Given gender differences and conditions, under which each sex competes for access to desirable
mates of the other sex, it would be astonishing to find that men and women were psychologically
identical in their behaviour in marriage. Infidelity represents a shortcut some take and from
the point of reproduction strategies can be viewed as attempt to obtain a more desirable mate, when
such opportunity arise. Whether a child will be conceived or not is another story and here social
restriction play dominant role. At this point in history, we can no longer doubt that men and women
differ in their preferences for a mate: primarily for youth and physical attractiveness in one case,
and for status, maturity, and economic resources in the other. So some males increase their value in
"mating market" as they age. While woman usually confront gradual deterioration (probably with the
exception of some Hollywood stars, who managed to look young up to their fifties). At the same time
women, especially married woman, dislike being treated as sex objects or valued for qualities
largely beyond their control, such as youth and beauty. Similarly men dislike being
treated as success objects or valued for the size of their wallet and the importance of their status
in a competitive world.
Marital infidelity is a pretty traumatic event. A very painful life experience. But
with ages behaviour
in which one spouse seeks happiness and sexual satisfaction outside the marriage not only became
more common, it became more socially accepted. Not so long ago (say 200 years from now) a man who seduced somebody else wife
risked to get a bullet in the chest. Now the rules are much easier and punishment is less severe. In the past it was regulated by law. Even now, for
example, in Minnesota, adultery
is a crime punishable by a fine of up
to $3000 and/or up to a
year in jail (St. Paul Pioneer Press Dispatch, 1987).
Yet 50% of men
and 30% of women admit they have engaged in such relations at some point of their current or former marriage.
The overwhelming number of Americans disapprove of extramarital sexual relations. In national
opinion polls, 87% of Americans say that extramarital relations are “always wrong” or “almost
always” wrong (Atwater, 1982). Still despite being a clear betrayal of the other spouse such
behaviour is relatively common: estimates are that,
during marriages in contemporary American culture, at least one half of the individuals (mostly
extramarital sexual relations.
This is high opportunistic behaviour and chance plays a dominant role in fostering
extramarital involvement. However, perceived opportunity may be confounded with other factors,
including the person attitudes toward sexuality, morality and life-styles. A study by Gerstel ( 1969) of commuter
marriages (couples who lived apart for professional reasons at least three days a week) showed that
60% had not had extramarital relations. But that most of those who did had also had extramarital
relations prior to the commuting circumstances. Nevertheless, even persons indisposed to affairs may
behave in remarkably uncharacteristic ways and end up in extramarital relationships when external
circumstances push them past their moral barriers.
Opposite-sex friendships may constitute a
particularly powerful opportunity for sexual affairs. Atwater ( 1979) found that, for many women,
extramarital sex developed within the context of friendship. Such entanglements may not start with
the intent of beginning an extramarital affair out of dissatisfaction with the marital relationship,
but may evolve to that point later. The excessive use of internet pornography also increased the
chances in engaging marital infidelity, especially for males, as they are primary consumer of this
new pulp culture.
Unless this is a case of infatuation, becoming
involved in extramarital relationships implies a decision process that identifies the costs and
benefits and compares them with the expected payoff of alternative decisions. Meyering and
Epling-McWerther ( 1986) found that men's decisions to become involved in extramarital affairs were
most affected by the perceived payoffs, such as variety. In contrast, women's decisions were most
affected by the perceived costs (e.g., guilt, destroying the marriage). Although extramarital
affairs play a role in one third of divorces ( Burns, 1984), research has not shown how many affairs
fail to result in divorce. Males were three times more likely to blame the breakup of the
relationship on their wives' affairs than on their own affairs. Females were significantly more
likely to identify relationship problems as the cause for the breakup.
Dissatisfaction with the marital relationship may push individuals into
affairs, simplifying obtaining divorce later. It seems that dissatisfaction with the
marital relationship is a more important motive for women to become entangled in extramarital
relationships, especially when it comes to affairs with the emotional involvement ( Glass & Wright, 1985). For
example, Atwater ( 1979) found that about half of the women who had been involved in extramarital
relationships mentioned an unsatisfactory marriage as part of their motivation. In general, the
occurrence of extramarital sexual relations has been found to be related to the level of marital dissatisfaction,
especially in women.
Most divorces due to infidelity are sought by women, but a wife's infidelity is more serious
reason for divorce for most men, then infidelity of their husband is for most women. Generally high rate of divorces is linked
not to increase of cases of infidelity, but mainly to the new level of women’s
involvement in the workplace, as well as the modernization of women’s roles in general. The
realities of living together that inevitably create major strains are ignored in modern cultures and
are experiences not as a norm, but as a sign of the failure of the marriage. Those trends are amplified
by Hollywood with its too rosy and unrealistic view of "happy marriage" (and BTW on the "unhappy
Women once married, are exposed and experience a social pressure to mold into the expectations that are ingrained in the
cultural concept of marriage, which are quite different from expectation throughout the engagement
period and are not visible during this period. For them workload dramatically increases. Many woman resent that their situation in marriage
inherently involves huge inequalities, putting substantially more stress on a woman shoulders including not only an unequal distribution of
domestic labor, but also an unequal fulfillment of other emotional or physical needs within the
relationship. That's why so many marriages do not survive for more then two years.
While previously mainly men phenomenon, now infidelity
became more common for married women too. Affairs can occur in happy marriages as well as in troubled ones,
but they dramatically more frequent in troubled one.
Although the involved spouse may not be getting enough from the marriage, often, in reality, the "disgrunted" spouse
is not giving enough. It take two for tango.
Among other typical reasons is attempt to raise low self-esteem, relationship deficits
(e.g., lack of affection), or a social context in which infidelity is condoned. It also may indicate
an addiction to sex or romance. People addicted to romantic relationships are driven by the excitement
and emotion which a new relationship temporary brings to them.
In most people affairs cause feelings of shame and worthlessness. that's not true for sex addicts
and philanderers. The latter perceive extramarital sex as an entitlement and status symbol (the more,
the higher status is). Infidelity is essentially a breach of trust, so it can be any action that
violates an implicit or explicit agreement between two married people.
I just can't stand cheating in any form. You better give up the relationship then cheat all
you want. I quit on my marriage because my husband lied to me. I just can't accept deceit cause
i've been honest since day one.
Dishonesty is certainly always a part of an infidelity.
Seeking sex outside of the relationship can also be compared to seeking alcohol, drugs, shopping,
gambling; virtually any substance or behavior that provides a “quick fix,” a distraction from everyday
life, something that makes you feel anticipation, intoxication, even fear of being caught doing something
“bad”. It can also be difficult for some people who have sex with someone they have deep intimacy
and connection with. The idea of “dirty” or playful sex with the same person you share so much of
your life with can be a hard concept to reconcile. For some, built into their belief system of “hot”
sex is the idea that the person you are having sex with doesn’t truly know you nor do you know them,
allowing a certain freedom and separation from your real life.
Crossing the line from platonic friendships into romantic relationships is helped by modern communications,
especially Internet, as well as high demand of time of a modern workplace.
Internet bring a new class of affairs called emotional affairs. The latter differ from platonic friendships
- greater emotional intimacy than in the marital relationship,
- secrecy and deception from the spouse,
- sexual chemistry.
- absence of physical contact.
Certain life cycle changes (midlife crisis in men, etc) also stimulates infidelity. Some associate
infidelity with selfishness. Some dissatisfied spouses begin an extramarital relationship as a way of
exiting from an unhappy marriage. More frequently, however, the marital history is re-written to justify
an ongoing affair. It is unreasonable to compare a brief splash of intensity of feelings in an affair
which is still at the stage of romantic idealization with the routine familiarity of spouses in a long-term
Causes of Marital Infidelity LIVESTRONG.COM)
The actual chances of infidelity might not be as high as many sources claim. In fact, Dr. John
Grohol, founder and CEO of PsychCentral.com, suggests these chances could be less than six percent
in a given year in his article, "How Common is Cheating and Infidelity Really?" However, he warns
that this number could increase to about 25 percent, depending on how long the relationship runs.
In either case, if you’re worried about infidelity in your relationship, learning the common causes
of cheating can ease your fears or help you address potential problems.
- Physical Desires. Sexual discontentment and desires often contribute to incidents of
cheating, suggests Susan Whitbourne, professor of psychology, in her PsychologyToday.com article,
"The Eight Reasons that People Cheat on Their Partners." Some people expect that a new partner
can serve their sexual needs better than his current spouse. This can especially true if the frequency
or physical passion has diminished over the years. In other cases, a person might believe that
in addition to sex with the spouse that she deserves more encounters.
Emotional Desires. Emotional needs contribute to incidents of cheating, as well. For
example, feeling an emotional disconnect from a spouse might lead someone to pursue an affair,
suggests Whitbourne. While this infidelity might initially be restricted to an emotional level,
it could grow into a physical affair. In other cases, a partner might feel underappreciated by
a spouse but praised by a third person, leading to cheating. Sometimes a spouse will feel completely
satisfied with their partner, but an emotional desire to simply pursue new experiences could also
lead to affairs.
Vengeful Desires. Affairs based on revenge are rare, despite over exaggerations in movies,
notes Whitbourne. However, a husband and wife routinely face domestic disputes, it is possible
that one member of the marriage might cheat out of spite. In cases like this, the cheater might
make the affair known to cause his spouse emotional pain. On the other hand, the cheating spouse
might still keep the affair a secret, as the satisfaction of secret payback could be rewarding
Platonic Relationship or Affair? Platonic friendships have the potential to evolve into
emotional affairs, warns the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. However, the
line between these two types of relationships can run thin. A platonic friendship becomes an affair
when three conditions are met, suggests the AAMFT. The first is that an emotional affair will
have more emotional intimacy than the marriage itself. The second is that the affair will involve
some level of secrecy. For example, perhaps a husband intentionally does not tell his wife that
he has daily video chats with another woman online. The third trait of an affair is sexual chemistry.
As Marilyn Monroe said: "It's better to be unhappy alone than unhappy with someone". In most people affairs cause feelings of shame and worthlessness. that's not true for sex addicts
and philanderers. The latter perceive extramarital sex as an entitlement and status symbol (the more,
the higher status is). Infidelity is essentially a breach of trust, so it can be any action that
violates an implicit or explicit agreement between two married people.
I just can't stand cheating in any form. You better give up the relationship then cheat all
you want. I quit on my marriage because my husband lied to me. I just can't accept deceit cause
i've been honest since day one.
Life becomes polarized into "before" and "after". Some can raise above this breach of trust
in the name of children or similar "higher level" considerations, but many can't. In this case the loss of trust being
irreparable for one, the continued anger and blame intolerable for the other
A majority of respondents in Western society disapprove of extramarital relationships under all
circumstances. Therefore, most persons who enter into extramarital affairs know their partners will
disapprove. Disclosure at some later time, then, will trigger feelings of not only betrayal but also
indignation over the deceit. Many negative feelings (e.g., guilt, fear, anxiety, conflict, fear of
pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease) dissuade individuals from engaging in affairs and
are often experienced by those who entered them. Those experiencing guilt reported less
satisfaction with the affair. The degree of disapproval has been found to be a function of the
nature of the extramarital involvement. These feelings along with anger, sadness, and fear of other
spouse may seriously disrupt or terminate the relationship. For instance, Thompson ( 1984) found
that the combination of emotional and sexual extramarital involvement was viewed as more
unacceptable than just sexual involvement.
Formerly condemned in
the name of
good morals, infidelity is now
condemned as a breach of trust.
the common view is that instrad of trying to pursue such
a petty practice
it is better
to tell each
other everything and get out of marriage that proved to
be so unsatisfactory. And is you can't do that you need just shut up and behave yourself
than to resort
to the subterfuges.
Making people laugh
at the misfortunes
of cuckolded husbands
was a mainspring
of boulevard theater
for almost a
century, and the
cuckold has always
been a character
However, adultery, even
if it is
discredited, is not
dead: outdated as
a genre, it
remains current as
a practice and
is one of
the main reasons
for the breakdown
of marriages. Adultery
is practiced by
both men and
women who deceive
one another to
combat boredom, to
respond to temptations,
or to lead
several lives at
once; it is
a symptom of
an individualist society
torn between the
ideal of fidelity
and a neoliberal thirst
for unlimited and selfish individualism.
There is also a kind of betrayal with respect to relatives and friends: as Oscar Wilde noted we
stab in the back only those who are close to us and whose weak.
We recall the stories that have run in American newspapers in recent years: the conservative
judge Clarence Thomas, accused in 1991 of having made indecent remarks to one of his advisors at the
Department of Education; Clinton-Lewinsky affair; the tribulations in 2007 of the governor of
New York, Eliot Spitzer, a champion of the fight against prostitution who was caught with a
ravishing twenty-two-year-old brunette whom he was paying for her services; the public confession
made by his successor for fear that later on the press would reveal his own infidelities; and the
attacks made in 2008 against the head of the IMF, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who had had intimate
relations with one of his former employees.
We can understand that political officials are called upon to be exemplary in their private
behavior: a public man does not belong to himself; if he wants to exercise authority over others, he
must be able to control his own instincts. The TV series
The Good Wife provides pretty
interesting depiction of consequences of such behaviour.
There are two types of fidelities: one a fidelity of convention, the other a fidelity
of conviction. The former involves a mechanical observance of social norms, the second a free
decision to be loyal to one’s beloved. Similarly there are a least to types of infidelity: with and
without emotional bonds.
For example, accidental infidelities (“It just
happened”) are unplanned acts based on the situation that arose spontaneously, are are not
expected to last more then a brief encounter. It not always that they develop as planned, so
risk is typically underestimated (Fatal Attraction). Such an
encounter does not entail strong emotional bonds and are somewhat similar with sexual acts with
be vulnerable to a sexual encounter for several reasons. They may still remain curious about what
they are missing. The very things most men and women find so exotically attractive in
the beginning often become irritating incompatibilities when you have to live with them.
In any case, once the “honeymoon is over” most couples are disappointed. In addition to the
inevitable disenchantments of marriage, some men and women were unpopular
as teenagers. Now as adults they can't believe that what they once longed for has become theirs for
the asking. Some just can't say no, have had no practice in gracefully refusing a sexual invitation.
Ado Annie in Oklahoma! bemoaned the fact that she just “cain't say no.” Women may be afraid
that by refusing they might crush the man ego, especially if he is her boss. Men are afraid
“the Good Ole' boys” will think him a “wimp” if he declines. Thus they accept sexual overtures they
don't really want. Sometimes, people tend to make impulsive decisions when they are drunk. Or maybe they have just had
a bad (or good) day. Or else they are horny.
In any case, some men just slide into an affair, without
really thinking about consequences. Such an adultery can
be fairly harmless in a marriage — if
the spouse doesn't find out (If the tree falls in the forest and no one sees or hears it, did it fall?). Later, they may be sorry. Laurie Colwin
(1981) depicted the emotions after such a encounter pretty vividly (see also classic scene in the
train in Unfaithful):
I was not prepared for the aftermath of this affair. The distress I felt seemed uncontainable. At the shop I found myself in the bathroom in tears, running the faucets so that Pete would not hear me weeping. … I was beset by devils I had not known existed: grief, rage, longing and pure desire, (pp. 148-149)
Some couples may embark on an extramarital affair as an act of revenge. Other couples may be engaged in a power struggle. Having an affair gives them ammunition to use against one another. They can represent a flamboyant revenge affairs that keep stormy marriages in a state of
intense passion and
jealousy. The sex goes
outside the marriage, but the emotion is still directed in. Unhappily married couples may stay together for a variety of perfectly good reasons. They may decide to stay together “for the sake of the children,” to protect the couple's family, careers, or finances. Some people are in a permanent process of
“getting a divorce.” Their state of prolonged separation protects them from having to get seriously
involved with anyone else. Some are just “shopping around” to see if they can find more suitable
mates. The secrecy of extramarital affairs may add to the erotic thrill. The strategies and
deceptive practices they must adopt to maintain the secret naturally drive a wedge between them and
their mates and cause the two secret lovers to become more obsessed with each other. After all, it
is only to one another that they can speak mindlessly; tell all. Secrecy adds an extra thrill—which
may vary from a shiver of delight to a rush of terror, depending on what is being risked — on each
Marital infidelity is not only about devaluing of the other spouse.
It is also the breach of trust. A form of betrayal. The emotions that are connected with marital
infidelity are the same as in case of betrayal. The most challenging aspects of the healing
process are the justifiable rage. So rebuilding trust is difficult unless couple agrees to stay
together for the sake of wellbeing of their children or some other "common cause". This emotional trauma fades with time
but rarely completely. When couples seeking a divorce were asked what caused their breakup, many
cited infidelity as the problem.
The US culture, especially movies has come to glamorize affairs rather than condemn,
them but it not clear what social factors are in play, which is kind of the chicken
the egg problem. As one Amazon reviewer put it:
- The same social forces act on ALL of us, but only SOME of us cheat. Thus, the social forces
cannot explain why cheaters cheat. Differentiating cheaters from others requires looking at variables
on which they differ from others, not on forces common to all.
- Ms. Vaughan's "evidence" that adultery has increased significantly in the last few decades,
when sex has become more public and less closeted, depends to a great extent on generally-unrespected
researchers like Shere Hite. Her figures on the rate of adultery are higher than others I've seen
(and I've read a lot on this subject). So far as I can tell, we do not really know that there has
been a meaningful rise in adultery to accompany the rise in glamorized sexuality (including glamorized
icons of adultery).
- Even if there is a rising rate of adultery, and even if it correlates the social forces Ms.
Vaughan mentions and a rising rate of adultery, it does not follow that one causes the other. Alternative
hypotheses can explain both. One such alternative would be that both are results of increasing egoism
and hedonism, which could result from any of a number of factors--consumerism, the decline of Heaven-oriented
religious belief, decline of community life, commodity-centered views of the person growing out of
capitalist ideology, etc. Another might be that both reflect the decline of patriarchal social structures.
Surely others could be framed. The point is that we just don't know.
Differences in the economic independence
of women, in the benefits provided by husbands, and in the intensity of competition for husbands all drive the critical cultural variation.
Where women benefit
and where competition for husbands is fierce, women compete to signal chastity, causing the average amount of premarital sex to go down. Where women control their economic fate, do not require so much of men's investment, and hence need to compete less, women are freer to disregard men's preferences, which
causes the average amount of premarital sex to go up. Men everywhere might value chastity if they could get it, but in some cultures they simply cannot demand it of their brides.
From a man's reproductive
cue to the certainty of paternity than virginity per se is the assurance of future fidelity. If men cannot reasonably demand that their mates be virgins, they can require of them sexual loyalty or fidelity. In fact, the study of temporary and permanent mating found that American men view the lack of sexual experience as desirable in a spouse. Furthermore, men see promiscuity as especially undesirable in a permanent mate, rating it -2.07
on a scale of -3.00 to +3.00.
The actual amount of prior sexual activity in a potential mate, rather than virginity per se, would have provided an excellent guide for ancestral men who sought to solve the problem of uncertainty of paternity.
studies show that
the single best predictor of extramarital sex is premarital sexual permissiveness --
who have many sexual partners before marriage are more unfaithful than those who have few sexual partners before marriage.
Modern men place a premium on fidelity. When American men in the study of temporary and permanent partners evaluated
characteristics for their desirability
in a committed mating,
emerged as the most highly valued traits.
All men give
an average of +2.85
on a scale of -3.00 to +3.00.
Men regard unfaithfulness as the least desirable characteristic
in a wife, rating it a -2.93, reflecting the high value that men place on fidelity. Men abhor promiscuity and infidelity in their wives. Unfaithfulness
proves to be more upsetting to men than any other pain a spouse can inflict on her mate. Women also become extremely upset over an unfaithful mate, but several other factors, such as sexual aggressiveness, exceed
the grief they cause women.
It is painful to be the wife of a man whose desire for sexual variety leads
him to sexual infidelity. It is painful to be the husband of a woman whose desire for emotional closeness
leads her to seek intimacy with another man.
Men and women also differ in their proclivities for casual sex without emotional involvement, in
their desire for sexual variety, and in the nature of their sexual fantasies. Men and women face
different forms of interference with their preferred sexual behavior and so differ in the kinds of
events that trigger powerful emotions such as anger and jealousy. Men and women differ in their
tactics to attract mates, to keep mates, and to replace mates.
Conflicts in marriage become exacerbated when one deceives the other. Forms of deception abound
in the plant and animal world. Among married couples, deception about the depth of commitment
continues in the form of sexual infidelity. The motivations for male infidelity are clear, since
ancestral men who had extramarital affairs had the possibility of siring additional offspring and
thereby gaining a reproductive advantage over their more loyal counterparts. Women get extremely
upset by male infidelity because it signals that the man might divert resources to other women or
even defect from their relationship. Women stand to lose the entire investment secured through the
marriage. Based on this prospect, women should be far more upset by an affair that contains
emotional involvement than about one that does not, because emotional involvement typically signals
outright defection rather than the less costly siphoning off of a fraction of resources. This proves
to be the case, because women are more forgiving and less upset if no emotional involvement
accompanies their husband's affair. Men seem to know this. When caught having an affair, men
often plead that the other woman "means nothing."
Not to mention that deception has an incontestable erotic potential: the fear of being caught,
spur-of-the-moment rendezvous, and shared secrets lend some clandestine encounters a density that the
conjugal gruel no longer has. We sometimes lie not to conceal the truth but to make life more
Because the deceived can suffer tremendous losses, there must have been great selection pressures
for the evolution of a form of psychological vigilance to detect cues to deception and to prevent
its occurrence. The modern generation is merely one more cycle in the endless spiral of an
evolutionary arms race between deception perpetrated by one sex and detection accomplished by the
other. As the deceptive tactics get more subtle, the ability to penetrate deception becomes more
Women have evolved strategies to guard against deception. When they are seeking a committed
relationship, the first line of defense is imposing courtship costs by requiring extended time,
energy, and commitment before consenting to sex. More time buys more assessment. It allows a woman
greater opportunity to evaluate a man, to assess how committed he is to her, and to detect whether
he is burdened by prior commitments to other women and children. Men who seek to deceive women about
their ultimate intentions typically tire of extended courtship. They go elsewhere for sex partners
who are more readily accessible.
To guard against deception, women spend hours discussing with their friends the details of
interactions they have had with their mates or with potential mates. Conversions are recounted and
scrutinized. When asked, for example, whether they talk with their friends to try to figure out the
intentions of someone they have gone out with, most women admit that they do. Men, in contrast, are
significantly less inclined to devote effort to this problem of assessment. Women must separate men
who seek casual sex from those who seek marriage.
Although women have developed strategies for penetrating men's deception, men clearly cannot
ignore deception at the hands of women.
This is especially true when men seek spouses. Accurate assessments of women's reproductive
value, resources, kin group or other alliances, and prospective faithfulness become paramount. This
is vividly illustrated in a scene from Tennessee Williams play A Streetcar Named Desire: Mitch is on
a date with Blanche DuBois, a former high school teacher to whom he is engaged to be married but who
has deceived him about her sexual past with other men, including a sexual relationship with a
student which caused her expulsion from the school. A friend has just alerted Mitch to Blanche's
past, so he aggressively tells her that evening that he has always seen her only at night under a
dim light, never in a well-lit room. He turns on a bright light, from which Blanche recoils, but he
sees that she is older than she had led him to believe she was. He confronts her with what he has
heard about her florid sexual past. She plaintively asks Mitch whether he will still marry her. He
says, "No, I don't think I'll marry you now," as he approaches her menacingly for sex.
Given the tremendous importance that men assign to physical appearance and sexual exclusivity in
a potential mate, they are especially sensitive to deception about a woman's age and sexual history.
Men seek out information about women's sexual reputation. Psychological alertness guards men against
deception by women about two of the most reproductively important considerations for a man in a
permanent mate -- her reproductive value and the likelihood that this value will be channeled
exclusively to him.
A shroud of secrecy surrounds extramarital sex, despite the multitude of studies on the subject.
The question on this subject caused more people to decline to participate in Alfred Kinsey's study
of sex than did any other question, and more people refused to answer it than any other question.
The statistics on the incidence of extramarital sex must therefore be regarded as conservative and
the actual incidence of affairs might at least 10% higher than reported.
It has been said that "monogamy is the Western custom of one wife and any number of mistresses."
The main point is not that men inevitably have more affairs than women or that infidelity is
invariably expressed in men's behavior. Rather, men's sexual psychology disposes them to seek sexual
variety, and many men tend to seek extramarital sex when the costs and risks are low. Some married
women also seek short-term sex, including extramarital sex, but their desires, fantasies, and
motivations for this form of sex are less intense on average than are men's. Mark Twain observed
that "many men are goats and can't help committing adultery when they get a chance; whereas there
are numbers of men who, by temperament, can keep their purity and let an opportunity go by if the
woman lacks in attractiveness." for significan percentage of men extramarital sex remains a large
component of desires throughout life.
In the Kinsey report on the lifetime incidence of extramarital coitus from age sixteen through
age sixty, affairs by husbands surpass those by wives at every age. Fully 37% of married
men in the youngest age bracket of sixteen to twenty report at least one affair, in contrast to a
mere 6% of comparably aged wives. The incidence of affairs by husbands remains relatively constant
over the years, with only a slight downward trend in the later years. Instead, affairs make up
a significant proportion of the men's sexual outlets at every age throughout their life.
Extramarital sex comprises about a fifth of these men's sexual outlets between ages sixteen and
thirty-five. For men who engage in extramarital sex with companions and prostitutes, these forms of
sex become increasingly important with age and occur at the expense of sex with their wives, which
becomes a smaller and smaller fraction of their total. Given our knowledge of men's evolved sexual
psychology, it is likely that the increase in the importance of extramarital sex for these men
results from boredom at repeating sex with the same partner or from a wife's decreasing sexual
attractiveness to the husband as a result of her increasing age.
Men's patterns of extramarital sex differ from those of women. More men who are happily married
can engage in extramarital sex without emotional involvement and without the feeling that their
marriages are unsatisfactory. On average, men engage in sex outside their marriage both more often
and more consistently than women over their lifetime. In one study, 48% of American men
express a desire to engage in extramarital sex; the comparable figure for women is only 5%. In
another study of marital happiness among 769 American men and 770 American women, 72% of men, but
only 27% of women, admit that they sometimes experience a desire for extramarital intercourse. A
study of working-class Germans reveals similar tendencies: 46% of married men but only 6% of married
women acknowledge that they would take advantage of a casual sexual opportunity with someone
attractive if it was provided.
The incidence of extramarital sex by women shows a marked trend with age. As men's intense mate
guarding lessens with age, middle aged women become less constrained by their husbands in their
sexual behavior with other men. Reliable information on extramarital affairs is difficult to
come by. But from what we know, the behavior is rare among the youngest wives, being acknowledged by
only 6% of wives at ages sixteen to twenty and about 9% of them at ages twenty-one to twenty-five.
The incidence of extramarital affairs goes up to 14% of women at ages twenty-six to thirty and
hits a peak of 17% of women between ages thirty-one and forty. After the late thirties and
early forties, extramarital sex by women declines steadily, acknowledged by 6% of women at ages
fifty-one to fifty-five and only 4% of them at ages fifty-six to sixty. Thus, there is a curvilinear
relationship between age and affairs for women: affairs are low when women are both most and least
reproductively valuable, but high toward the end of their reproductive years.
For women happiness in marriage is a strong correlating factor: in one study only 33% of women
who have affairs believe that their marriages are happy, whereas 56% of men who have extramarital
sex consider their marriages to be happy. The fact that women who have affairs are more likely to be
unhappy in their marriages and more likely to be emotionally involved with the extramarital partner
suggests that they may be using their affairs for the purpose of changing mates. Fully 72% of
women but only 51% of men are motivated by emotional commitment or long-term love rather than sexual
desires in their extramarital dalliances. But another study found that men who have affairs are
twice as likely as women to think of the involvement as purely sexual, devoid of emotional
Conflicts in marriage that experience "love triangle" situation include:
- Attitudes are negative
- Frequent unresolved misunderstandings and arguments occur
- Morale is low
- Spouses do not like working to/spending time together
- Spouses do not feel they are making a contribution
- Spouses feel they are not respected or valued
- Spouses feel unsafe
- Spouse are talking about other behind his/her back
- Tension is high
Another factor in many instances of infidelity it that "monogamous marriage" as an
contradicts neoliberal ideology and can't be not properly adjusted to neoliberal society, which
commodify everything including love and views marriage as a contract entered by two individuals
within some virtual "marketplace" when both individuals agree on the "price", with "tying the knot"
as a final compromise. Among the most typical issues that cause such a conflict we can list the following:
- Neoliberal culture of "wolf-eat-wolf" individualism and narcissism.
In this context infidelity is viewed not as betrayal of trust, which in reality it is, but as an
attempt of self-fulfillment.
- Excessive, infused by Hollywood and romantic novels unrealistic expectations.
Hollywood provides a very idealized and
romanticized view of love. to the extent that a question arise "Is not Hollywood-style romantic love,
in reality, a flavor of masochism ? "
- Narcissism, egoism, self-centerness, self indulgence.
- The grass looks greener on the other side, but it does
not necessarily holds to be
- Midlife crisis. very real if you are 40 something.
As relationships develop, persons become very sensitive to the
potential for loss. Ironically, this may be more salient in relationships when stability is not
firmly established (dating) than it is later in relationships when passion is blunted and commitment
is well entrenched. This paradox might be due to the fact that most individuals realize that, in
general, dating relationships are unstable. Most premarital relationships are terminated prior to
marriage, and divorce rates in first two years of marriage are reported to be high. Furthermore,
persons are told in the popular media that extramarital relationships are common. Accordingly, even
when there is no clear evidence of extramarital relationships, some persons will display, to
varying degrees, the following qualities: worrying, vigilance, suspiciousness, mistrust, snooping,
testing the relationship, and attempting to control the partner's behavior. which are all summarized
under the term of jealousy. Also called suspicious jealousy and we prefer this term
to distinguish it from reactive (after the fact) jealousy.
Suspicious jealousy represents a rather consistent pattern of behaviors and feelings, and it is
most prevalent among individuals with low self-esteem who are relatively dependent upon and insecure
about their relationships. Jealousy over minor events may be construed as a sign of love, and it
forewarns other spouse of possible consequences, if an extramarital relationship were
perpetrated. In movie
Shall We Dance the wife hired detective to find out where her husband spends nights.
Although suspicious jealousy usually occurs in the absence of clear, unequivocal signs of
extramarital involvement (see , there may be circumstantial evidence to support such jealousy. Minor
events, such as watching the partner engage in an animated discussion with someone of the opposite
sex, the partner being late, and telephone calls that are wrong numbers can result in worrying,
agitation, and apprehension. Intensity depends of types of specific activities. for example in the
spouse's absence spending an evening at an opposite-sex married friend's home and going
to a movie with that couple are more acceptable then having dinner in a secluded place, dancing with
somebody else spouse without the other spouse present, spending type in a secluded cabin, and
Suspicious jealousy is not necessarily unhealthy jealousy. When there
is a pattern of minor incidents suggesting that the partner might be involved with someone else,
vigilance to determine what is happening may be a prudent response that reflects reasonable concern
and good strategies to cope with the situation. Furthermore, emotional reactions to these events may
forewarn the partner of what will happen if them are serious transgressions and thereby serve the
role of preventing extramarital involvements.
On the other hand, suspicious jealousy may be self-defeating and may
negatively affect the person's self-esteem. In its most extreme forms, suspicious jealousy may be
associated with paranoid personality disorder. Furthermore, chronic suspiciousness and mistrust that
fails to abate in the absence of actual major jealousy-evoking events can disrupt the relationship.
Attempts to control the partner's behavior and deter that which the person had no intention of doing
anyway may create a cycle of reactance, resentment, counteraccusation, counterthreat, and
provocation. Finally, continually protesting minor transgressions in an attempt to warn the partner
of one's resolve may seriously attenuate relationship outcomes.
A dependent individual in a premarital relationship will not only be
relatively more jealous: Occasionally, it seems, such a person will intentionally induce jealousy in
the partner. The most frequent reasons for doing so were to test the relationship (e.g., "to see if
he still cared") and to increase specific rewards (e.g., "wanting more attention"). White's study
also showed that females were more likely than males to induce jealousy, particularly females who
thought they were relatively more involved in the relationship than their partners. This is more
typical for dating period. During this period induction of jealousy took the form of exaggerating or
discussing an attraction to someone else, flirting, and actually dating others.
Traditional marriage is a legal, social, economic, and emotional contract. It is also a contract
for sexual fidelity. However, history indicates that the sanctity of this bonding has always been
tenuous, even prior to the religious prohibitions most clearly seen in the Judeo-Christian creed
(paradoxically Romantic love, which serves as the basis for marriage in our Western culture, was the
feeling reserved for one's mistress in medieval Europe during the period of arranged marriages )
The intensity of reactive jealousy also serves as a protest and a punishment to the transgressing
partner. . Such a response might prevent subsequent incidents and preserve the relationship.
However, fervent and vicious reactions can antagonize the partner and destroy the relationship.
Jealousy seems, in part, to serve as the glue that helps maintain the couple as a couple. On the
other hand, it can be the explosive force that destroys the couple and alienates the persons from
each other. Whatever the consequences, jealousy will reliably surface whenever there are sexual
affairs that violate norms of exclusivity in intimate relationships.
Disclosure of an affair creates the need for the offending person to explain the
relationship to the spouse. Both justifications and excuses are used to explain affairs.
Justifications are aimed at protecting one's self-image through accepting responsibility but
attenuating the negative consequences (e.g., "there is nothing wrong with an occasional affair when
the loyalty to the marriage remains intact"). Excuses acknowledge the negative consequences but deny
personal responsibility for the event (e.g., "I was just drunk and depressed"). Atwater found that,
for women, justifications were more frequent than excuses. The most frequently mentioned
justifications for affairs were, in descending frequency: dissatisfaction with the relationship,
boredom, revenge, anger or jealousy, being unsure of the relationship, and variety. Females were
more likely than males to mention relationship dissatisfaction as a reason, whereas males were more
likely than females to mention lack of communication and sexual incompatibility. The most frequently
mentioned reaction were, in descending order: terminate the relationship, confront and find out the
reason, talk it over, consider terminating the relationship, and work to improve the relationship.
Females were more likely than males to indicate that they would discuss the problem with the
partner. The most common justification was self-fulfillment. This is consistent with Glass and
Wright's ( 1985) conclusion that women's extramarital affairs were more oriented toward emotional
issues, whereas for men, affairs were more sexually oriented. Hupka, Jung, and Silverthorn ( 1987)
showed that, in addition to justifications and excuses, apologies (e.g., "I don't know what got into
me") were also used to explain affairs, when the intent was to maintain the relationship.
Extramarital relations may result not only from general marital processes that influence
satisfaction but also from specific behaviors by the partner. Buunk ( 1982) found a strong
correlation between inclinations toward extramarital relations and the readiness to tolerate the
behavior in the spouse. Such reciprocity may take the form of revenge ("You did it so I'll do it")
or inducement ("I'll let you do it so that I can do it").
Much depends on relative dependency of the partner in the relationship. Relative dependency
refers to the degree to which one is more or less dependent upon the relationship, compared to the
partner. The less dependent person in a couple is assumed to have more rewarding activities outside
the present relationship, more attractive alternative relationships, and therefore has more power in
the relationship. The frequency and intensity of jealousy were found to be greater to the degree
that a person was attracted to the other person, to the degree that a person was dependent upon the
relationship, and to the degree that a person was more involved than the partner
My Cheating Heart
What Causes Infidelity - Psychology Tomorrow MagazinePsychology Tomorrow Magazine
Here are six things I believe everyone can do in order to minimize the risk of infidelity:
Do The Work It Takes To Know Yourself As A Sexual Person.
Read books, take a workshop, talk to a counselor. Study your sexuality as you would any other
subject you were trying to master. Increase your own awareness about what you like and don’t like;
what you fantasize about; how you like to be touched and where; what you would like to try.
