Cunha Tried to Expose Corruption in CT Family Court

On December 1, 2021, attorney Nickola Cunha appeared before Judge Thomas Moukawsher in the Superior Court of Connecticut. She was disbarred for comments she made that day.

The hearing was to determine whether Judge Gerard Adelman should be disqualified for bias in the divorce and custody case of Christopher Ambrose versus Karen Riordan.

Judge Gerard Adelman

During the proceedings, Attorney Cunha said, “My belief is there is significant evidence that Judge Adelman… has a bias against anyone that is not of the Jewish faith.”

Judge Moukawsher pressed Cunha to expand.

Cunha named lawyers and therapists in the case Adelman favored. She said they were all Jewish.

Judge Moukawsher: Judge Adelman secretly knows that certain people are Jews and not Jews, and that somehow he favors them because of that? I mean, this is a very serious thing to say.

Cunha:… I don’t think it’s some secret knowledge…. it’s well-known within the Jewish community who the Jewish professionals are…

Moukawsher: What evidence do you have that there’s a universal understanding among the Jewish community as to what professionals are Jewish or not? I mean, that’s a dangerous thing to say.

When Cunha tried to discuss Adelman’s rulings, Judge Moukawsher added the word, “conspiracy.”

Moukawsher: What I hear from you is allegations about a Jewish conspiracy among these people. … they’re conspiring together to frustrate justice?

Cunha said the conspiracy was based on money.

Cunha: … it’s a money thing… normally it’s the father that has the money, and what they do is they create this false fact pattern to ultimately divest the parent without the money of all of her rights. My client ended not only up penniless. She ended up without her children. She ended up homeless. And this is a consistent pattern that has occurred in cases where Attorney Aldrich and Attorney Hurwitz, Judge Grossman, and Judge Adelman have sat on cases.

Cunha tried to talk about mothers losing their children when they did nothing wrong. She was not pressing the Jewish commonality.

Moukawsher: So, you’re claiming that because they’re Jewish that they are trying to direct money to one another? Is that what it was?”

Cunha: I don’t – that – listen, all I can say to the Court is that they are all Jewish. To me, that rises [to] a level of concern. And, in other cases, it is a consistent level, a pattern, of concern  where the mothers end up without their children, end up homeless, and end up broke.

***

Moukawsher:… I thought what you were saying was that you believed that Judge Grossman, Judge – Ms. Aldrich, Ms. Hurwitz, because they’re Jewish, are conspiring together to help each other to make money. Is that what you’re saying? Or that Judge Adelman helps them to get money because they’re Jewish? Is that you’re claim?”

Cunha: I believe that there is an element of consistency and a pattern that support that. Judge Grossman and Judge Adelman [favor] attorneys that are within the Jewish faith. I believe that support that… And I believe that… occurred in this case.

Moukawsher:… So, what you’re claiming is that Judge Hurwitz [sic] and Judge Grossman favor lawyers who are Jewish –

Cunha: That is my belief, yes. That is my belief. That is my understanding. It is kind of like – it’s a cultural thing. It’s like as if you go to the Italian Club or the Portuguese Club, or there is a community of individuals that are well-known to each other of the Jewish faith, which is common. Same thing with Catholics…

Moukawsher disbarred her the following month.

Cunha retained CT attorney Norm Pattis to fight to get her law license back. His defense of Cunha’s conduct appears to be temporary mental instability caused by physical illness.

Now a guest view from:

By E. P. Pluribus

It looks like Attorney Cunha isn’t “mentally ill.” It looks like she’s a whistleblower who tried her best to address the corruption in a family court case as best as she could.

The Court should have allowed her to say what she said.

Her attorney in her disbarment case, Norm Pattis, and most others probably know that.

Mr. Pattis also probably knows Attorney Cunha couldn’t address the blatant corruption and exorbitant profits made by simply telling the Court: “The judge and attorneys colluded for huge profits and their own interests.”

Mentioning any group of people with common interests who favor working together is generally acceptable.

If the same judge and the same attorneys were members of the same baseball team, Attorney Cunha probably would have mentioned that instead of religion.

If they all played the same instruments in the same orchestra — or were members of the same fraternity at the same college — those facts would have been acceptable for “building the foundation” for her argument regarding corruption.

Most of us hang around with like-minded people. We’re prone to favor those who look, talk, think, pray, earn and eat as we do. Religious groups, political groups, and lawyers with common interests prefer to spend time with each other rather than with those without common interests. That’s a fact.

