeWitt Stewart the “child murdered”.
I can’t stand LA, but I love the LA noire-esque stories.
Thanks!
***
For more dirt on Hollywood celebrities read the prolific gay author Darwin Porter who is also noted for writing numerous Frommer travel guides.
Biographies
[16][17]
The Secret Life of Humphrey Bogart: The Early Years (1899-1931) (2003);
Katharine the Great—Hepburn, Secrets of a Lifetime Revealed (2004);
Howard Hughes, Hell’s Angel (2005);
Brando Unzipped (2006);
Jacko, His Rise and Fall—the Social and Sexual History of Michael Jackson (2007);
Hollywood Babylon—It’s Back! (2008);
Merv Griffin, A Life in the Closet (2009);
Paul Newman, The Man Behind the Baby Blues (2009);
Steve McQueen, King of Cool, Tales of a Lurid Life (2009);
Hollywood Babylon Strikes Again! (2010);
Humphrey Bogart: The Making of a Legend (2010);
Damn You Scarlett O’Hara, The Private Lives of Vivien Leigh and Laurence Olivier (co-authored with Roy Moseley, 2011);
The Kennedys, All the Gossip Unfit to Print (2011);
Frank Sinatra, The Boudoir Singer (2011);
Elizabeth Taylor, There is Nothing Like a Dame (2012);
J. Edgar Hoover and Clyde Tolson—Investigating the Sexual Secrets of America’s Most Famous Men and Women (2012);
Marilyn at Rainbow’s End—Sex, Lies, Murder, and the Great Cover-up (2012);
Those Glamorous Gabors, Bombshells from Budapest (2013);
Inside Linda Lovelace’s Deep Throat—Degradation, Porno Chic, and the Rise of Feminism (2013);
Pink Triangle—The Feuds and Private Lives of Tennessee Williams, Gore Vidal, and Truman Capote (2014);
Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis: A Life Beyond Her Wildest Dreams (2014);
Love Triangle, Ronald Reagan, Jane Wyman, & Nancy Davis (2014);
Peter O’Toole, Hellraiser, Sexual Outlaw, Irish Rebel (2015);
Bill & Hillary, So This Is That Thing Called Love (2015);
Donald Trump, The Man Who Would Be King (2016);
James Dean, Tomorrow Never Comes (2016);
Lana Turner, Hearts & Diamonds Take All (2017);
Rock Hudson, Erotic Fire (2017);
Carrie Fisher & Debbie Reynolds: Princess Leia & Unsinkable Tammy in Hell (2018);
Playboy’s Hugh Hefner: Empire of Skin (2018);
Kirk Douglas More Is Never Enough: Oozing Masculinity, a Young Horndog Sets Out to Conquer Hollywood & To Bed Its Leading Ladies (2019).
Burt Reynolds: Put the Pedal to the Metal, 2019
Historic Magnolia House: Celebrity and the Ironies of Fame, 2018
Glamour, Glitz, and Gossip at Historic Magnolia House, 2019
Judy Garland & Liza Minnelli: Too Many Damn Rainbows, 2020
The Seductive Sapphic Exploits of Mercedes de Acosta, Hollywood’s Greatest Lover, 2020
Marilyn: Don’t Even Think About Tomorrow, 2020
Lucille Ball & Ricky Ricardo, They Weren’t Lucy & Desi, 2021.
Film Criticism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_Porter
Shadow-
Good list. I’m going to check it out.
I appreciate your time. Thanks!
Eduardo,
Do you sit for hours, days even, rewriting the same articles over and over or do you just reshuffle the paragraphs and post?
Ed
I’m not an expert in this case, and therefore, I have no sense where things will go.
It seems you have invested a great deal emotionally, financially and spiritually in this case. What will you do if the judge does not recuse himself or denies Rule 33 motion? How will you move forward in your life?
Eduardo Asunsolo must know a lot of prosecutors because he seems to be speaking for them…
This article is recycled from the pro-NXIVMs never-ending mantra — they will keep repeating it over and over and over until they think someone actually believes them.
This is nothing more than a fantasy opinion piece and would probably be better if they told it to Dr. Phil.
None of this matters because Raniere did it, there is overwhelming evidence of that and personal testimony, just because you don’t want to believe it, doesn’t make it so. He is where he belongs and he will stay there until he dies there, that’s justice. Whatever he’s done to make you think otherwise is the same crap he’s done to rape young girls and steal peoples money for his personal agendas. What a loser, he doesn’t deserve to be heard from again.
How is it that team Raniere just can’t see what’s really in front of them, is it their age or their memory.Thanks to the likes of Jim Jones’s Peoples Temple or David Koresh’s Branch Davidians our government will not tolerate cults someone just has to mention the word cult attached to a name and everyone is all up in arms.