Communicate To Your Partner Who You Are Sexually.
Don’t assume that they know! Have an honest conversation at a time when you both feel relaxed
and close. If a tool would facilitate the conversation or if you need some structure around it, take
a questionnaire together and compare answers.
Ask Questions And Listen To Who They Are As A Sexual Person.
Don’t assume that you know! Unless you have asked them and they feel safe in answering, you probably
don’t know all of it. Keep in mind, it may be difficult for your partner to share their sexual desires
and fantasies with you if they are not used to talking about sex or if they are fearful that their
answers will hurt or offend you. Make sure that when you do ask, you are ready for whatever the answers
may be. Do your best to be encouraging and supportive.
Keep An Open Mind And Heart. Be Willing To Try New Things Together.
Try not to judge! In the realm of sexuality, almost anything goes (I say “almost” because the
one caveat is that “anything” must be consensual). People’s sexual desires and expressions are hugely
varied, and you should avoid making assumptions about what they mean as it is unique to each individual.
Many people fantasize about things they are actually not interested in trying in real life or are
only willing to try within the safety of their relationship.
Instead Of Distracting Yourself And Avoiding The Problem, Try To Remain Present And Engaged.
Affairs are distractions, and people distract themselves when they are bored or unhappy. An affair
is a “quick fix” with a long-term consequence, even if not discovered. Do due diligence in your personal
work. You owe it to yourself and to your partner.
Be Honest: Honest With Yourself And Honest With Your Partner.
Honesty early on (before an affair) about your concerns can create an opening for a new level
of intimacy. It can be hard to talk about the fact that you are unhappy with the sex in your relationship
or that you are finding yourself attracted to another person. Too many couples avoid the topic of
sex, especially when it has been a long period of time since partners have had sex because the subject
feels too tense and overwhelming. Honesty after an affair will demonstrate accountability and remorse.
Many partners who “discover” an affair say that the discovery and the deception were the worst part.
So what happens when an infidelity has taken place? The bottom line is that some couples are able
to make it through an affair and some aren’t. Those who do make it through tend to possess two qualities:
a genuine commitment to the relationship and a willingness to show remorse and accountability on
the part of the person who has acted outside of the implicit and explicit relationship agreements.
Also necessary is a willingness to forgive (this may take some time) by the person who feels betrayed.
For the person who had the affair, a first stance when faced with the discovery of the truth and
the potential loss of their relationship may be defensiveness or blame, masking their true feelings
of guilt, shame, and fear. This partner MUST acknowledge that it was their choice and their choice
alone to have an affair, and that nothing, including a lack of sex or disconnection from their partner,
justifies their betrayal. This partner can expect to be in for some rough times ahead. A betrayed
partner will most likely want details; many details, ALL details, and be terrified of new information
being discovered, leaving them in a locked place of terror, anger, and hurt. I believe that it is
best to honor their request for information as it is the first step to rebuilding trust. They will
also tend to question all aspects of what they believed to be true for the relationship, looking
back over time with a view now clouded by the idea that what they believed to be truth in one area
of their relationship was not truth, and so surely there are other areas in which similarly they
were living a lie. Perhaps that even the whole relationship and who their partner presented themselves
as being is a lie.
A couples counselor will be helpful in navigating these very difficult conversations. Both partners
can also benefit from individual therapy to have a space that they can share their feelings without
filter. Books such as After the Affair: Healing the Pain and Rebuilding Trust When a Partner
Has Been Unfaithful by
Janis Abrahms Spring, PhD,
can also help couples navigate this trespass and gain comfort from hearing the stories of those who
have been through a similar ordeal, as well as knowledge about what their partner may be feeling.
Ultimately, it is rarely the act of sex outside of a relationship that makes or breaks a couple’s
ability to survive an infidelity. It is the meaning we attach to the act and the way we proceed with
the information once it has been made known.
- [Jul 18, 2017] A man does not want anything they get too easy ( Jul 18, 2017 | awfulavalanche.wordpress.com )
- [Mar 03, 2017] Charge of epstein procuring underaged girls for sex ( Mar 03, 2017 | cannonfire.blogspot.ca"> )
- [Feb 26, 2017] Townhall 'Why the MSM Is Ignoring Trump's Sex Trafficking Busts' - Breitbart ( Feb 26, 2017 | www.breitbart.com )
- [Feb 26, 2017] the code words like "pizza", "cheese", "hotdog", "pasta", etc. are from an FBI list of code words commonly used by pedophiles. ( Feb 26, 2017 | kunstler.com )
- [Feb 15, 2017] Proof of sexual misconduct accumulated by the deep state makes it possible to dictate the votes of Congress, decisions of judges and administrators ( thesaker.is )
- [Jan 24, 2017] Pizzagate - The Unz Review by Aedon Cassiel ( Dec 02, 2016 | www.unz.com )
- [Jan 24, 2017] That a person with the stature of being a former president would hang around with a low-life like Epstein is really telling. He flew perhaps twenty-seven times on Epsteins plane which makes him more than just a passing acquaintance. Birds of a feather flock together. ( Jan 24, 2017 | www.unz.com )
- [Jan 24, 2017] Precedents for Pizzagate - The Unz Review ( Jan 24, 2017 | www.unz.com )
- [Jan 18, 2017] It was the Left who defended Bill Clinton in the whole Monica Madness era (and before). Mainstream media and "centrist" Democrats, were falling all over themselves to condemn Bill Clinton and his nasty penis, Ken Starr was treated as the second coming of Jesus ( Jan 18, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com )
- [Jan 17, 2017] Jeffrey Epsteins Political and Sex Trafficking Networks Plus Help me find a Miami-based Cuban by Ken Silverstein ( Jan 17, 2017 | washingtonbabylon.com )
- [Dec 04, 2016] There is a vengeful, spiteful ugliness that some women have for other women. Hillary is just one of those women ( Feb 16, 2016 | dailymail.co.uk )
- [Nov 21, 2016] Belgiums Dutroux Pedophile, Child Rape Affair A Road Map for Deep-State Criminality ( Nov 20, 2016 | www.newnationalist.net )
- [Nov 06, 2016] Incarceration in the United States ( Nov 06, 2016 | en.wikipedia.org )
- [Nov 03, 2016] BREAKING BOMBSHELL NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails Money Laundering, Sex Crimes with Children, Child Exploitation ( Nov 02, 2016 | truepundit.com )
- [Nov 03, 2016] Steve Pieczenik additional video on Lolita express ( Nov 03, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com )
- [Oct 29, 2016] The Nuclear Option - Wikileaks Reveals Even Hillarys Own Staff Knows Truth Shes Psychotic ( Oct 29, 2016 | www.breitbart.com )
- [Oct 29, 2016] Was Bill Clinton stoned yesterday in Arizona ( Oct 29, 2016 | www.fireandreamitchell.com )
- [Oct 20, 2016] The Billionaire Pedophile Who Could Bring Down Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton by Brandy Zadrozny ( Jul 30, 2016 | www.thedailybeast.com )
- [Oct 19, 2016] Hillary Fixer Breaks Ranks I Arranged Sex Trysts For Her - With Men WOMEN National Enquirer ( Oct 18, 2016 | www.nationalenquirer.com )
- [Oct 18, 2016] BREAKING Hillary LESBIAN Sex Scandal Tapes To Be Released (GROSS)... THIS IS MASSIVE ( Oct 17, 2016 | www.americasfreedomfighters.com )
- [Oct 18, 2016] Hillary to come out as lesbian in October Surprise ( Oct 18, 2016 | fellowshipoftheminds.com )
- [Oct 17, 2016] Broaddrick on evil Clinton rape I could never forgive them ( Oct 17, 2016 | www.wnd.com )
- [Oct 17, 2016] Lead Lewinsky Scandal Reporter Says NBC Is Sitting On Devastating Tape With Juanita Broaddrick ( Oct 17, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com )
- [Oct 11, 2016] Paul Krugman: Predators in Arms ( Oct 11, 2016 | economistsview.typepad.com )
- [Oct 09, 2016] Lolita Express book will be released Monday detailing the exploits of the infamous billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein ( Oct 09, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com )
- [Sep 22, 2016] 6 Signs Your Spouse Has Checked Out Of Your Marriage Huffington Post ( Mar 14, 2016 | www.huffingtonpost.com )
- [Sep 14, 2016] I wonder if Bill Clinton got AIDS ( Sep 14, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com )
- [Sep 13, 2016] Bill Clinton Was Here The Elite One-Percent's 'Orgy Island' Exposed Zero Hedge ( Sep 13, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com )
- [Sep 10, 2016] Surviving the Storm - Divorcing a Narcissist ( May 02, 2016 | dalkeithpress.com )
- [Sep 09, 2016] The Secret Life of Bill Clinton The Unreported Stories ( www.amazon.com )
- [Aug 24, 2016]
Hillary Clintons Lesbian Past Is Exposed (
- [Aug 12, 2016]
Meet the Hookers for Hillary (
The Daily Beast )
- [Aug 06, 2016] Andrew Bacevich The 60-Year Decay of American Politics ( www.nakedcapitalism.com )
- [Aug 05, 2016] Meet Neocon "Doughnut Dolly" Victoria Nuland by Wayne MADSEN ( 18.12.2013 | www.strategic-culture.org )
- [Aug 05, 2016] Nuland is a Democrat? Boy they let anybody in ( www.nakedcapitalism.com )
- [Aug 05, 2016] Obama's Failed Foreign Policy Change The American Conservative by Philip Giraldi ( www.theamericanconservative.com )
- [Aug 05, 2016] Clinton's Hawk-in-Waiting The American Conservative by Philip Giraldi ( May 19, 2016 | www.theamericanconservative.com )
- [Aug 01, 2016] Campaign Cover-Up? Hillary Clinton Facing 'Mounting Health Issues,' Political Insider Claims: 'Blinding Headaches,' Near-Fainting Fits Worse! by Radar Staff ( radaronline.com )
- [Aug 01, 2016] Let Me Remind You Fuckers Who I Am ( Medium )
- [Aug 01, 2016]
Epstein And The Lolita Express ( winteractionables.com )
- [Jul 28, 2016] Cosmopolitan Magazine The Clintons Are "Good Marriage Role Models" ( www.newsbusters.org )
- [Jul 25, 2016]
Clinton left his secret service goons behind when he went on Lolita jet trips
- [Jul 03, 2016] Claims by bodyguard about Monica Lewinsky hurt Hillary Clintons White House bid ( Daily Mail Online )
- [Jun 28, 2016] Republicans Are Pushing a New Clinton Sex Scandal ( Jan 07, 2015 | motherjones.com )
- [Jun 25, 2016] Anthony Weiner's Dirty Business Reveals The Sad State Of Sanitized Sex ( July 30, 2013 | huffingtonpost.com )
- [Jun 25, 2016] A French Point of View on Anthony Weiner's Sexting Scandal by Laurent-David Samama ( Aug 1, 2013 | www.huffingtonpost.com )
- [Jun 20, 2016] The Gifts of Imperfection Let Go of Who You Think Youre Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are Brene Brown 9781592858491 A ( www.amazon.com )
- [Jun 05, 2016] Stand By Your Man
- [Jun 05, 2016] I Beg Your Pardon, I Never Promised You A Rose Garden
- [May 25, 2016] Oscar Wilde on Love
- [May 17, 2016] Hillary Clinton Unbelievably Nasty, Mean Enabler Of Pervy Prez Bill, Trump Slams ( May 17, 2016 | radaronline.com )
- [May 17, 2016] 6 Warning Signs Youre Dating a Narcissist ( Jan 17, 2015 | www.huffingtonpost.com )
- [May 17, 2016] Are You Dating a Narcissist ( www.huffingtonpost.com )
- [May 17, 2016] 10 Signs Youre In Love With A Narcopath ( www.huffingtonpost.com )
- [May 17, 2016] 7 Strategies for Dealing With the Narcissist You Love ( Jun 23, 2014 www.huffingtonpost.com )
- [May 17, 2016] Emotion-phobia by Dr. Craig Malkin ( www.huffingtonpost.com )
- [May 16, 2016] Stockholm Syndrome The Psychological Mystery of Loving an Abuser, Page 1 ( counsellingresource.com )
- [Apr 13, 2016] Gone Girl ( Amazon.com )
- [Apr 13, 2016] What an adulterous spouse needs to do to restore his or her marriage ( March 15, 2016 )
- MommyReviewer, February 26, 2014
- [Apr 13, 2016] After the Affair, Updated Second Edition Healing the Pain and Rebuilding Trust When a Partner Has Been Unfaithful
- I Love You But I Dont Trust You The Complete Guide to Restoring Trust in Your Relationship by Mira Kirshenba
- [Apr 13, 2016] The Monogamy Myth A Personal Handbook for Recovering from Affairs - Kindle edition by Peggy Vaughan. Health, Fitness & Dieting
- [Apr 11, 2015] Judge orders Prince Andrew sex allegations struck from court record ( Apr 07, 2015 | The Guardian )
- [Oct 28, 2014] Hillary Clinton's Lesbian Past Is Exposed ( mrconservative.com )
July 17, 2017 at 3:29 pm Mark: Blame me, I was the one who urged everybody to
engage and fight against Matt.
Against those who said, "Ach Gewahlte, just ignore this noodge "
People can disagree with my reasoning, but I figured if somebody shows up
spoling for a fight, then they should get what they ask for.
It's like, if you were in a space station, and an energetic monster suddenly
starts zipping around acting hostile, then you should take note and not ignore
another plug for one of my blogposts, a movie review.
Sorry, I coundn't resist!
As Blanche Dubois used to say: "Attention must be paid."
Underaged sex with Alan Dershowitz and Prince Andrew...and Bill Clinton...? (If the claims
are true, Hillary is OVER.)
A court filing in a civil case in Florida last week included new allegations against Jeffrey
E. Epstein, a businessman who pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution, and two other high-profile
men: a member of the British Royal family and an American lawyer.
Jeffrey Epstein is not just a businessman. He's a billionaire, and he has already been convicted
of soliciting underaged prostitution.
The motion filed in United States District Court in the Southern District of Florida alleges
that Mr. Epstein forced a teenage girl to have sexual relations with several men, including
Prince Andrew, Queen Elizabeth's second son, and Alan M. Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at
Harvard Law School. Both men have denied the allegations.
About the royal: Some of you may argue that if there was an encounter, the Prince may have been
unaware of the girl's age. He has people . People who make arrangements for him. One can
see how such a fellow might hear the same knock on the door that Neil Bush once heard. Perhaps,
upon opening the door, his first reaction was something other than "May I see your ID, Miss?"
That scenario seems plausible. However, as we shall see, that scenario is not what
has been alleged.
We will get to the Prince in a bit. For now, let's focus on Dershowitz.
On Saturday, Mr. Dershowitz said he "categorically and unequivocally"
denied all of the allegations. He said he would file disbarment proceedings against the lawyers
who filed the motion, Bradley J. Edwards, a lawyer in Florida, and Paul G. Cassell, a former
federal judge and a law professor at the University of Utah.
The very predictability of that furious reaction means that no lawyer would have filed such charges
against Dershowitz frivolously. Cassell has an impressive resume. He's not a young go-getter out
to make a name for himself.
"They are lying deliberately, and I will not stop until they're disbarred," Mr. Dershowitz
said in a phone interview.
I understand that there are a lot of women who have made iffy claims against famous people. But
this case seems different. Epstein has already pled guilty. Moreover, Dershowitz was part of Epstein's
The full court filing was published on
a couple of days ago. We learn that the complainant, Jane Doe #3, was 15 years of age,and
that she was recruited by an Epstein associate named Ghislaine Maxwell, daughter of Robert Maxwell
(the late news tycoon and known Mossad asset). The photo to the left shows the Prince with the
girl who seems to have been Jane Doe #3. Allegedly, the shot was taken by Epstein. (Note: In what
follows, the term NPA refers to non-prosecution agreement .)
Epstein then became enamored with Jane Doe #3, and with the assistance of Maxwell converted
her into what is commonly referred to as a "sex slave." Epstein kept Jane Doe #3 as his sex
slave from about 1999 through 2002, when she managed to escape to a foreign country and hide
out from Epstein and his co-conspirators for years. From 1999 and 2002, Epstein frequently
sexually abused Jane Doe #3, not only in West Palm Beach but also in New York, New Mexico,
the U.S. Virgin Islands, in international airspace on Epstein's private planes, and elsewhere.
There's a third named participant in these doings, one Jean Luc Brunel, a close Epstein friend
and a scout for various modelling agencies.
Epstein also sexually trafficked the then-minor Jane Doe, making her available for sex to politically-connected
and financially-powerful people. Epstein's purposes in "lending" Jane Doe (along with other
young girls) to such powerful people were to ingratiate himself with them for business, personal,
political and financial gain, as well as to obtain potential blackmail information.
One such powerful individual that Epstein forced then-minor Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations
with was former Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, a close friend of Epstein's and well-known
defense attorney. Epstein required Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with Dershowiz on numerous
occasions while she was a minor, not only in Flroida but also on private planes, in New York,
New Mexico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. In addition to being a participant in the abuse of
Jane Doe #3 and other minors, Dershowitz was an eye-witness to the sexual abuse of many other
minors by Epstein and several of Epstein's co-conspirators. Dershowitz would later play a significant
role in negotiating the NPA on Esptein's behalf. Indeed, Dershowitz helped negotiate an agreement
that provided immunity from federal prosecution in the Southern District of Florida not only
to Epstein, but also to "any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." NPA at 5. Thus, Dershowitz
helped negotiate an agreement with a provision that provided protection for himself against
criminal prosecution in Florida for sexually abusing Jane Doe #3. Because this broad immunity
would have been controversial if disclosed, Dershowitz (along with other memebers of Epstein's
defense team) and the Government tried to keep the immunity provision secret from all of Epstein's
victims and the general public, even though such secrecy violated the Crime Victims' Rights
He would bring young girls (ranging from ages as young as twelve) to the United States for
sexual purposes and farm them out to his friends, especially Epstein. Brunel would offer the
girls "modeling" jobs. Many of the girls came from poor countries or impoverished backgrounds,
and he lured them in with a promise of making good money.
The Government was well aware of Jane Doe #3 when it was negotiating the NPA, as it listed
her as a victim in the attachment to the NPA. Moreover, even a rudimentary investigation of
Jane Doe #3's relationship with Epstein would have revealed the fact that she had been trafficked
throughout the United States and internationally for sexual purposes. Nonetheless, the Government
secretly negotiated a non-prosecution agreement with Epstein precluding any Federal prosecution
in the Southern District of Florida of Epstein and his co-conspirators. As with Jane Doe #1
and Jane Doe #2, the Government concealed the non-prosecution agreement from Jane Doe #3 --
all in violation of her rights under the CVRA -- to avoid Jane Doe #3 from raising powerful
objections to the NPA that would have shed tremendous light on Epstein and other powerful individuals
that would likely have prevented it from being conlcuded in the secretive manner in which it
The document also mentions a Jane Doe #4, an impoverished sixteen year old who was told that she
could make $300 by giving a "massage" to an old man in Palm Beach.
This matter seems very serious. We have too many details, too many corroborating witnesses (in
the form of four Jane Does). We have a photo. We have reports of the existence of many, many more
photos. The hugger-mugger involving the NPA seems downright ghastly -- yet all too credible.
Frankly, I would not rule out the possibility that Epstein was working for an intelligence agency
-- either Mossad or one of our own. The Maxwell connection points to Mossad.
This whole business has "honeytrap" written all over it.
The Clinton connection.
Daily Mail discloses that one of Epstein's, er, protegees was a woman named Johanna Sjoberg.
Since the story links her to Prince Andrew, it is tempting suppose that she is the aforementioned
Jane Doe #3. However, British newspapers have named another young woman, Virginia Roberts.
Miss Sjoberg worked for Epstein for four years, often massaging him as he lay on a couch in
his giant bathroom making phone calls to friends such as Bill Clinton and Cate Blanchett.
The Prince strongly denies any claim of impropriety, of course.
He kept a little black book, containing the numbers of all his masseuses by a phone in the
bathroom, she said. She left after he started becoming 'more aggressive' in his demands that
she 'do sexual things to him'.
She said she was aware that the girls recruited by Epstein and his acolytes were not paid just
for massages but for 'sexual favours'.
Virginia Roberts revealed that as a 17-year-old 'erotic masseuse', she was flown by Epstein
to London to meet Prince Andrew,
Miss Sjoberg said: 'I'm not surprised he was sending girls abroad. I just did not think they
were so young.'
What about Epstein and Clinton? Obviously, there is nothing wrong in taking a man's phone call,
even a call from someone like Epstein. However...
Bill Clinton was also named dozens of times in lawsuits against Epstein and was alleged to
have flown on his private jet more than 10 times.
Let's make the obvious point. If there is any evidence of wrongdoing against Bill Clinton, then
Hillary's chances at the nomination are over . A candidacy can withstand many things, but
a statutory rape scandal involving one's spouse? No.
Flight logs in lawsuits detailed that between 2002 and 2005 the former US President traveled
around the world courtesy of his friend and stopped at Epstein's Caribbean island Little St
James where young girls were supposedly kept as sex slaves.
Clinton was deemed to be so close to Epstein that he was nearly deposed during the investigation
into his paedophilia.
Before he was jailed Epstein's other acquaintances are said to have been former Israeli Prime
Minister Ehud Barak; former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson; and former Treasury Secretary
More on the Clinton link
Over the years, the casually-dressed, globe-trotting financier, who was said to log more than
600 flying hours a year, has been linked with Bill Clinton, Kevin Spacey, Chris Tucker and
Manhattan-London society figure Ghislaine Maxwell, daughter of the late media titan Robert
Epstein reportedly flew Tucker and Spacey to Africa on his private jet as part of a charitable
endeavour. Clinton, meanwhile, flew on multiple occasions in the same plane to Epstein's private
Caribbean island, Little St James, between 2002 and 2005 as he developed his philanthropic
post-presidential career. It would later be alleged in court that Epstein organised orgies
on that same private island in the US Virgin Islands.
Reports in the US media say many of the A-list names broke off any links with the former maths
teacher after his arrest and conviction in 2008 of having sex with an underage girl whom he
had solicited. His arrest followed an 11-month undercover investigation at a mansion in Florida's
Palm Beach that Epstein owned.
The story goes on to give much useful information about Epstein's business dealings.
In 2008, he pleaded guilty to a single charge of soliciting prostitution and was handed a 18-month
jail sentence. He served 13 months in jail and was obliged to register as a sex offender. A
2011 report in the New York Post said that he celebrated his release from jail and his return
to a property he maintains in New York – a 45,000-sq-foot eight-storey mansion on East 71st
Street – with Prince Andrew.
The financier, who was jailed for 18 months in 2008 after pleading guilty to solicitation for
prostitution, kept a sickening stash of images on a computer seized at his Palm Beach mansion
The six-year-old papers, seen by the Sunday People, state: "Some of the photographs in the
defendant's possession were taken with hidden cameras set up in [Epstein's] home in Palm Beach.
"On the Day of his arrest, police found two hidden cameras and photographs of underage girls
on a computer in the defendant's home.
"[He] may have taken lewd photographs of Jane Doe 102 with his hidden cameras and transported
[them] to his other residences and elsewhere."
Court papers also allege that Maxwell presented nude pictures of her she had taken herself
to Epstein as a birthday present.
And now let's play our game: Who was that Prime Minister?
They add that Roberts' claims that she was forced to tell Epstein all about her sexual encounters
so he could use the information to "blackmail" the royal.
She further claims she was sex-trafficked to "many other powerful men, including numerous prominent
American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign presidents, a well known Prime
Minister, and other world leaders".
To- neeeeee...! If that's you, you're gonna have to say so many rosaries that even the
Virgin Mary will get sick of hearing your voice.
This scandal places our right-wing media in a bind. Obviously, the right-wingers will want to
leap on anything that dirties the Clinton name. On the other hand, anything that reeks of Mossad
involvement is untouchable.
"... Liz Crokin of Townhall.com recently published an article titled "Why the MSM Is Ignoring Trump's Sex Trafficking Busts", discussing the arrests of sex criminals under Donald Trump's presidency and why it has been underreported by mainstream outlets. ..."
Liz Crokin of Townhall.com recently
published an article
titled "Why the MSM Is Ignoring Trump's Sex Trafficking
Busts", discussing the arrests of sex criminals under Donald Trump's presidency
and why it has been underreported by mainstream outlets.
Since President Donald Trump has been sworn in on Jan. 20, authorities have
arrested an unprecedented number of sexual predators involved in child sex
trafficking rings in the United States. This should be one of the biggest
stories in the national news. Instead, the mainstream media has barely, if at
all, covered any of these mass pedophile arrests. This begs the question – why?
SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER
As a strong advocate for sex crime victims, I've been closely following the
pedophile arrests since Trump took office. There have been a staggering
1,500-plus arrests in one short month; compare that to
less than 400 sex trafficking-related arrests in 2014 according to the FBI
It's been clear to me for awhile that Trump would make human trafficking a top
priority. On October 8, 2012, Trump tweeted: 'Got to do something about these
missing children grabbed by the perverts. Too many incidents – fast trial,
February 24, 2017 at 9:51
Apparently, the code words like "pizza", "cheese", "hotdog", "pasta", etc. are
from an FBI list of code words commonly used by pedophiles. These words appear
in the Podesta emails. They're not just found in the Podesta emails.
On page 20, it says that the strongest indicator of a pedophile is a person
who collects child pornography. John Podesta's brother collected sexually
bizarre and sadistic photos of young children.
February 24, 2017 at
Good point, Pucker. All the pro-Podesta apologists can't explain away the
code language. Especially, disturbing are remarks (I think by owner James
Alefantis) about 4 sick pizzas left over from the last session on sale for
$1000. Be sure and dispose of them properly."
Then there's Laura Silsby
rescued from a Haitian jail by the Clintons after being caught trafficking
in children for prostitution.
Either JHK can't believe that such blatant evil exists in the world or
he's pimping for that well entrenched crowd.
Log in to Reply
24, 2017 at 5:01 pm
I have pages of Word docs and have listened to too many facts,
You Tube, Titus Frost, especially hhis talk and
display of sick 'art' on his PIZZA BRAIN –investigated.
Why is Katy Perry and the other bimbo, Miley, wearing Pizza
WHAT IS PIZZAGATE
CHILD SEX SLAVERY
BILL CLINTON SEX SCANDAL
BILL CLINTON PEDOPHILIA
BILL CLINTON SEX SLAVE ISLAND
BILL CLINTON ORGY ISLAND
LAURA SILSBY HAITi CHILD TRAFFICKING
CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING
THE CLINTON FOUNDATION
ROGER CLINTON COCAINE
ROGER CLINTON PRESIDENTIAL PARDON
DAN LASATER PRESIDENTIAL PARDON
END TIMES NEWS REPORT
COMET PING PONG
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
24, 2017 at 7:47 pm
The utilization of "Conspiracy theorist" came about after the
common man on the street started waking up to the fact that he was
being screwed by those in power and lied to consistently. Did you
know that during World War II, President Roosevelt, was onboard the
battleship USS Iowa in route to North Africa when it was
"accidently torpedoed" (the fish detonated in the ship's wake and
did not actually impact the ship) by the US destroyer, the William
D. Porter? Well it's the first I am hearing of it so I guess that
these people are pretty good at keeping things quiet when they go
wrong, especially REALLY wrong
I am reading the trilogy of the war by Rick Atkinson, and in the
second book in the series, The Day of Battle, the revelation was
detailed much to my surprise. If our own people can accidently fire
a live torpedo at one of our own battleships, especially the one
that happens to be transporting the standing President of the
United States on it at the time, well there is no telling what
supreme act of incompetence they will pull of next.
Those who rule lie their asses off every damned day and cover up
every damned screw up they create until enough time goes by so that
those that are now in the general public don't give a damn anymore.
You would have to be retarded or on their payroll to believe
on February 14, 2017
· at 5:51 pm UTC
Never mind their sex lives
on February 14, 2017
· at 9:31 pm UTC
@Greg Schofield -
Catastrophic mistake. Proof of sexual misconduct accumulated by the deep state makes it
possible to dictate the votes &c. of Congress, decisions of judges and administrators, &c.
Without a one-time blanket amnesty - however morally revolting - deep state control of government
will endure. If you want to end its control of the ship of state, you must remove its nuclear
option : blackmail (threat of exposure/prosecution/bankruptcy/family impoverishment/dying in
No way around this.
the whole Military Intelligence is rife with pedophilia and sodomy – I can't imagine how Flynn
avoided it – the whole top ranking guys are involved – watch video interview of Kay Griggs
on February 15, 2017
· at 12:33 am UTC
Flynn was probably blackmailed
Good point, but there are many types of amnesty. The first is the amnesty of tolerance, consenting
adult sex mutual or professional, no matter how distasteful or strange, whether adulterous
or not, should be considered private and off the table, but never kiddy-fiddling (actual rather
than fictitious, in the real that is). Publication of tolerated sexual matters should be slammed,
tolerance does not mean condoning, tolerance is what it says tolerating what is not condoned.
on February 15, 2017
· at 2:26 am UTC
That is an amnesty that every civilised nation follows I can't see why the US should not
adopt it as it use to be the case. In Australia we tolerate a lot of things, ex prime minister
Bob Hawke was a notorious womaniser a faithless husband, and his antics were a national laugh.
I also agree blackmail is one of the main weapons and sexuality is one of its mainstays.
Its an puritanical extension of identity politics, I believe toleration is the amnesty. I think
your logic and argument is correct.
Look at the other way, a corrupt person, rips off this person and that, they are a public
menace. A corrupt judge that cheats on taxes, runs fictions companies, uses legal fictions
to launder wealth is defrauding the public as a whole - it is a worse crime. By extension accepting
bribes, favours, preferential treatment, corporate support is to provide inequality before
the law, negate the whole purpose of the judiciary and again is a worse crime than tax fraud
- it is at best a serious conflict of interest (serious enough for removal), but is usually
the accepted method of tilting the judicial system which is, with evidence, criminal. and all
the evidence has to be is that judge has accepted favours and their judgements demonstrate
his gratitude to the social network that provided the favour.
Against this a man whose marriage is happy, but sexually disaster, visits prostitutes or
keeps a mistress, or has fathered a child, is as is nothing - if only it was tolerated whilst
terrible crimes are tolerated instead. Flint's water poisoning is not a scandal it is a criminal
conspiracy that stemmed from a criminal neglect. Banks that seize homes that they purposefully
overvalued and over-lent of which we have a mountain of documents to show this was done purposefully
- the banks are the ones that should suffer, not those desperate to own a house and were sent
to them, by Real Estate agents and developer.
A sea change in attitude, on really simple stuff, has a disproportional effect. And today
that is actually easier to achieve than ever before. My advice is to go to the local churches
and argue that their fixation on sex is producing untold evils in the world and their moral
righteousness is being misdirected. A direct confrontation on theological grounds etc.,
Sorry for the rant your point has been taken on board well and truly.
The first is the amnesty of tolerance, consenting adult sex mutual or professional, no matter
how distasteful or strange, whether adulterous or not, should be considered private and off
the table, but never kiddy-fiddling (actual rather than fictitious, in the real that is).
No rant at all. IMO this is the real elephant in the political livingroom. People are coming
to understand who the orcs are, how they operate and what their objective is. They can be mentioned
now without everything melting down in a storm of terror.
But that they have the whole US government, industry and military (pardon the expression)
"by the balls" is not known so well. Nor is it appreciated that no necessary change can be
expected to gain political traction so long as this iron control continues.
The trial balloon figure of 30% compromised is probably a gross underestimate. And we are
not talking about marital infidelities with secretaries or "escorts" but romping with adolescents
(both sexes but apparently boys are their favorites -
Franklin/Boys Town scandal, Sandusky/Penn State, pizzagate, et al.)
This may not be the place for it but, if not, where ? The "Age of Consent" to sexual relations
in the early US varied, but was often put at 9 years of age (this when puberty occurred around
age 17-18). I see this as no evidence of moral turpitude, but of hard-nosed realism. It was
human nature (as you have the moral decency to note) that people were going to get up to stuff
like that, and there was no need to make bigger issue of it than it was. If it stirred popular
outrage, the perpetrator could expect to be lynched or, where I grew up, shot "in a tragic
accident" during hunting season when he was in the woods. People took care of their own problems.
And gravely mistrusted the judicial system where the ability of wealth and connections (business
relationships and funny handshakes) all but guaranteed impunity.
We now take it for granted (see Goebbels on the power of simple repetition to create "public
opinion") that sex between an adolescent and an adult is the single worst moral outrage imaginable.
In reality (I came to understand it inside the criminal justice system during 20+ years of
working in it), making this a criminal offense, with the age of consent raised to 18 (completely
ridiculous with puberty now happening in elementary school and given the "sexualization" of
children by the orc media) was a strategic coup by the prison-industrial complex. By legally
re-defining this as RAPE (!) and the perpetrator as a RAPIST (!) - well, repeat this often
enough in court with an adolescent well coached by the childrens' services caseworker to see
herself as a VICTIM who was GROOMED by him (when the actual dynamics of the situation were
often the other way around), and a conviction was a prosecutor's easiest victory in an average
month. Not to mention that the threat of sentence piling (pioneered during the Nixon years
- prosecuting the same offense as as many separate crimes as possible, with sentences running
consecutively) all but guaranteed "plea bargains" without even the expense or inconvenience
of a trial.
Prisons love(d) this, as (except for homosexual pederasts) "sex offenders" ( almost 100%
White for some strange reason ) are the most easily managed demographic of all. If a state
prison (or private one) could house 2,500 of them, it could operate with a staff of, probably,10
guards per 8-hour shift.
Now, with the MSM and academia having turned sex with adolescents into the new "forbidden
fruit," the appeal of it to the idle imaginations of the susceptible is multiplied. The whole
thing stinks to high heaven of rank hypocrisy, human exploitation and lives ruined by a system
that exploits human frailties as profit & control opportunities.
Now I am ranting, so will stop here. Noting that there is a LOT more that needs to
be said on this.
"... Mehrdad Amanpour ..."
"... The Sunday Times ..."
"... The Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal first "broke" in the far-right blogosphere.
The accusation they made was that these gangs were being allowed to operate undisturbed because everyone
was too afraid of "appearing racist" to properly investigate them . . . and nobody listened to the far-right
bloggers who were breaking this story because they were afraid of "appearing racist" if they gave any
credibility to those far-right sources, too. Never mind that it seemed paranoid to rely on bloggers
"... the far-right blogosphere turned out to be right. ..."
"... those people ..."
"... The Podesta Emails ..."
"... The evidence is of wildly varying levels of quality, ranging from the pareidolia of "Jesus
is appearing to me in my toast" to "wait, that's actually pretty damn creepy." The mountain of claims
and observations and speculations being compiled in places like Voat and Steemit are too overwhelming
for any one person to hope to wade through sorting wheat from chaff, and while I don't intend to try,
I will summarize some just a little bit of it here. ..."
"... While many of these claims are wild speculation over coincidences (though by no means all of
them are), at some point I think a bunch of weird coincidences involving pedophilia and kids becomes
sort of damning in and of itself. In one email , Podesta is among those being invited to a farm and
the host says, "Bonnie will be Uber Service to transport Ruby, Emerson, and Maeve Luzzatto (11, 9, and
almost 7) so you'll have some further entertainment, and they will be in [the] pool for sure ." ..."
"... Could that have an innocent explanation? Sure, maybe. But inviting a group of adult men to
a gathering and calling young children "further entertainment" while listing their ages is ..."
"... All the Children ..."
"... Here are just a few of the more "institutional" coincidences involved in the story: one of
the men on the small list of people found "liking" photos like this one on these individuals' Instagram
accounts is Arun Rao , the U.S. Attorney Chief, charged with prosecuting cases of child pornography.
"... Besta Pizza, the business whose logo so closely resembled the "little boy lover" logo, is owned
by Andrew Kline , who was one of four attorneys in the Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit of the Department
of Justice. Isn't it just a little ..."