It’s not anti-Semitism or crazy talk of the “mentally ill.”

Attorney Cunha obviously thought it was safe to mention a common religion among those who were clearly colluding and profiting in the case.

Stating their shared interests seems to have been her foundation for facts about the blatant corruption. Her building of whatever foundation she chose to present her case should have been welcomed — and challenged — in an honest court.

Her comments would have been welcomed if the judges and attorneys were all Norwegians, and she used that as an introduction to prove other points.

Of course, that would have been acceptable because Attorney Cunha isn’t Norwegian.

Italians enjoy carnivals with Italian food and music. Wealthy yacht owners summer with other rich yacht people.

Children who have fun playing soccer enjoy playing soccer with other children who have fun playing soccer. Many people with curly hair prefer to buy dogs with curly hair. Most consider that acceptable behavior.

Some call that “tribalism” or “networking” — or “corruption” when criminals get together to commit crimes.

It’s not a crime to notice any of that.

It’s also not a crime to mention any of that.

There’s minor and major corruption in almost every system of government in America and throughout the world. Corruption has been a problem since civilization began.

Are we supposed to believe there’s no corruption in Connecticut family courts?

Maybe so.

The last time the Department of Justice prosecuted crimes committed in Connecticut family courts was: never.

Given the Justice Department ignores corruption and crimes in Connecticut family courts, maybe Attorney Cunha should have started by asking the judge the following question:

“Should Connecticut family courts handle the blatant corruption in the cases, or should information about corruption be sent to the Feds?”

Now that Mr. Pattis did what he did, will all Connecticut attorneys be disbarred, mocked, and shamed for noticing corruption in Connecticut courts?

Unfortunately, Attorney Cunha seems to trust Mr. Pattis.

She apparently doesn’t see that he’s a well-greased cog in the machine that punished her for blowing the whistle on the corruption. Seems like he thoroughly fooled her with his “champion for the underdog” shtick.

Purposeful distraction and deceit are common among criminals, scoundrels, and attorneys in corrupted courts.

That’s their religion.

Attorney Cunha is a whistleblower who tried her best to address corruption in a family court case.

People used to call brave people like that “heroes.”

Attorney Cunha could have addressed the corruption in the case, starting with: “The judge and attorneys colluded for profit in their own best interests.”

Most attorneys in most courts build foundations for their arguments. Attorney Cunha didn’t know that mentioning a group of people with common interests who favor each other is unacceptable now.

If all judges and vendors were Buddhist or Christian, Attorney Cunha could have said that. She would have been “building a foundation” for her argument regarding corruption. The judge probably would have told her, “Go on. What’s your point?” Instead of considering immediate disbarment.

Corrupted judges, attorneys, and vendors in Connecticut family courts target brave citizens who expose corruption and crimes. A cold shoulder to unpopular attorneys and legislators, gossip, mocking, and favoritism used to be good enough to silence dissent.

Quick disbarment is a new one.

It will be a practical option unless more whistleblowers share what they know about corruption in Connecticut family courts.

These days, the number of politically-incorrect ways attorneys can offend a judge with a chip on his/her/their/xir/hir/xim etc shoulder is endless and ad nauseum.

About the author

Guest View

31 Comments

Click here to post a comment

Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us! (Email & username are optional)

  • Cunha has admitted she is crazy. Why is everyone dancing around that fact. She told the judge she is nuts and yet everyone here is pretending she did something heroic. Wierd

  • Currently reviewing ethical guidelines of an Attorney in the state of Connecticut. Almost 700 pages. Found several I am not even half way through. The court system is not operating based on the law. Violating the residents rights having to use it. Gender profiling, dragging children through cruel and inhumane psychological services.

    Residents labeled for filing complaints and speaking out. The Connecticut court family system is a court of law. It’s my experience it’s absolutely not acting as one. Due process is unaffordable. Enough is enough folks. The children are suffering!

    • Right on point. It’s lawless. There’s no due process at all. The abuse of power and judicial “discretion” is limitless.

      They forget discretion is meant to encompass the spirit of the law. Instead it’s used as a free pass to do whatever they want. Abuse of children is rampant.

      Sinister. No medical profession would endorse any of this which is why they solicit a small group of psychologists who play the game and are given immunity by the courts. They protect each other. That’s the name of the game.