The United States government will take pleasure in draining the bank accounts of the Bronfman sisters or any one else that gets in their way, they want Keith Raniere behind bars and that’s where Keith Raniere will stay , the sisters may have plenty of money but they simply will be out lawyered by the government with their endless supply of funds and lawyers who aren’t looking to cut a deal with NXIVM any time soon .
This is the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. It has absolutely no content. It’s just talking points and broad concepts that most people would of agree with on the surface.
It uses the same tired examples and quotes as all of the other pieces written by Keith Raniere and presented by the dead-enders.
It reads exactly how a pedophile in prison would spend his days trying to come up with words to get people on his side when he has actually no proof of anything being done wrong in an airt-tight case that rightfully convicted him.
Eduardo straight up calls the women Keith Raniere abused , “liars” and “the abusers”.
What does that kind of bullshit attacking of a pedophile’s victim have to do with tampering? And he is a father?
Fuck this guy. What an evil henchman.
Just a vile, dirtbag who is willing to say or do anything to rescue a child predator from his rightful spot on the trash heap of human failure.
This is the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. It has absolutely no content. It’s just talking points and broad concepts that most people would agree with on the surface.
It uses the same tired examples and quotes as all the other pieces written by Keith Raniere and presented by the dead-enders.
It reads exactly how a pedophile in prison would spend his days trying to come up with words to get people on his side when he has actually no proof of anything being done wrong in an air-tight case that rightfully convicted him.
Eduardo straight up calls the women Keith Raniere abused “liars” and “the abusers”.
What does that kind of bullshit attacking of a pedophile’s victim have to do with tampering? And he is a father?
Fuck this guy. What an evil henchman.
Just a vile, dirtbag who is willing to say or do anything to rescue a child predator from his rightful spot on the trash heap of human failure.
“ This is the stupidest thing I’ve ever read..”
As much as I’d be inclined to agree with you, there’s just too many deserving entries to choose from. Amongst them shall we never forget the story of Tuffy from the Carozzoni Crime Family, or my personal favorite courtesy of the world’s smartest man, the vampire that got buyer’s remorse from a toaster.
Benjicarver would likely nominate Suneel’s poopy bottom wiping masterpiece submitted to a federal judge, which certainly deserves a category of its own.
Ice-nine.
I forgot about those. You got me. I stand corrected.
ONE of the stupidest things I’ve ever read.
Ice-Nine-
I agree ☝🏻 with you!
“Curiously, a motion about falsifying evidence has people proclaiming it false without looking at the evidence.”
What evidence? There is no evidence. Once more, I see a long diatribe from the Raniere cult, claiming there are facts to prove their idiotic allegations, without giving a single one.
Where are these fucking facts you keep talking about?
Instead, we are transported to the early 1500s to hear from Thomas More. Heluva dude, Saint Tom. Maybe the missing facts are under that fabulous velvet hat of his.
Then we make a dog’s leg diversion to television’s Perry Mason Show and its fictional prosecutor. Heluva guy also, but what’s any of this got to do with evidence in a sex trafficking case 60 years later?
Where’re the facts, man? Where’s the fuckin’ evidence?
We’re being bullshitted. That’s been obvious for months.
The Raniere leftovers have no evidence. This long-winded diatribe of Asunsolo’s PROVES they have no evidence. Because if they had any evidence, they’d have shown it by now.
Instead, all they’ve got is bullshit. And now they have a platform, an allegedly “neutral” platform, for their bullshit. That platform is the Frank Report.
Aside from having dragged the FR down to their level, this, of course, gains the Raniere Cult nothing. What are they going to do, appear before a Federal Appeals judge with their bullshit about the Perry Mason TV show, the dates it aired and the names of the actors? Quote Saint Thomas More on the sanctity of English Law?
‘Cuz that’s all they’ve got.
Another well written essay without substance. Quit telling everyone you’re going to prove something and just do it! Words are nothing but air, actions and facts tell the story. If his followers spent half as much time gathering evidence as you have writing useless essays, he would have had another trial already.
What was this, a social studies essay? It’s like he was on a minimum word count and didn’t have enough new material, so he kept repeating the same shit over and over. It was far too verbose and zero percent persuasive. Poorly written gibberish spewed from a whiny, pretentious child.
“The government, I assure you, must know our experts are credible.”
No dude, you don’t assure me, or the government, of anything. We already ripped Wayne apart. Wayne’s credibility is stinky sewage that was dumped into an almost swimmable pool, polluting everything associated with it. Using Wayne as an expert has completely destroyed any believability in your argument. What a stinker you found for an ally.
Eduardo is a better writer than Suneel and I’m willing to believe the evidence before my eyes: better quotes, better sentence structure, less of a ‘rant’. Others may disagree. Having an opinion does not make the opinion ‘fact’.