"... The disturbing bit is that the photo uses the tag "#chickenlovers," and "chicken lover" is
in fact ..."
"... Chicken Hawk ..."
"... Furthermore, Tony Podesta's favorite ..."
"... In addition to Jeffrey Epstein, the Podesta brothers are also friends with convicted sex offender
Clement Freud as well as convicted serial child molester Dennis Hastert . ..."
"... And we do know that this has happened before. ..."
"... The Franklin Scandal: A Story of Powerbrokers, Child Abuse & Betrayal ..."
"... how we should respond to the possibility. ..."
Man Motivated by 'Pizzagate' Conspiracy Theory Arrested in Washington Gunfire
Eric Lipton, The New York Times, December 5th, 2016
Beginning in 1997, in an English town of more than 100,000 people, eight Pakistani men stood at
the core of a group involving as many as three hundred suspects who abused, gang-raped, pimped and
trafficked, by the most conservative estimate, well over a thousand of the town's young girls for
The police were eventually accused of not just turning a blind eye, but of
participating in the abuse - even supplying the Pakistani gangs with drugs and tipping them off
when they heard of colleagues searching for children they knew to be in the gangs' possession.
Others were afraid of investigating the gangs or calling attention to their behavior because it
would have been politically incorrect to accuse the town's ethnic community of such a rampant and
heinous crime - in the words of one English writer, "
Fears of appearing racist trumped fears of more children being abused ."
But when this story first broke, guess where it appeared?
Here's how a blogger writing under the name
Mehrdad Amanpour tells the story of how the story first started reaching people:
Some years ago, a friend sent me a shocking article. It said hundreds of British girls were
being systematically gang-raped by Muslim gangs. It claimed this was being covered-up.
I've never had time for conspiracy theories, especially when they look as hateful as those
in the article. So I checked the links and sources in the piece. I found an American racist-far-right
website and from there, saw the original source was a similarly unpleasant website in the UK.
I did a brief search for corroboration from reputable mainstream sources. I found none. So
I wrote a curt reply to my friend: "I'd appreciate it if you didn't send me made-up crap from
Some months later, I read the seminal exposé of the (mainly) ethnic-Pakistani grooming gang
phenomenon by Andrew Norfolk in The Sunday Times .
I was stunned and horrified - not just that these vile crimes were indeed happening and endemic,
but that they really were being ignored and "covered-up" by public authorities and the mainstream
Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal first "broke" in the far-right blogosphere. The accusation
they made was that these gangs were being allowed to operate undisturbed because everyone was too
afraid of "appearing racist" to properly investigate them . . . and nobody listened to the far-right
bloggers who were breaking this story because they were afraid of "appearing racist" if they gave
any credibility to those far-right sources, too. Never mind that it seemed paranoid to rely on
bloggers to report truths like these when the allegations were so wide-reaching, involving
a literal conspiracy within the police force.
And yet, years after no one was willing to take them seriously, the far-right blogosphere
turned out to be right.
Well over a thousand (mostly) white young girls were being abused by (mostly) Pakistani
And the authorities were covering it up.
We are now, once again, in the stage of an evolving scandal that Mehrdad Amanpour described his
experience with above. Just to be clear, I'm not going to commit myself to the idea that this is
going to be as huge as Rotherham was. We should be careful: we don't know what would or wouldn't
be confirmed with a proper investigation. The question here is not whether we've gotten to the bottom
of this online. The question is whether there is enough here to justify thinking there should be
a proper investigation.
And the parallel with Rotherham is that the relatively small number of people asking for that
are mostly the loathsome kinds of people who run "racist far-right websites." So, since the claims
are inherently conspiratorial, and the mainstream doesn't want to be associated with those people
who are talking about it, it is once again all too easy to just dismiss the claims out of hand
as paranoia run wild.
Again, the evolution of the Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal was an extremely
painful lesson that the mainstream can be wrong and the "paranoid racist far-right"
can be right. And that lesson was far too expensive to simply let go to waste.
The name of this scandal is Pizzagate.
It gets the name for two reasons: first, because at the center of the scandal are high-level Washington
insiders who own a handful of businesses in the DC area, including a couple pizzerias (Comet Ping
Pong and Besta Pizza), who have fallen under suspicion for involvement in a child sex abuse ring.
Second, because the first questions arose in peoples' minds as a result of some very bizarre emails
revealed by Wikileaks in The
Podesta Emails that, quite simply, just sound strange (and usually involve weird
references to pizza). One of the strangest emails involves Joe Podesta being asked this question:
"The realtor found a handkerchief (I think it has a map that seems pizza-related). Is it yours?"
The evidence is of wildly varying levels of quality, ranging from the pareidolia of "Jesus
is appearing to me in my toast" to "wait, that's actually pretty damn creepy." The mountain of claims
and observations and speculations being compiled in places like
Steemit are too overwhelming
for any one person to hope to wade through sorting wheat from chaff, and while I don't intend to
try, I will summarize some just a little bit of it here.
While many of these claims are wild speculation over coincidences (though by no means all
of them are), at some point I think a bunch of weird coincidences involving pedophilia and kids becomes
sort of damning in and of itself. In
one email , Podesta
is among those being invited to a farm and the host says, "Bonnie will be Uber Service to transport
Ruby, Emerson, and Maeve Luzzatto (11, 9, and almost 7) so you'll have some further entertainment,
and they will be in [the] pool for sure ."
Could that have an innocent explanation? Sure, maybe. But inviting a group of adult men to
a gathering and calling young children "further entertainment" while listing their ages is
weird , whether it ends up having an explanation or not.
If I was getting messages that listed the ages of young children that would be in a pool
And it turned out that the logo for my business contained a symbol strikingly close to
the "little boy lover" logo used by pedophiles to signify that their interest is in young boys rather
than girls . . .
And the bands that showed up at my restaurant had albums called All the Children
with images on the cover
of a child putting phallic-shaped objects into his mouth . . .
. . . and were found making creepy jokes about pedophilia (in reference to Jared Fogle: "
we all have our preferences
. . . ") . . . and there were instagram photos coming out of kids ("jokingly?") taped
to the tables in my restaurant . . .
. . . frankly, I would start asking questions about myself.
Here are just a few of the more "institutional" coincidences involved in the story: one of
the men on the small list of people found "liking" photos like this one on these individuals' Instagram
Arun Rao , the U.S. Attorney Chief, charged with prosecuting cases of child pornography.
Besta Pizza, the business whose logo so closely resembled the "little boy lover" logo, is
Andrew Kline , who was one of four attorneys in the Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit of the
Department of Justice. Isn't it just a little unusual that someone that high up in a human
trafficking division would fail to notice the symbolism?
For yet another coincidence,
Lauren Silsby-Gayler is the former director of The New Life Children's Refuge in Haiti. It is
a matter of public record that she was caught, prosecuted, and sent to jail while in that role for
trying to abduct dozens of children, most of whom had homes and families. The
main lawyer paid
to represent Silsby-Gayler, "President of the Sephardic Jewish community in the Dominican Republic,"
was himself suspected of involvement in human trafficking.
When the Clintons gained influence in the region, one of their first acts was to work to
off the hook . Among the Podesta Wikileaks are
State Department emails
discussing their case. Meanwhile, she now works on the executive board of
AlertSense . . .
which collaborates with IPAWS to send out nation-wide Amber Alerts.
While some of the supposed "codewords" people have claimed to have identified in Pizzagate appear
to be made up, there is at least one unambiguous instance: here is an Instagrammed photo posted by
James Alefantis, the owner of Comet Ping Pong that appears innocent enough: a man carrying a young
child with a beaded necklace draped around both of their necks.
The disturbing bit is that the photo uses the tag "#chickenlovers," and "chicken lover" is
in fact an established term to refer to a pedophile - someone who loves "chicken," which
is also unambiguously an established term to refer to underage children (you can see this in the
gay slang dictionary subset of the
of Playground Slang ).
Complain all you want about the "speculative" and "paranoid" online discussions of Pizzagate,
but when you have clearer-cut cases like this one where James Alefantis absolutely, unquestionably
did in fact post a photo of a man holding an infant and the one and only hashtag he used for the
photo involved a term that unquestionably is a reference to pedophilia, in a context where it is
clear that there is nothing else here that "chicken" could possibly have been referring to, the likelihood
that more speculative claims might have truth to them is increased.
There is a 1994 documentary expose on NAMBLA (the North American Man/Boy Love Association) called
Here is yet another reference from a watchdog group from 2006, proving that this one existed
well before Pizzagate surfaced. Another confirmed fact dug up by the paranoid right-wing conspiracy
nuts on the Internet?
So here are a few more things we do know. We know that Bill Clinton has taken dozens
of international flights on a plane colloquially known as the "
Lolita Express " with Jeffrey Epstein, a man who spent 13 months in jail after being convicted
of soliciting a 13-year-old
prostitute . We know that Hillary Clinton's staff knew that
Anthony Weiner was sexting underage girls all the way back in 2011 - and covered it up. Guess
whose laptop revealed evidence that Hillary Clinton went on flights on Jeffrey Epstein's "
Lolita Express " along with Bill? That's right: Anthony Weiner's.
Now do you understand why the mainstream media was so eager to spin these emails as just a "distraction"
during the election?
The staff that ignored Weiner's sexting of young children included John Podesta himself, whose
brother Tony is one of the very men at the center of Pizzagate. Tony Podesta has rather warped tastes
in art. For instance, he owns a bronze statue of a decapitated man in a contorted position identical
to a well-known photograph of one of serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer's victims:
here for the disturbing photo of the real victim.)
The same news story that features the image above also mentions the fact that John Podesta's
bedroom contains multiple images from a photographer "known for documentary-style pictures
of naked teenagers in their parents' suburban homes.")
Furthermore, Tony Podesta's favorite artist is Biljana Djurdjevic, whose art heavily
features images of children in BDSM-esque positions in large showers. Here's one with a row of young
girls in a shower with their hands behind their backs in a position that suggests bondage:
Here's one with a young boy in a shower tied up in the air with his hands over his head:
In addition to Jeffrey Epstein, the Podesta brothers are also friends with convicted sex offender
Clement Freud as well as convicted serial child molester
Dennis Hastert .
We do know that the New York Times , which is now dismissing Pizzagate in its
entirety as a hoax, is run by Mark Thompson - who was credibly accused a few years back of lying
to help cover up a scandal involving another high-profile public figure involved in child sex abuse,
, during his time as
head of the BBC .
And we do know that this has happened before.
Lawrence King , the
leader of the Black Republican Caucus, who sang the national anthem at the Republican convention
in 1984, was accused by multiple claimed victims of trafficking and abusing boys out of the Boys
Town charity for years. You can
hear the chilling testimony
from three people who claim to have been victimized by King in a documentary produced shortly
after the events transpired.
You can hear the FBI, even after they received extensive testimony from victims, explain in their
own words that they weren't going to prosecute King because if anything were wrong with him, he would
have been prosecuted by a lower authority already. Eventually, King was found "O. J. guilty" of abusing
Paul Bonacci - convicted in civil court, acquitted in criminal court.
The best written source for information about the depths of corruption and cover-up involved in
this scandal is Nick Bryant's The Franklin Scandal:
A Story of Powerbrokers, Child Abuse & Betrayal (if you can't find a free copy on your own,
contact me through my website, www.zombiemeditations.com
and I tell you where to find it).
Could all of this turn out to be nothing?
Of course it could.
But that's not the question here. The question is how we should respond to the possibility.
Do we take the possibility seriously? History clearly indicates that we should. Even if it did
turn out to be nothing at all, I would still be more proud to belong to a community willing
to take the possibility seriously and call for investigation than I would to belong to a community
that dismissed the possibility far too hastily and luckily turned out to be right - even as it did
this and turned out to be wrong in so many cases like Rotherham before.
The real horror here would be to live in a society that responded as Reddit has - by shutting
down the whole conversation entirely, banning
r/pizzagate even while keeping subreddits like r/pedofriends, "a place for (non-offending) pedophiles
and allies to make friends with each other!" alive.
Over on his blog,
asks us to keep in mind cases where confirmation bias did lead to false allegations of institutional
pedophilia, to caution against excessive confidence. (He hastens to add: "I want to be totally clear
here that I'm not saying Pizzagate is false. I see the mountain of evidence too. And collectively
it feels totally persuasive to me. It might even be true. I'm not debating the underlying truth of
it. That part I don't know.")
But which is worse? If all the evidence coming out of Pizzagate is entirely
false, what have we lost by spending time on it? On the other hand, if even five percent of the allegations
that have been made surrounding the topic are true, what have we lost by ignoring them? Which is
worse: spending too much time pursuing and thoroughly vetting false leads, or looking the other way
while any amount of child abuse goes on?
According to the FBI's National Crime Information
Center (NCIC) database, nearly 470,000 children disappear in the United States alone each year.
This number is dubious for a number of reasons. It
looks like some number of runaways
end up in the NCIC count, and to make matters worse, repeat offenders can make it into the data multiple
times. So that would suggest that the real number must be lower than this tally; but on the other
hand, we also know that many missing children are never reported in the first place, so it's possible
that that could boost the number back up. The bottom line, however, seems to be that there is no
reliable way to determine how many total children are actually missing in the U.S.
Either way, though, even if correcting for these errors took out 90% of the disappearances in
the NCIC database, and there were no unreported disappearances to account for at all, I think even
the resulting 50,000 per year would still be enough to call the problem systematic and justify suspicion
that these disappearances could well involve organized efforts-given that we already know of so many
pedophile rings in so many powerful institutions.
In 2013, Canada busted a ring involving
more than 300 adults , who had teachers, doctors, and nurses heavily represented among them.
A pedophile ring has just been identified in the
highest levels of UK football (Americans
know the sport as soccer). Norwegian police also just uncovered a ring of 50 organized pedophiles
working in the tech sector , once again including elected officials, teachers, and lawyers. The
Vatican scandals can practically go without mention - institutional involvement in child sex exploitation
is nearly an a priori given.
And the children that are being raped and murdered in the photos passed around by these
child porn rings are coming from somewhere . And when figures like politicians, teachers,
and lawyers are involved in the rings, it's hardly inconceivable that they could be involved in disappearances.
Have we identified one here?
Only time will tell. But we deserve to be paid attention. We deserve to have the matter taken
(Reprinted from Counter-Currents
Publishing by permission of author or representative)
"... That a person with the stature of being a former president would hang around with a low-life like Epstein is really telling. He flew perhaps twenty-seven times on Epstein's plane which makes him more than just a passing acquaintance. Birds of a feather flock together. ..."
"... If a country next to us, so similar to ours in many ways but with a fraction of our population, has so many that can be exposed at one time then how many could the US have? ..."
"... The Burning Platform has featured a series of posts over the last few weeks that provide a volume of evidence that is impossible to discount. ..."
"... I have no doubt whatsoever that child sex abuse, trafficking and even sex-related murder may well be hung around the necks of very, very famous persons, and the horrors so bad that those persons (if still alive) will not even make it to trial before they're hung from a street lamp. ..."
"... What is clear is that the contention that there is "no evidence", a contention that is asserted or implied in seemingly every mainstream media discussion, is flatly false. There is a vast array of pertinent evidence, much of it circumstantial, but much of it also suggesting something of the mindset of some of the central figures. Anyone who denies this is utterly oblivious, or a liar, or a fool. ..."
"... As to what the evidence establishes, that is a different question. If skilled and intelligent investigators fail to take it up, then motivated and fervent - if not entirely competent - inquirers will surely rise up in their stead. ..."
"... Watch for the "fake news" sources' standard method for dealing with a large set of serious allegations like these from the internet's "real news" sources. They will take the most absurd/least likely allegations and dispose of them. They will then unobtrusively fail to address harder to dismiss allegations. Instead they will argue to the effect that, some of these allegations are false so obviously all must be. ..."
"... The "truther" site Snopes once had a perfect example, since taken down, I suspect because it made the technique so obvious ..."
6, 2016 at 3:47 pm GMT • 300 Words
December 6, 2016
at 4:30 pm GMT \n
The children in some of these poor third-world 'orphanages' aren't really orphans as we understand
the term but are just from poor families who can't take care of them. These international adoptions
are a business where everyone along the line gets paid with the child being the commodity being
sold to the end purchaser, people in the west seeking to adopt a child to make themselves feel
good. As in the mentioned case, the agencies move around from country to country where people
are poor and desperate and legal safeguards are weak. Although the end receivers seem to be mostly
naive and well-meaning people there's no telling how many aren't.
That a person with the stature of being a former president would hang around with a low-life
like Epstein is really telling. He flew perhaps twenty-seven times on Epstein's plane which makes
him more than just a passing acquaintance. Birds of a feather flock together.
The Canadians pulled in over three hundred people. If a country next to us, so similar
to ours in many ways but with a fraction of our population, has so many that can be exposed at
one time then how many could the US have? Yet we hardly ever hear much, just of a few lone wolves
here and there. Look at how Sandusky got away with it for so many years. People didn't want to
know, turned a blind eye to it, because he was too valuable.
This entire bunch who hobnob with each other have a very creepy vibe. There's all these 'coincidences'
that seem to gather together in one place.
6, 2016 at 3:50 pm GMT \n
6, 2016 at 3:54 pm GMT \n
This 'story' is complete horseshit / random confirmation bias. Scan the full social media
accounts of any group of 100+ people and you could find just as much 'evidence' if you were determined
to do so. This is scary -- the day that any social media post involving children that uses the
word "chicken" anywhere in it counts as evidence of pedophilia is the day anyone could be smeared.
Ron Unz should be ashamed of himself for giving this kind of unhinged paranoid fear-mongering
Do some of your own research on this topic and you will come to a different conclusion if you
can get beyond your massive bias. The Burning Platform has featured a series of posts over the
last few weeks that provide a volume of evidence that is impossible to discount.
Most people cannot accept something like this would be real because they cannot fathom the
depths of evil that exist in this world ..why, I don't know. You'd think the fact that many of
the people implicated have also been the ones fully on board with unprovoked wars that have killed,
maimed and displaced millions of people, including children, would be evidence enough.
Kudos to Ron Unz for exposing more people to this tragic, disgusting, horrendous story.
Socionomic Theory documents that the public's appetite for scandals is low when stocks and
high and high when stocks are low.
Case in point: The "news" about Enron was favorable all the way down, until the stock had lost
way over 90%. Only then did "news" about criminality and malfeasance gain traction.
This being the case, with stocks at All Time Highs after an astonishing 7 year vertical rally,
pizzagate's very existence here tells us that when the next bear market (in social mood,
as revealed by stock prices) is in full swing, the level of sociopathic, demonic
behaviors emerging into public consciousness will be unimaginable.
I have no doubt whatsoever that child sex abuse, trafficking and even sex-related murder may
well be hung around the necks of very, very famous persons, and the horrors so bad that those
persons (if still alive) will not even make it to trial before they're hung from a street lamp.
Public disgust with those who ran (and run) the Federal Government will in all likelihood be
so pervasive that it will undermine the very political cohesion of the United States.
This is by far the best survey of this topic that I've read.
What is clear is that the contention that there is "no evidence", a contention that is asserted
or implied in seemingly every mainstream media discussion, is flatly false. There is a vast array
of pertinent evidence, much of it circumstantial, but much of it also suggesting something of
the mindset of some of the central figures. Anyone who denies this is utterly oblivious, or a
liar, or a fool.
As to what the evidence establishes, that is a different question. If skilled and intelligent
investigators fail to take it up, then motivated and fervent - if not entirely competent - inquirers
will surely rise up in their stead.
Watch for the "fake news" sources' standard method for dealing with a large set of serious
allegations like these from the internet's "real news" sources. They will take the most absurd/least
likely allegations and dispose of them. They will then unobtrusively fail to address harder to
dismiss allegations. Instead they will argue to the effect that, some of these allegations are
false so obviously all must be.
The "truther" site Snopes once had a perfect example, since taken down, I suspect because it
made the technique so obvious. One popular right-wing internet site claimed to link 100 or so
suspicious deaths to the Clintons. Snopes attacked the obviously absurd linkages and was left
with about twenty cases of persons who (1) were involved or rumored to be involved with nefarious
activities involving the Clintons; (2) were scheduled to testify against the Clintons or rumored
to be brokering plea deals; and (3) died under suspicious circumstances soon after. Snopes dismissed
these with a comment to the effect that all public figures had numbers of known associates die
like this; let's just move on, folks; nothing to see here.
December 6, 2016
at 4:55 pm GMT \n
@MQ This 'story' is complete horseshit / random confirmation bias. Scan the full social media
accounts of any group of 100+ people and you could find just as much 'evidence' if you were determined
to do so. This is scary -- the day that any social media post involving children that uses the
word "chicken" anywhere in it counts as evidence of pedophilia is the day anyone could be smeared.
Ron Unz should be ashamed of himself for giving this kind of unhinged paranoid fear-mongering
In one of my many different careers I worked for a couple of years as an outside consultant
to the FBI's ViCAP (now VICAP) program. About the time I was thus delving the depths of human
depravity - and they are far deeper than the more fortunate readers of this are ever likely to
learn - a scandal similar to this broke in Belgium, involving the highest levels of society, politics,
and the EU bureaucracy in criminal conspiracies to kidnap children, sexually violate them, torture
them, and even use them in the production of snuff films. A full investigation dead-ended after
many suicides and suspicious deaths and disappearances. IMHO, based on some experience with criminal
conspiracies of this type, the mass of material presented here is a pretty overwhelming indication
that something very bad is happening. That the MSM ("fake new") sources are not paying more attentionto
this is scandalous.
6, 2016 at 5:03 pm GMT \n
I'm not going to commit myself to the idea that this is going to be as huge as Rotherham
Sorry, but you are deluded if you believe Rotherham was "huge" in the media - even after the
story broke, the English media did its best to downplay and underreport it - when they did report
it, especially the BBC, it was always in a professional monotone, with no hint of outrage, or
how disgusting and appalling all of it was, including/especially the behavior of the authorities
- however let the BNP or EDL protest in front of the court where some of the Paki scum were being
tried, and there you saw and felt media outrage - at this point, Rotherham has practically disappeared
from the news - which is pretty sad because as everyone knows, it was just the tip of the iceberg.
And as currently being framed and investigatively fleshed out, if Rotherham was "huge", then
Pizzagate will be a scandal of positively galactic dimension.
People will not let this go the way they did with the Jeffrey Epstein sleaze.
6, 2016 at 6:26 pm GMT \n
Thank you for this article. It is well written and makes the point I have been trying to make.
That the Wikileaks taken together with the Instagram photos warrant an investigation. A person
with a predilection to pedophilia (based on the Instagram photos, choice of music, and music recordings
at the Pizza Parlor premises) at the least, should not be running a "child-friendly" pizza parlor
without some kind of societal due diligence to ensure the safety of our children.
On the one hand, what is lost if an investigation occurs and it turns out there is no wrong
doing? We would have wasted some tax dollars and time of the law enforcement teams, but James
Alefantis would in fact benefit from being exonerated. If however, there is ANY
truth and any harm has and is occurring to children, then the greater good resulting from the
investigation would be without price.
6, 2016 at 7:12 pm GMT \n
In one of my many different careers I worked for a couple of years as an outside consultant
to the FBI's ViCAP (now VICAP) program. About the time I was thus delving the depths of human
depravity -- and they are far deeper than the more fortunate readers of this are ever likely to
learn -- a scandal similar to this broke in Belgium, involving the highest levels of society,
politics, and the EU bureaucracy in criminal conspiracies to kidnap children, sexually violate
them, torture them, and even use them in the production of snuff films. A full investigation dead-ended
after many suicides and suspicious deaths and disappearances. IMHO, based on some experience with
criminal conspiracies of this type, the mass of material presented here is a pretty overwhelming
indication that something very bad is happening. That the MSM ("fake new") sources are not paying
more attentionto this is scandalous.
The Belgian case, among other high-profile quashed investigations, is summarized here:
It was known as the Dutroux Affair.
6, 2016 at 7:28 pm GMT \n
Furthermore, Tony Podesta's favorite artist is Biljana Djurdjevic, whose art heavily features
images of children in BDSM -esque positions in large showers.
Psychopathy in the Pedophile (From Psychopathy: Antisocial, Criminal, and Violent Behavior, P
304-320, 1998, Theodore Millon, Erik Simonsen, et al, eds.--See NCJ-179236)
This paper argues that pedophilia may represent a special case or subcase of psychopathy
and that the main aims of both the psychopath and the pedophile are to dominate, to use, and
to subjugate another person in service of the grandiose self. [...] It notes that the major
differences between psychopaths and pedophiles are that the object of the predation for the
pedophile is a child and that the overt behavioral manifestation of the pathology is sexual.
I just wanted to reemphasize Scott Adams' statement about the scandal:
Over on his blog, Scott Adams asks us to keep in mind cases where confirmation bias did
lead to false allegations of institutional pedophilia, to caution against excessive confidence.
These types of investigations and scandals can easily lead to 'witch hunts' and 'panics' and
need to be handled with the greatest care, prudence, and levelheadedness possible.
I wanted to add the following study/information, because as the study states ' These
results provide further evidence of the importance of distinguishing between these groups of offenders.
This might just be an irrelevant distinction for most people appalled by this potential/alleged
abuse of power and authority of 'our' elites; but I believe we might mostly be looking at
and dealing with psychopathy and not necessarily 'just' pedophilia in this Pizzagate scandal.
This has several different implications for how this scandal might be handled or be covered
up, etc., because psychopaths are master liars, deflectors, charmers, etc., i.e. 'pillars of the
community,' 'movers and shakers,' etc.
There is another curious connection here; Professor Robert Hare – the father of psychopathy
research – said this:
Hare considers newspaper tycoon Robert Maxwell to have been a strong candidate as a corporate
Robert Maxwell is the father of Ghislaine Maxwell, who is close friends with Jeffery Epstein:
In an American court case that was made public in January 2015, a woman identified as 'Jane
Doe 3′ said she was approached by Maxwell in 1999, and claimed that Maxwell procured under-age
girls to have sex with Epstein. Maxwell has always denied any involvement in Epstein's crimes.
She said: "She [Ghislaine] said she'd hit hard times. Jeffrey offered her a job and then,
I guess, because of her ability to procure girls, she became a vital asset to him.
Psychopathy among pedophilic and nonpedophilic child molesters.
6, 2016 at 9:36 pm GMT \n
Among men who commit sexual offenses against children, at least 2 distinct groups can be identified
on the basis of the age of the primary targets of their sexual interest; pedophiles and nonpedophiles.
In the present report, across 2 independent samples of both types of child molesters as well
as controls, a total of 104 men (53 pedophilic and 51 nonpedophilic) who had sexually offended
against a child age 13 or younger were compared to each other (and to 49 non-sex offender controls)
on psychopathy as assessed by the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI).
In both samples of child molesters, the nonpedophiles scored as significantly more psychopathic
than the pedophiles.
These results provide further evidence of the importance of distinguishing between these groups
@MQ This 'story' is complete horseshit / random confirmation bias. Scan the full social media
accounts of any group of 100+ people and you could find just as much 'evidence' if you were determined
to do so. This is scary -- the day that any social media post involving children that uses the
word "chicken" anywhere in it counts as evidence of pedophilia is the day anyone could be smeared.
Ron Unz should be ashamed of himself for giving this kind of unhinged paranoid fear-mongering
Your comment sounds familiar to me. Are you writing from the UK perchance?
Back in the mid-Aughts I was surprised by how often I saw commenters at MSM news sites talking
about the grooming and abduction of white girls in cities in England. At the time I was regularly
reading BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, and Times. The stories where these comments appeared were diverse
Sometimes other comments would share similar experiences. Some would say they talked to someone
who claimed similar experience. Others would say they'd heard murmurs of such things.
These voices repeatedly called on the MSM outlet to investigate, or they wondered why
no response was forthcoming from elected officials or policymakers.
This was after–I later learned–Ann Cryer (MP for Keighley) had bravely stepped forward on behalf
of girls whose parents had approached her for help. IOW, the cat was emerging from the bag, but
the MSM were trying to stuff it back in.
Dismissive responses to these comments frequently were framed as yours is here: nothing to
see here, move along, it's confirmation bias, you people are nuts, mods, step in and censor them!
In the Rotherham/etc. case, racism, Islamophobia, etc., were trotted out to inflict silence.
What was most noteworthy to me, and creepy, was how these comments would be removed from
the comment streams of these outlets.
Sometimes the comments would be deleted but the response calling them racists or Islamophobes
allowed to stand.
By the late Aughts I was convinced some sort of coverup was underway of something terrible
We now know that the MSM were key players in that.
Similar murmurings were afoot in Pennsylvania for many years prior to the revelations of the
sexual abuse of children by Penn State coach Sandusky. I knew men who steered their sons away
from football in general, guiding them instead to hockey or lacrosse, because the word on the
street was that football camp was not a safe place for boys anymore. (Nor, increasingly, Boy Scouts
or church camps.)
The gig is up for the MSM acting as panderers and pimps in the Cathedragogue of their own degenerate
They won't go down without a fight. They have more power and money to lose than any of the
kids victimized by pedocidal perverts.
But what those kids have to lose is a treasure of vastly more importance than power and money.
Thing is, truth and goodness of spirit will win. This is part of why these degenerates fight
back as they do. They can put truth and goodness on the run for only so long. They fight back
not because they are losing, but because, by nature, they can never join the winning side of
truth and goodness. It's just not in them.
All the more reason they need to be found out and reined in hard.
One last thing, regarding some people's assertion that these symbols, in-jokes, etc., are all
"just a game." Or, worse, "art." (Which implies getting money and power by representing degeneracy
to decorate rich people's businesses, homes and bedrooms.)
If pedophilia, grooming, and child rape are now matters to take lightly as shibboleths of entrance
to circles of power, then those circles of power need to be napalmed.
"In the beginning there were the swamp, the hoe, and Jussi."
6, 2016 at 10:52 pm GMT \n
I think the crux of the problem is that most people find two different things equally plausible.
1) That the people who are talking about this (pizzagate) are lunatics.
2) That Podesta and the rest actually are involved in things like this.
Personally I think a nation that has reached this point, that it is totally believable that
our leaders and elites are a bunch of monsters well that's a real problem.
Another problem is that the UK article a poster above linked to is two years old. Has anyone
heard anything about that since? Expect to?
Sandy Berger's Socks ,
December 6, 2016
at 11:13 pm GMT \n
How many members of the media political class, that are dismissing this as fake news have enjoyed
"pizza" at Besta or at a similar place?
What if criminal deviancy rather than disqualifying a person, is not instead some weird prerequisite
for elite status? Don't have to worry about rock throwers if they're inside the same glass house.
Blackmail seems as good an explanation as any for things like John Roberts sudden change of
heart on the constitutionality of the Obama care mandate.
7, 2016 at 12:09 am GMT \n
This is a very good summary; thank you for publishing it.
The speed with which the old media have declared the entire thing false, far sooner than they
possibly could have explored all the latest information and come to that conclusion, is astonishing.
In other cases of conspiracy theories they think are false, they are willing to stand back and
ridicule the theorists. Obama Birthers, 9/11 Truthers, Boston Bombing hoax, Sandy Hook . all certainly
called false and ridiculed, but that's all. I don't think I've ever seen them try to squelch an
entire line of discussion from the start like this before, even threatening lawsuits and prosecution.
7, 2016 at 12:16 am GMT \n
There may be something to pizzagate but I'm very skeptical of accusations of widespread institutional
pedophilia. I initially fell for the "Satanic panic" of the 1980s; I learned my lesson.
7, 2016 at 12:23 am GMT \n
I see that this case relies a lot on cryptic symbols. Reminds me of the people who see swastikas
and white supremacy runes wherever they look and try to make a case for a vast neo-Nazi underground.
But the author states that 470,000 children "disappear" each year in the US alone. Really? The
link goes to "reported missing" which is a whole different thing. I once reported one of my kids
missing; he turned up shortly afterwards at a friend's house. He hadn't even run away, just overstayed
and not informed us where he was. That sort of thing happens all the time, but genuine disappearances?
I don't know of a single case and I know plenty of people with kids. In some third world country
in a war, tens of thousands of missing kids might be believable, but even in most such countries
(Syria for example) 470,000 disappearances per year would be a stretch.
In the U.K., all the abuse took place by people in power. Catholic clergy over choirboys. Celebs
over their fans. Pakistanis targeted girls from broken homes. The wealthy and 'noble' preyed on
the lesser born.
The worst though are the politicians, who have maximum power. I'm not sure I believe the pizzagate
thing – the evidence is not conclusive (show me a victim or witness). But I certainly believe
it is possible.
7, 2016 at 12:44 am GMT \n
The reliably excellent John Helmer provides an oblique reference to Pizzagate in the following
linked piece about Propornot and its marvellous 200 Putin Stoogesites:
7, 2016 at 12:49 am GMT \n
@utu "What 'relatively obscure charge'?" - Making payments in a manner hiding the detection
of payments. Payments were not illegal but he was doing it in amounts below the amounts that automatically
would require reporting. In my opinion he did nothing illegal. The crimes he allegedly committed
were beyond the statute of limitation and paying hush money is not illegal either.
I kinda thought that's what you were referring to, but wanted to make sure.
His real crime was something else.
He was a high school coach years ago and was raping underage boys in his charge. The cash he
was withdrawing was for payments to one of the boys to keep him quiet. If memory serves, another
one of his victims had committed suicide (not sure though). But the one Hastert was paying off
wanted to burn him.
In addition, Sibel Edwards, when she was working for the FBI and translating foreign language
intercepts, picked up some conversations by Turkish officials, who were bribing Hastert, and claimed
they "owned him". He reportedly got $500K, but not sure for what. FBI had courts put a gag order
on Sibel, so she could not reveal any more details. The story was buried: probably because too
many high ranking swine were involved.
Hastert pleaded guilty to a Mickey Mouse charge so that there would no public child-rape trial,
where the public might learn all the lurid details of what the filthy swine did to those underage
Hastert got away with destroying the lives of many boys.
Johnny Smoggins ,
December 7, 2016
at 2:19 am GMT \n
Hopefully he will be savagely beaten and crippled in prison – but not killed – so he can suffer
Like a lot of people I have gone from completely ignoring this story, thinking it was Alex
Jones type fantasy to starting to wonder if there might not be some truth to it after all. So
far I haven't seen any definitive evidence that kids are actually being molested, or worse. And
because the accusations are so damning I would want to be very cautious about casually tossing
That being said, a lot of the stuff that's surfaced; the artwork, the cryptic messages, Spirit
cooking, the odd choices of entertainment for a family friendly pizza restaurant and the Instagram
pictures are just flat out creepy .
Even with a presumption of innocence I wouldn't allow anyone under the age of 18 anywhere near
the Podesta brothers, Alefantis and everyone else involved without adult supervision.
I'm glad Unz has decided to publish this. I'm interested to see if anything more will come
of it. It certainly warrants further investigation.
December 7, 2016
at 3:04 am GMT \n
Rotate the old logo for Besta Pizza 180 degrees. It is the pedophile BLogo symbol.
That's why when it got publicised, Besta's management immediately deleted the old one and converted
to a new, BLogo-free symbol on all their website and printed materials.
What is interesting to note in mainstream media "debunkings" of PizzaGate is that they focus
on the doubtful evidence, things that could be "interpreted either way" and they leave out the
glaringly obvious pedophilia links, like the Besta Pizza logo.
Just look at all the "debunking articles." Do any of them mention the old Besta logo? I haven't
It seems to me this is the way to wean the public off the mainstream media. Hammer on the fact
that the MSM insists on leaving out the clear, obvious evidence and tries to imply that everything
is doubtful and open to interpretation. Then people will start to associate them with coverup
and BS. The MSM can't recover from that.
Actually the logo issue is a prominent part of this Washington Post article (and a tweet
by the fairly well-known Dave Weigel highlighted that part in particular):
7, 2016 at 3:48 am GMT \n
@Johnny Smoggins Like a lot of people I have gone from completely ignoring this story, thinking
it was Alex Jones type fantasy to starting to wonder if there might not be some truth to it after
all. So far I haven't seen any definitive evidence that kids are actually being molested, or worse.