  • The system is designed for the attorneys. Not the families. Not for the children. The main question asked by most judges are if people are cooperating. No one asks about the children. These cases are inflamed. When a non attorney complains they are labeled as crazy as well. Connecticut is considered one of the most poorly run court system in the United States. No one wants to address this. The curruption has no boundaries. This also extends beyond the rich residents in Connecticut. It’s happening in the middle class also. The courts are a mess. We need leadership in the State who is not afraid to fix it. We need federal oversight. Abolish the GALs! We need psychologist not working for the courts. If parents can’t choose one a lottory system in place. Cunha
    Is definitely not crazy . Take the religious commonality out of it. Time to clean up family court!

    • That’s so true. I wonder if any state or federal office has ever followed up with a sincere effort to survey damage family courts have done.

      A few Connecticut surveys on family courts asked general questions such as: “Were office workers friendly?” and “Was the courthouse clean?” but no useful questions aimed at improving the system were asked.

      Those (2?) surveys I saw with such general questions definitely prove what you wrote: “The system is designed for the attorneys. Not the families. Not for the children.”

      A survey should ask questions like this ASAP:

      Which “best practices” were used in your case that helped? Which “best practices” did harm?
      Were your family members offered accommodations for political preferences, religious faith and financial status?
      Were you forced to accept service(s) from a hostile provider(s)?
      If you filed complaints, were complaints received respectfully? How were complaints settled?
      How much money (in total)was taken from your family?
      How many hours (in total) did family courts take from the lives of each family member?
      How did each family member improve?
      How did each family member decline?
      How many lives were affected with abuse/physical harm/emotional harm?
      On a scale of 1 – 10, how much stress did Connecticut family courts cause each family member to endure and for how long?
      How many family members developed PTSD?
      How many lives were lost?

      If any stat or federal employee has ever asked those kinds of questions to improve Connecticut family courts, I’d like to know.

      Very few family court attorneys and state legislators have been brave enough to speak on behalf of families “in the family court system” because of the harsh response from those who want the family court system to stay exactly as it is.

      Representatives Gonzalez and Vargas helped, but were given the cold shoulder for their efforts. Attorney Cunha tried to help, but was disbarred. In 2015, Judge Bozzutto (Chief Family Court judge) asked what resources were available for domestic violence cases in family courts (saying she had “no idea” what resources were available) during a task force meeting to “Study the Statewide Response to Minors Exposed to Domestic Violence”. That was a few months after a father threw his child off a bridge.

      Connecticut family courts have been so destructive for so long.

      I think the chaos and destruction of children and families is on purpose.

  • I lost my kids unjustifiably along with all of my money and my house & home. I’m a Jew too. The caveat is that I divorced a well connected Attorney. He and the judges were all good ‘ol boys and I lost everything. I believe it’s because I’m not a lawyer and because THE FAMILY COURTS ARE LOADED WITH CORRUPT LAWYERS AND JUDGES. That’s the bottom line. Its a corrupt scene here too in SAN FRANCISCO CALI.
    Thx for this story! It was inspiring & refreshing to hear about a brave lawyer!

  • These judges are being chased, their time is running out, the last efforts of a dying breed of child abusers who cannot withstand the light of public scrutiny, just a matter of time, it will be all over, the old guard collapses, the unclean are vanquished, liberty prevails.

  • “I don’t think it’s some secret knowledge…. it’s well-known within the Jewish community who the Jewish professionals are…”

    Since Cunha is not a member of the Jewish community, how does she know what is well-known within the Jewish community? Sounds to me like an anti-Semitic assumption. “They’re all in on it together.”

    “Most of us hang around with like-minded people”

    Sorry, but choosing friends who have something in common with you is a bit different than purposely giving a child to a sex predator or “stealing kids from their mothers” so that a person with something in common with you makes more money. Are you going to violate laws and ethics, behave completely immorally, just because you and some random acquaintance both play the oboe? The odds are you would not, unless you were an evil, wicked, twisted person, and it shows the assumption that people of the Jewish faith must be evil bc they are supposedly willing to sacrifice innocent children just because a they supposedly share something in common—a Jewish last name.

    • After learning for the past few years how to be easily offended, we need to tame our knee-jerk reactions and figure out why the world is as it is right now. It could be that Judge Moukawsher did what he did because of all the awful politics floating around.

      Which of the following is most offensive?

      “I don’t think it’s some secret knowledge…. it’s well-known within the Irish community who the Irish professionals are…”

      “I don’t think it’s some secret knowledge…. it’s well-known within the AFCC community who the AFCC professionals are…”

      “I don’t think it’s some secret knowledge…. it’s well-known within the young lawyer community who the young lawyers are…”

      Whichever label is most offensive doesn’t matter.