Both S & E sound like the teenagers who end their communications with ‘… Fact!’ and believe they’ve won the argument. So far, neither has given any fact worth considering: “We have the best attorneys” (didn’t KR have the best, at somebody else’s cost, at his trial? Fact) – and a long list of ‘the best attorneys’ since? Fact. “We have the best experts” (has S & E not read the ‘debunking’ of one of their experts in the comments on this very site recently? Fact); If memory serves, SC quoted this expert’s report as ‘evidence’.
This is an expert who seems to have ‘expertise’ in a wide range of areas – just like KR – but is he also ‘genius’ level?. ‘After reviewing the work of Expert no. 1, I agree with him’. So Expert no. 3 didn’t have any Facts to go on, didn’t forensically examine anything, just reviewed Expert no. 1’s opinion? is that a fact? “KR should be released immediately …” is that a fact? And to think that such ‘factual’
KR followers set themselves up as ‘fact-based’ journalists with the ‘Knife’. Maybe SC and EA might consider getting the expert opinion of one Prince Harry and his wife next? They also seem to be self-appointed experts in any number of areas; maybe a bit of Hollywood glamour and a ‘royal’ touch is what’s needed? Fact.
Anonymous – Ptince Andrew’s going cheap. 🤭😁😂🤣
When’s the evidence going to be released? What is it? Who is it? What charge(s) will no longer be valid against Raniere?
Eduardo, why become a citizen if you hate the government? If you seek government reform, why not remain in your homeland and attempt to reform its government?
Or did you become a U.S. citizen for the sole purpose of legal standing to defend Raniere?
Unfortunately, they’ll never let Keith out of prison.
I’d like to know, what proven violations of procedure and law would be sufficient for our government to grant a new trial and release Keith on bail?
The accused are convicted in the US.
And Raniere’s depraved moral compass will be used as justification for his indefinite stay in purgatory – even if Eduardo actually has irrefutable evidence of tampering.
Raniere aside, I hope they expose the government corruption which thrives on violations of due process, breeds fear, and forces outcomes and submission to power and control.
What the founding fathers envisioned is all but gone. Constitutional rights are violated freely, and brazenly-
Considering the source, most of us are erroring on the side of bullshit.
To my knowledge, none of us are opposed to frying the FBI. F- em if they abused their power.
The FBI is like a regular police force, just with silly suit requirement and a bigger budget.
The mentality of always being right, enjoying their power entirely too much, and the old adage of “Power corrupts” applies to them the same as any police force.
I wouldn’t trust an FBI agent any further than could throw one despite whatever high minded nonsense TV tries to sell you on them.
But there is a difference between agreeing might be on to something with the FBI and agreeing with thinking it will (or should) free your hero Keith (and somehow make him magically innocent of everything).
As said before by most, even if best case scenario comes about – the judge agrees with you all, the FBI confesses, and Jesus himself comes down and points at Keith going “innocent of taking those pictures!”, Keith is still rotting in jail because of what he was actually charged with.
The moral cloak of crusading for justice that you all have donned doesn’t change what he has done.
You know, all that other shitty, abusive behavior your lot continues to ignore and excuse because it was “consensual”. It’s like declaring yourself in the right to take your grandma’s money for food and medicine so you can get drunk because she consented to it (I am sure if Keith did that you all would go “what is the problem?”).
The complete inability you lot continue to display about not knowing what is morally wrong vs what is legally wrong is ultimately why we hold all of you pro-Keithers in such contempt. The Rule 33 motion thing is just an amusing distraction at most.
The last gasp of a desperate group hanging on to their delusion of high ground by their fingertips.
“free your hero Keith”
“magically innocent of everything”
This is the typical stance of the dead-ender anticultist here on the Frank Report.
It’s an attempt to counter a claim no one has made.
Completely made up out of thin air, it’s used by these royalists to ignore and distract from real claims of evidence tampering by the FBI – evidence of which was testified to under oath at trial by the FBI itself, factually establishing a broken chain of custody.
Even if other convictions are valid, this is no reason to abandon efforts to expose government corruption – especially when that corruption endangers us all.
Alanzo
Don’t co-opt “dead-ender,” you creatively depleted bore. Make up your own term.
That nugget escapes some people due to their objective, Alonzo.
” What ya gonna do when they come for you”?
Alonzo worships Satan.
—I wouldn’t trust an FBI agent any further than could throw one.
BUT, you trust Alex Jones. Which way to Bohemian Grove?
Alex Jones deserves to burn in the fires of hell. No clue why you think I am a fan of his.
If the FBI questions you, even if its just to ask the weather, your only response is “lawyer”. Only a fool would trust them or any police when it comes to investigations as they really have only one goal – close the case. Accuracy is not the priority.
EraSend-
An incredibly important reason to have an attorney is that if you answer an FBI question wrongly, the FBI can claim you lied and charge you with a felony; it’s a felony to lie to the FBI.
******************
Many criminal defense attorneys have stated when you allow a client to speak to the FBI, you’re literally walking your client into prison.
************************
And this “overwhelming evidence” is?