And because the accusations are so damning I would want to be very cautious about casually tossing
That being said, a lot of the stuff that's surfaced; the artwork, the cryptic messages, Spirit
cooking, the odd choices of entertainment for a family friendly pizza restaurant and the Instagram
pictures are just flat out creepy .
Even with a presumption of innocence I wouldn't allow anyone under the age of 18 anywhere near
the Podesta brothers, Alefantis and everyone else involved without adult supervision.
I'm glad Unz has decided to publish this. I'm interested to see if anything more will come of
it. It certainly warrants further investigation.
7, 2016 at 3:48 am GMT \n
Podesta is a creepy fuck period.
7, 2016 at 3:48 am GMT \n
How did such a dweeb get to be such a big person in our national conversation?
He is an obvious hack , but not a particular clever one. He just comes off so "are you fucking
kidding me?". Where do they get these dudes? James Carville. Paul Begala. Bill Burton. Robby Mook.
Even right has George Will, Buckley. Strange unnormal people.
See, for example,
7, 2016 at 4:23 am GMT \n
I confess I don't get it. I can understand pizzagate as a brutal and nasty last minute campaign
tactic, but the election is over, drop it. A mighty tissue of "coincidences" woven together in
a manner that would make Glenn Beck envious. I guess I need to fashion a tin foil hat and then
re-read the article. I think it just discredits the source more than the target.
If someone is actually raping children, then where are the children? The kids related to the
socialite that she is bringing to a pool party? Come on, that is what plebes are for. How are
the children procured? Where do they live? There is necessarily logistics to this kind of activity,
and zero evidence of logistics, just some weird emails and weird art. Its like saying someone
is a coke head because they had a runny nose. tweet at early hours in the morning, and behave
December 7, 2016
at 4:45 am GMT \n
In the 70s, I hear that NY pizzerias were fronts for narcotics dealers.
Are they now used by pedo-dealers?
I love pizza, but this issue is making me feel a bit icky about it.
December 7, 2016
at 5:02 am GMT \n
@Anonymous "Every aspect of British society seems to have ties to pedophilia, from Parliament,
to the elites, the City of London, the government, public schools, Oxbridge, the universities,
all the way down to Paki immigrant communities and even British soccer."
Why do pedos gain such power? Same reason why homos do? Since many of them don't have families
and since they resent the Normal World(from which they must hide their deviance or sickness),
do they have extra time/energy for gaining power? Are they fueled by resentment toward Normal
Society? It seems like homos had a kind of revenge streak, and it all came out with New Normal.
Homos really want to rub our faces in their feces. They want to force us to accept the New Normal
or be totally destroyed. They want to turn us into their bitches. They are into Bitch-Hunting.
Working in the shadows, homos and pedos seemed to gained considerable power. And since they
are associated with Vice Industry, they have the dirt on everyone else and can blackmail them.
Bill Clinton prolly never had sex with a minor, but surely homos and pedos have a lot of dirt
on him about his many affairs and orgies. And since they have many connections, they serve as
essential middlemen for those who seek power.
Also, there is a code of silence among the powerful. They watch out for one another. And homos
and pedos are both pushy and gushy. They are very demanding but also accommodating and supportive
of the powerful and ambitious. They go all out to serve the powerful and those on the up-and-up,
but they also demand a cut of the pie.
The ambitious care most about power and privilege than about right and wrong. If their power
depends on a coterie of people committed to them 24/7, they will look the other way even when
they know something is up. Also, there is the human factor. People who work together closely develop
an emotional bond. It's team politics, us vs them. And loyalty must be favored.
Since homos and pedos have more time on their hands and more energy(fueled by resentment), they
might be more available to the powerful or those who seek power.
Hollywood made the media the hero in the movie SPOTLIGHT. But the media seem eager to bury
this as fast as possible.
Why did it take so long for the Hastert and Sandusky cases to come to light?
How did they get away with that stuff forever?
Is it a good idea to allow homos into Boy Scouts?
Homos seem to be closely allied with pedos, and the trajectory of our culture is to normalize
pedophilia by sexualizing young girls and boys. If young ones are sexualized, it means they can
be objects of sexual desire. And then what?
And the scientific community is arguing pedophilia should be treated as a condition than a
crime. This may be legit as long as pedos didn't act on their impulses. But if they did, how can
it not be a crime?
Rape is 'natural' too given that sexual feelings are natural. But we can't treat rape itself
as a condition and not a crime.
of Oz ,
December 7, 2016
at 5:48 am GMT \n
Regrettably, though one may have grown old without ever feeling the wish to have sexual contact
with a pre-adolescent or of anyone of the same sex it hasn't been possible for a long time to
deny the prevalence of socially disapproved sex drives and behaviours. So one finds that the nice
young presenter on the antique show has been arrested for downloading and keeping pedophile images.
And so on But isn't the idea of a large network, and what is needed to keep it covered up, a
bit much to swallow? Nasty minds? Conspiracy theories?
Well I suppose not. Sex as a drive and the perverse varieties of expression that we know to
manifest themselves are enough to make one accept the pedophile reality. Then the network and
the cover up? The cover up, however difficult to make it reliable, is just a consequence of the
danger their behaviour exposes them to. And the network? Easy enough to explain once you are in
it – like knowing that you could attend mass in a number of aristocratic Elizabethan households.
But the detail of why and how it should grow from a very small group is obviously more complex.
I guess that there are organisers and facilitators who seek various rewards, some financial, some
in young flesh, some in the obtaining of blackmailing power.
7, 2016 at 6:07 am GMT \n
It's the age difference and the power equation that matters. If a fifteen year old is sexting
a thirteen year old it's quite different than a grown man like Anthony Wiener. I couldn't blame
any father who administered a sound beating to an adult creep who was sexting a minor. What kind
of a society doesn't protect children?
December 7, 2016
at 6:28 am GMT \n
MSM is so eager to kill this story but tried so hard to keep alive the UVA hoax.
Even after it became clear that the whole thing had been made up, NY Times pretended that it
But then, look at our political culture.
Say nothing of Israel's 200 nukes but never stop bitching about Iran's non-existing nukes.
And even though the West is the aggressor, blame Russia.
Yellow Cake and WMD. Colin Powell's lies and MSM's collusion.
Silence about black thuggery but pretend innocent blacks are murdered by evil white cops.
A real inversion of truth and lies.
Lugenpresse calling its detractors 'fake news'.
7, 2016 at 7:30 am GMT \n
First, the emails are not just weird. Second, regarding this:
"There is necessarily logistics to this kind of activity, and zero evidence of logistics "
Actually, there is.
Jeffrey Epstein, the Lolita Express, and his pedophile island. This was obviously covered up.
The Pizzagaters have shed a tiny bit of light on Laura Silsby. Look her up.
December 7, 2016
at 8:25 am GMT \n
"IMO this is yet another Jimmy Savile case: i.e. literally Satanic pedophilia on a vast
scale, with the active collusion of our political and media elites"
Savile case wasn't that at all – more like famous DJ/charity fundraiser with great PR taking
advantage of his status with teenage girls. How many of the post-death allegations are true, who
knows, but we know some definitely aren't true – we know because long-time blogger Anna Raccoon
was a resident of a small children's home where Savile was claimed to have abused girls. She has
a whole series of seven posts called "Past Lives and Present Misgivings" on the allegations.
More "active collusion" is likely in the cases of Cyril Smith and Greville Janner, two pretty
high-profile and connected MPs, who seem to have managed to go to their graves scot free.
7, 2016 at 9:21 am GMT \n
The idea of on-camera child rape as a prerequisite of entry into organizations/guarantee of
cooperation is a pretty old one. It's no doubt been done.
7, 2016 at 1:58 pm GMT \n
How the "fake news" trope works in the real world:
Flynn's tweet regarding this story was perfectly reasonable.
7, 2016 at 2:00 pm GMT \n
The story has been stamped "bogus" without any kind of investigation.
No response to questions about the weird content of emails by Podesta and others.
Makes one think the shotgun blast at Comet might even have been a false flag!!
For those wondering about the authenticity of the FBI document, here is the wikileaks page
where it was revealed in 2007 and they say "Wikileaks has verified the document":
And here is a MSM article about it:
7, 2016 at 4:17 pm GMT \n
I remember watching an excellent Australian film years ago that covered this very topic. It
portrayed in a very realistic way the whole homo/ pedo underground in the upper rungs of society,
from posh public schools to university, where grooming of youngsters occurred, to Parliament and
Finance, where the powerful pederasts/homosexuals ruled. In this world, the shortest way to power
and riches for a young man was to seek out the protection and guidance of an older and powerful
homo/pederast lover. It was shot in Australia and in Australian settings and institutions, but
it's all so British you'd think the film makers really intended the story to reflect British society
and were using Australia as a legal cover.
December 7, 2016
at 8:01 pm GMT \n
Sorry, I can't remember the title of the movie or the director. It was quite disturbing to watch
but very interesting.
Perhaps Pat Hannagan or some other knowledgeable Australian reader can help.
Let's say there was no pedo-ring. I'm rather skeptical of it myself.
But just look at that pizzeria. What kind of freako place is that?
And why are some of the 'most powerful' people in DC such downright perverts and degenerates?
The fish rots from the head. Degenerates run government, institutions, and culture.
Government and judges push homo agenda. College push porn and 50 genders. Hollywood pushes
drugs and tattoos. Disney turns girls into whores.
And this isn't just a 'left' vs 'right' problem. A lot of Trump voters were ass-tattoo freaks.
The working class grew up on Jerry Springer, WWE, mentally deranged metal music, or Goth freakery.
And middle class kids grew up on the nerdy black magic of Harry Potter whose teacher is a happy
Whether it's elites and their Pervert Pizza or the underclass with their degeneracy, it's ugly
We need Vito-Corleonism.
This is how a man should be:
December 7, 2016
at 8:29 pm GMT \n
I'm not sold on the pedo-ring. Too much risk, though I think those 'elites' are a bunch of
If anything, this pedo-issue takes our eyes off the ball.
The real issue should be that the governing elites of this nation in government, colleges,
cultural institutions, media and even military(look at those tranny freaks) are a bunch of decadents,
even degenerates. We are seeing the normalization of freakery and grossness.
The fact that it is considered NORMAL for Hillary to invite Lena Dunham to the DNC speaks for
itself. The fact that Newsweek celebrated Obama with a gay 'halo' speaks for itself. The fact
that churches hang 'homo flags' speaks for itself.
It is a sick nation.
A tolerant nation has room for decadence and even degeneracy. It belongs in the underground.
They always existed.
But now, this underground stuff is the bobo cultural fixation of the elites who consider themselves
'hip' and 'edgy'.
And they even introduce their kids to this stuff from a young age.
Indeed, even without overt pedophilia, introducing sexuality to kids at a very young age is a
kind of indirect pedophilia.
When homo-ness is promoted among kids, what is being done? Kids will ask 'what is homo stuff?'
And an honest answer will have to be, "some guys wanna stick pee pee into poo poo". But then,
the kids will have to be told THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT, and if anything, WE SHOULD BLESS
THE HOMOS. But why? What is so great about pee pee in poo poo?
We really need Culturegate. The whole culture is a rotten scandal, and the fact that US globo-imperialism
spreads this filth around the world speaks volumes about how sick America has become. We don't
need real pedo-rings of 'pizzagate' to accuse the elites of filth and vileness. Their cultural
life is garbage.
Just look at this: 'mainstream' culture has no problem with it. If anything, it is promoted
as the New Norm.
December 7, 2016
at 9:01 pm GMT \n
As John Helmer points out, the new digital news business model doesn't provide any funds for
7, 2016 at 9:20 pm GMT \n
So who is going to pay for a serious journalist to do the legwork and paperwork and FOIA requests,
Re "And why are some of the 'most powerful' people in DC such downright perverts and degenerates?
I thought you were going to say:
December 7, 2016
at 9:43 pm GMT \n
What are the most powerful people in DC doing hanging out at this creepy pizza parlor and doing
fundraising events there?
We all know where Hillary goes for "real" money: The Saudis, Goldman Sachs, billionaires' glitzy
summer compounds in the Hamptons, places like that-you know, where the money is.
So WTF is she doing in one of these pizza joints? Why would there be any real money there?
With creepy, tawdry "artwork" on the walls?
Something here does not pass the smell test.
I'm intrigued by the Anna Racoon stuff, but I found it completely incoherent. Could you explain
what these claims are, and why they should be taken seriously?
Re Sir Savile and Satanic child sex abuse, at least two victims gave entirely credible and
consistent accounts. Here's a mainstream source:
7, 2016 at 11:36 pm GMT \n
Agreed. Often one wonders why such outrageous decisions are made in politics that clearly contradict
the public good and one wonders, why? This topic goes a long way to explaining the why. I'm not
so sure if the investigating of it is the hard part or the broad exposure, but it needs to happen.
I am probably more tolerant of 'deviates' than most on here. Queers don't bother me much, though
I would recommend that they be more discreet and stop the promotion of their peccadilloes as normal.
When it comes to children, even teenagers, I am very strict about them not being able to give
consent and should be treated with respect, if not revered, by all adults with no exceptions.
There is enough smoke here for a thorough investigation to be demanded and carried out. I hope
nothing less ensues.
8, 2016 at 4:52 am GMT \n
The fact that it is considered NORMAL for Hillary to invite Lena Dunham to the DNC speaks
for itself. The fact that Newsweek celebrated Obama with a gay 'halo' speaks for itself. The
fact that churches hang 'homo flags' speaks for itself.
It is a sick nation.
Yep. I don't have to look any further then this perv Alefantis. This is what you get when sodomy
is legal. Of course this craven bastard makes all kinds of snarky degenerate comments about children
on his instagram
Society has been desensitized to homosexuality- so they have moved on to the "prize".
You have hit it out of the park as usual, I enjoy and concur with your assesments.
8, 2016 at 12:51 pm GMT \n
I believe I saw the instagram account of Alefantis before it came down. The girl pictured in
several images seems to be the child of a family friend. I thought the taped to the table image
and the other pic with #chickenlover tag were at a minimum indicators of a dark humor or innuendo.
Who finds this sort of thing funny?
There were more pics of infants and a doll with creepy tags like #hoetard and suggestive comments,
again, indicating a level of casual comfort with making implied references to pedophilia. ..wink
Gross, at a minimum. But evidence of a ring? I don't understand why Alefantis doesn't just
acknowledge that there is an "appearance" of sick humor.
Regarding the use of supposedly known pedo symbols- I'm skeptical. These are shapes and motifs
we see everywhere. It could be that the pedo symbol inventors purposely chose designs that would
easily coincide with innocent use so as to hide in plain sight. Or hmm ?
Podesta is definitely using code in his emails but my read was that he's talking about drugs
and partying. Didn't we all use "pizza" at one time or another as a reference to party favors
back in the day?
The Podestas have bad taste in art. Not a crime, just a general indicator of regular degenerately
"hip" tastes so as to impress the cool kids?
And yet no one clears the air. And this is disturbing. I have yet to read one Wapo or nyt article
denouncing the "witch hunt" but acknowledging that, yes, it looks bad. Because it really does.
Incidentally, if they haven't been faked, one of Alefantis' instagram commenters is the maker
of child sized coffin coffee tables. Nice.
8, 2016 at 4:54 pm GMT \n
Here is the Judge rebuking serial molester Hastert (R) before sentencing.
Scalpel , Website
December 8, 2016
at 7:42 pm GMT \n
@Sandy Berger's Socks
"What if criminal deviancy rather than disqualifying a person, is not instead some weird prerequisite
for elite status? Don't have to worry about rock throwers if they're inside the same glass house.Blackmail
seems as good an explanation as any for things like John Roberts sudden change of heart on the
constitutionality of the Obama care mandate."
This fits Occam's Razor. I would go so far as to say that pedophilia blackmail appears to have
been a method of political control since the days of the British Empire. Much like gang membership,
participation is required for entrance into the inner circles of political power, then used as
blackmail to enforce conformity and secrecy.
Interestingly, there is a recent episode of "The Black Mirror," a Netflix show, that addresses
this very psychology.
9, 2016 at 5:11 pm GMT \n
There is a rather informative article in the WaPo about Pizzagate and its potential
(mass-)psychological origins. It actually indirectly and temporarily "blames" over-zealous feminists
with being the originators of the this moral panic. Quite interesting, but of course the article/author
reverts back to Trump-bashing, etc. in the end.
What the Pizzagate conspiracy theory borrows from a bogus satanic sex panic of the 1980s
Second, in both cases, social movements were involved in the weaponization of suspicion,
although the political center of gravity has shifted from one episode to the next. In the
late 1970s, social workers and feminist activists had focused on combating child sexual abuse;
they sometimes developed extremely broad definitions of abuse or floated exaggerated estimates
of its occurrence in this quest. Such efforts have left deep cultural residues, and these include
the acceptance of exaggerated claims about the number of child trafficking victims, and the
incidence and forms of organized child sexual abuse. Pizzagate relies on these inflated
fears to seem plausible, and it similarly relies on a viewpoint marked by extreme suspicion
(of the media, Washington "elites," politicians and the Clinton camp specifically) to decode
ordinary events and statements into extraordinary claims.
A moral panic is a feeling of fear spread among a large number of people that some evil
threatens the well-being of society. A Dictionary of Sociology defines a moral panic as
"the process of arousing social concern over an issue – usually the work of moral entrepreneurs
and the mass media." –
I had never come across the term "moral entrepreneur" before, very useful term
9, 2016 at 8:50 pm GMT \n
We know all about "Hysteria", but why did the artist use a decapitated male if not to
possibly conflate this in the viewers mind with the atrocities of Dalmer?
What about the other degenerate art, such as the child bondage spankees posing in the easy-
to -clean tiled torture chambers?
Some of us will never accept homosexuality as an "alternative" lifestyle.
The fact that Alefantis is a homo; who by dint of his perverse sexuality- has achieved some
level of notoriety prior to pizzagate- is certainly part of the underlying rancor towards him.
9, 2016 at 11:01 pm GMT \n
Incredibly generous of you to quote WaPo as a credible source. I would have done the same at
one time but that was ages ago.
BB753 asks why haven't the Posdestas sued? I would ask why haven't they at the very least stepped
forward to offer a simple explanation for what most agree is code in the emails?
I would suggest a possibility that blowing the lid off on this exposes exactly how certain
"lobby" groups maintain control of the wheelhouse of the US ship of state, and have consistently
steered it into troubled waters against the national interest.
Wiz, a simple typo that my computer ran with (very observant of you).
December 9, 2016
at 10:02 pm GMT \n
This clip of Brietbart going off on John Podesta seemed to me more than just a political squabble.
Keep in mind, this was years before the Wikileaks 'Pizza' stuff. Also keep in mind that Breitbard
dropped dead shortly after this was filmed.
December 10, 2016
at 3:17 am GMT \n
Pizzagate is not "fake news" at all. It needs to be investigated.
The MSM says it does not disseminate "fake news". However, the MSM will often simply not cover
events that ARE real news.
Thus, the MSM is disseminating the opposite of "fake news", namely NO NEWS. The MSM keeps people
in the dark because there things that it does not want people to know about. For example, the
MSM will often not cover stories about how the LGBTQ movement is brainwashing kids in even the
lowest grade in public elementary schools. That's because the MSM does not want people to become
upset at the penetration (no pun intended) of the LGBTQ agenda.
In reality, there is relatively little "fake news" out there. Most alternative websites that
people visit, such as Unz, simply provide a different perspective on issues that the MSM won't
cover at all, or cover in a cursory manner.
10, 2016 at 2:35 pm GMT \n
10, 2016 at 9:49 pm GMT \n
And the "fake news" trope is an excellent example of misdirection/laying a false trail.
Classic disinfo technique, to seed the truth with a few lies that are provably false so that
then the whole thing can be claimed to be false and written off.
I don't know about the Podestas but as others here have rightly stated, there's enough smoke
for a thorough, open investigation.
Coincidently, the anti-Russian rhetoric has escalated to an even more absurd degree alongside
the Pizzagate news. I wonder if the result will be even less people believing the blatant lies
of mass media or if people will just demonstrate that there are no limits to gullibility.
December 11, 2016
at 5:31 am GMT \n
I saw a headline on CNN.com claiming Russia was attempting to smear people by 'planting' child
pornography on their computers.
I didn't bother reading it, as CNN is a Gawker level news source these days, but it seems like
they may attempt to blame this stuff on Russia – along with everything else.
Green , Website
December 11, 2016
at 7:41 am GMT \n
Here's another sex scandal (and a certifiably real one) involving a prominent Canadian who
turned out to be a pedaphile. There's a lot in this story that's revealing and fascinating.
11, 2016 at 2:33 pm GMT \n
Such a disturbing story. But instructive. In particular the information, or perhaps it is a
speculation, that the pedophiliac sexual drive develops early on. This drive must be incredibly
strong-stronger than what would be considered normal sexual desire? I don't know. But I have read
that it is so strong that pedophiles make major life choices in terms of finding a way to get
access to children to use sexually. Such as marrying: so they can father their own children and
have them handy for abuse. Or entering a profession, such as the priesthood, or pediatrics, or
education, etc. so that they have access to children. Or becoming sports coaches, where they spend
a lot of time in locker rooms and also have blandishments to offer young boys such as sports career
I think this point-the power of the drive-should be taken into account when people such as
some commenters on this thread say: "These people [such as Podesta} are too intelligent to risk
their careers blah blah." If the pedophilia drive is as strong as, say, a heroin addiction, then
the addiction is in the driver's seat, not "intelligence." The more you feed an addiction, the
stronger it gets, and the more stimulation it takes to get the charge.
As for the sprinkling of a few lies in with a story that is targeted for debunking: In a normal
police investigation the police solicit leads from the public. (It is true that in this case there
is not an obvious victim, so that must also be taken into account; but this was also the situation
with the Ben Levin [Toronto] case; nevertheless what he did was criminal and dangerous.) They
examine the leads and follow them up. This is detectives' job.
Often an obscure lead does lead to further useful information needed to build a hypothesis
of the motive-means-opportunity for the crime and widen the scope of an investigation. Every American
with a TV set has seen hundred of such police procedurals showing how crimes have been solved,
often cold cases. Bona fide detectives who get leads from the public don't immediately start to
smear the source of leads as looney-tunes. In this case the public, in the face of apparent inaction
by law enforcement to follow up on this case, is responding by posting ideas and hypotheses and
An honest law enforcement agency would be conducting an aggressive investigation and checking
out any useful info and ideas that members of the public come up with, whether online or off.
Honest news outlets should either be calling for a thorough investigation, or staying mum if they
have been informed that an investigation is ongoing. The fact that the MSM, absent any sign of
an investigation, are blaring out the "nothing here; move on; blogger are rabid fools" message
is in itself suspicious and suggests that someone is being protected. The MSM have put out just
enough info to warn the possible wrongdoers to get their act together, change their signage, and
run for cover.
11, 2016 at 4:40 pm GMT \n
The fact that the MSM, absent any sign of an investigation, are blaring out the "nothing
here; move on; blogger are rabid fools" message is in itself suspicious and suggests that someone
is being protected. The MSM have put out just enough info to warn the possible wrongdoers to
get their act together, change their signage, and run for cover.
My feeling exactly. Too much volume, no doubts, too orchestrated and nothing being investigated,
in fact just like WMD, and 9/11.
December 11, 2016
at 5:23 pm GMT \n
Ping Pong Comet Pizza should rename itself as Suck-E-Cheese.
Btw, more pedo stuff.
Media seem less enthused about going after secular pedos, just like rabbi pedos got less public
scrutiny than the Catholic pedo priests did.
Dasein , Website
December 11, 2016
at 6:07 pm GMT \n
I believe that Pizzagate is a Trojan Horse being pushed into Alt-Right internet circles by
Hillary/Soros' former CTR trolls in order to help the Democrats and the MSM continue to flog the
"fake news" narrative. The idea behind it is to enable them to say, "Look, you see what kind of
crazy conspiracies those Alt-Righters consume and repeat amongst themselves? This is the kind
of fake news believing nutjobs we're up against." If you think back upon the history of the meme
(I hate that word, but I have no other to use in its place), you'll find that its original and
most vocal proponents were exhibiting clear trolling behavior. Given their flaky commenting histories,
their pretended expertise on this then-obscure topic, their ostentatious expressions of optimism
that this breaking news would ensure a Trump victory (itself a rather obsequious and scarcely
believable attempt to paint themselves as one of our number), and their single-minded determination
to talk about (and to get us talking about) nothing else, one can only suspect the presence of
some sort of agenda behind their sudden exuberance over Pizzagate.
I believe we are up against a new and rather sophisticated sort of Concern Troll here-a veritable
Stuxnet of concern trolling. A perfect example here at the Unz Review is the poster "anonguy".
Look at his commenting history. Look at the sudden acceleration of his offerings as Election Day
neared. And then look at his militant megaphoning of the Pizzagate narrative all over Sailer's
blog in the days immediately preceding the election. Furthermore, pay attention to his unusual
style, i.e. how he structures his comments as detached musings about the goings-on in the
"infosphere" (his word), how he jejunely assures us the "the narrative is forming" (yes, he actually
said that, and at a time when there was no narrative to speak of), and his links to literally
fake news sites (the Denver Guardian? Give me a break). Now tell me that this is the behavior
of someone who actually has the health of the body politic as his primary objective.
Now, after having sifted all that, do try to remember that the larger general public really
doesn't know or care anything at all about Pizzagate, and that the leaked Podesta emails (all
37,000 of them, or whatever the final tally was) influenced the vote of precisely no one who did
not have the time or inclination to read through them all, which is practically every one of us.
Remember that the only people talking about this in the first place are the Alt-Right bloggers
and their followers, the very venues of "fake news" whom the Left is attempting to discredit and
sully. Remember that the Clintons and Soros specialize in public deception and that they employ
all sorts of people for that very purpose. Now consider who is rendered vulnerable by all of this.
It isn't going to be the Clintons or Podesta. If Hillary Clinton was not prosecuted for trafficking
in state secrets from her private server-a crime for which she should have been executed- then
Podesta is not going to be investigated for this. But you all, on the other hand, have been tainted
with it. You have been successfully associated in the public mind with a "conspiracy theory,"
with the "fake news."
My conclusion: Pizzagate is a "thought worm" designed to infect, distract, and destroy the
Alt-Right, and most of you have been infected with it. This is not to say that there is no pedophilia
going on in Podesta's circle. There may be or there may not be, I really don't know. The point
is that there isn't anything you can do about it. The accusations will be turned against
the accusers instead-classic Clinton behavior. It would be better not to take the bait anymore.
Recent history has demonstrated over and over again that the public is not going to rise up with
one voice and clamor for the punishment even of credibly accused child molesters unless there
is something more to be gained from doing so, and in this case there clearly isn't. What this
says about the spiritual state of the modern West or the psychology of fallen mankind are subjects
I will leave for another discussion. For now it is simply a fact of life with which we have to
account. The only way to beat these people is the Chicago Way: hit them harder than they hit you.
We dealt them a stunning blow by electing Donald Trump, but now we are in danger of losing our
advantage by immersing ourselves in a mire of toothless recriminations, and this is exactly what
they want. Let's not fall for this again; let us rather rekindle the spirit that got us this far,
and take these vile people down once and for all.
11, 2016 at 6:28 pm GMT \n
The Washington Post found the funds to assign 27 investigative reporters for over a year to
dig dirt on Trump, and bragged about it. Judging by what they came up with, it wasn't too fruitful.
11, 2016 at 8:50 pm GMT \n
Your comment is ridiculous.
First you say the entire pizzagate meme is fake and it's fakery will undo the alt-right. Then
you say that you can't do anything about pedophilia anyway, pizzagate or otherwise.
Which is it? Is the story fake and thereby discrediting to those who support it, or is it real
but pointless to cover because you can't do anything about it?
Then you suggest we do this "the Chicago way" which is hitting harder than them whatever that
means. If you are not going to open investigations against these people, then what does "hitting
There is no way that Soros or anyone else is going to construct an elaborate criminal conspiracy
out of whole cloth and tag one of his own loyal operatives.
11, 2016 at 9:55 pm GMT \n
Intelligent's comment looks to me like an elaborate misdirection.
All such blah blah gets no one any closer to an answer as to what is behind the coded language
in the Wikileaks emails.
It is a classic example of throwing up a convolution of dust to obscure the smoking emails.
11, 2016 at 11:45 pm GMT \n
Stick to the evidence.
Ignore irrelevant baroque musings.
You make some good points but have missed the real issue entirely. Whilst I and many others
here DO care about pedos and want them locked away from society, what makes this matter much more
important is that it involves many top level power brokers in politics.
Pedophilia is more of a compulsion rather than addiction, why matters less than the fact that
recidivism is the norm and society deserves protection both from the crime itself and from the
crimes of blackmail that can result from knowledge of it..
Blackmail is a very powerful tool in the work of pure evil and is the reason why even Marines
and Embassy guards have restrictions on who they may or may not consort with whilst on active
foreign postings. I would estimate that there is no greater threat of exposure than one of sexually
exploiting children. Even hardened criminals have contempt for such perverts who are usually granted
special protection when incarcerated.
I would venture the suggestion that people with a compulsion towards sexual contact with children
are identified early in their careers and consequently put forward for rapid progress within government
institutions by those working behind the scene to exercise control over others with decision making
capacity in the highest levels of government.
This is not a matter to be swept away if the swamp is to be drained, rather, this may well
be where the "plughole" to the swamp itself is to be uncovered. It will require a special investigation
team but not one like the Warren Commission or 9/11 "Investigation", a real investigation. Americans
should settle for nothing less and it is incumbent of them to demand it.
12, 2016 at 11:07 am GMT \n
This is not a matter to be swept away if the swamp is to be drained, rather, this may well
be where the "plughole" to the swamp itself is to be uncovered.
I'm willing to believe something pretty sordid is required to keep the bung hole as tightly
plugged as it is and I can't imagine anything else creating a more tightly woven, impenetrable
web of mutual blackmail. Imagine what they have on each other, and imagine what foreign intelligence
services could do with same if they got hold of it. Come to think of it, maybe they have
America must get to the bung, dislodge it and deal with the stench that will cover the country
for a generation. Until then, America can't hope to be great again.
12, 2016 at 12:51 pm GMT \n
This makes a lot of sense.
16, 2016 at 7:25 am GMT \n
That string pullers are on the lookout for rising political stars who can be compromised along
Hmmmmm . . .
Seems like a lot of political families have dynastic aspirations. That would mean that such offspring
might be natural targets for monitoring for any "quirks."
Craig Spence's call boy business in Washington clearly involved high civilian and military
officials. And Spence was able to take friends on midnight tours of the White House.
Spence's house was provided by the Japanese ruling party. The house they provided him had at
least one bedroom wired for audio and video. I'm sure the Japanese didn't know that.
The Washington Times covered it for two or three weeks and it was never mentioned again.
Kids from Boys Town in Nebraska were allegedly used.
Unpack that and hope your hair doesn't turn white.
17, 2016 at 1:37 pm GMT \n
"Nobody is suggesting a rush to judgement here but clearly a prompt and thorough investigation
is called for especially given the supporting evidence, as other commenters have pointed out."
If the putative "circumstantial evidence" that Russia-no! Putin himself!!-interfered in the American
election suffices to launch the CIA on a nutty investigation whose purpose is, obviously, to "prove"
that this is the case to the satisfaction of enough electors for them to become "faithless," then
I think the Pizzagate emails plus "circumstantial" Pizzagate evidence are by comparison much more
compelling and really scream for an investigation. In the Pizzagate case the investigating agency
would presumably be the FBI. Which *might* be grounds to expect a genuine investigation.
No reasonable person would think that the emails really are about Podesta's playing dominos
and having cheese for dinner. quite apart from the fact that cheese is usually mixed in with pasta!!
Come on. I bet Podesta doesn't know how to play the game of dominos. What are these people really
18, 2016 at 1:35 pm GMT \n
The Podestas' silence about the leaks seems pretty damning in itself. Silence is an admission
December 22, 2016 at 5:56 am GMT \n
For U.S. readers to gauge whether something like this COULD be happening in an advanced country,
look to other countries where such incidents ARE known to have happened.
In Belgium, the Marc DUTROUX scandal led to political consequences and appears to be ongoing.
In the UK, the claims against Ted Heath and Cyril Smith (see picture of both in article linked
below) are broadly seen as having at least some factual basis, and were reported in a number of
newspapers including the Independent, the Guardian and the Daily Mail (see link below). Other
names were rumored about.
There were also years of investigations and cover-ups involving various orphanages such as
KINCORA (in Northern Ireland) and HAUTE GARENNE (on the Isle of Jersey). Both were conveniently
located in somewhat remote locations outside the direct reach of English law.
There were also extensive rumors regarding several locations in London. Investigations were
accompanied by the usual fortuitous deaths of potential witnesses, mysterious disappearance of
24, 2016 at 10:11 pm GMT \n
Mr. Cassiel concludes his 3-part series of Pizzagate articles:
Precedents for Pizzagate
Aedon Cassiel Published: December 23, 2016
27, 2016 at 9:45 pm GMT \n
To reiterate a point that should be clear to the more astute reader, my goal in this series
(part 1, part 2) has not been to defend "Pizzagate" as such. My goal has been to defend the
people who want to investigate it against specific accusations levied against them by people
who think Pizzagate has revealed no intriguing information at all-for a specific reason, which
I will be honing in and focusing on much more directly in this closing entry.
Whereas the mainstream critics of Pizzagate would have you believe that the world is divided
between paranoid conspiracy theorist followers of "fake news" and level-headed people who follow
trustworthy news sources and rely on cold, hard reason to determine the truth, my goal has
been to show that-whatever is or is not happening with Pizzagate itself-this framing of the
issue is arrogant, insulting, and the product of extremely narrow tunnel vision. [...]
And if the media is telling you only about the most bizarre, reaching accusations without
telling you any of the more interesting points that have been uncovered (which it is), it is
not doing its proper job."
@Sandy Berger's Socks
If in fact making all the "elite" blackmailable is the object of the exercise and at the same
time being blackmailable is the requisite entry ticket to the elite, then not all the people taking
part in all this sinister deviancy need be actual pedophiles! Some of them could be "merely" psychopaths
furthering their careers. (Not that that makes them any better.)
If this story is what it appears to be – the tip of a very nasty and very large iceberg, then
it could be the mechanism by which the "Deep State" keeps its control of the US government. That
would make getting an investigation by official investigators going, very difficlt indeed.
27, 2016 at 10:07 pm GMT \n
If in fact making all the "elite" blackmailable is the object of the exercise and at the
same time being blackmailable is the requisite entry ticket to the elite, then not all the
people taking part in all this sinister deviancy need be actual pedophiles! Some of them could
be "merely" psychopaths furthering their careers.
Well, I don't really have anything to contribute to the "Pizzagate" discussion myself, except
to say that some of the supposed evidence plus the behavior of the media makes me very, *very*
However, here's a somewhat related paragraph from one of the articles I published a year or
An obvious problem with installing puppet rulers is the risk that they will attempt to cut
their strings, much like Putin soon outmaneuvered and exiled his oligarch patron Boris Berezovsky.
One means of minimizing such risk is to select puppets who are so deeply compromised that they
can never break free, knowing that the political self-destruct charges buried deep within their
pasts could easily be triggered if they sought independence.
I have sometimes joked with my friends that perhaps the best career move for an ambitious
young politician would be to secretly commit some monstrous crime and then make sure that the
hard evidence of his guilt ended up in the hands of certain powerful people, thereby assuring
his rapid political rise.
20, 2017 at 2:17 am GMT \n
This is ALL about the child trafficing that the Clinton-Bush Foundation was doing in Haiti.