      Judges, attorneys and auxiliary profiteers grossly mishandled the Ambrose custody case after the (Hispanic?) judge almost saved those children from the hell that followed.

      After the little cabal (that just as easily could have been all Democrats, all Republicans or all Boomers) took over, they passed the case to and from each other. Each of them made lot of money and/or secured future professional opportunities.

      Aspiring criminals in Connecticut might want to know:

      Can any kind of cabal in family courts mishandle allegations of corrupting morals of minors, grooming and associated behaviors?

      Yes! DOJ offices won’t do anything about it!

      They haven’t yet and there’s no sign they will anytime soon!

      It’s not that Connecticut family courts have been crime-free since opening for business. It’s that a few shrewd individuals figured out a way for attorneys and random vendors to make lots of money in fo-profit, purposely adversarial mandatory court cases.

      For-profit and non-profit corporations, American Legal Institute “model penal codes”, various Kinsey groups, Dr. Gardner protocols, Jessica Pearson and “AFCC, Inc” all made it happen — along with those who count on guaranteed income when children and families are in danger and court administrators who know exactly what’s happening.

      Did the Ambrose case have anything to do with religion before Judge Moukawsher focused on Attorney Cunha’s passing comments?

      What matters most? Whatever those who colluded had in common … or the collusion, profit and opportunity the cabal chose instead of the best interests of the children?

      Attorneys Cunha complained about collusion, the dishonesty, the lack of law and the lack of protection for the children and their mother.

      She didn’t insult any religion or denomination as Judge Moukawsher apparently thought. Had Attorney Cunha complained about the Irish, Muslim or young lawyer community, Judge Moukawsher would have allowed it — and he should have allowed it. Courts find facts, not distractions. Utility AND justice. Not one or the other.

      François Gény once wrote, “Justice and general utility, such will be the two objectives that will direct our course.” Moukawsher complained about the religion, not the collusion. Why did he do that?

      The same thing happens in these comments sometimes when someone wants to distract readers away from that small cabal’s crimes committed against the children and their mother.

      “Justice and general utility” only help when judges, lawyers, auxiliary providers and court administrators are on that same course.

      • Your whole argument falls down because Cunha herself has asked the court to believe she is crazy! Currently she is trying to fund a psyce evaluation to show she is crazy. So you seem to be arguing against even Nickola Cunha herself. She’s a shitty lawyer. She didn’t lose her license because she blamed the Jews, she lost it because she lied to the court that it was the Jews and she couldn’t prove it

    • Dear WTF,

      Context matters.

      “Judge Moukawsher said the word Jew 14 times in successive questions to get her to focus back on it. She was trying to present evidence of collusion. He was trying to make her anti-Semitic.

      Between them, they said the word “Jew” 77 times. Moukawsher said it 52 times. Cunha said it 25 times – 23 of which were in reply to his relentless questioning.

      She never said Jews are bad or anything anti-Semitic. Moukawsher tried to get her to say those things.

      Here is a sample:

      Judge Moukawsher: Judge Adelman secretly knows that certain people are Jews and not Jews and that somehow he favors them because of that? I mean, this is a very serious thing to say.

      Cunha:… I don’t think it’s some secret knowledge…. It’s well-known within the Jewish community who the Jewish professionals are…

      Moukawsher: What evidence do you have that there’s a universal understanding among the Jewish community as to what professionals are Jewish or not? I mean, that’s a dangerous thing to say.

      He was right. It was dangerous. He disbarred her for it.

      What happens to the Ambrose children is meaningless to Judge Moukawsher. He was gunning for Cunha. And Cunha set herself up. And she got gunned down.

      That was a good thing for the profiteers in CT Family Court.“

      “Worst Abuses in CT Family Court: Anti Semitism by Cunha? or Judge Moukawsher’s Corruption?” Frank Report, August 14, 2022

      • The fact that the judge used the word Jew so many times could be viewed as giving her an opportunity to snap out of her foolishness and become aware of the ridiculousness of her accusations. She did not.

        It’s like if I went into court and said “yeah that’s right I killed the guy” And the judge say “are you telling me you secretly killed him and I say “No it’s not a secret I killed
        him.”

        And the judge says hold on a minute you are saying straight out you killed him? Do you have evidence showing that you killed him?

