Kevin’s Hottest Defense of Danielle; Attacks Sarah in War of Words

Kevin

Kevin

You don’t think it’s strange that the lead attorney who prosecuted people for participating in what she called a “sex cult” also spends time with and associates with other members of that organization? Members who had substantial rank and made substantial income from what Penza herself identified as a “sex cult?”

Not even a little bit strange?

A US Senator [Gillibrand] from the fourth biggest state in the country has a father who represented what mainstream media considers a criminal organization and sex cult. But it didn’t make the news, not once, other than Frank Report.

US Senator Kirsten Gillibrand

You don’t think that’s strange, not even a little bit?

According to Frank, via interviews with Heidi Hutchinson, KR was sneaking into bedrooms of underage girls since the 80s.

Heidi’s sister, and others, killed themselves. KR wasn’t on anyone’s radar until 2017, when Agent Penza read about Sarah’s brand in the NYT?

That’s not strange? Not even a little bit?

I’m not defending KR or the organization. I’m asking why something wasn’t done sooner if he and it were so bad. If they are as bad as advertised, then NYS police, Albany police, and the FBI are filthy for having allowed this to go on, especially after the guy made a legally binding agreement not to operate another company with MLM characteristics.

Keith Raniere and Nancy Salzman in 1998 

Why does this point bother you if you’re against KR and NXIVM?

Because it goes beyond the bubble of “good guys/bad guys” and requires critical thinking skills beyond a fourth grade level?

You take the position that KR was the only authority in the organization when it comes to Sarah, but not anyone else.

So everyone else is responsible for their actions, but Sarah, because she’s held to a lower standard despite having had a higher rank.

That’s a strange position to take unless you’re in her inner circle.

I don’t mean to make fun of her for her acting roles. It’s a harder job than it appears. I respect anyone who’s worked in television or film, at any level, in any role.

I make fun of her for making herself the authority on what’s right and wrong pertaining to the organization, when she has no business pointing fingers at anyone outside of KR and the Salzmans, one of whom she forgives.

Lauren Salzman and Sarah Edmondson had a master slave relationship at one time. Sarah turned whistleblower. Lauren was convicted. Sarah asked the judge to give her leniency.

The questions I ask are not strange, difficult to understand. They are common sense questions that don’t seem to have straightforward answers.

As for the alleged FBI tampering, will you defend Agent Penza if she engaged in misconduct, and her misconduct results in a legitimately guilty predator being released?

Because she took a shortcut when more than enough clean evidence existed to win a conviction? Will you defend her then, because she’s exempt from the rules for being part of the right social circles?

Frank Parlato

I like Sarah, and she has become a star. She did forgive Lauren, which was good. She did not forgive Danielle, which was her decision.

I asked her if she would consider withdrawing her medical board complaint. She told me she would forgive Danielle if she renounced Raniere. I told Danielle. She declined to renounce Raniere. This was prior to the medical board’s decision to revoke her license.

Kevin

Sarah likes having control over people. It’s almost as if she was a major recruiter and profiteer of a criminal racket, pyramid scheme, and cult.

Lois

There should be a statement in the Daily Mail story that Nicki Clyne is currently a defendant in an ongoing civil lawsuit connected to both DOS and NXIVM. It’s shady not to disclose that information upfront and throughout.

The viewer should be fully informed of the true motives and stakes for the person making a testimonial video. It colors the narrative differently. And for Nicki and the Daily Mail to choose to exclude that pertinent fact is problematic.

Full disclosure, transparency, and all relevant facts are vital for a true and reliable narrative in reporting.

Even one-sided opinion pieces skewed like this one toward the cult, and Keith’s view, benefit from at least the appearance of honesty.

Kevin

Agreed Lois, under the condition that the publication also mentions that the two lead plaintiffs suing Clyne were high ranking officers and center owners in the organization, who held considerable rank and made substantial incomes off the backs of unsuspecting students/clients.

Who actively performed unsanctioned medical and therapeutic acts, such as performing NLP/EMs without a license or any credentials.

Things that they’re suing Nicki and Danielle for, things that neither defendant actually did, but that the two lead plaintiffs themselves did.

After all, we want to be transparent.

You have it backwards.

Danielle wasn’t given that benefit, but the lead prosecutor was. If Penza’s personal life wasn’t used against her, who was she to hold people to standards she wasn’t held to herself?

Danielle Roberts practicing yoga in her private life.

Also, Danielle wasn’t the lead prosecutor in a high profile sex trafficking case, wasn’t suing anyone, wasn’t accusing anyone of anything, and consistently took the stance that she is neither a victim nor a perpetrator.

Frank Parlato