It is the weakpoint in a global child trafficing network and it is why the Clinton-Bush Foundation
has taken down their website and are attempting to cover up any traces of it as we speak. Trump
Anyone who believes that it is ludicrous to think that pizzerias could be used for such nefarious
operations, I 'd like to point out to you the case of "The French Connection" which later became
known as "The Pizza Connection" in which a huge global network of pizzerias were being used to
distribute drugs in the 1980′s.
Anyone who believes that the pedophile code is purely circumstantial needs to take a look at
the Katy Perry video "This Is How We Do" which appears to be an homage to Comet Pizza. It is absolutely
rife with the code words from the Podesta emails revealed by Pizzagate. They prance around with
convicted sex offender, who plea bargained out of a child porn charge, Pee-Wee Herman(
http://people.com/celebrity/pee-wee-actor-settles-kiddie-porn-case/ ) singing about "this
is how they do" and "it's no big deal".
Here is a video "Kids" by the group MGMT. The quote at the beginning of the video is from the
quintessential Satanist Nietzsche("Free spirits", by contrast to the philosophers of the past,
are "investigators to the point of cruelty, with rash fingers for the ungraspable, with teeth
and stomach for the most indigestible"
). The video shows them bragging about how prevalent they are through our community. The "do
as thou wilt" bastards are laughing at us about how they control positions of authority like policemen(3:36
of video) and how childrens TV programs are filled with their garbage of wolves in sheeps clothing(4:24
of video). And of course the Pizza and Hot Dog symbology throughout the end which culminates with
them eating the child. This trash has 77 million views on Youtube.
Here is the video "Criminal" by Fiona Apple. It is all about placing the blame on the victim,
by saying that the victim enticed the pedo scum, instead of the perpetrator. This homage to Child
Porn makes great pains to highlight Pizza(:21 and :38 of the video) and tiled kill rooms with
easy clean-up(:45 of the video and blood stains on carpet at :48 and :54).
20, 2017 at 3:06 am GMT \n
The lyrics from "In Bloom":
Sell the kids for food. Weather changes moods. Spring is here again. Reproductive Glands. We
can have some more. Nature is a whore. Bruises on the fruit. Tender age in bloom . But he don't
know what it means when I say "Yummmmmm"
It should be noted that there are two versions of this song. The original one has the Yummmmm
heard at the end at 4:15 in this version.
20, 2017 at 5:55 am GMT \n
Some potential victims of James Alefantis have been identified and one gave an anonymous testimony.
What James Alefantis allegedly did here is not illegal, but speaks volumes about his character,
in my opinion, if the story indeed is true:
It turns out that Carole's son, who is +/-18 at this time, is also working at the restaurant.
I think his name is Dylan/Dillon. He grew up without a father and turned to James Alefantis
often for advice.
One night Carole walked into the comet pizza kitchen, and saw James Alefantis fucking her son
in the kitchen. She was furious because she immediately knew how completely James had taken
advantage of her son. She quit immediately and denounced James viciously in private, unwilling
to do so publicly for professional reasons.
The story checks out, so far: Carole Greenwood is a single mom and has a son named Dylan,
who was 13 years old/young in 2003. [...] [–] daj 16 points (+16|-0) 11 hours ago (edited 10
Disclaimer : I have absolutely no idea if this person is authentic, but since many
Pizzagate critics argue that the scandal has not a leg to stand on, because no victims
have come forward so far, I believe this testimony is important to share.
This is how he answered one of the questions on a voat comment thread. He seems to know/be
aware of Dylan Greenwood
Here is one of the email exchanges between he and James Alefantis, that he did not delete:
After a little while when it was nearing the final exams, I was stressed out, exhausted and
let my guard down and went out for some drinks with James a few times after work to get stuff
off my chest. James would drug me up and then take advantage of me. When I threatened to go
to the police he implied that he would harm me physically and said he would sue me. He had
so many friends around DC that I believed him, I really was afraid, and just kept it all bottled
up. I ended up getting PTSD, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, from what were effectively rapes,
and later I began to realize that I likely had Stockholm Syndrome. I eventually quit the job,
but James would send me lewd photos and texts for another 2 or three years at the rate of once
about every 2 to 3 months, I think 6 months was the longest in that period. I had to kick him
out of the place I worked when he came in every other month or so for about a year. Let this
be a lesson: do not trust sociopaths and pathological liars.
21, 2017 at 1:15 am GMT \n
Former Comet Ping Pong Employee Alleges: "James Alefantis sexually assaulted me"
5 hours ago by abortionburger in pizzagate
Note: I have personally verified this person's identity and backstory. I obviously cannot
verify his accusations. He wishes to remain anonymous.
By now, most people are at least vaguely familiar with the so-called "fake news" story known
as Pizzagate. For those that aren't, the brief version is that self described "internet investigators"
caught wind of some strange wording in the John Podesta emails released by Wikileaks, and went
down the largest internet rabbit hole in recent history.
The story was quickly written off as mass hysteria, a conspiracy theory, and fake news by
nearly all of mainstream media, and censored from the internet forum site Reddit. The theory,
which has a plethora of circumstantial evidence, lacked one key factor: a victim. [...]
The anonymous nature of internet forums leads to skeptics demanding proof of any seemingly
outrageous claim. The publication of these emails adds credibility to his story.
In 2006, the DHS's Department of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ran an
internationally cooperative investigation
into the purchase of subscriptions of child
pornography online. Code-named Project Flicker, the investigation uncovered the identities of
30,000 child porn subscribers in 132 different nations. Some 250 of these identities belonged to
civilian and military employees of the U.S. Defense Department, who gave their real names and
purchased the porn with government .mil email addresses-some with the highest security clearances
available. In response, the Pentagon's Department of Criminal Investigative Services (DCIS)
cross-referenced ICE's list with current employment roles and began a series of prosecutions.
from July 2010 shows that 30 of these individuals were investigated, despite
uncovering a new total of
264 Defense employees
and contractors who had purchased child pornography online. 13 had Top
Secret security clearance. 8 had NATO Secret security clearance. 42 had Secret security
clearance. 4 had Interim Secret security clearance. A total of 76 individuals had Secret security
clearance or higher.
Yet, the investigations were halted entirely after only some 50 total names were investigated
at all, and
just 10 were prosecuted
A full 212
of the individuals on ICE's list were never even given the most cursory
investigation at all. (Note: The number 5200 keeps popping up in sources covering this-for
-and I'm not sure what that number is for: American subscribers? Pentagon email
addresses that weren't confirmed to have actually been used by Pentagon employees, but still may
have been? I'll leave it to anyone interested enough to pursue these individual leads to see if
they can figure that out and get back to us.)
In 2011, the story resurfaced when
Anderson Cooper covered it
with (again) Senator Chuck Grassley on CNN. After this, the story
appears to have sunk straight back down into the memory hole yet again. Neither Anderson Cooper
nor CNN appear to have given a follow–up in the five years since the story of the failed
investigation first aired-why not? And why wasn't the first airing enough to lead to mass outrage
and calls for action anyway? See
for another summary of the squashed investigation from 2014.
"... So I found myself on the crazy left. I'm genuinely more "lefty" than I was 15 years ago, but even now I'm not exactly calling for full communism. I generally think that usually the best use of my efforts are to pull the party leftward (not that I think I have the superpowers required to do this), not just because I'm more lefty, but because the forces pulling them to the right continue to be powerful and well-funded. Also, if the "crazy" position is a minimum wage of $25 an hour, then $15 an hour doesn't look so crazy anymore (for example). If the best we can ever do is a compromise, then it's best not to start the negotiations with the compromise position. ..."
"... People get mad about criticizing Democrats these days in a way they never did before. People like Obama associates "the crazy left" with Bernie, blaming him (and therefore the crazy left) for Clinton's election problems. Maybe I'm wrong, but whatever horrors the Trump administration is going to unleash, the important thing is for the Democrats to draw distinctions, and not just hope for team R to step on enough rakes. "Not as evil as the other guys" just doesn't win elections, even when the other guys are really f!@#ing evil. ..."
Peter K. :
January 15, 2017 at 08:38 AM
SUNDAY, JANUARY 15, 2017
Short blog post means big generalizations, but...
Post-impeachment, post-Bush selection, post-9/11 was a
weird time in American politics (I suppose a specific
weird time, it's always a weird time). One thing people
forget about the impeachment era was that it was basically
The Left (sometimes actually The Left like The Nation
magazine writers and sometimes people who found themselves
being branded The Left because of this) who defended Bill
Clinton in the whole Monica Madness era (and before).
Mainstream media (hi New York Times!), columnists, cable
news personalities, all the respectable prominent
"centrist" Democrats, were falling all over themselves to
condemn that nasty Bill Clinton and his nasty penis, and
Ken Starr was treated as the second coming of Jesus in
respectable DC circles. It was a weird time in which the
crazy left were actually the biggest defenders of the
Democratic party, much bigger defenders of it than the
Democratic party itself. It was a time when you wouldn't
have been surprised if you woke up one morning and half
the party hadn't decided to switch teams and become
Republicans. "I was a Democrat before Bill Clinton did
nasty things with that woman, but now I don't think rich
people should pay taxes anymore..."
And then the selection, and then Iraq, and then Bush's
re-election, and the whole Social Security privatization
nonsense... It was always the "crazy left" that was trying
to make the Democratic party just, you know, be Democrats,
and everybody else basically being like "Why can't a
Democrat be more like a Republican." Being against the war
or against Social Security privatization (the Dems finally
woke up on that one, but it took a lot of yelling) wasn't
exactly calling for full communism, and plenty of people
who thought they were just standard squishy Democrats
suddenly found themselves being lumped together with
So I found myself on the crazy left. I'm genuinely more
"lefty" than I was 15 years ago, but even now I'm not
exactly calling for full communism. I generally think that
usually the best use of my efforts are to pull the party
leftward (not that I think I have the superpowers required
to do this), not just because I'm more lefty, but because
the forces pulling them to the right continue to be
powerful and well-funded. Also, if the "crazy" position is
a minimum wage of $25 an hour, then $15 an hour doesn't
look so crazy anymore (for example). If the best we can
ever do is a compromise, then it's best not to start the
negotiations with the compromise position.
People get mad about criticizing Democrats these days
in a way they never did before. People like Obama associates "the crazy left" with Bernie, blaming him (and
therefore the crazy left) for Clinton's election problems.
Maybe I'm wrong, but whatever horrors the Trump
administration is going to unleash, the important thing is
for the Democrats to draw distinctions, and not just hope
for team R to step on enough rakes. "Not as evil as the
other guys" just doesn't win elections, even when the
other guys are really f!@#ing evil.
by Atrios at 09:48
Before heading out for the weekend, let's discuss Jeffrey Epstein, America's best connected political
pedophile, shall we?
If you haven't heard of him, Epstein's the super-sleazy Palm Beach billionaire who was busted
some time back and convicted for conspiring to bring underage foreign girls to his estates in the
United States and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Or as his 2008 plea deal put it, to "knowingly and willfully
conspiring with others known and unknown to persuade, induce, or entice minor females to engage
I've previously written about Epstein's ties to
Bill Clinton and to
Donald Trump . Neither Clinton nor Trump look come out of it looking good, to put it mildly,
but in this case Clinton looks a lot worse.
"Flight logs show Bill Clinton traveled at least 10 times on Epstein's private jet, dubbed the
'Lolita Express,' by tabloids, and he is widely reported to have visited Little St. James, Epstein's
private island in the US Virgin Islands," I've previously written. "That's where, according to attorneys
for Epstein's victims, many of the worst crimes against minors were committed by Epstein and friends
who traveled there with him."
In a 2011 interview with her attorneys, Virginia Roberts, one of the teenagers preyed upon by
Epstein, said he had told her he had "compromising" information on Bill Clinton and that the former
president "owes me a favor."
Oh yeah, and by the way Epstein donated to the Clinton Foundation and multiple Democratic Party
causes before and after being convicted for pedophilia.
Lately, however, the party has reportedly shunned Epstein. Indeed,
he's so toxic, recently released emails show
, that Team Obama rejected the idea of having Epstein's chief attorney, Roy Black, host a fundraiser.
Black, by the way, is perhaps best known for winning an acquittal for William Kennedy Smith for allegedly
raping a Palm Beach teenager. Following that trial Black married a juror in the case.
Federal and state investigators amassed a mountain of evidence against Epstein, but in the end
Black and his other attorneys were able to draft and negotiate a bizarre plea deal. The terms of
the agreement, which was secret at the time, capped damages against Epstein - reportedly worth about
$2 billion - to between $50,000 and $150,000, depending on what year he had abused the girl, an attorney
with direct knowledge of the case told me.
The agreement also barred victims from seeking any future financial redress. Roberts and a number
of other "Jane Does" - Epstein's underage victims- are currently suing to overturn the
settlement. A number of attorneys with ties to the Obama administration were involved in negotiating
the deal, which was highly criticized and never publicly explained. (The astonishing story of the
"sweetheart" plea deal is laid out in
this article in the Palm Beach Daily News.)
So why write about Epstein now?
First, as just noted, this creep got off easy.
Second, Page Six
recently spotted Epstein on the Upper East Side with young Russian "playmates."
Third, James Patterson, the best-selling writer, is
authoring a book about Epstein that's coming out in October. It's a great time to pile on.
Fourth, I've been looking into the Epstein affair for over a year. I've interviewed dozens of
sources in Florida, including several of the Miami-area lawyers for the Jane Does, and have a lot
of material in my files.
Interviews with key sources, documents and previously published accounts show that Epstein's closest
friends and collaborators included Ghislaine Maxwell, the daughter of disgraced British newspaper
tycoon Robert Maxwell, and Frenchman Jean-Luc Brunel. The latter ran a modeling agency called Karin,
which is based in Paris but also has offices in New York, Miami, and Brazil.
Brunel, whose role in the Epstein case has been
covered by Jezebel and others, has a long and
sordid record of abusing and pimping out young women. Back in 1988, 60 Minutes aired a segment that
featured a dozen models who said they had been sexually assaulted by Brunel.
Craig Pyes, an associate producer and chief investigator of the segment, said various witnesses
told him that Brunel was "heavily into cocaine and sex with young girls," and that he set-up parties
for "his rich playboy friends" and invited girls to weekend parties that "operated as meat markets
for older men." Several models told 60 Minutes they had been drugged and raped by Brunel or his friends.
What's especially outrageous, attorneys tell me, is that neither Brunel nor Maxwell ever testified
in Epstein's case. Both fled the United States on the eve of their respective depositions with the
flimsiest of excuses. (Page Six
recently reported that Maxwell was finally going to be forced to testify in the ongoing Jane
Doe trial, but I haven't been able to confirm that.)
Brunel lined up underage girls for Epstein's Virgin Islands hideaway through his modeling agency,
several of the victims' attorneys I interviewed said. A private investigator involved in the case
backed those accounts.
He said that Karin had two departments, one that was legal and sent girls to New York and elsewhere,
and an illegal side that recruited underage girls for Epstein and other global clients. "They lured
young girls [to Orgy Island], mostly from small towns in Brazil and Eastern Europe – with the promise
of a fat modeling contract," this person said. "They told them they'd go to the island and meet the
head of the modeling agency. Instead, they were coerced into pleasuring Epstein, Brunel and their
This source said Epstein's entire sex procurement operation was laid out to him by a former Karin
bookkeeper, a Cuban-American woman who worked for the modeling agency's Miami office during the relevant
I've unsuccessfully tried to track this woman down. Anyone with information please email me at
I've reached out to Epstein, Brunel, Maxwell and Black on various occasions and never heard back
from any of them.
This is from Daily Mail. The later is a British daily conservative, middle-market tabloid. You
are warned !
I wonder whether when the Dems --or I should say if the Dems --select an "establishment" nominee
they might consider Elizabeth Warren. She's very popular & not as far out there as Bernie. I could live
with that. B ut is considered to be a menace to the Wall Street. In realty not much, but due to this
perception chances for this happening are slim. Dems are corrupt to the core and are now the party of
Wall Street ("republicans light") , thanks to this neoliberal stooge Bill Clinton who sold the party
for 20 silver coins (sorry, millions in annual speeches). And as the neoliberals the last thing they
need is have Warren as their (temporary) leader. Warren is probably acceptable to neocons as she is
war hawk "light" do I would say that her chances are single digits.
An interesting combination would be to have her as VP to boost Hillary changes and then force Hillary
to resign. But this is a conspiracy theory.
Funny, Republicans start digging the dirt on Bill Clinton again and it looks like he enjoyed himself
not only with Monica during his time at White House. There were also unnamed receptionist, his female
jogger companions, and even Eleanor Mondale, the daughter of former US Vice President Walter Mondale.
Of course those are rumors but they are 'well substantiated rumors" (http://www.dailymail.co.uk
Now it is quite clear that both Clintons have a really sociopathic sense of entitlement. A lack
of concern for feelings, needs, or suffering of others; lack of remorse after hurting or mistreating
another; use of seduction, charm, glibness.' That's why "Anyone by Clinton" movement is so strong. Reportedly
around a half of Bernie supporters decided never vote for Hillary.
"... 'There is a vengeful, spiteful ugliness that some women have for other women. Hillary is just one of those women.' For the latest on Hillary and Bill Clinton visit www.dailymail.co.uk/hillary ..."
"... Their clandestine meetings typically included Bill goofing around and playing his sax while Miller, a trained singer and musician, accompanied him on her piano. He would sometimes unwind by smoking a marijuana cigarette. Miller claims that she saw Clinton produce a pouch of white powder on several occasions and snort lines off her coffee table. 'I don't do drugs and I don't smoke. But if you come into my house and say "gosh I've had a bad day" I wouldn't know how to stop you,' said Miller. ..."
"... Their affair would remain a secret for nearly a decade until she went public on the Sally Jesse Raphael show in July 1992, a day after Clinton had been formally named by the Democratic Party as its Presidential candidate. ..."
'There is a vengeful, spiteful ugliness that some women have for other women. Hillary is just
one of those women.' For the latest on Hillary and Bill Clinton visit
...The book promises to recall a series of unguarded conversations in which she claims Bill revealed
his wife's preference for female lovers. As far-fetched as her accusations may appear, she remains
convinced that Hillary Clinton is behind a plot to silence her ahead of the November election. But
it will also lay bare what Miller, describes as a decades-long Democrat campaign to discredit and
harass her that began when she first revealed the affair in 1992, a campaign she claims has now reached
such perverse depths that she actually fears for her life.
The twice-divorced 77-year-old took to social media in recent weeks to post an extraordinary warning
that if she dies by 'suicide' no-one should believe it. When Daily Mail Online visited Miller at
her Arkansas home she insisted she had been stalked, spied upon and plagued by anonymous phone calls
since word of her memoir leaked out.
... ... ...
It was a very different scenario in August 1983, when a 44-year-old Miller left her back door
ajar so her seven-years' younger paramour Bill could be chauffeured to the rear of the property before
slipping inside unnoticed.
The pair had met a decade earlier at parties and political functions when Miller was a senate
aide at the Arkansas State Capitol and Clinton was preparing for his unsuccessful 1974 run for the
House of Representatives.
So when she needed help getting a vintage steam train project off the ground, she sought out her
former friend, by now in his second stint as Governor. 'I left my number with his secretary,' recalled
Miller. 'He was playing golf but within three hours he'd called me. 'He said "I'm going to be leaving
here in a little while, why don't I just drop by and let's see each other for old times' sake."
'We decided because of the positioning of the condo it might be better if he didn't come by the
front door, there are some prominent people that live across by me. 'He never drove himself, it was
a state trooper or someone on his staff. He parked in the park behind my house. I had a gate on the
patio but he just had to lift the latch. 'The first night I just played the piano while he sang.
He's not noted as someone who has a trained voice but we laughed, it was just kind of fun. 'Finally
he said ''we didn't talk about what I came to talk about, so we're going to have to do this again
sometime''. I had all my notes and pictures, all my ideas, all he had to do was call his parks and
tourism gal and get her on this. Bill is not the most handsome man. But he makes you feel like you
have an incredible body and on top of all that you're beautiful. There are not many men that can
make a woman feel that way. 'But we dragged it out for about three months. And yes, we did go upstairs
where the bedrooms were.'
Their clandestine meetings typically included Bill goofing around and playing his sax while
Miller, a trained singer and musician, accompanied him on her piano. He would sometimes unwind by
smoking a marijuana cigarette. Miller claims that she saw Clinton produce a pouch of white powder
on several occasions and snort lines off her coffee table. 'I don't do drugs and I don't smoke. But
if you come into my house and say "gosh I've had a bad day" I wouldn't know how to stop you,' said
'Bill is not the most handsome man. But he makes you feel like your breasts are the right size,
your legs are the perfect length, you have an incredible body and on top of all that you're beautiful.
There are not many men that can make a woman feel that way. 'Do I make it a point to have affairs
with married men, no. But most everyone in Arkansas assumed that their marriage was a business arrangement.
'Bill never sounded like he was in love or locked into a loyal arrangement.'
Their affair would remain a secret for nearly a decade until she went public on the Sally
Jesse Raphael show in July 1992, a day after Clinton had been formally named by the Democratic Party
as its Presidential candidate. But while the future president was a born entertainer and charismatic
companion, the sex itself failed to inspire. 'It wasn't that memorable. It was no big deal - think
about that,' chuckled Miller. 'That's probably why he didn't have any confidence as a lover. 'He
reminded me of a what a little boy would say to his momma. 'Is it OK if I put my hand there? Can
I touch you here?' I've always preferred younger men but I've never had one who asked permission.'
She claims the affair ended abruptly in late 1983 when Miller revealed her intention to stand for
mayor of her hometown, Pine Bluffs, as a Republican.
It would remain a secret for nearly a decade until she went public on the Sally Jesse Raphael
show in July 1992, a day after Clinton had been formally named by the Democratic Party as its Presidential
BILL'S WOMEN WHO HAUNT HILLARY
- Kathleen Willey, a former White House volunteer who says Bill Clinton groped her in
an Oval Office hallway in 1993 when she came to him seeking a paid job, says she has agreed to
become a paid national spokeswoman for an anti-Clinton group being created by operative Roger
- Paula Jones, the former state employee whose allegations of sexual harassment dogged
President Bill Clinton throughout his administration, was photographed appearing at a rally for
presidential candidate Donald Trump in Little Rock.
- Linda Tripp, Monica Lewinsky's confidante and who worked as a White House staffer says
that Hillary Clinton not only knew about her husband's exploits, 'She made it her personal mission
to disseminate information and destroy the women with whom he dallied.'
- Juanita Broaddrick, who claims that she was raped by Bill Clinton in an Arkansas hotel
38 years ago, says that she was cornered by Hillary as she was helping at a Clinton fundraiser
and was given a thinly-veiled warning to keep her mouth shut.
- Maria Crider, who worked on Bill Clinton's first political campaign, said power-hungry
Hillary torpedoed the torrid affair that threatened to destroy her master plan to become president
with anonymous phone calls, fears of stalking and veiled threats.
SF94123, San Francisco, United States, 3 months ago
She probably fears her because it's all a bunch of lies.
Not_Surprised, Walton County, United Kingdom, 3 months ago
Don't believe this mess!
Barney Fife, St Paul, United States, 4 months ago
And this is news? It has been rumored for many years Hillary swings both ways. As for Billy,
that has been known, too.
mememememe, Glasgow, 4 months ago
So what? Sad old woman reliving her youth
du Vallon, Midwest, United States, 4 months ago
So this woman admits that she freely threw her cat at a married man, and now she is bragging
about it, and all the bible pounding, family values, right wing Christian fundamentalists want
us to believe that she is the caliber of woman who we should all believe. Making it worse, she
has so little regret at the hurt she caused that she is now passing around some completely unsupported
and foul whispers about the wife of the man that she dragged into bed. Then has the gall to whine
that Hillary isn't very nice to her. I should think not. She is a sodden dox of a woman with no
morals whatsoever. I have no use for her and don't believe a word she says.
peanutmom, SFBay, United States, 4 months ago
Meh. Who the Clintons get busy with, and how, is of no consequence. Hillary could do the entire
USC football team, and I wouldn't care, just so long as the job she does is done right. It was
ridiculous that Bill got impeached over a dalliance with an intern. It's not like Lewinsky interfered
with how the country was being run.
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the
government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success
of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, controlled press and a mere token opposition
1. Dummy up . If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant . This is also known as the "how dare you" gambit.
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news
blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors."
4. Knock down straw men . Deal only with the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Even better,
create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors and give them lead play when you appear to debunk
all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nut," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot" and,
of course, "rumor monger." You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people
you have thus maligned.
6. Impugn motives . Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not
really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to
7. Invoke authority . Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
9. Come half-clean . This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hang-out
route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively
harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back
position quite different from the one originally taken.
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
11. Reason backward , using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction,
troublesome evidence is irrelevant. For example: We have a completely free press. If they know of
evidence that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma
City bombing they would have reported it. They haven't reported it, so there was no prior knowledge
by the BATF. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a
press that would report it.
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely.
13. Change the subject . This technique includes creating and/or reporting a distraction.
According to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), 2,220,300 adults were incarcerated in
US federal and state prisons, and county jails in 2013 – about 0.91% of adults (1 in 110) in the
U.S. resident population. Additionally, 4,751,400 adults in 2013 (1 in 51) were on probation
or on parole. In total, 6,899,000 adults were under correctional supervision (probation, parole,
jail, or prison) in 2013 – about 2.8% of adults (1 in 35) in the U.S. resident population.
 Correctional Populations in the United States, 2013 (NCJ 248479). Published December 2014
by U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).
... and those who survive, survive in the belly of the beast.
"... New York Police Department detectives and prosecutors working an alleged underage sexting case against former Congressman Anthony Weiner have turned over a newly-found laptop he shared with wife Huma Abedin to the FBI with enough evidence "to put Hillary (Clinton) and her crew away for life," NYPD sources told True Pundit. ..."
"... NYPD detectives and a NYPD Chief, the department's highest rank under Commissioner, said openly that if the FBI and Justice Department fail to garner timely indictments against Clinton and co- conspirators, NYPD will go public with the damaging emails now in the hands of FBI Director James Comey and many FBI field offices. ..."
"... Meanwhile, FBI sources said Abedin and Weiner were cooperating with federal agents, who have taken over the non-sexting portions the case from NYPD. The husband-and-wife Clinton insiders are both shopping for separate immunity deals, sources said. ..."
"... Prosecutors in the office of US Attorney Preet Bharara have issued a subpoena for Weiner's cell phones and travel records, law enforcement sources confirmed. NYPD said it planned to order the same phone and travel records on Clinton and Abedin, however, the FBI said it was in the process of requesting the identical records. Law enforcement sources are particularly interested in cell phone activity and travel to the Bahamas, U.S. Virgin Islands and other locations that sources would not divulge. ..."
"... Both NYPD and FBI sources confirm based on the new emails they now believe Hillary Clinton traveled as Epstein's guest on at least six occasions, probably more when all the evidence is combed, sources said. Bill Clinton, it has been confirmed in media reports spanning recent years, that he too traveled with Epstein over 20 times to the island. ..."
"... Because Weiner's campaign website is managed by the third-party consultant and political email guru, FBI agents are burdened with the task of trying to decipher just how many people had access to Weiner's server and emails and who were these people. Or if the server was ever compromised by hackers, or other actors. ..."
"... Abedin told FBI agents in an April interview that she didn't know how to consistently print documents or emails from her secure Dept. of State system. Instead, she would forward the sensitive emails to her yahoo, Clintonemail.com and her email linked to Weiner. ..."
"... Abedin said, according to FBI documents, she would then access those email accounts via webmail from an unclassified computer system at the State Dept. and print the documents, many of which were classified and top secret, from the largely unprotected webmail portals. ..."
New York Police Department detectives and prosecutors working an alleged underage sexting
case against former Congressman Anthony Weiner have turned over a newly-found laptop he shared with
wife Huma Abedin to the FBI with enough evidence "to put Hillary (Clinton) and her crew away for
life," NYPD sources told True Pundit.
NYPD sources said Clinton's "crew" also included several unnamed yet implicated members of
Congress in addition to her aides and insiders.
The NYPD seized the computer from Weiner during a search warrant and detectives discovered a trove
of over 500,000 emails to and from Hillary Clinton, Abedin and other insiders during her tenure as
secretary of state. The content of those emails sparked the FBI to reopen its defunct email investigation
into Clinton on Friday.
But new revelations on the contents of that laptop, according to law enforcement sources, implicate
the Democratic presidential candidate, her subordinates, and even select elected officials in far
more alleged serious crimes than mishandling classified and top secret emails, sources said. NYPD
sources said these new emails include evidence linking Clinton herself and associates to:
- Money laundering
- Child exploitation
- Sex crimes with minors (children)
- Pay to play through Clinton Foundation
- Obstruction of justice
- Other felony crimes
NYPD detectives and a NYPD Chief, the department's highest rank under Commissioner, said openly
that if the FBI and Justice Department fail to garner timely indictments against Clinton and co-
conspirators, NYPD will go public with the damaging emails now in the hands of FBI Director James
Comey and many FBI field offices.
"What's in the emails is staggering and as a father, it turned my stomach," the NYPD Chief said.
"There is not going to be any Houdini-like escape from what we found. We have copies of everything.
We will ship them to Wikileaks or I will personally hold my own press conference if it comes to that."
The NYPD Chief said once Comey saw the alarming contents of the emails he was forced to reopen
a criminal probe against Clinton.
"People are going to prison," he said.
Meanwhile, FBI sources said Abedin and Weiner were cooperating with federal agents, who have
taken over the non-sexting portions the case from NYPD. The husband-and-wife Clinton insiders are
both shopping for separate immunity deals, sources said.
"If they don't cooperate they are going to see long sentences," a federal law enforcement source
NYPD sources said Weiner or Abedin stored all the emails in a massive Microsoft Outlook program
on the laptop. The emails implicate other current and former members of Congress and one high-ranking
Democratic Senator as having possibly engaged in criminal activity too, sources said.
Prosecutors in the office of US Attorney Preet Bharara have issued a subpoena for Weiner's
cell phones and travel records, law enforcement sources confirmed. NYPD said it planned to order
the same phone and travel records on Clinton and Abedin, however, the FBI said it was in the process
of requesting the identical records. Law enforcement sources are particularly interested in cell
phone activity and travel to the Bahamas, U.S. Virgin Islands and other locations that sources would
The new emails contain travel documents and itineraries indicating Hillary Clinton, President
Bill Clinton, Weiner and multiple members of Congress and other government officials accompanied
convicted pedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein on his Boeing 727 on multiple occasions to his private
island in the US Virgin Islands, sources said. Epstein's island has also been dubbed
Orgy Island or Sex Slave Island where Epstein allegedly pimps out underage girls and boys to
Both NYPD and FBI sources confirm based on the new emails they now believe Hillary Clinton
traveled as Epstein's guest on at least six occasions, probably more when all the evidence is combed,
sources said. Bill Clinton, it has been confirmed in media reports spanning recent years, that he
too traveled with Epstein over 20 times to the island.
Laptop Also Unveiled More Classified, Top Secret Breaches
According to other uncovered emails, Abedin and Clinton both sent and received thousands of classified
and top secret documents to personal email accounts including Weiner's unsecured campaign web site
which is managed by Democratic political consultants in Washington D.C.
Weiner maintained little known email accounts that the couple shared on the website anthonyweiner.com.
Weiner, a former seven-term Democratic Congressman from New York, primarily used that domain to campaign
for Congress and for his failed mayoral bid of New York City.
At one point, FBI sources said, Abedin and Clinton's classified and top secret State Department
documents and emails were stored in Weiner's email on a server shared with a dog grooming service
and a western Canadian bicycle shop.
However, Weiner and Abedin, who is Hillary Clinton's closest personal aide, weren't the only people
with access to the Weiner's email account. Potentially dozens of unknown individuals had access to
Abedin's sensitive State Department emails that were stored in Weiner's email account, FBI sources
FEC records show Weiner paid more than $92,000 of congressional campaign funds to Anne Lewis Strategies
LLC to manage his email and web site. According to FBI sources, the D.C.-based political consulting
firm has served as the official administrator of the anthonyweiner.com domain since 2010, the same
time Abedin was working at the State Department. This means technically Weiner and Abedin's emails,
including top secret State Department emails, could have been accessed, printed, discussed, leaked,
or distributed by untold numbers of personnel at the Anne Lewis consulting firm because they can
control where the website and it emails are pointed, FBI sources said.
According to FBI sources, the bureau's newly-minted probe into Clinton's use and handling of emails
while she served as secretary of state, has also been broadened to include investigating new email-related
- Abedin forwarded classified and top secret State Department emails to Weiner's email
- Abedin stored emails, containing government secrets, in a special folder shared with Weiner
warehousing over 500,000 archived State Department emails.
- Weiner had access to these classified and top secret documents without proper security clearance
to view the records
- Abedin also used a personal yahoo address and her Clintonemail.com address to send/receive/store
classified and top secret documents
- A private consultant managed Weiner's site for the last six years, including three years when
Clinton was secretary of state, and therefore, had full access to all emails as the domain's listed
registrant and administrator via Whois email contacts.
Because Weiner's campaign website is managed by the third-party consultant and political email
guru, FBI agents are burdened with the task of trying to decipher just how many people had access
to Weiner's server and emails and who were these people. Or if the server was ever compromised by
hackers, or other actors.
Abedin told FBI agents in an April interview that she didn't know how to consistently print
documents or emails from her secure Dept. of State system. Instead, she would forward the sensitive
emails to her yahoo, Clintonemail.com and her email linked to Weiner.
Abedin said, according to FBI documents, she would then access those email accounts via webmail
from an unclassified computer system at the State Dept. and print the documents, many of which were
classified and top secret, from the largely unprotected webmail portals.
Clinton did not have a computer in her office on Mahogany Row at the State Dept. so she was not
able to read timely intelligence unless it was printed out for her, Abedin said. Abedin also said
Clinton could not operate the secure State Dept. fax machine installed in her Chappaqua, NY home
Perhaps more alarming, according to the FBI's 302 Report detailing its interview with Abedin,
none of the multiple FBI agents and Justice Department officials who conducted the interview pressed
Abedin to further detail the email address linked to Weiner. There was never a follow up, according
to the 302 report.
But now, all that has changed, with the FBI's decision to reopen the Clinton email investigation
and the husband and wife seeking immunity deals to testify against Clinton and other associates about
the contents of the laptop's emails.
Muse minus Time
Nov 3, 2016 10:18 AM ,
Steve Pieczenik additional video on "Lolita express" HRottenC enabled/participated in pedophilia
as well, more intel leaks to come from US gov. insiders:
Julian Assange is a hero as well as the US moral citizens standing up against this evil criminal
"... Remember back when President Bill Clinton got into all that trouble molesting the young intern in his Oral Office? Remember the first thing the lying, conniving, dissembling commander-in-cheek did? ..."
"... In the latest batch of leaked emails, one top Democratic operative is still grappling with "WJC Issues." "How is what Bill Clinton did different from what Bill Cosby did?" Ron Klain asks in a list of questions worth posing to Mrs. Clinton. "You said every woman should be believed. Why not the women who accused him?" And, perhaps the best: "Will you apologize to the women who were wrongly smeared by your husband and his allies?" ..."
"... Never apologize. Never admit. And always keep lying. ..."
"... That is the very heart of the ethos of Hillary Clinton's campaign. Lie about everything. Lie all the time. ..."
"... Lie about emails. Lie about servers. Lie about national security. Lie about who knew what when. Lie about spilling classified secrets. Lie about dead soldiers. ..."
...l each batch of stolen emails is worse than the last.
Hillary Clinton is a liar. She has terrible instincts. She doesn't believe in anything. Her head
is broken. She doesn't know why she should be president. She is pathological. And she is psychotic.
Just ask everybody who works for her. Just ask campaign chairman John Podesta. Just ask the people
working the hardest to get her elected president.
I mean, in her most rabid streak of attacks on Donald Trump's alleged unfitness for office, Mrs.
Clinton doesn't call him "psychotic."
Psychotic! That is what her campaign chairman called her.