        “Well he wasn’t breathing OK he was dead and I caused it why are we fixating on the word kill are you trying to frame me????”

        • “The fact that the judge used the word Jew so many times” could be viewed any way you please, right?. You could have chosen to read the transcript in the context of the actual hearing instead of in the context of your imagination.

          You really think the role of that judge was to give her “an opportunity to snap out of her foolishness and become aware of the ridiculousness of her accusations”?

          Friendly reminder: The court transcript isn’t your creative interpretation of the transcript, WTF.

          You do write impressive dramatic dialogue, though.

          • Oh, you are just precious. So I guess “He was trying to make her anti-Semitic.” is not a creative interpretation on your part? Gimmie a break. Seems to me the judge was giving her a chance to clarify that she was not anti-Semitic and was not accusing the court of engaging in an evil Jewish conspiracy. And Cunha blew it.

            I think the judge went about it very fairly. He wanted to make sure that he heard her correctly and that she actually meant what she’d said.

            And btw, I read the court transcript.

  • so when the skeletons of infants are found under the septic tank of a ‘laundry’ in ireland, or millions of people worldwide, come forward to report gross abuse as kids at the hands of uh, men and women who wear a sort of uniform and work in a sort of building -usually with some sort of spire, when the capo of capos the Boss of these uniformed people spends days on his knees in contrition to the people of Argentina who are connected to these abusers… are we not to mention the word that links all these people together in ideological obedience?

    Not to say that the majority of people who need people in uniforms that work in buildings with spires, at least once a week, usually on a Sunday – are ALL child molesters, far from… but Ive yet to dissolve in a bucket of self righteous bile, every time there is a mention of wicked and disgusting facts relating to these people, even though I would be one myself, most of my family would be, if it were not for a great grand father who switched sides, there are those who switched back, those who always were and are excellent people…

    I could have preci’d this with one word – three if we add ‘the…….and problem” because it is a problem. Not a conspiracy but a fucking problem. All compacts unions etc. have them.

    • In America, the biggest source of child molestation cases isn’t the Catholic church.

      The biggest source of child molesters (in America) is public school teachers and staff members.

      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/has-media-ignored-sex-abuse-in-school/

      CBS news reported that sexual abuse in schools is 100 times higher than sexual abuse by priests.

      Yet, nobody seems to care about teachers molesting kids at a rate far greater than the Catholic church.

      Why not? Mostly because public teachers’ unions are heavily supported by the democratic party.

      Alonzo loves to trumpet his hatred for the Catholic Church due to sex abuse.

      Yet, what will he say about public school teachers being a much greater threat to kids than priests?

      Will Alonzo take the same nasty tone against public school teachers and the corrupt unions which protect them from negative news headlines?

      Probably not. Alonzo is partisan here. He’s not looking for truth. He’s just a hack.

      What about other libtards?

      What about other people who purport to be searching for ‘truth’, like JJ O’hara?

      Will JJ O’hara begin writing articles addressing the ‘myths’ about priests being a greater threat to kids than other professions, like public school teachers?

      I doubt it.

      But I have no doubt that JJ O’hara will eventually write NEGATIVE articles about the Catholic Church though.

      Cuz that’s what most liberals do. They spout the party line, Pravda style. 🙂

      I want TRUTH, god damn it.

      I’m getting tired of people PRETENDING to preach about TRUTH —– when they’re really just a bunch of liberal, political hacks.

      What say you, Joe?

      Say it ain’t so, Joe. Say it ain’t so. 🙂

      Say that you’ll report the TRUTH even if it goes against your liberal ideology.

      I wonder why liberals always ‘pretend’ to care about child molestation —- EXCEPT when public school teachers do it, at which point they become silent.

      Is this a conversation we need to have in America?

      Have a nice day. 🙂

      • As ever, you miss the point entirely and attach your ranting response to something or someone You wish to lay into..

        sadly at least 80% of child abuse in the US and UK, which includes neglect, (the number one precursor of sexual abuse outside the home) takes place at the hands of at least one parent.

        The point Im making here, is that there is no need for hyper sensitivity surrounding the issues arising from close compact under the banner of religion.

        These types of secrets and lies – covered over by the sly use of religious morality can arise in any religion.

        What is happening to the Catholic Church is as a result of that church recognising this fact and doing all it can to atone for it. Perhaps the Anglicans are doing the same, I dont know.

        Is this an attempt to get at Joe O’Hara because he once taught? Or because you think I’m a classroom teacher?