Remember back when President Bill Clinton got into all that trouble molesting the young intern
in his Oral Office? Remember the first thing the lying, conniving, dissembling commander-in-cheek
Take a poll. And he found out that he could skate by on even this - even this! But first - the
poll told him - he had to stall for time. He had to lie about it for as long as he possibly could
before coming clean.
And that was exactly what he did. And he survived.
And good thing he survived so he could go on to haunt America another 15 years later.
In the latest batch of leaked emails, one top Democratic operative is still grappling with "WJC
Issues." "How is what Bill Clinton did different from what Bill Cosby did?" Ron Klain asks in a list of
questions worth posing to Mrs. Clinton. "You said every woman should be believed. Why not the women who accused him?" And, perhaps the best: "Will you apologize to the women who were wrongly smeared by your husband
and his allies?"
Answer: Not likely.
Never apologize. Never admit. And always keep lying.
That is the very heart of the ethos of Hillary Clinton's campaign. Lie about everything. Lie all
Lie about emails. Lie about servers. Lie about national security. Lie about who knew what when.
Lie about spilling classified secrets. Lie about dead soldiers.
Exhaust the people with lies. And then, very flippantly, after months or years of lying, say whatever
you have to say to make the press go away.
"I am sorry you were confused."
"I have already said I wish I had done it differently."
"What difference, at this point, does it make?"
It is all so shameless and dirty and befuddling that it would make Niccolo Machiavelli blush.
• Charles Hurt can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org; follow him on Twitter via
March 21, 2016
What is wrong with Bill Clinton? He just doesn't look right these days. Is he just stoned, or
is whatever is left of the rapist's brain drying up? Check out Bill Clinton yesterday in Arizona
where they forced Gabby Giffords to stumble through a speech for Hillary Clinton. Something about
BJ just doesn't seem right.
Something isn't right with Bill Clinton. Did he pick up some sort of disease from one of his
trips to Jeffrey Epstein's Pedo Island? He looked like he was about to pass out. You ALMOST want
to feel sorry for the old fogey, but I don't.
7 months ago
Late stage syphilis?
Ed Grafke •
7 months ago
Slick Willie may be Sick Willy,
Never met a skirt he didn't hike in the Crooked Wagg'in Finger Days of Yore. Firing blanks..
he won't have wedlock problems of Pal Webster Hubbell.
Nor will a poor little baby suffer with the horrible affliction. 2 out of 3, It's more positive,
than negative. Bill has Great Health Care...He'll be Fine.
"... A judge threw out Guiffre's motion in 2015, but Guiffre stands by her claims and is suing Ghislaine Maxwell, whom she claims acted as Epstein's madam. ..."
"... Buckingham Palace has also denied the allegations against Prince Andrew, calling them "categorically untrue. ..."
"... Requests for comment to Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Clinton Foundation were not returned. The former president, who flew on the "The Lolita Express" at least 26 times from 2001 to 2003, has never addressed his ties with Epstein, a onetime major Democratic donor, according to Federal Election Commission records, who also gave millions to the Clinton Foundation even after his arrest for abusing underage girls. ..."
Trump's supporters have long wondered whether he'd use billionaire sicko Jeffrey Epstein
as ammo against the Clintons-until a lurid new lawsuit accused The Donald of raping one of Epstein's
girls himself. Editor's note: This article has been updated to reflect the withdrawal of Virginia
Roberts Guiffre's allegations against Alan Dershowitz and the striking of the allegations from the
court record by a federal judge. For Jeffrey Epstein and his famous friends, the Aughts were
a simpler time, when the businessmen, academics, and celebrities who counted themselves among the
playboy philanthropist's inner circle could freely enjoy the fruits of his extreme wealth and connections.
little black book and
flight logs read like a virtual Who's Who: Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Larry Summers,
Prince Andrew , and Naomi Campbell all hitched rides on Epstein's private planes. Socialites
and distinguished scientists went to visit Epstein's island in St. Thomas, and cavorted at
epic dinner parties
at his palatial townhouse-then the largest privately owned residence in New York, as
to brag .
There, they picked at elaborate meals catered by celebrity chefs like Rocco DiSpirito,
marvelled at Epstein's opulent decor, and noted the pack of very, very young model-types with whom
Epstein always seemed to surround himself. But a darker story was going on underneath the glamour.
In 2008, Epstein was convicted of soliciting
sex from an underage girl and quietly paid settlements to scores of alleged victims who
said he serially molested them. But the girls kept coming out of the woodwork-in 2014, another young
woman filed a lawsuit claiming that Epstein used her as a sex slave for his powerful friends-and
that she'd been at parties on his private island with former President Clinton. And just last week,
yet another "Jane Doe" filed a suit in New York accusing Epstein and Donald Trump of raping her at
a series of sex parties when she was only 13.
... ... ...
By the time Epstein was arrested in 2008, police in Palm Beach County, Florida, had already
spent months monitoring his movements, rifling through his trash, and interviewing potential
victims and witnesses. Police
reported to prosecutors
that they had gathered enough evidence to charge the money manager with several felonies:
lewd and lascivious molestation and four counts of unlawful sexual activity with a minor. Epstein's
freedom, his wealth, his little black book full of famous folk-including princes, presidents, and
prime ministers-all were seemingly at stake.
So Epstein did what the mega-rich do in these situations: hired star attorneys Gerald Lefcourt
and Alan Dershowitz, who defended their client vigorously, reportedly having witnesses followed and
discrediting the alleged victims by offering their MySpace pages as evidence of supposed drug use
and scandalous behavior.
Prosecutors said Epstein's dream team made successful prosecution unlikely. "Our judgment in this
case, based on the evidence known at the time, was that it was better to have a billionaire serve
time in jail, register as a sex offender, and pay his victims restitution than risk a trial with
a reduced likelihood of success," U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta explained in a 2011 letter.
And so, despite a decade of alleged serial sexual abuse and rape of an unknowable number of girls,
some as many as 100 times according to court filings, the notoriously secretive financier was offered
a deal. For the alleged systematic victimization of young girls-most of whom were plucked by Epstein's
assistants from Palm Beach's poorer neighborhoods and groomed to adore or acquiesce to him-he was
slapped with a 2008 conviction on a single charge of soliciting a minor; and sentenced to an 18-month
stay in a Palm Beach county jail-of which he served only 13 months and was allowed to leave six days
out of every week for "work release." He also agreed to a few dozen confidential, out-of-court payoffs
to his accusers, the most recent of which was finalized in 2011.
Epstein's "potential co-conspirators," as the U.S. Attorney called them-women who allegedly procured
girls for Epstein-also received immunity from prosecution as a condition of the 2007 agreement that
enraged the local police force for its leniency. As of 2015, according to The Guardian, two of these
women had changed their names, and were operating businesses out of a building owned by Epstein's
brother, where it was alleged in court documents that Epstein had housed young women.
Though Epstein must register as a sex offender for life, and arguably suffer the world's most revolting
Google presence, he has seemingly retained his collection of elite academic and media friends as
well as his fortune. Since his release in 2009, Epstein has gone about his business, running a mysterious
money management firm (clients unknown, income unknown, investments and activities unknown) from
his private 70-acre island in the U.S. Virgin Islands and spending time at his Uptown stone mansion.
The palace was gifted to Epstein, some say, by its previous owner-Epstein's guardian angel and the
founder of The Limited Inc., Leslie Wexner.
... ... ...
In December 2014, just as the Palm Beach lawsuits were winding down, another alleged victim emerged
and her claims were salacious: Epstein, she said, had loaned her out as an underage sex slave to
his famous friends -- including Britain's Prince Andrew and Epstein defense attorney Dershowitz (both
men denied the charges). Coming forward in Britain's
Daily Mail in 2011, Virginia Roberts Guiffre-called Jane Doe #3 in a related lawsuit
PDF )-claimed that Epstein and his "girlfriend,"
alleged madame Ghislaine Maxwell, forced her to have sex with the pair's powerful pals
and gather intel that Epstein could later use. In
court documents, Guiffre testified, "Epstein and Maxwell also told me that they wanted
me to produce things for them in addition to performing sex on the men. They told me to pay attention
to the details about what the men wanted so I could report back to them."
noted that Epstein appeared to be collecting information on Prince Andrew-particularly
on his alleged foot fetish-and claimed, "Epstein also trafficked me for sexual purposes to other
powerful men, including politicians and powerful business executives. Epstein required me to describe
the sexual events I had with these men presumably so that he could potentially blackmail them. I
am still very fearful of these men today." A judge threw out Guiffre's motion in 2015, but Guiffre
stands by her claims and is suing Ghislaine Maxwell, whom she claims acted as Epstein's madam. Meanwhile,
the men named by Guiffre seem eager for her to go away. "It's as if I've been waterboarded for 15
months," Dershowitz told the
Boston Globe after the settlement of a defamation case related to Guiffre's claims.
"This has taken a terrible toll on my family, on my friends…" Buckingham Palace has also
denied the allegations against Prince Andrew, calling them "categorically untrue."
UPDATE: This April, Giuffre's lawyers withdrew her allegations against Dershowitz and said
that it was a "mistake" to have filed the accusations in the first place. A federal judge later struck
her allegations against Dershowitz from the court record. At Dershowitz's request, Louis Freeh, the
former head of the FBI, also conducted an independent investigation of her claims and published a
statement noting, "Our investigation found no evidence to support the accusations of sexual misconduct
against Professor Dershowitz."
In her lawsuit, Guiffre had claimed that during trips to Epstein's
private island, she'd also encountered another very famous person: former President Bill Clinton.
alleges the former U.S. president visited Epstein's "Orgy Island" when there were underage
girls present, but added that she never had sex with him and never saw him have sex with any of the
young women. Still, it's these sorts of allegations that have journalists and Clinton-haters circling.
Just last month, pundits on MSNBC's
Morning Joe were speculating about Bill Clinton's oft-discussed friendship
with Epstein and whether it would be the go-to play for a Trump campaign looking to combat Hillary
Clinton's claims that Trump is
bad for women .
Requests for comment to Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Clinton Foundation
were not returned. The former president, who flew on the
"The Lolita Express"
at least 26 times from 2001 to 2003, has never addressed his ties with Epstein, a onetime
major Democratic donor, according to Federal Election Commission records, who also
gave millions to the Clinton Foundation even after his arrest for abusing underage girls.
"I invest in people-be it politics or science. It's what I do," Epstein has
to friends. "There's a 100 percent chance [Trump] is going there," said former McCain strategist
Steve Schmidt on Morning Joe , referring to Clinton's friendship with the pervy moneyman.
Evidently, the National Enquirer is doing Hillary like they did Edwards.
By National ENQUIRER Staff
Oct 18, 2016
Hillary Clinton is a secret sex freak who paid fixers to set up illicit romps
with both men AND women!
That's the blockbuster revelation from a former Clinton family operative who is sensationally
breaking ranks with his one-time bosses to speak to The National ENQUIRER in a bombshell
9-page cover story - on newsstands Wednesday.
"I arranged a meeting for Hillary and a woman in an exclusive Beverly Hills hotel," the man,
who was hired by the Clintons, via a Hollywood executive, to cover up their scandals, told
The ENQUIRER .
"She had come to the studio to see the filming of a movie in 1994."
"While I was there, I helped her slip out of a back exit for a one-on-one session with the other
woman. It was made to look casual, leaving quietly [rather] that being caught up in the melee … but
really it was for something presumably more sordid."
What's more, it wasn't just Hillary's flings with women that the shadowy Mr. Fix It helped to
orchestrate! Hillary's former bagman finally confessed to The ENQUIRER just how
he helped her to cover up her affair with married lover Vince Foster
The shadowy figure - who provided PROOF of his employment for the Clintons - also revealed 12
fixes he covered-up, including:
- + How Hillary secretly plotted to a counter-attack on Bill's mistress Monica
Lewinsky - via a document
buried for two decades!
- + What crooked reporters were on the take from the Clinton camp!
- + How he covered up Bill's seedy romp with hookers!
- + Which A-list celebrity had a secret affair with Bill during his presidency!
In the bombshell exposé, The ENQUIRER will reveal the fixer's dossier of smoking gun
including 24-years of documents, notes, and journals.
This is just a nasty rumor or what ???
"... Rumors have abounded for years that Hillary's door swings this way and this is why she had no issue with Bill's marital infidelities. While the story is not a new one, if it came with credible proof to support those long persistent rumors, it could be a complete game-changer for the election that is now just a short, three weeks away. ..."
Popular Conservative news personality, Matt Drudge, has caused quite the stir. On Sunday
Drudge tweeted that he was about to unleash a bombshell like none other, one that could potentially
upend this contentious Presidential election.
"Oh, on the sex stuff. Hillary is about to get hers … ," he wrote on Twitter,
sharing a photo of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton with talk show host-comedienne-actress
Ellen DeGeneres. The implications, of course, are that the rumors may force Hillary out of the closet
so to speak as a lesbian.
Rumors have abounded for years that Hillary's door swings this way and this is why she had no
issue with Bill's marital infidelities. While the story is not a new one, if it came with credible
proof to support those long persistent rumors, it could be a complete game-changer for the election
that is now just a short, three weeks away.
It did not happened...
"... Yoko Ono has been talking about it for years…and those who would be bothered by it, aren't voting for her anyway. ..."
"... I don't think anyone really cares especially since I doubt she's doing much of anything with anyone nowadays. ..."
"... Now, if she were to divorce Bill and have a public gay wedding ceremony with a divorced Huma Abedin, that might surprise some people but that wouldn't win her any points since it would alienate those who actually just like Bill…. ..."
September 5, 2016 at 12:29 pm
why bother, it's no secret to her voters I don't think…Yoko Ono has been talking about
it for years…and those who would be bothered by it, aren't voting for her anyway.
September 5, 2016 at 12:33 pm
I don't think anyone really cares especially since I doubt she's doing much of anything with anyone
Now, if she were to divorce Bill and have a public gay wedding ceremony with a divorced Huma Abedin,
that might surprise some people but that wouldn't win her any points since it would alienate those
who actually just like Bill….
It may be a preemptive move because there are whisperings that Trump would out her.
Warns Hillary presidency 'would be destructive to the United States' Published: 05/18/2016
at 9:56 PM >
[Editor's note: WND sent Candice Jackson, attorney and author of the acclaimed book
"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine," to Arkansas to conduct a rare in-person
interview with Juanita Broaddrick, who claims Bill Clinton raped her in 1978. Jackson's revealing,
in-depth interview with Broaddrick is presented here for the first time. For those not familiar with
the actual details of Clinton's alleged felonious sexual assault on Broaddrick, WND has published
the entire Broaddrick rape narrative from "Their Lives"
What follows, as Jackson explains, poignantly and in detail, reveals for the first time how
Broaddrick's life – like that of so many others – has been deeply and permanently scarred by her
alleged unwanted sexual encounter with Bill Clinton. Broaddrick also details Hillary Clinton's "haunting"
and intimidating interaction with her following the sexual assault.]
By Candice E. Jackson
Juanita Broaddrick first spoke publicly about her experience being raped by Bill Clinton in 1999.
I met her while featuring her story in my book,
"Their Lives: The Women Targeted By The Clinton Machine." She has largely stayed out of the public
eye for the last decade, but she has spoken out during this 2016 election cycle to urge the American
public to refuse to elect Hillary Clinton to the presidency. I was honored to meet with Juanita in
her Van Buren, Arkansas, home to talk about the long-lasting impact the Clintons' abuse has had on
The brutal sexual assault itself has been described in Juanita's own words in the
Wall Street Journal
NBC's "Dateline" with Lisa Myers , and in my book
"Their Lives." This interview isn't about cheap headlines promising new revelations of details
surrounding the rape itself. This is about sharing publicly new details of how the rape has affected
Juanita over her lifetime. It's also about presenting Juanita's experience to a new generation, including
millennials who may be more open-minded to hearing the truth about the Clintons now than their baby
boomer parents were in the 1990s.
The rape is
described by Juanita Broaddrick to Candice Jackson in gruesome detail here.
Juanita created a social media firestorm earlier this year by tweeting that she had been "dreading
seeing my abuser on TV campaign trail for enabler wife … but his physical appearance reflects ghosts
of past are catching up." One of the many media figures who called her after this tweet was Andrea
Mitchell of NBC. Because she'd had a positive experience with Lisa Myers with NBC back in 1999, Andrea
Mitchell was one of the few calls Juanita returned in the aftermath of her trending tweets. Andrea
Mitchell asked her just one question, listened to her answer, and told Juanita condescendingly, "We're
not going to air anything with you because you have nothing new to add." Juanita felt bewildered
by Andrea Mitchell's dismissive attitude.
Nothing new? Hardly. What happened to Juanita in that Little Rock hotel room at the hands of Bill
Clinton in 1978 is "nothing new," and Hillary's inimical confrontation of Juanita weeks later, and
Bill Clinton's much-delayed and dubious "apology" to Juanita years later are historical events that
haven't changed for three decades. What's new is that Hillary Clinton has all but secured the Democratic
Party's nomination for president, and Juanita Broaddrick is willing to bravely come forward to shed
new light on the lifetime of pain Bill and Hillary Clinton have caused her (and so many women like
... ... ...
"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine" – available at the WND Superstore – is a
wake-up call to Americans everywhere to re-evaluate this ruthless power couple and prevent Hillary
Clinton from returning to the White House.
... ... ..
"I could actually have respected Hillary if she had divorced Bill in 1978. But I feel like she
has always known about all of his dalliances and misdeeds either at the time or shortly after, and
now we know their marriage is just an arrangement. I can't respect a woman like that." She pauses,
reflecting, "I remember being shocked to hear that Hillary was pregnant. She'd been in Sweden or
Switzerland or something like that when I heard it on the news. I was shocked because of what Bill
had told me in that hotel room, you know, that I shouldn't worry about getting pregnant because he
was sterile after having had the mumps."
... ... ...
The 'Stop Hillary'
campaign is on fire! Join the surging response to this theme: 'Clinton for prosecution, not president'
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/05/broaddrick-on-evil-clinton-rape-i-could-never-forgive-them/#YSZ8w708aU2FKEkW.99
"... Michael Isikoff, who was a leading reporter during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, said in a Thursday discussion that NBC should release a 17-year-old tape of an interview that it conducted with Broaddrick. ..."
"... Hillary Clinton was involved in quashing Broaddrick's rape claims. ..."
October 15, 7:53 PM
Michael Isikoff, who was a leading reporter during
the Monica Lewinsky scandal, said in a Thursday
discussion that NBC should release a 17-year-old
tape of an interview that it conducted with
Broaddrick has long claimed that the
interview that NBC aired edited out her claim that
Hillary Clinton was involved in quashing Broaddrick's rape claims.
Hillary advocates are in a typical situation "The pot calling the kettle black". Bill Clinton
sexapades are much more serious that Trump said or ever attempted...
"... Krugman's hero, Hillary Rodham Clinton, is on the record for support Simpson-Bowles. Austerity and raising the Social Security age? What gives? ..."
"... I'd suggest, an underlying cynicism... We're talking about a party that has long exploited white backlash to mobilize working-class voters, while enacting policies that actually hurt those voters but benefit the wealthy. Anyone participating in that scam ... has to have the sense that politics is a sphere in which you can get away with a lot if you have the right connections ..."
"... There is also, I'd suggest, an underlying cynicism that pervades the Republican elite. We're talking about a party that has long exploited white backlash to mobilize working-class voters, while enacting policies that actually hurt those voters but benefit the wealthy. ..."
"... I agree, impugning the integrity of a large group of people is about as bad as calling a large group of people 'deplorables' or Romney's writing off 47% of the population. ..."
"... Unfortunately, history is clear that there is one group of people who routinely took sexual advantage of women: some of the rich and powerful. ..."
"... The main reason it was incomprehensible was that "Europe" practices the allegedly-French maxim "live and let live" in this regard - a considerable level of "benevolent" sin and debauchery will be tolerated and dutifully disregarded as long as it is properly hidden and orderly public perceptions are maintained (or if some of it gets out, at least a customary effort will have to have been made to keep it under wraps). I.e. if you make reasonable efforts to keep it private, it will be treated as private. But fail to make the effort or deliberately show off, then you will meet with scorn and resentment. ..."
"... Using positions of influence to actively take advantage or extract concessions, or abusive behavior of any kind, are not OK, and there is no presumption that it is a perk of power. ..."
"... And that it was viewed as extramarital relations was in good part because a lot of the media "coverage" concentrated on rehashing all the salacious "sexual" aspects in almost pornographic detail. If anybody defiled Ms. Lewinsky's virtue and reputation, it was the persecutors and the media. ..."
"... So why do the French tolerate behavior that would both shame and topple leaders in the U.S. or Britain? Because, despite French lip service to their revolution's promise of "egalite" for all citizens, voters still tend to defer to politicians as a class apart who enjoy entitlements once associated with royal courts. ..."
"... Italy was pretty tolerant of Berlusconi's behavior...until it was proven that he slept with an underage woman. ..."
"... Krugman's claim: "Yes, Bill Clinton had affairs; but there's a world of difference between consensual sex, however inappropriate, and abuse of power to force those less powerful to accept your urges." ..."
"... Wikipedia: "Bill Clinton, the 42nd President of the United States (1993-2001), has been publicly accused by several women of sexual misconduct. Juanita Broaddrick has accused Clinton of rape; Kathleen Willey has accused Clinton of groping her without consent; and Paula Jones accuses Clinton of exposing himself and sexually harassing her." ..."
"... Sadly, Krugman is just spewing the usual partisan sanctimony ...being shocked--just shocked--at the behavior of the other side while showing a shocking lack of curiosity in the misbehavior of politicians on his side...or denying that it might have happened. ..."
"... Let's be clear...Trump's behavior was despicable. Any maybe, just maybe, Bill Clinton's behavior was somewhat less despicable. Still, we can agree that both behaved badly, taking advantage of their power and position to take advantage of others. ..."
"... Clintons have no convictions. And there is always a worse criminal to excuse them. ..."
"... According to sexual harassment guidelines issued by the Clinton administration, large imbalances of power made "consensual" very problematic. For you irony fans..... ..."
"... How can Democrats be shocked--just shocked!--at Trump's behavior, while they continue to cover up and minimize Bill Clinton's? Can Democrats legitimately claim that Bill Clinton was the lesser of two evils when it came to sexual predation? I don't think so. How many hairs do you want to split when it comes to sexual predation? ..."
"... Certainly, Hillary must find it hard to have stood by her man, despite his sexual predations, and then attack Trump for the same behavior. As a result, she leaves the attacks to her army of partisan hacks...like Krugman. ..."
"... Of course he was abusing his power. Being an apologist for Clinton exploiting his power to get sex is pathetic. Failing to recognize the significance of the power differential between Clinton and the women he screwed is pathetic. ..."
"... Predator talk angst on faux prudes is nothing to neocon predator plans on entire countries. It is alleged that Trump does women. Hillary would do Syria, ousting Assad is her goal much like her murder of Qaddafi and Libya. The bait and switch! ..."
"The Trump-Ailes axis of abuse":
Predators in Arms, by Paul Krugman, NY Times
: As many people are
pointing out, Republicans now trying to distance themselves from
Donald Trump need to explain why The Tape was a breaking point, when
so many previous incidents weren't. ...
Meanwhile, the Trump-Ailes axis of abuse raises another question: Is
sexual predation by senior political figures - which Mr. Ailes
certainly was, even if he pretended to be in the journalism business -
a partisan phenomenon?
Just to be clear, I'm not talking about bad behavior in general...
Yes, Bill Clinton had affairs; but there's a world of difference
between consensual sex, however inappropriate, and abuse of power to
force those less powerful to accept your urges. ...
... ... ...
Mr. Trump, in other words, isn't so much an anomaly as he is a pure
distillation of his party's modern essence.
A Boy Named Sue -> Phil...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 09:46 PM
Krugman's hero, Hillary Rodham Clinton, is on the record for
support Simpson-Bowles. Austerity and raising the Social Security age?
Mr. Bill -> anne...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 04:51 PM
"There is also, I'd suggest, an underlying cynicism... We're
talking about a party that has long exploited white backlash
to mobilize working-class voters, while enacting policies
that actually hurt those voters but benefit the wealthy.
Anyone participating in that scam ... has to have the sense
that politics is a sphere in which you can get away with a
lot if you have the right connections. ..."
anne -> Mr. Bill...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 05:34 PM
tough, our backs are against the wall. But, do Americans quit
Like when the Germans attacked Pearl Harbor ;-) ......
There is also, I'd suggest, an underlying cynicism that
pervades the Republican elite. We're talking about a party
that has long exploited white backlash to mobilize
working-class voters, while enacting policies that actually
hurt those voters but benefit the wealthy.
anne -> Mr. Bill...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 06:02 PM
participating in that scam - which is what it is - has to
have the sense that politics is a sphere in which you can get
away with a lot if you have the right connections. So in a
way it's not surprising if a disproportionate number of major
players feel empowered to abuse their position....
[ This is the rationale of the generalizing in the column,
and possibly the rationale is correct as such and makes sense
of the stereotyping of individuals in the Republican Party. I
have no counter argument, though I feel I should have. ]
Times are tough, our backs are against the wall. But, do
Americans quit ? No....
JohnH -> anne...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 03:56 PM
[ I understand the analogy and
sympathize completely. ]
I agree, impugning the integrity of a large group of people
is about as bad as calling a large group of people
'deplorables' or Romney's writing off 47% of the population.
anne -> JohnH...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 05:37 PM
Unfortunately, history is clear that there is one group of
people who routinely took sexual advantage of women: some of
the rich and powerful.
The practice even has a name: Droit du seigneur, or droit
du jambage, whereby a lord was entitled to deflower the bride
of another man on her wedding night.
Though the Wikipedia entry casts some doubt on the
practice, because there was no proof (there wasn't proof of
much back then), it has been a recurring theme. Balzac and
Dumas, fils wrote novels about very young women brought into
wealthy households as playthings. Mario Vargas Llosa wrote a
novel about the dictator Trujillo's practice of having
virgins delivered to his palace during the 1950s. Amin Malouf
wrote a similar novel about a local lord in Lebanon in the
My guess is that the practice is alive and well. Many
Europeans never understood why the Lewinsky affair became a
scandal, because they assumed that such behavior was just a
perk of the position. Certainly, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, IMF
Managing Director and a contender for the presidency of
France, felt no compunction about sexually assaulting a maid
in New York City in 2011.
Now I don't want to impugn the integrity of ALL people who
are rich and/or powerful, but there is clearly a problem with
some of them, regardless of nationality or political party.
anne -> JohnH...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 05:42 PM
Feast of the Goat (Spanish: La fiesta del chivo, 2000) is a
novel by the Peruvian Nobel Prize in Literature laureate
Mario Vargas Llosa. The book is set in the Dominican Republic
and portrays the assassination of Dominican dictator Rafael
Trujillo, and its aftermath, from two distinct standpoints a
generation apart: during and immediately after the
assassination itself, in May 1961; and thirty five years
later, in 1996. Throughout, there is also extensive
reflection on the heyday of the dictatorship, in the 1950s,
and its significance for the island and its inhabitants.
The novel follows three interwoven storylines....
JohnH -> anne...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 08:40 PM
November 25, 2001
By WALTER KIRN
THE FEAST OF THE GOAT
By Mario Vargas Llosa.
Translated by Edith Grossman.
Sympathy, or at least empathy, for the Devil seldom fails
as a novelistic formula. Virtue may inspire, but evil
fascinates. Most fascinating of all, perhaps, is political
evil -- the sort of programmatic perfidy that doesn't just
harm individuals but roils the flow of history itself. For
all its richness as a subject, such large-scale wrongdoing
rarely gets much play in the work of North American writers,
who tend to favor stories of private crime over tales of
public villainy. Recent events may change this cultural
emphasis, but for now one has to look abroad, to talents such
as Mario Vargas Llosa, the prolific Peruvian essayist and
novelist, for the lowdown on organized evil in high
Latin American literature is great...and it often deals with
the abuses of the politically powerful...Isabel Allende,
Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Mario Vargas Llosa, Carlos Fuentes
and others. One of my favorites is 'El Otoño del Patriarca,"
a composite of many strongmen who ruled in Latin America.
anne -> JohnH...
Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 05:48 AM
The US once had great authors such as Steinbeck and Sinclair
Lewis. Barbara Kingsolver's 'The Lacuna' is a really good
story set in Mexico and The US in the 1930s and fascinating
commentary on art and politics of the time.
anne -> JohnH...
Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 05:50 AM
October 31, 1976
A Stunning Portrait of a Monstrous Caribbean Tyrant
By WILLIAM KENNEDY
THE AUTUMN OF THE PATRIARCH
By Gabriel García Márquez.
Translated by Gregory Rabassa.
In 1968 when he began to write this majestic novel,
Gabriel García Márquez told an interviewer that the only
image he had of it for years was that of an incredibly old
man walking through the huge, abandoned rooms of a palace
full of animals. Some of his friends remember him saying as
far back as 1958, when as a newsman he was witnessing the
fall of Marcos Pérez Jiménez in Venezuela, that he would one
day write a book about a dictator. He has since spoken of the
influence of the life of the Venezuelan caudillo, Juan
Vicente Gómez, on this book. He himself lived for years under
the Rojas Pinilla dictatorship in his native Colombia. He
covered the trial of a Batista butcher in the early days of
Castro's Cuban takeover. He lived in Spain during the
interminable rattlings of Franco's elusive death, when that
country was a hospitable journey's end for deposed Latin
He has added to these times of his own life fragments from
the long history of dictators--the deaths of Julius Caesar
and Mussolini, the durability of Stroessner, the wife-worship
of Perón, what seems to be a close study of the times of
Trujillo and the United States and English
gunboat-puppeteering of so many bestial morons into the
dictator's palace. He has absorbed and re-imagined all this,
and more, and emerged with a stunning portrait of the
archetype: the pathological fascist tyrant.
García Márquez (his surname is García; Márquez is his
mother's name) began this novel in 1968 and said in 1971 that
it was finished. But he continued to embellish it until 1975
when he published it in Spain. Now Gregory Rabassa, who
translated the author's last novel, "One Hundred Years of
Solitude," and who on the basis of these two books alone
stands as one of the best translators who ever drew breath,
has given us the superb English equivalent of García
Márquez's magisterial Spanish.
The book, as is to be expected from García Márquez, is
mystical, surrealistic, Rabelaisian in its excesses, its
distortions and its exotic language. But García Márquez'
sense of life is that surreality is as much the norm as
banality. "In Mexico surrealism runs through the streets,"he
once said. And elsewhere: "The Latin American reality is
And so his patriarch, the unnamed General (his precise
rank is General of the Universe) of an unnamed Caribbean
nation, lives to be anywhere between 107 and 232 years old,
sires 5,000 children, all runts, all born after seven-month
gestations. He is a bird woman's bastard, conceived in a
storm of bluebottle flies, born in a convent doorway, gifted
at birth with huge, deformed feet and an enlarged testicle
the size of a fig, which whistles a tune of pain to him every
moment of his impossibly long life. The graffiti on the walls
of the servants' toilet give him oracular insight into
traitorous cohorts, one of whom he serves roasted for dinner
to a gathering of his generals.
He has such power that when he orders the time of day
changed from three to eight in the morning to deliver himself
from darkness, the roses open two hours before dew time. His
influence is so indelible that eventually his cows are born
with his hereditary presidential brand. His venality such
that he rigs the weekly lottery, using children under seven
to draw the winning three numbers, and he always wins all
three. To quiet the children about their enforced complicity,
he imprisons them. When they number 2,000 and the Pope
anguishes publicly over their disappearance and the League of
Nations investigates it, he isolates the children in the
wilderness after a Nazi-like deportation in boxcars, and
finally drowns them at sea, denying they ever existed.
But his most fantastic depredation is the sale of the
Caribbean Sea to the gringos who have kept him in power. The
United States ambassador orders in giant suction dredges and
nautical engineers, who carry off the sea "in numbered pieces
to plant it far from the hurricanes in the blood-red dawns of
Arizona, they took it away with everything it had inside
general sir, with the reflection of our cities, our timid
drowned people, our demented dragons," and they leave behind
a torn crater, a deserted plain of harsh lunar dust. To
replace the breezes that were lost when the sea went away,
another U.S. ambassador gives the General a wind machine....
Latin American literature is great...and it often deals with
the abuses of the politically powerful...Isabel Allende,
Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Mario Vargas Llosa, Carlos Fuentes
cm -> JohnH...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 11:09 PM
[ Surely so. ]
"Many Europeans never understood why the Lewinsky affair
became a scandal, because they assumed that such behavior was
just a perk of the position."
cm -> cm...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 11:17 PM
I disagree. I don't know any
Europeans who think like that.
Extramarital affairs are not really uncommon, and not
restricted to people of high social stature. The affair was
viewed more as extramarital relations than (passively) taking
advantage of somebody arguably in a position of occupational
dependence, and the whole impeachment proceedings were
recognized as a witch hunt by lecherous old bucks riding the
well-worn Puritan mock adultery outrage theme. (And some of
whom later turned out to have had affairs of their own going
The main reason it was incomprehensible was that "Europe"
practices the allegedly-French maxim "live and let live" in
this regard - a considerable level of "benevolent" sin and
debauchery will be tolerated and dutifully disregarded as
long as it is properly hidden and orderly public perceptions
are maintained (or if some of it gets out, at least a
customary effort will have to have been made to keep it under
wraps). I.e. if you make reasonable efforts to keep it
private, it will be treated as private. But fail to make the
effort or deliberately show off, then you will meet with
scorn and resentment.
Using positions of influence to actively take advantage or
extract concessions, or abusive behavior of any kind, are not
OK, and there is no presumption that it is a perk of power.
And that it was viewed as extramarital relations was in good
part because a lot of the media "coverage" concentrated on
rehashing all the salacious "sexual" aspects in almost
pornographic detail. If anybody defiled Ms. Lewinsky's virtue
and reputation, it was the persecutors and the media.
JohnH -> cm...
Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 08:11 AM
"So why do the French tolerate behavior that would both shame
and topple leaders in the U.S. or Britain? Because, despite
French lip service to their revolution's promise of "egalite"
for all citizens, voters still tend to defer to politicians
as a class apart who enjoy entitlements once associated with
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 02:52 PM
Italy was pretty tolerant of Berlusconi's behavior...until it
was proven that he slept with an underage woman.
I thought that Thoma would be wise enough not to republish
this Krugman column...but since he wasn't, here goes:
ken melvin -> JohnH...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 03:36 PM
Krugman's claim: "Yes, Bill Clinton had affairs; but there's
a world of difference between consensual sex, however
inappropriate, and abuse of power to force those less
powerful to accept your urges."
Wikipedia: "Bill Clinton, the 42nd President of the United
States (1993-2001), has been publicly accused by several
women of sexual misconduct. Juanita Broaddrick has accused
Clinton of rape; Kathleen Willey has accused Clinton of
groping her without consent; and Paula Jones accuses Clinton
of exposing himself and sexually harassing her."
Sadly, Krugman is just spewing the usual partisan
sanctimony ...being shocked--just shocked--at the behavior of
the other side while showing a shocking lack of curiosity in
the misbehavior of politicians on his side...or denying that
it might have happened.
Let's be clear...Trump's behavior was despicable. Any
maybe, just maybe, Bill Clinton's behavior was somewhat less
despicable. Still, we can agree that both behaved badly,
taking advantage of their power and position to take
advantage of others.
I say, let's continue to expose the dirty laundry...all of
it. Historically, the media has chosen to treat Presidents
like royalty. But, as we know, the British royal family has
its share of tawdry scandals.
The American people deserve to see what's behind the
carefully fabricated public images of rich and powerful
people who choose to be our leaders. A spotlight needs to be
shown on powerful people who abuse their position both for
personal gain as well as exploitation of the less powerful.
What alternate universe do you live in? Bill Clinton - a bit
old and decrepit - goes down as a good president, isn't
running. We dems don't bring up GWB - a very bad president -
in re Trump.
ilsm -> ken melvin...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 03:53 PM
The analogy to Clinton and Monika: there was evidence he did
the deed; she was bullied, she was the underling, she was
abused, and the process let Bill off. Why different standard
for no evidence but braggadocio Trump?
pgl -> ilsm...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 04:01 PM
The shady "process"
that let H. Clinton off on security and federal records was
not like the process Bill endured.
Monica Lewinsky engaged in consensual sex. Something you
would never understand.
JohnH -> pgl...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 04:08 PM
Juanita Broaddrick has accused Clinton of rape...but pgl
takes the traditional male position of denying that it could
ever have happened...
pgl -> JohnH...
Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 01:39 AM
What a load of garbage even for you. Juanita Broaddrick said
under oath this did not happen. This is a fraud - just like
JohnH -> pgl...
Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 08:30 AM
Of course, pgl provides no link and cherry picks the story:
ilsm -> pgl...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 04:30 PM
Yeah like the woman Petraeus engaged in.....
Tom aka Rusty -> pgl...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 05:20 PM
A 22 year
intern is an equal to the predator pres?
Clintons have no convictions.
And there is always a worse criminal to excuse them.
According to sexual harassment guidelines issued by the
Clinton administration, large imbalances of power made
"consensual" very problematic.
For you irony fans.....
JohnH -> ken melvin...
Monday, October 10, 2016 at 04:05 PM
How can Democrats be shocked--just shocked!--at Trump's
behavior, while they continue to cover up and minimize Bill
Clinton's? Can Democrats legitimately claim that Bill Clinton
was the lesser of two evils when it came to sexual predation?
I don't think so. How many hairs do you want to split when it
comes to sexual predation?
Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 09:29 AM
Certainly, Hillary must find it
hard to have stood by her man, despite his sexual predations,
and then attack Trump for the same behavior. As a result, she
leaves the attacks to her army of partisan hacks...like
> Krugman's claim: "Yes, Bill Clinton had affairs; but
there's a world of difference between consensual sex, however
inappropriate, and abuse of power to force those less
powerful to accept your urges."
Wow. Show of hands: Who
believes Bill Clinton was not using his power to 'encourage'
less powerful people to accept his urges?
I can't keep a straight face with that. Of course he was
abusing his power. Being an apologist for Clinton exploiting
his power to get sex is pathetic. Failing to recognize the
significance of the power differential between Clinton and
the women he screwed is pathetic.
Predator talk angst on faux prudes is nothing to neocon
predator plans on entire countries.
It is alleged that
Trump does women.
Hillary would do Syria, ousting Assad is her goal much
like her murder of Qaddafi and Libya. The bait and switch!
"... A blockbuster book detailing the exploits of the infamous billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein hits shelves on Monday. Sources close to the 63-year-old Brooklyn native have advised him to be "unreachable and out of the country" this weekend when the preliminary media blitz gets underway. ..."
"... Epstein is far deeper scum than a mere pedophile, while the Koch bros and Pence may have a truly fundamentalist moral streak. The period of time between now and the election could be very dangerous for Epstein. ..."
Lolita Express Monday - just another tequila sunrise:
A blockbuster book detailing the exploits of the infamous billionaire pedophile Jeffrey
Epstein hits shelves on Monday. Sources close to the 63-year-old Brooklyn native have advised
him to be "unreachable and out of the country" this weekend when the preliminary media blitz gets
"Filthy Rich," a collaborative effort between best-selling author James Patterson and investigator
John Connolly, is set to reopen old wounds for Epstein, who served 13 months in prison following
a 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a teenage girl.
Epstein has reportedly settled numerous similar cases out of court. The blockbuster book is
also expected to further embarrass celebs who once partied with Epstein.
An absolutely remarkable aspect of this "news" article is that while it mentions Trump as a celebrity
who partied with Epstein, the name "Bill Clinton" is entirely missing. That's despite documentary
proof that "Bill" took 21 flights on the Lolita Express.
Just another MSM advertorial for Hyena Rodent Clinton.
October 9, 2016 at 11:17 am
October 9, 2016 at 11:30 am
Hey Jim, I've got a comment in moderation that touches on this. Specific to Epstein, I'll say
the Koch brothers are as close to the White House as they will ever get, and that Epstein was
adamant about getting evidence about the people he serviced.
Epstein is far deeper scum than a mere pedophile, while the Koch bros and Pence may have
a truly fundamentalist moral streak. The period of time between now and the election could be
very dangerous for Epstein.
October 9, 2016 at 11:53 am
Now that the Politics of Personal Destruction are in full play, certain parties had better
hope that Epstein's settlements, compelling his victims to silence in exchange for hush money,
After all, if one of them has already spent all her settlement money, she's effectively judgment
proof in case she tells her story in violation of the settlement.
As ol' Saddam Hussein used to say, " Anything is possible now, my brothers. "
October 9, 2016 at 11:37 am
Will the next debate be rated XXX?
Is this getting personal? Is that trap for Trump?
Trump: "Go behind closed doors of the holier-than-thou politicians and pundits and see what
they're saying. I look like a baby."
What's it like inside the restrooms at the White House or Capitol Hill? Must be very colorful.
Here, we are looking at public and private etiquette. Unless you're a saint or infallible,
many of us work like that.
"... Will you get dinner and pick up the kids? Could you call the plumber about the kitchen sink?" ..."
"... everything - ..."
"... "I'll be in bed in a little bit" ..."
"... Do you want to be more mindful about eating healthy foods that'll keep your mind and body at their best? Sign up for our newsletter and join our Eat Well, Feel Great challenge to learn how to fuel your body in the healthiest way possible. We'll deliver tips, challenges and advice to your inbox every day. ..."
When your spouse isn't interested in doing the "work" of marriage, it's easy to feel powerless.
But all isn't lost, said Jeannie Ingram,
a couples therapist based in Nashville, Tennessee.
"The relationship doesn't have to end," she told HuffPost. "The truth is, all relationships need
tuning up from time to time."
Below, Ingram and other experts share the most common signs a spouse has checked out of a marriage
- and what you can do to take matters into your own hands.
1. They spend a lot of time around you but not with you.
It doesn't count as quality time if one of you is
distracted by your smartphone or checking work emails, said
Aaron Anderson, a marriage and
family therapist based in Denver, Colorado.
"If you and your spouse spend a lot of time in the same room but they never do things with you,
they've likely disengaged from the relationship," he told us. "Nobody wants to spend the two hours
after work browsing social media."
Try planning new, exciting things to do together so hopefully "your partner will want
to shut down the computer and turn off their phone to be with you," Anderson said.
2. They never include you in their weekend or after-work plans.
Spending time apart (pursing your hobbies or seeing friends) is essential in a healthy marriage.
It keeps the mystery alive. But spend too much time apart and you're well on your way to
living separate lives, said Becky Whetstone, a
marriage and family therapist who works in Little Rock, Arkansas.
"If your S.O feels disillusioned with the marriage, they might cope by distracting themselves
with things they enjoy that that don't involve you," she said.
To figure out why they're disengaging, broach the conversation in a calm manner, at a time that
works for the two of you, Whetstone said.
"Therapists call this 'coming toward your partner,'" she said. "Watch the tone of your voice and
your body language and find the right time - not in the middle of something hectic. Ask, 'Hey, what's
up? I've noticed you pulling away lately.'"
Most importantly, don't lash out if their answer upsets you. "Make it safe for them to reply or
they're not likely to open up again after that," Whetstone said.
3. They never ask, "How was your day?"
If your conversations are limited to household logistics (" Will you get dinner and pick up
the kids? Could you call the plumber about the kitchen sink?" ) and your S.O. seems disinterested
in how you're doing, your marriage may be in trouble, Anderson said.
"When someone checks out of a relationship, they stop caring about their partner as much," he
said. "They don't ask you how work is going, how your family is doing or even if you got that promotion
To show that your marriage is still very much a priority - and that you, at least, care about
them - make it a point to vocalize that.
"Just because they've checked out doesn't mean you have to," Anderson said, "And after they see
how much you care, they might just start caring more, too."
4. They aren't interested in sex.
The thrill is gone - and your S.O. seems entirely OK with that. Why might that be the case? Oftentimes,
partners avoid physical intimacy after they've been hurt emotionally, said Ingram.
"In the beginning, couples in love are so intoxicated with each other that they share everything
- they allow themselves to be fully vulnerable," said Ingram.
But that same vulnerability also opens you up to hurt from your partner.
"If you're emotionally hurt, intimacy doesn't feel safe - it's just too vulnerable,"
Ingram said. "Couples need to become conscious of this and be willing to talk about why they avoid
closeness, perhaps in the office of a qualified marriage therapist."
5. They're hyper-critical of your friends and family.
Your partner may not be as forgiving of your parents as you are, but they shouldn't take the liberty
to rag on them any chance they get, Whetstone said.
"It shows disinterest but it's also unacceptable behavior," she said. "Set a boundary and say
something like, 'Please, why so much venom? It hurts me when you throw so much negativity on to me
and my friends and family. What's going on? Obviously you're unhappy about something. Please, let's
talk about it.'"
6. They go to bed at different times.
"I'll be in bed in a little bit" is not as innocent a phrase as you might think, Ingram
"Commonly, couples fall prey to what I call 'functional exits," she said. "These are behaviors
that are part of everyday life, but serve the dual purpose of avoiding intimacy. For example, work,
hobbies, or when you regularly say or hear, 'You go on to bed; I'll be along later.'"
The good news? Mismatched bedtimes and similar problems are easily fixed if you and your partner
are willing to make the effort.
"Exits like these are not necessarily a sign the relationship needs to end, but rather, an indication
that it's time for some work," she reassured.
Do you want to be more mindful about eating healthy foods that'll keep your mind and body at
Sign up for our newsletter and join our Eat Well, Feel Great challenge to learn how to fuel your
body in the healthiest way possible. We'll deliver tips, challenges and advice to your inbox every
Sep 13, 2016
J S Bach
May 30, 2016 2:05 AM
Just sit right back
And you'll hear a tale
A tale of a sordid lot
Who started from this Florida port
Aboard this pervert yacht.
The mate was a sleazy Jewish boy
Both cocky and assured
Five pedophiles set sail that day
For an all-weekend splurge
An all-weekend splurge.
The pressure started heating up
The foul ship was tossed
If not for the cover of his corrupt tribe
Jeff Epstein would be lost
Jeff Epstein would be lost.
The ship touched ground
On the shore of this uncharted orgy isle
Jeff Epstein too
Without their wives
The movie stars
Prince Andrew and Dershowitz
Here on Jeff Epstein's isle.
J S Bach
May 30, 2016 2:21 AM
Fantastic. You could write for Hollyweird. .. On second thought, they might not appreciate your style.
May 30, 2016 12:56 PM
was my wife I would divorce her and go get a real life. But what do I know about how psychopathic/pervert minds work?
May 30, 2016
Submitted by Shepard Ambellas of
Bill Clinton made multiple trips to Epstein's private island, Little St
James (pictured), between 2002 and 2005
However, the people attending the lavish residence are
likely do not go there to discuss "cutting edge scientific
and medical research" as the Epstein VI Foundation would
like you to believe, but rather go there to experience
full-on sexual encounters with underage girls as young as
That's right, just like a scene out of the
Hollywood blockbuster film Eyes Wide Shut, starring Tom
Cruise, from wild parties to prostitution, orgies and even
Little St. James
reportedly has it all and is seemingly
a gathering point frequented by prominent jet-setters, and
it is all being exposed. The cat is out of the bag so to
Back in 2005 police conducted an 11-month-long undercover
investigation on Jeffery Epstein and his estate after the
mother of a 14-year-old girl went to police after suspecting
her daughter was paid $300 for at least one sexual act on
the island in which she was ordered to strip, leaving on
just her panties while giving Epstein a massage.
Although police found tons of photos of young women on
the island and even interviewed eyewitnesses, Epstein was
hit with a mere slap on the wrist after "pleading to a
single charge of prostitution." Epstein later served
13-months of his 18-month service in jail.
In 2008 Epstein was hit again, this time with a $50
million civil suit after another victim, a woman, made a
filing in a federal court claiming that she was "recruited"
by Epstein to give him a "massage" but was essentially
forced into having sexual intercourse with him for $200,
which was payable upon completion.
Additionally it is important to point out that Bill
Clinton has been mentioned by the press often over the years
- and not just for his controversial relationship with
Monica Lewinsky, but rather his friendship with Jeffery
In fact, flight records indicate that ol' Billy-boy would
frequent the island paradise around the 2002 and 2005 era,
while Hillary, Bill's wife, was a Senator in New York.
The Daily Mail
one woman's experience on the island:
'I remember asking Jeffrey what's Bill Clinton doing
here kind of thing, and he laughed it off and said well
he owes me a favor,' one unidentified woman said in the
lawsuit, which was filed in Palm Beach Circuit Court.
The woman went on to say how orgies were a regular
occurrence and she recalled two young girls from New
York who were always seen around the five-house compound
but their personal backstories were never revealed.
"At least one woman on the compound was there
unwillingly" and was an actual sex slave, according to the
The woman was allegedly forced to have sex with
"politicians, businessmen, royalty, [and] academics" at the
retreat and was just one of "more than 40 women" that have
come forth with claims against Epstein, showing the vast
scale of the man's dark operations, which aren't limited
only to 'Orgy Island.'
Moreover Epstein was invited to Chelsea Clinton's wedding in
2010, amongst 400 other guests, demonstrating his close
friendship with the Clinton family.
To top it all off
"Prince Andrew was allegedly one of the house's visitors. On
Friday, the Duke of York was
in a federal lawsuit filed against Epstein, whom
the FBI once reportedly linked to 40 young women. Filed in
2008 in the Southern District of Florida, the $50 million
Epstein had a "sexual preference and obsession
for underage minor girls … gained access to primarily
economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually
assaulted these girls", as
by the Washington Post.
May 29, 2016 6:10 PM
I thought that
his personal life did not matter.
Damn, would I
love to see one of those teeny
boppers come forward and finger the
He was on
Epstein's "Lolita Express" something
like 26 times.
May 29, 2016 11:56 PM
If Epstein needs to restock merchandise, ISIS now have a bargain line in sex slaves.
Anyone close to UK trade circles knows that Andrew is partial to a "massage" wherever he travels.....
You may have thought that living with your troubled spouse was hard. But now that you've reached
the point of divorce, you probably already know that this can be ever harder. Narcissistic behavior
can be labeled as borderline, sociopathic, narcissistic, or just intolerable, but it all derives
from one fundamental driving force: narcissists can't tolerate criticism, especially public criticism.
And divorcing them is about them most direct and public criticism you can make. You'll know you're
there when your soon-to-be ex spouse begins a campaign of destruction against you. And if you don't
know how to resond and deal with it, it can take a terrible toll.
Surviving the Storm offers practical strategies that can help you reach a settlement with
your soon-to-be ex, in spite of his or her seeming determination to scorch the earth. The key is
understanding that narcissists fear, above all, critical judgment by others. Your decision to divorce
sets these fears in motion. To counter them, you need to know how to split the battlefield, offering
on the one hand a safe alternative in which you get what you need, and on the other a continuing
stream of criticism, judgment, and shame heaped on your soon-to-be ex. In essence, you trade the
safety of silence for the things you need in the settlement.
Surviving the Storm also offers practical boundaries on what you can and can't expect to
do. It explains the impact of divorcing a narcissist on your children, and offers strategies and
tactics to help achieve a custody arrangement that is best for your kids. It explains what parental
alienation is and where to get more help with it. It offers some reflection on the moral issues we
face in divorce, including the Catholic Church's surprising position holding that marriage to a narcissist
is a moral impossibility. Finally, it offers a perspective on healing and the need for new experiences
to move on.
Richard has been helping people deal with the trauma and pain of abusive relationships for nearly
ten years. His other books are
Tears and Healing
, Meaning from
Madness , In Love
and Loving It - Or Not! ,
Tears and Healing
Reflections , and
the Way of Respect
If you've read them, you know his style, and this book is also short and to the point, giving you
the information and insight you need without wading through hundreds of pages you don't need.
"... ...Bill Clinton was not just being entertained by prostitutes with his brother Roger ... he, Roger and Dan Lasater were partying with HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS when Clinton was a married governor in his early 30's. I don't know what the age of consent is in Arkansas, but Clinton and Co. were getting pretty damn close... ..."
"... The sleaziest pair to lie, cheat, and steal their way to political power. Sad to realize this country has turned stupid and apathetic while ignoring the current Bonnie and Clyde ruining our country. I approve of the Ceaucescu method of removing evil. ..."
"... And it's critical that ANYONE who votes in our next election read this book. Because Hillary Clinton is one of the most evil players on the world state today, and this book proves it. Just google 'mena arkansas clinton bush', or 'hillary rape lawyer'...there's so much info here in this book and on the web from court documents, newspaper reports that are never mentioned in the mainstream more than once (they got quashed), FOIA results. ..."
"... Wow. This book is just incredible. The Oklahoma City bombing, Waco, Vince Foster, Jerry Parks, Barry Seal, an international Cocaine trade, the airport at Mena - the list of Bill Clinton's acts of corruption and criminality goes on and on. ..."
"... And don't get the wrong idea: Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is not some tabloid sensationalist; he's a legitimate and well-respected journalist for London's Daily Telegraph and every charge here is substantiated by facts: photographs, declassified FBI documents, interviews with eyewitnesses, and so on and so on, an avalanche of facts. ..."
"... This book is best read in conjunction with Terry Reed's book " Compromised: Clinton, Bush and the CIA " to get the full picture of just how much Bill Clinton was willing to sell his soul for a shot at the White House. ..."
"... Here's this Brit's take on America's ruling class: "The American Elite, I am afraid to say, is almost beyond redemption. Moral relativism has set in so deeply that the gilded classes have become incapable of discerning right from wrong." That was back in 1997. It's only gotten worse since. The day the "almost" in that sentence disappears, that's the day a second American Revolution will start. And when it does, justice will finally catch up with Bill and Hillary. ..."
Robert P. Morrow, January 30, 2012
A Must Read book on the corruption/criminality of Bill Clinton - drugs,
Jerry Parks, young girls, etc.
...Bill Clinton was not just being entertained by prostitutes with
his brother Roger ... he, Roger and Dan Lasater were partying with HIGH
SCHOOL GIRLS when Clinton was a married governor in his early 30's. I don't
know what the age of consent is in Arkansas, but Clinton and Co. were getting
pretty damn close...
ageshio, June 12, 2016
Perverts from start to finish. And I hope their finish is soon!
The sleaziest pair to lie, cheat, and steal their way to political power.
Sad to realize this country has turned stupid and apathetic while ignoring
the current Bonnie and Clyde ruining our country. I approve of the Ceaucescu
method of removing evil.
Joseph H. Race
VINE VOICE, May 30, 2016
NOTHING NEW HERE - JUST CLINTON BEHAVIOR
This one is dated but
not the conduct of the Clintons. It seems whatever they do, nothing seems
to stick. Both being lawyers, they know the law and politics and how to
HeavyElectronicsBuyer, December 12, 2015
OMG. This book is eye-opening. I wouldn't believe it, but there's just too
much proof in court docs, FOIA, first-hand, etc.
To say I loved
this book would be completely amiss. I hated the info I read in this book,
but I'm not that stupid that I would ignore it either. Because anyone who
has done any research into these two characters, realizes that everything
in this book is unfortunately, true.
And it's critical that ANYONE who votes in our next election read
this book. Because Hillary Clinton is one of the most evil players on the
world state today, and this book proves it. Just google 'mena arkansas clinton
bush', or 'hillary rape lawyer'...there's so much info here in this book
and on the web from court documents, newspaper reports that are never mentioned
in the mainstream more than once (they got quashed), FOIA results.
Folks, we are in serious trouble if this woman gets elected. If you thought
it was bad with George Bush 1 and 2, or Clinton 1. Just wait. Because if
Hillary or Jeb get elected, you might as well get out of this country while
you've got the chance. They will put the final nail in the coffin of what
was the great United States of America.
Do something about it! Vote for ANYONE OTHER THAN DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN.
Agentgary7, August 12, 2012
Good Thing This Guy Never Got to Be President ... Oh, Wait ...
Wow. This book is just incredible. The Oklahoma City bombing, Waco,
Vince Foster, Jerry Parks, Barry Seal, an international Cocaine trade, the
airport at Mena - the list of Bill Clinton's acts of corruption and criminality
goes on and on.
And don't get the wrong idea: Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is not some
tabloid sensationalist; he's a legitimate and well-respected journalist
for London's Daily Telegraph and every charge here is substantiated by facts:
photographs, declassified FBI documents, interviews with eyewitnesses, and
so on and so on, an avalanche of facts.
Ultimately, there is no smoking gun here. Evans-Pritchard got as close
as he could with the available facts out there. The evidence here is mostly
circumstantial. But circumstantial as it is, the cumulative effect is devastating.
Yes, the federal government knew about the Oklahoma City Bombing in advance.
Yes, Vince Foster was murdered and his body subsequently placed in Fort
Marcy Park in an amateurish attempt to make it look like a suicide. Yes,
Bill Clinton knew all about the international drug trade going on out of
the airport in Mena, Arkanasas and looked the other way (for a price). And
so on and so on.
This book is best read in conjunction with Terry Reed's book "Compromised:
Clinton, Bush and the CIA" to get the full picture of just how much
Bill Clinton was willing to sell his soul for a shot at the White House.
And one of the truly disquieting things this book drives home to the
reader is that the very institutions we look to to prosecute crimes and
expose injustices - the Department of Justice, the FBI, the mainstream media
- seem all to have been co-opted long ago by the White House and corrupted
in the process. Read this book and, at times, you'll think you're living
in the old Soviet Union - and, in a sense, you are.
Here's this Brit's take on America's ruling class: "The American
Elite, I am afraid to say, is almost beyond redemption. Moral relativism
has set in so deeply that the gilded classes have become incapable of discerning
right from wrong." That was back in 1997. It's only gotten worse since.
The day the "almost" in that sentence disappears, that's the day a second
American Revolution will start. And when it does, justice will finally catch
up with Bill and Hillary.
"... Washington Times ..."
"... The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, And How Far She'll
Go To Become President ..."
One of the worst kept secrets in Washington circles is that Hillary Clinton
is a lesbian. Rumors have swirled in the past about the former First Lady's
gay ways, and with a potential presidential run coming in 2016, they have come
back to haunt her.
Back in 2004, a Washington Times columnist reviewing Bill Clinton's
memoir My Life concluded that Hillary and Bill, "have had a pact for
decades. Their sexy, sexy pact is this: "He gets to fool around with
women and she gets to fool around with women (plus the occasional man) … yes,
The lesbian rumors resurfaced a year later in Edward Klein's book The
Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, And How Far She'll Go
To Become President. In it, Klein claimed that Hillary "wasn't maternal"
"had no wifely instincts," and "many of her closest friends were lesbians."
Klein asserted that Hillary was obsessed with lesbianism, but not in a normal
way. Instead, she was "much more interested in lesbianism as a political statement
than a sexual practice … Hillary talked about it a lot, read lesbian literature,
and embraced it as a revolutionary concept."
In the end, Klein concluded that though she has experimented with lesbianism,
Hillary is ultimately asexual.
The rumors were fired up once again in 2007, when Huma Abedin, Hillary's
top aide, stumbled into the national spotlight with her husband Anthony Wiener's
sex scandal. Many accused Hillary and Huma of being lesbian lovers, with Hillary
hiding her "in plain sight" by hiring her as her top aide.
The lesbian rumors got so bad that year that Hillary addressed them personally.
"It's not true, but it is something that I have no control over. People will
say what they want to say," she told top gay magazine Advocate.
In 2013, when Hillary came out as pro-gay to the country, American Family
Association radio host Sandy Rios claimed to know for a fact that Hillary is
"[Hillary] has always, as far as I know back to college, endorsed and
embraced all things lesbian and gay, that is her history on this so that
shouldn't be too shocking. She has played the role of wife and cookie-making
mother, I'm sorry but this is just the reality of things. We are being caught
in this vortex of homosexual advocacy, it's just amazing."
Finally, Bill Clinton's former mistress Gennifer Flowers spoke out last year
about the former first couple's sex life, and what she had to say was shocking.
Flowers claimed that Bill told her repeatedly that Hillary was "bisexual,"
and that he was fine with it. He also told her that Hillary had "eaten more
p*ssy than he had," a statement which shocked the nation.
In the end, if God-forbid Hillary becomes President in 2016, she will not
only be the first female President, but also the first gay President.
Is America really ready for a lesbian to be running the free world? What
do you think about all this? Sound off in the comments below!
I wonder for how many of them Slick Willie was a patron ;-).
"... According to the National Task Force on Prostitution , it's estimated that
well over 1 million people in the U.S. have worked as prostitutes - or roughly 1
percent of American women. If this campaign is a success, that could translate into
some serious voting power. ..."
"Everyday Americans need a champion," Hillary Clinton proclaimed in her
YouTube video. "And I want to be that champion."
Yes, few were surprised when Hilary Clinton announced her campaign for
the 2016 U.S. presidential race, but many were surprised by some of her
early supporters. Since that announcement, the lovable ladies of Nevada's
renowned Moonlite Bunny Ranch have come out in support of our former first
lady in a serious, potentially large-scale campaign called "Hookers for
Hillary." These Everyday Americans have chosen their candidate.
... ... ...
Bunny Ranch owner Dennis Hof agrees. "With Obamacare the girls were able
to buy good health insurance and without it they weren't able to. Since
Day One when I bought the brothel in 1992 no legal prostitute could get
health insurance," says Hof.
the National Task Force on Prostitution, it's estimated that well over
1 million people in the U.S. have worked as prostitutes - or roughly 1 percent
of American women. If this campaign is a success, that could translate into
some serious voting power.
"... they make the point that Hillary Clinton is a deeply flawed candidate, notably so in matters related to national security. Clinton is surely correct that allowing Trump to make decisions related to war and peace would be the height of folly . Yet her record in that regard does not exactly inspire confidence. ..."
"... When it comes to foreign policy, Trump's preference for off-the-cuff utterances finds him committing astonishing gaffes with metronomic regularity. ..."
"... By comparison, the carefully scripted Clinton commits few missteps, as she recites with practiced ease the pabulum that passes for right thinking in establishment circles. But fluency does not necessarily connote soundness. Clinton, after all, adheres resolutely to the highly militarized "Washington playbook" that President Obama himself has disparaged - a faith-based belief in American global primacy to be pursued regardless of how the world may be changing and heedless of costs. ..."
"... First, and most important, the evil effects of money: ..."
"... Republic Lost, Version 2.0 ..."
"... Second, the perverse impact of identity politics on policy ..."
"... Third, the substitution of "reality" for reality ..."
"... The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America ..."
"... According to Boorstin, more than five decades ago the American people were already living in a "thicket of unreality." By relentlessly indulging in ever more "extravagant expectations," they were forfeiting their capacity to distinguish between what was real and what was illusory. Indeed, Boorstin wrote, "We have become so accustomed to our illusions that we mistake them for reality." ..."
"... While ad agencies and PR firms had indeed vigorously promoted a world of illusions, Americans themselves had become willing accomplices in the process. ..."
"... "The American citizen lives in a world where fantasy is more real than reality, where the image has more dignity than its original. We hardly dare to face our bewilderment, because our ambiguous experience is so pleasantly iridescent, and the solace of belief in contrived reality is so thoroughly real. We have become eager accessories to the great hoaxes of the age. These are the hoaxes we play on ourselves." ..."
"... Real Housewives of ..."
"... Game of Thrones ..."
"... "The making of the illusions which flood our experience has become the business of America," wrote Boorstin. It's also become the essence of American politics, long since transformed into theater, or rather into some sort of (un)reality show. ..."
"... This emphasis on spectacle has drained national politics of whatever substance it still had back when Ike and Adlai commanded the scene. It hardly need be said that Donald Trump has demonstrated an extraordinary knack - a sort of post-modern genius - for turning this phenomenon to his advantage. ..."
"... The thicket of unreality that is American politics has now become all-enveloping. The problem is not Trump and Clinton, per se. It's an identifiable set of arrangements - laws, habits, cultural predispositions - that have evolved over time and promoted the rot that now pervades American politics. As a direct consequence, the very concept of self-government is increasingly a fantasy, even if surprisingly few Americans seem to mind. ..."
"... I know Clinton is one of this gang. And I am sure that given his personality, Trump will succumb to this madness almost at once. Give a narcissistic jerk that much power and good luck to all of us (of course, give that much power to a rabid insider like Clinton and good luck to all of us). Of course, their partisans will say, "Trump will just ignore the entire vast apparatus of the permanent government and the security state and do whatever he likes" or "Nixon went to China, and Clinton can metaphorically do the same when she realizes she's no longer a cheerleader at State and the buck stops at her desk", but I don't believe either of those assertions. ..."
"... Thanks james, to the annoying chest thumpers the image of dems chanting USA USA to drown out No More Wars really signals an alternate reality. I think AB went way too easy on clinton, ..."
"... It's depressing to see Andrew Bacevich, one of our country's most astute observers of the national security scene and a retired military officer, come down on the side of Hilary Clinton as the lesser evil candidate. He can only do so by totally ignoring her central role in the ignition of Cold War 2.0 in his litany of her liabilities. ..."
"... Hillary Clinton offers more of the same bad news, only worse. Trump scares everybody from the MIC, which includes Bacevich, who after all draws a hefty monthly pension from the Defense Dept., because he indicates he actually wants to be the boss, to call the shots, to shake things up, to rattle some cages. The last prez who actually tried to boss around the MIC was JFK, and he had his brain tissue splattered onto the Dallas street in broad daylight. Trump was kind of a stealth candidate in the primaries, in that the bigwigs were unable to take him seriously, even after he won some primaries. By the time they marshaled enough opposition to stop him, it was too late. ..."
"... The people, in the eyes of miscreants like Obama, are mere pawns to be manipulated, stolen from, etc. He's implying the GOP should have had a superdelegate fix, like the dems, to overcome any spurt of independent thinking from the electorate. ..."
"... Clinton may be a non-introspective narcissist who has an poor understanding of the historical results of policy and current affairs, who never admits mistakes/grievous wrongs ("Libya needs more time") and whose most significant personal decision was to recognize that, after failing the bar exam in Washington DC, it was time to go to Arkansas and hitch her wagon to Bill Clinton's career. ..."
"... Trump is a novice at government, yes, but he has experienced dealing with foreign countries as a businessman. HRC is much scarier-she is capable of rattling off the neocon doctrine as it pertains to a lot of countries. Great. I'd much prefer the novice. I would love to have the neocons and neolibs destroyed. ..."
"... Hillary is scary because I think she and Victory Nuland are going to push us into a war with Putin – Trump is an idiot, but we already know that Hillary has a taste for blood. Libya and Iraq are two prime examples. ..."
... ... ...
Even by Washington standards, Secretary Clinton exudes a striking sense of entitlement combined
with a nearly complete absence of accountability. She shrugs off her
misguided vote in support of invading Iraq back in 2003, while serving as senator from New York.
She neither explains nor apologizes for pressing to depose Libya's Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, her most
accomplishment " as secretary of state. "We came, we saw, he died," she
bragged back then, somewhat prematurely given that Libya has since fallen into anarchy and become
a haven for ISIS.
She clings to the demonstrably false claim that her use of a private server for State Department
no classified information . Now opposed to the Trans Pacific Partnership (TTP) that she
once described as the "gold standard in trade agreements," Clinton rejects charges of political
opportunism. That her change of heart occurred when attacking the TPP was helping Bernie Sanders
win one Democratic primary after another is merely coincidental. Oh, and the big money accepted from
Wall Street as well as the
tech sector for minimal work and
the bigger money still from leading figures in the Israel lobby? Rest assured that her acceptance
of such largesse won't reduce by one iota her support for "working class families" or her commitment
to a just peace settlement in the Middle East.
Let me be clear: none of these offer the slightest reason to vote for Donald Trump. Yet together
they make the point that Hillary Clinton is a deeply flawed candidate, notably so in matters
related to national security. Clinton is surely correct that allowing Trump to make decisions related
to war and peace would be the
height of folly . Yet her record in that regard does not exactly inspire confidence.
When it comes to foreign policy, Trump's preference for off-the-cuff utterances finds him
committing astonishing gaffes with metronomic regularity. Spontaneity serves chiefly to expose
his staggering ignorance.
By comparison, the carefully scripted Clinton commits few missteps, as she recites with practiced
ease the pabulum that passes for right thinking in establishment circles. But fluency does not necessarily
connote soundness. Clinton, after all, adheres resolutely to the highly militarized "Washington playbook"
that President Obama himself has
disparaged - a faith-based belief in American global primacy to be pursued regardless of how
the world may be changing and heedless of costs.
On the latter point, note that Clinton's acceptance speech in Philadelphia included not a
single mention of Afghanistan. By Election Day, the war there will have passed its 15th anniversary.
One might think that a prospective commander-in-chief would have something to say about the longest
conflict in American history, one that continues with no end in sight. Yet, with the Washington playbook
offering few answers, Mrs. Clinton chooses to remain silent on the subject.
So while a Trump presidency holds the prospect of the United States driving off a cliff, a Clinton
presidency promises to be the equivalent of banging one's head against a brick wall without evident
effect, wondering all the while why it hurts so much.
Pseudo-Politics for an Ersatz Era
But let's not just blame the candidates. Trump and Clinton are also the product of circumstances
that neither created. As candidates, they are merely exploiting a situation - one relying on intuition
and vast stores of brashness, the other putting to work skills gained during a life spent studying
how to acquire and employ power. The success both have achieved in securing the nominations of their
parties is evidence of far more fundamental forces at work.
In the pairing of Trump and Clinton, we confront symptoms of something pathological. Unless Americans
identify the sources of this disease, it will inevitably worsen, with dire consequences in the realm
of national security. After all, back in Eisenhower's day, the IEDs planted thanks to reckless presidential
decisions tended to blow up only years - or even decades - later. For example, between the 1953 U.S.-engineered
coup that restored the Shah to his throne and the 1979 revolution that converted Iran overnight from
ally to adversary, more than a quarter of a century elapsed. In our own day, however, detonation
occurs so much more quickly - witness the almost instantaneous and explosively unhappy consequences
of Washington's post-9/11 military interventions in the Greater Middle East.
So here's a matter worth pondering: How is it that all the months of intensive fundraising, the
debates and speeches, the caucuses and primaries, the avalanche of TV ads and annoying robocalls
have produced two presidential candidates who tend to elicit from a surprisingly large number of
rank-and-file citizens disdain, indifference, or at best hold-your-nose-and-pull-the-lever acquiescence?
Here, then, is a preliminary diagnosis of three of the factors contributing to the erosion of
American politics, offered from the conviction that, for Americans to have better
choices next time around, fundamental change must occur - and soon.
First, and most important, the evil effects of money: Need chapter and verse? For a tutorial,
see this essential 2015 book by Professor Lawrence Lessig of Harvard:
Lost, Version 2.0 . Those with no time for books might spare 18 minutes for Lessig's brilliant
and deeply disturbing
TED talk . Professor Lessig argues persuasively that unless the United States radically changes
the way it finances political campaigns, we're pretty much doomed to see our democracy wither and
Needless to say, moneyed interests and incumbents who benefit from existing arrangements take
a different view and collaborate to maintain the status quo. As a result, political life has increasingly
become a pursuit reserved for those like Trump who possess vast personal wealth or for those like
Clinton who display an aptitude for persuading the well to do to open their purses, with all that
implies by way of compromise, accommodation, and the subsequent repayment of favors.
Second, the perverse impact of identity politics on policy : Observers make much of the
fact that, in capturing the presidential nomination of a major party, Hillary Clinton has shattered
yet another glass ceiling. They are right to do so. Yet the novelty of her candidacy starts and ends
with gender. When it comes to fresh thinking, Donald Trump has far more to offer than Clinton - even
if his version of "fresh" tends to be synonymous with wacky, off-the-wall, ridiculous, or altogether
The essential point here is that, in the realm of national security, Hillary Clinton is utterly
conventional. She subscribes to a worldview (and view of America's role in the world) that originated
during the Cold War, reached its zenith in the 1990s when the United States proclaimed itself the
planet's "sole superpower," and persists today remarkably unaffected by actual events.