        Youre an acquired taste, Bangkok, like hundred year old egg, ortolans, or sheep testicles. And you whine like a little bitch who failed to get into the Liberal Society in 6th form. Sliante!

  • So you’re saying it’s not Anti-Semitism…

    It’s simply a case of Jews being a like-minded ‘group’ who pray together, who eat together, who penny-pinch together, and who collude to steal children together.

    Okay. Got it.

    How’s Cunha’s mental state doing these days? Is she on meds?

    By the way, you haven’t yet shown how the judges were being ‘bought’ by this greed.

    What evidence proves that they received payoffs from their Jewish conspirators?

    Or did the judges do it for free? …Simply because they favor fellow Jews OVER the innocent children they’re mandated to protect?

    Oh, I forgot… You’re allergic to providing evidence.

    Whoever wrote this drivel is likely a colleague or friend of kooky Cunha.

    If you’re an attorney, sir, then I feel sorry as fuck for your future clients.

    How many tries did it take you to pass the BAR exam?

    Was ‘6 times’ a charm for you?

    Have a good day.

      • Bangkok is as hostile as he is cheap. Some folks got together to build a community pool for underprivileged.

        They went door to door in affluent neighborhoods, and when they knocked at his home, Bangkok came outside.

        They asked for a donation so that the poor could swim in a pool like the rich do.

        Bangkok said, “Sure, I’ll do my part and make a donation.” He went inside and came back with a glass of water.

    • Bangkok-

      Refer to Keith Harmon Snows investigation and book, In The Worst Interest of the Child: Trafficking Children through the Family Court System.

      Refer to Anne Stevensons testimony and evidence presented. Refer to the hearings and testimony of many CT parents. Peter Szymonik presented a petition with over one thousand signatures of ct parents who experienced similar abuse, threat, isolation and theft of children and family savings.

      It’s difficult to imagine, and Cunha failed miserably at whatever it was she was attempting to convey during the hearing. But that does not change the reality that has been documented and proven. It is money driven.

      https://www.cga.ct.gov/jud/tfs/20131001_Task%20Force%20to%20Study%20Legal%20Disputes%20Involving%20the%20Care%20and%20Custody%20of%20Minor%20Children/20140109/Testimony%20-%20Stevenson,%20Anne.pdf

      Please consider the reality for children and parents. None of the parents have been found to be unfit.

      Children are suffering. Mothers and sometimes fathers are being killed off by attorneys and judges.

      This is not an isolated case.

      Why is it that the courts endorsed Ambrose having unilateral control over all money and assets?

      Why did they switch judges when judge Rodriquez demanded Ambrose file a financial affidavit?

      Suddenly a change to judge grossman who- as FR reported on – with testimony – Grossman acknowledged no financial affidavit (this is now a year into trial) and continued to allow Ambrose to keep all finances secreted from his wife and nothing on record with the court for over two years of litigation. Why?

      It’s financial abuse and control endorsed by the courts. Consider it at least. Thank you

      • It’s a classic Jewish ‘stereotype’.

        Visit google and search for “Jews” and “Penny-pinchers”.

        • Does Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Orthodox Judiaism, Messianic or Masonic Judaism promote saving as much money as possible? And what does that have to do with blatant corruption and hidden crimes in The Ambrose case?

        • Frank Supports this Jew knocking because he believes in it. Otherwise he would admit Nickola using the Jews as a scapegoat was wrong.

          • I love the Jews. There are many exquisite elements to Judaism. I enjoy reading the Talmud and the Torah. I am not bragging, but I think I understand Judaism better than most Rabbis and far better than you.

            And I will stand a challenge on that too.

            I also love Catholics and Hindus. Muslims and Parsis, Buddhists and Mormons. Love them all. Even Protestants and Taoists. I am just bursting with love.

            And I want to tell you dear commenter, from the bottom of my heart, you annoy me. What the hell is there no remedy for irritable bowel syndrome?

          • Frank seems to say everything except that what Nicola said was anti-Semitic and wrong. She deserves to lose her license. Frank spent too many hours on the phone getting gossip for his blog and that’s why he will never admit she is crazy – no matter how many times Cunha admits it herself.

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.” In addition, he was credited in the Starz docuseries 'Seduced' for saving 'slave' women from being branded and escaping the sex-slave cult known as DOS.

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 premieres on May 22, 2022.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Parlato,_Jr.

Contact Frank with tips or for help.
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083
Email: frankparlato@gmail.com

Archives