On the campaign trail, Clinton attests to her bona fides by routinely reaffirming her belief in American
exceptionalism , paying fervent tribute to "
the world's greatest military ," swearing that she'll be "listening to our generals and admirals,"
and vowing to get tough on America's adversaries. These are, of course, the mandatory rituals of
the contemporary Washington stump speech, amplified if anything by the perceived need for the first
female candidate for president to emphasize her pugnacity.
A Clinton presidency, therefore, offers the prospect of more of the same - muscle-flexing and
armed intervention to demonstrate American global leadership - albeit marketed with a garnish of
diversity. Instead of different policies, Clinton will offer an administration that has a different
look, touting this as evidence of positive change.
Yet while diversity may be a good thing, we should not confuse it with effectiveness. A national
security team that "looks like America" (to use the phrase originally coined by Bill Clinton) does
not necessarily govern more effectively than one that looks like President Eisenhower's. What matters
is getting the job done.
Since the 1990s women have found plentiful opportunities to fill positions in the upper echelons
of the national security apparatus. Although we have not yet had a female commander-in-chief, three
women have served as secretary of state and two as national security adviser. Several have filled
Adlai Stevenson's old post at the United Nations. Undersecretaries, deputy undersecretaries, and
assistant secretaries of like gender abound, along with a passel of female admirals and generals.
So the question needs be asked: Has the quality of national security policy improved compared
to the bad old days when men exclusively called the shots? Using as criteria the promotion of stability
and the avoidance of armed conflict (along with the successful prosecution of wars deemed unavoidable),
the answer would, of course, have to be no. Although Madeleine Albright, Condoleezza Rice, Susan
Rice, Samantha Power, and Clinton herself might entertain a different view, actually existing conditions
in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, and other countries across the Greater
Middle East and significant parts of Africa tell a different story.
The abysmal record of American statecraft in recent years is not remotely the
fault of women; yet neither have women made a perceptibly positive difference. It turns out that
identity does not necessarily signify wisdom or assure insight. Allocating positions of influence
in the State Department or the Pentagon based on gender, race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation -
as Clinton will assuredly do - may well gratify previously disenfranchised groups. Little evidence
exists to suggest that doing so will produce more enlightened approaches to statecraft, at least
not so long as adherence to the Washington playbook figures as a precondition to employment. (Should
Clinton win in November, don't expect the redoubtable ladies of
Code Pink to be tapped for
jobs at the Pentagon and State Department.)
In the end, it's not identity that matters but ideas and their implementation. To contemplate
the ideas that might guide a President Trump along with those he will recruit to act on them - Ivanka
as national security adviser? - is enough to elicit shudders from any sane person. Yet the prospect
of Madam President surrounding herself with an impeccably diverse team of advisers who share her
own outmoded views is hardly cause for celebration.
Putting a woman in charge of national security policy will not in itself amend the defects exhibited
in recent years. For that, the obsolete principles with which Clinton along with the rest of Washington
remains enamored will have to be jettisoned. In his own bizarre way (albeit without a clue as to
a plausible alternative), Donald Trump seems to get that; Hillary Clinton does not.
Third, the substitution of "reality" for reality : Back in 1962, a young historian by
the name of Daniel Boorstin published
Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America . In an age in which Donald Trump and
Hillary Clinton vie to determine the nation's destiny, it should be mandatory reading. The Image
remains, as when it first appeared, a fire bell ringing in the night.
According to Boorstin, more than five decades ago the American people were already living in a
"thicket of unreality." By relentlessly indulging in ever more "extravagant expectations," they were
forfeiting their capacity to distinguish between what was real and what was illusory. Indeed, Boorstin
wrote, "We have become so accustomed to our illusions that we mistake them for reality."
While ad agencies and PR firms had indeed vigorously promoted a world of illusions, Americans
themselves had become willing accomplices in the process.
"The American citizen lives in a world where fantasy is more real than reality, where the image
has more dignity than its original. We hardly dare to face our bewilderment, because our ambiguous
experience is so pleasantly iridescent, and the solace of belief in contrived reality is so thoroughly
real. We have become eager accessories to the great hoaxes of the age. These are the hoaxes we play
This, of course, was decades before the nation succumbed to the iridescent allure of Facebook,
Google, fantasy football, " Real Housewives of _________," selfies, smartphone apps,
Game of Thrones , Pokémon GO - and, yes, the vehicle that vaulted Donald Trump to stardom,
The Apprentice .
"The making of the illusions which flood our experience has become the business of America," wrote
Boorstin. It's also become the essence of American politics, long since transformed into theater,
or rather into some sort of (un)reality show.
Presidential campaigns today are themselves, to use Boorstin's famous term, "pseudo-events" that
stretch from months into years. By now, most Americans know better than to take at face value anything
candidates say or promise along the way. We're in on the joke - or at least we think we are. Reinforcing
that perception on a daily basis are media outlets that have abandoned mere reporting in favor of
enhancing the spectacle of the moment. This is especially true of the cable news networks, where
talking heads serve up a snide and cynical complement to the smarmy fakery that is the office-seeker's
stock in trade. And we lap it up. It matters little that we know it's all staged and contrived, as
long as - a preening Megyn Kelly getting under Trump's skin, Trump himself denouncing "lyin' Ted"
Cruz, etc., etc. - it's entertaining.
This emphasis on spectacle has drained national politics of whatever substance it still had back
when Ike and Adlai commanded the scene. It hardly need be said that Donald Trump has demonstrated
an extraordinary knack - a sort of post-modern genius - for turning this phenomenon to his advantage.
Yet in her own way Clinton plays the same game. How else to explain a national convention organized
around the idea of "
reintroducing to the American people" someone who served eight years as First Lady, was elected
to the Senate, failed in a previous high-profile run for the presidency, and completed a term as
secretary of state? The just-ended conclave in Philadelphia was, like the Republican one that preceded
it, a pseudo-event par excellence, the object of the exercise being to fashion a new "image" for
the Democratic candidate.
The thicket of unreality that is American politics has now become all-enveloping. The problem
is not Trump and Clinton, per se. It's an identifiable set of arrangements - laws, habits, cultural
predispositions - that have evolved over time and promoted the rot that now pervades American politics.
As a direct consequence, the very concept of self-government is increasingly a fantasy, even if surprisingly
few Americans seem to mind.
At an earlier juncture back in 1956, out of a population of 168 million, we got Ike and Adlai.
Today, with almost double the population, we get - well, we get what we've got. This does not represent
progress. And don't kid yourself that things really can't get much worse. Unless Americans rouse
themselves to act, count on it, they will.
James Levy ,
August 5, 2016 at 7:36 am
August 5, 2016 at 11:14 am
Americans are annoying chest-thumpers but the average Jane or Joe has no power in their own
lives. In contrast, the Washington foreign policy elite has power, the power of life and death,
over billions across the globe, and they exercise it regularly. This power has utterly corrupted
the elite and gone to their heads. That is why any defiance is met with such rage. They are used
to getting their own way, and woe to the country that acts or even thinks otherwise.
I know Clinton is one of this gang. And I am sure that given his personality, Trump will succumb
to this madness almost at once. Give a narcissistic jerk that much power and good luck to all
of us (of course, give that much power to a rabid insider like Clinton and good luck to all of
us). Of course, their partisans will say, "Trump will just ignore the entire vast apparatus of
the permanent government and the security state and do whatever he likes" or "Nixon went to China,
and Clinton can metaphorically do the same when she realizes she's no longer a cheerleader at
State and the buck stops at her desk", but I don't believe either of those assertions.
Good luck to all of us.
ex-PFC Chuck ,
August 5, 2016 at 6:32 am
Thanks james, to the annoying chest thumpers the image of dems chanting USA USA to drown out
No More Wars really signals an alternate reality. I think AB went way too easy on clinton, and
the misogyny claim was one cheap shot…(True, antipathy directed toward Hillary Clinton draws some
of its energy from incorrigible sexists along with the "vast right wing conspiracy" whose members
thoroughly loathe both Clintons. Yet the antipathy is not without basis in fact.) but I think
he retakes that ground when he labels her "utterly conventional", On balance a good article but
as with many prominent figures he can make a laundry list of her downsides and still come out
sounding like a supporter of hers. I share your conclusion, good luck
August 5, 2016 at 6:53 am
It's depressing to see Andrew Bacevich, one of our country's most astute observers of the national
security scene and a retired military officer, come down on the side of Hilary Clinton as the
lesser evil candidate. He can only do so by totally ignoring her central role in the ignition
of Cold War 2.0 in his litany of her liabilities.
John Wright ,
August 5, 2016 at 10:01 am
Hillary Clinton offers more of the same bad news, only worse. Trump scares everybody from the
MIC, which includes Bacevich, who after all draws a hefty monthly pension from the Defense Dept.,
because he indicates he actually wants to be the boss, to call the shots, to shake things up,
to rattle some cages. The last prez who actually tried to boss around the MIC was JFK, and he
had his brain tissue splattered onto the Dallas street in broad daylight. Trump was kind of a
stealth candidate in the primaries, in that the bigwigs were unable to take him seriously, even
after he won some primaries. By the time they marshaled enough opposition to stop him, it was
Obama, for his part, has indicated the republican party was negligent in its duties
by letting the people vote this guy into the nomination. The people, in the eyes of miscreants
like Obama, are mere pawns to be manipulated, stolen from, etc. He's implying the GOP should have
had a superdelegate fix, like the dems, to overcome any spurt of independent thinking from the
August 5, 2016 at 10:50 am
Clinton may be a non-introspective narcissist who has an poor understanding of the historical
results of policy and current affairs, who never admits mistakes/grievous wrongs ("Libya needs
more time") and whose most significant personal decision was to recognize that, after failing
the bar exam in Washington DC, it was time to go to Arkansas and hitch her wagon to Bill Clinton's
Kathleen Smith ,
August 5, 2016 at 3:16 pm
Trump is a novice at government, yes, but he has experienced dealing with foreign countries
as a businessman. HRC is much scarier-she is capable of rattling off the neocon doctrine as it
pertains to a lot of countries. Great. I'd much prefer the novice. I would love to have the neocons
and neolibs destroyed.
As Bacevich says, Ike was not a bad president, and he had no gov't experience before he was elected.
My dad was a democrat, I guess, but the one thing I remember hearing him utter regarding politics
was praise of Ike: " Things were good in the 50's-we had General Motors, General Electric, and
Hillary is scary because I think she and Victory Nuland are going to push us into a war with
Putin – Trump is an idiot, but we already know that Hillary has a taste for blood.
Libya and Iraq are two prime examples.
"... Nuland would survive the controversy over the October 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission/CIA facility in Benghazi, Libya. Initially, many conservative Republicans criticized Nuland for her role in providing ambassador to the UN Susan Rice with "talking points" explaining away the failure of the U.S. to protect the compound from an attack that killed U.S. ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other U.S. personnel. All it took was a tap on the shoulder from Nuland's husband Kagan and his influential friends in the neo-con hierarchy for the criticism of his wife to stop. And stop it did as Nuland was confirmed, without Republican opposition, to be the new Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, a portfolio that gave her a clear mandate to interfere in the domestic policies of Ukraine and other countries, including Russia itself. ..."
"... Although McCain was defeated by Obama in 2008, Kagan's influence was preserved when his wife became a top foreign policy adviser to Obama. The root of this control by neo-cons of the two major U.S. political parties is the powerful Israel Lobby and is the reason why in excess of 95 percent of neo-cons are also committed Zionists. ..."
"... Kagan's writings and pronouncements from Brookings have had a common thread: anti-Vladimir Putin rhetoric and a strong desire to see Ukraine and Georgia in NATO, Bashar al Assad falling in Syria and thus eliminating a Russian ally, no further expansion of Shanghai Cooperation Organization membership and the eventual collapse of the counter-NATO organization, and the destabilization of Russia's southern border region by radical Salafists and Wahhabists funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Qatar, not coincidentally, hosts a Brookings Institution office that advises the Qatari government. ..."
Nuland would survive the controversy over the October 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission/CIA
facility in Benghazi, Libya. Initially, many conservative Republicans criticized Nuland for her role
in providing ambassador to the UN Susan Rice with "talking points" explaining away the failure of
the U.S. to protect the compound from an attack that killed U.S. ambassador Christopher Stevens and
three other U.S. personnel. All it took was a tap on the shoulder from Nuland's husband Kagan and
his influential friends in the neo-con hierarchy for the criticism of his wife to stop. And stop
it did as Nuland was confirmed, without Republican opposition, to be the new Assistant Secretary
of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, a portfolio that gave her a clear mandate to interfere
in the domestic policies of Ukraine and other countries, including Russia itself.
Kagan began laying the groundwork for his wife's continued presence in a Democratic administration
when, in 2007, he switched sides from the Republicans and aligned with the Democrats. This was in
the waning days of the Bush administration and, true to form, neo-cons, who politically and family-wise
hail from Trotskyite chameleons, saw the opportunity to continue their influence over U.S. foreign
With the election of Obama in 2008, Kagan was able to maintain a PNAC presence, through his wife,
inside the State Department. Kagan, a co-founder of PNAC, monitors his wife's activities from his
perch at the influential Brookings Institution. And it was no surprise that McCain followed Nuland
to Maidan Square. Kagan was one of McCain's top foreign policy advisers in the 2008 campaign, even
though he publicly switched to the Democrats the year before. Kagan ensured that he kept a foot in
both parties. Although McCain was defeated by Obama in 2008, Kagan's influence was preserved
when his wife became a top foreign policy adviser to Obama. The root of this control by neo-cons
of the two major U.S. political parties is the powerful Israel Lobby and is the reason why in excess
of 95 percent of neo-cons are also committed Zionists.
Kagan's writings and pronouncements from Brookings have had a common thread: anti-Vladimir
Putin rhetoric and a strong desire to see Ukraine and Georgia in NATO, Bashar al Assad falling in
Syria and thus eliminating a Russian ally, no further expansion of Shanghai Cooperation Organization
membership and the eventual collapse of the counter-NATO organization, and the destabilization of
Russia's southern border region by radical Salafists and Wahhabists funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Qatar, not coincidentally, hosts a Brookings Institution office that advises the Qatari government.
But dominance of U.S. foreign policy does not end with Nuland and her husband. Kagan's brother,
Fred Kagan, is another neo-con foreign policy launderer. Residing at the American Enterprise Institute,
Fred Kagan was an "anti-corruption" adviser to General David Petraeus. Kagan held this job even as
Petraeus was engaged in an extra-marital affair, which he corruptly covered up. Fred Kagan's wife
is Kimberly Kagan. She has been involved in helping to formulate disastrous U.S. policies for the
military occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Fred and Kimberly have also worked on U.S. covert operations
to overthrow the government of Iran. No family in the history of the United States, with the possible
exception of John Foster and Allen Dulles, has had more blood on its hands than have the Kagans.
And it is this family that is today helping to ratchet up the Cold War on the streets of Kyiv.
Victoria Nuland is, indeed, the proper "Doughnut Dolly" for the paid George Soros, U.S. Agency
for International Development, National Endowment for Democracy, and Freedom House provocateurs on
Maidan Square. Political prostitutes representing so many causes, from nationalistic Ukrainian fascists
to pro-EU globalists, require a symbol. There is no better symbol for the foreign-made "Orange Revolution
II" than the biscuit-distributing Victoria Nuland.
Her unleavened biscuits have found the hungry mouths of America's "Three Stooges" of ex-boxer
and political opportunist Vitaly Klitschko, globalist Arseny Yatsenyuk, and neo-Nazi Oleg
Investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist. A member of the Society of Professional
Journalists (SPJ) and the National Press Club
US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Vicrotia Nuland was appointed
by Hillary nu the forigh policy is domain of the President, so she executed policy hatched by "Obama
the neocon", who is great admirer of books by Robert Kagan...
"... Nuland is a Democrat? Boy they let anybody in. I only ask because she's supposed to be a Bush holdover but maybe worked for the Clintons before that? ..."
"... Nuland started out with Bill Clinton, then moved on to Dick Cheney . She certainly is nimble! ..."
"... Because of her marriage to Kagan, most Europeans believe she's a Republican, but her hawkish approach to Russia isn't entirely unique within the Obama administration. ..."
"... FP professionals don't need no stinkin' party affiliations. They are the other half of the "Double Government" that most voters have never heard of. You know, the half that makes sure foreign policy is consistent from one administration (and party) to the next. Works great! ..."
"... You start out wherever your opportunity lies. Once established you can follow your heart. Where does her heart lead her when Cheney leaves office? Drum roll… Why, it's Hillary! ..."
August 4, 2016 at 2:43 pm
Strether Post author ,
August 4, 2016 at 2:50 pm
Paul Wolfowitz is leaning Clinton. Nuff said.
August 4, 2016 at 3:20 pm
Following along with his good friend, Republican Robert Kagan (married, in good bipartisan
power couple fashion, to Victoria Nuland, rumored to be inline for Clinton's Secretary of State,
but I don't think so. Not even Clinton could be that crazy).
Strether Post author ,
August 4, 2016 at 3:33 pm
Nuland is a Democrat? Boy they let anybody in. I only ask because she's supposed to be
a Bush holdover but maybe worked for the Clintons before that?
August 4, 2016 at 3:59 pm
out with Bill Clinton, then moved on to Dick Cheney . She certainly is nimble!
I can't find a link that makes her party affiliation explicit.
Because of her marriage to Kagan, most Europeans believe she's a Republican, but her
hawkish approach to Russia isn't entirely unique within the Obama administration.
But FP does not then go on to clarify. I assumed she was a Democrat because of the Clinton
connection. My bad!
John k ,
August 4, 2016 at 4:14 pm
FP professionals don't need no stinkin' party affiliations. They are the other half of
the "Double Government" that most voters have never heard of. You know, the half that makes sure
foreign policy is consistent from one administration (and party) to the next. Works great!
August 4, 2016 at 4:45 pm
You start out wherever your opportunity lies. Once established you can follow your heart.
Where does her heart lead her when Cheney leaves office? Drum roll… Why, it's Hillary!
It's probably bias, but my sense is Republicans love to parade anyone who is Jewish or not
white in front of cameras who can say, "im a Republican" without drooling or dying a little on
the inside. Since Nuland is Jewish, the GOP would have her on their book tour if she was suspected
Republican especially given the GOP obsession with winning Florida Jewish retirees.
If Nuland was a Republican, we would know.
"... Interestingly, in a self-promoting recent review of Henry Kissinger's new book World Order, Clinton both defines her own Kissinger-esque foreign policy strategy and also concedes that it is more-or-less the same as Obama's. Clinton wrote that Kissinger's world view "largely fits with the broad strategy behind the Obama administration's effort over the past six years to build a global architecture of security and cooperation for the 21st century." ..."
"... Clinton inevitably confuses leadership with hegemony, clearly believing as one of her predecessors at State put it, that America is the "indispensable nation." Nor can she discern that few outside the beltway actually believe the hype. It would be difficult to make the case that the United States either stands for justice or is willing to tolerate any kind of international order that challenges American interests. ..."
"... Any plan to "destroy" ISIS without serious consideration of what that might entail means that the U.S. will inevitably assume the leadership role. Because air strikes cannot defeat any insurgency, and the moderate Syrian rebels waiting to be armed are a fiction, the Obama plan invites escalation and will make the Islamist group a poster child for those who want to see Washington fail yet again in the Middle East. ..."
"... Yanukovych, an admittedly corrupt autocrat, nevertheless became Prime Minister after a free election. Nuland, who is the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the State Department, provided open support to the Maidan demonstrators opposed to Yanukovych's government, to include media friendly appearances passing out cookies on the square to encourage the protesters. ..."
"... The replacement of the government in Kiev was only the prelude to a sharp break and escalating conflict with Moscow over Russia's attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine, most particularly in Crimea. ..."
"... And make no mistake about Nuland's broader intention to expand the conflict and directly confront Russia. In Senate testimony in May she cited how the administration is "providing support to other frontline states like Moldova and Georgia." Frontline? Last week Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel seemed to confirm that the continued expansion of NATO is indeed administration policy, saying that Georgia would be next to join in light of "Russia's blatant aggression in Ukraine." ..."
"... The president also reportedly is an admirer of her husband's articles and books which argue that the U.S. must maintain its military power to accommodate its "global responsibilities." So in response to the question "Why does Victoria Nuland still have her job?" the answer must surely be because the White House approves of what she has been doing, which should give everyone pause. ..."
A new administration only gave interventionism a confused, humanitarian face-lift.
President Barack Obama presents something of a dilemma. I voted for him twice in the belief that
he was basically a cautious operator who would not rush into a new war in Asia, unlike his Republican
opponents who virtually promised to attack Iran upon assuming office. Unfortunately, Obama's second
term has revealed that his instinct nevertheless is to rely on America's ability to project military
power overseas as either a complement to or a substitute for diplomacy that differs only from George
W. Bush in its style and its emphasis on humanitarian objectives.
That the president is indeed cautious has made the actual process of engagement different, witness
the ill-fated involvement in Libya and the impending war-without-calling-it-war in Syria and Iraq,
both of which are framed as having limited objectives and manageable risk for Washington even when
that is not the case. Obama's foreign and security policy is an incremental process mired in contradictions
whereby the United States continues to involve itself in conflicts for which it has little understanding,
seemingly doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past thirteen years but without the shock and awe.
Obama's actual intentions might most clearly be discerned by looking at his inner circle. Three
women are prominent in decision making relating to foreign policy: Samantha Power at the United Nations,
Susan Rice heading the National Security Council, and Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett in the White
House. One might also add Hillary Clinton who, as Secretary of State, operated far more independently
than her successor John Kerry, putting her own stamp on policy much more than he has been able to
do. Where Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel fits into the decision making is unclear, but it is notable
that both he and Kerry frequently appear to be somewhat out of sync with the White House.
What does the Obama team represent? Certain things are obvious. They are hesitant to involve the
United States in long, drawn out military adventures like Iraq and Afghanistan but much more inclined
to intervene than was George W. Bush when there is an apparent humanitarian crisis, operating under
the principle of responsibility to protect or R2P. That R2P is often a pretext for intervention that
actually is driven by other less altruistic motives is certainly a complication but it is nevertheless
the public face of much of American foreign policy, as the nation is currently witnessing regarding
Hillary Clinton has criticized Obama foreign policy because on her view he did not act soon enough
on ISIS and "Great nations need organizing principles, and 'don't do stupid stuff' is not an organizing
principle." Her criticism is odd as she was a formulator of much of what the president has been doing
and one should perhaps assume that her distancing from it might have something to do with her presidential
ambitions. Interestingly, in a self-promoting recent review of Henry Kissinger's new book World Order,
Clinton both defines her own Kissinger-esque foreign policy strategy and also concedes that it is
more-or-less the same as Obama's. Clinton wrote that Kissinger's world view "largely fits with the
broad strategy behind the Obama administration's effort over the past six years to build a global
architecture of security and cooperation for the 21st century."
Now if all of that is true, and it might just be putting lipstick on a pig to create an illusion
of coherency where none exists, then the United States might just be engaging in a sensible reset
of its foreign policy, something like the Nixon Doctrine of old. But the actual policy itself suggests
otherwise, with the tendency to "do stupid stuff" prevailing, perhaps attributable to another Clinton
book review assertion of "a belief in the indispensability of continued American leadership in service
of a just and liberal order."
Clinton inevitably confuses leadership with hegemony, clearly believing as one of her
predecessors at State
put it, that America is the "indispensable nation." Nor can she discern that few outside the beltway
actually believe the hype. It would be difficult to make the case that the United States either stands
for justice or is willing to tolerate any kind of international order that challenges American interests.
And the arrogance that comes with power means that the country's leadership is not often able to
explain what it is doing. Currently, the administration has failed to make any compelling case that
the United States is actually threatened by ISIS beyond purely conjectural "what if" scenarios, suggesting
that the policy is evolving in an ad hoc but risk-averse fashion to create the impression
that something is actually being accomplished. Any plan to "destroy" ISIS without serious consideration
of what that might entail means that the U.S. will inevitably assume the leadership role. Because
air strikes cannot defeat any insurgency, and the moderate Syrian rebels waiting to be armed are
a fiction, the Obama plan invites escalation and will make the Islamist group a poster child for
those who want to see Washington fail yet again in the Middle East.
The tendency to act instead of think might be attributable to fear of appearing weak with
midterm elections approaching, but it might also be due to the persistence of neoconservative national
security views within the administration, which brings us to
Victoria Nuland. Nuland,
many will recall, was the driving force behind efforts to destabilize the Ukrainian government of
President Viktor Yanukovych. Yanukovych, an admittedly corrupt autocrat, nevertheless became
Prime Minister after a free election. Nuland, who is the Assistant Secretary of State for European
and Eurasian Affairs at the State Department, provided open support to the Maidan demonstrators opposed
to Yanukovych's government, to include media friendly appearances
passing out cookies on the square to encourage the protesters.
A Dick Cheney and Hillary
Clinton protégé who is married to leading neocon Robert Kagan, Nuland openly sought regime change
for Ukraine by brazenly supporting
government opponents in spite of the fact that Washington and Kiev had ostensibly friendly relations.
It is hard to imagine that any U.S. administration would tolerate a similar attempt by a foreign
nation to interfere in U.S. domestic politics, particularly if it were backed by a
$5 billion budget,
but Washington has long believed in a global double standard for evaluating its own behavior.
Nuland is most famous for her
foul language when referring to the potential European role in managing the unrest that she and
the National Endowment for Democracy had helped create. To be sure, her aggressive guidance of U.S.
policy in Eurasia is a lot more important than whatever plays out in Syria and Iraq over the remainder
of Obama's time in office in terms of palpable threats to actual American interests. The replacement
of the government in Kiev was only the prelude to a sharp break and escalating conflict with Moscow
over Russia's attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine, most particularly in Crimea.
Victoria Nuland is playing with fire. Russia, as the only nation with the military capability
to destroy the U.S., is not a sideshow like Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Backing Moscow into a corner with
no way out by using threats and sanctions is not good policy. Washington has many excellent reasons
to maintain a stable relationship with Moscow, including counter-terrorism efforts, and little to
gain from moving in the opposite direction. Russia is not about to reconstitute the Warsaw Pact and
there is no compelling reason to return to a Cold War footing by either arming Ukraine or permitting
it to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
And make no mistake about Nuland's broader intention to expand the conflict and directly confront
Russia. In Senate testimony in May
she cited how
the administration is "providing support to other frontline states like Moldova and Georgia." Frontline?
week Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel seemed to confirm that the continued expansion of NATO
is indeed administration policy, saying that Georgia would be next to join in light of "Russia's
blatant aggression in Ukraine."
In 2009 President Barack Obama received
the Nobel Peace Prize for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and
cooperation between peoples." In retrospect it was all hat and no cattle given the ongoing saga in
Afghanistan, the reduction of a relatively stable Libya to chaos, meddling in Ukraine while simultaneously
threatening Russia, failure to restrain Israel and the creation of an Islamic terror state in the
Arab heartland. Not to mention "pivots" and additional developments in Africa and Asia. It is not
a record to brag about and it certainly does not suggest that the administration is as strategically
agile as Hillary Clinton would like to have one believe.
Victoria Nuland is a career civil servant and cannot easily be fired but she could be removed
from her top-level policy position and sent downstairs to head the mailroom at the State Department.
It would send the message that aggressive democracy promotion is not U.S. policy, but President Obama
has kept her on the job. The president also reportedly is an
admirer of her husband's articles and books which argue that the U.S. must maintain its military
power to accommodate its "global responsibilities." So in response to the question "Why does Victoria
Nuland still have her job?" the answer must surely be because the White House approves of what she
has been doing, which should give everyone pause.
Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National
If Hillary wins the White House, expect Victoria Nuland to be at her side.
The other day, a question popped up on a Facebook thread I was commenting on: "Where is Victoria
Nuland?" The short answer, of course, is that she is still holding down her position as assistant
secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs.
But a related question begs for a more expansive response: Where will Victoria Nuland be after
January? Nuland is one of Hillary Clinton's protégés at the State Department, and she is also greatly
admired by hardline Republicans. This suggests she would be easily approved by Congress as secretary
of state or maybe even national-security adviser-which in turn suggests that her foreign-policy views
deserve a closer look.
Nuland comes from what might be called the First Family of Military Interventionists. Her husband,
Robert Kagan, is a leading neoconservative who co-founded the Project for the New American Century
in 1998 around a demand for "regime change" in Iraq. He is currently a senior fellow at the Brookings
Institution, an author, and a regular contributor to the op-ed pages of a number of national newspapers.
He has already declared that he will be voting for Hillary Clinton in November, a shift away from
the GOP that many have seen as a clever career-enhancing move for both him and his wife.
Robert's brother, Fred, is with the hawkish American Enterprise Institute, and his sister-in-law,
Kimberly, is the head of the Institute for the Study of War, which is largely funded by defense contractors.
The Kagans work to encourage military action, both through their positions in government and by influencing
the public debate through think-tank reports and op-eds. It is a family enterprise that mirrors the
military-industrial complex as a whole, with think tanks coming up with reasons to increase military
spending and providing "expert" support for the government officials who actually promote and implement
the policies. Defense contractors, meanwhile, benefit from the largesse and kick back some money
to the think tanks, which then develop new reasons to spend still more on military procurement.
The Kagans' underlying belief is that the United States has both the power and the obligation
to replace governments that are considered either uncooperative with Washington (the "Leader of the
Free World") or hostile to American interests. American interests are, of course, mutable, and they
include values like democracy and the rule of law as well as practical considerations such as economic
and political competition. Given the elasticity of the interests, many countries can be and are considered
potential targets for Washington's tender ministrations.
For what it's worth, President Obama is reportedly an
admirer of Robert Kagan's books, which argue that the U.S. must maintain its military power to
accommodate its "global responsibilities." The persistence of neoconservative foreign-policy views
in the Obama administration has often been remarked upon, though Democrats and Republicans embrace
military interventionism for different reasons. The GOP sees it as an international leadership imperative
driven by American "exceptionalism," while the Dems romanticize "liberal intervention" as a sometimes-necessary
evil undertaken most often for humanitarian reasons. But the result is the same, as no administration
wants to be seen as weak when dealing with the outside world. George W. Bush's catastrophic failures
in Afghanistan and Iraq continue to bear fruit under a Democratic administration, while Obama has
added a string of additional "boots on the ground" interventions in Libya, Syria, Yemen, the Philippines,
And Nuland herself,
many will recall, was the driving force behind efforts to destabilize the Ukrainian government of
President Viktor Yanukovych in 2013-14. Yanukovych, admittedly a corrupt autocrat, nevertheless assumed
office after a free election. In spite of the fact that Washington and Kiev ostensibly had friendly
relations, Nuland provided open support for the Maidan Square demonstrators opposed to Yanukovych's
passing out cookies to protesters on the square and holding photo ops with a beaming Sen. John
Nuland started her rapid rise as an adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney. Subsequently, she was
serially promoted by secretaries of state Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, attaining her current position
in September 2013. But it was her behavior in Ukraine that made her a media figure. It is hard to
imagine that any U.S. administration would tolerate a similar attempt by a foreign nation to interfere
in domestic politics, particularly if it were backed by a
$5 billion budget,
but Washington has long adhered to a double standard when evaluating its own behavior.
Nuland is most famous for using
foul language when referring to the potential European role in managing the unrest in Ukraine
that she and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) had helped create. She even discussed with
U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt who the new leader of Ukraine ought to be. "Yats is the guy" she said
(referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk), while pondering how she would "glue this thing" as Pyatt simultaneously
considered how to "midwife" it. Their insecure phone call was
intercepted and leaked,
possibly by the Russian intelligence service, though anyone equipped with a scanner could have done
The inevitable replacement of the government in Kiev, actually a coup but sold to the media as
a triumph for "democracy," was only the prelude to a sharp break-and escalating conflict-with Moscow
over Russia's attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine. The new regime in Kiev, as corrupt
as its predecessor and supported by neo-Nazis and ultra-nationalists, was consistently whitewashed
in the Western media, and the conflict was depicted as "pro-democracy" forces resisting unprovoked
Indeed, the real objective of interfering in Ukraine was, right from the start, to install a regime
hostile to Moscow. Carl Gershman, the head of the taxpayer-funded NED,
called Ukraine "the biggest prize" in the effort to topple Russian President Vladimir Putin,
who "may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself." But
Gershman and Nuland were playing with fire in their assessment, as Russia had vital interests at
stake and is the only nation with the military capability to destroy the U.S.
And make no mistake about Nuland's clear intention to expand the conflict and directly confront
Moscow. In Senate testimony in May of 2014,
she noted how
the Obama administration was "providing support to other frontline states like Moldova and Georgia."
Nuland and her neoconservative allies celebrated their "regime change" in Kiev oblivious to the
fact that Putin would recognize the strategic threat to his own country and would react, particularly
to protect the historic Russian naval base at Sevastopol in Crimea. Barack Obama responded predictably,
initiating what soon became something like a new Cold War against Russia, risking escalation into
a possible nuclear confrontation. It was a crisis that would not have existed but for Nuland and
Though there was no evidence that Putin had initiated the Ukraine crisis and much evidence to
the contrary, the U.S. government propaganda machine rolled into action, claiming that Russia's measures
in Ukraine would be the first step in an invasion of Eastern Europe. Former Secretary of State Clinton
compared Putin to Adolf Hitler. And Robert Kagan provided the argument for more intervention,
producing a lengthy essay in The New Republic entitled "Superpowers
Don't Get to Retire," in which he criticized President Obama for failing to maintain American
dominance in the world. The New York Times
revealed that the essay was apparently part of a joint project in which Nuland regularly edited
her husband's articles, even though this particular piece attacked the administration she worked
As the situation in Ukraine continued to deteriorate in 2014, Nuland exerted herself to scuttle
several European attempts to arrange a ceasefire. When NATO Commander Air Force Gen. Philip Breedlove
was cited as being in favor of sending more weapons to the Ukrainian government to "raise the battlefield
cost for Putin," Nuland
commented, "I'd strongly urge you to use the phrase 'defensive systems' that we would deliver
to oppose Putin's 'offensive systems.'"
To return to the initial question of where Victoria Nuland is, the long answer would be that while
she is not much in the news, she is continuing to provide support for policies that the White House
apparently approves of. Late last month, she was again in Kiev. She criticized Russia for its lack
of press freedom and its "puppets" in the Donbas region
a Ukrainian audience about a "strong U.S. commitment to stand with Ukraine as it stays on the path
of a clean, democratic, European future. … We remain committed to retaining sanctions that apply
to the situation in Crimea until Crimea is returned to Ukraine." Before that, she was in
Cyprus and France discussing
"a range of regional and global issues with senior government officials."
But one has to suspect that, at this point, she is mainly waiting to see what happens in November.
And wondering where she might be going in January.
Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National
Among her issues are "blinding headaches" that have "frequently plagued her," he claimed. As Radar
reported, other insiders have claimed she has had a series of strokes and
may be suffering from MS.
In fact, the friend claimed, Clinton even turned to sleeping pills like Ambien and Lunesta in
her desperation, but they offered no relief. Said the friend, "She said they made her less sharp
the next day.
"There were incidents on the campaign trail when she felt faint and nearly swooned," he claimed.
"Those incidents were kept secret."
What the fuck is your problem, America??
I'm Hillary goddamn Clinton. I'm a political prodigy, have been since I was 16. I have an insane
network of powerful friends. I'm willing to spend the next eight years catching shit on all sides,
all so I can fix this fucking country for you. And all you little bitches need to do is get off your
asses one goddamn day in November.
"Oh but what about your eeeemaaaaillls???" Shut the fuck up. Seriously, shut the fuck up and listen
for one fucking second...
But you know what? I don't fucking care. If I gave two shits about the haters I would've dropped
the game decades ago.
"... The pedophile scandals among the U.K.'s elite and officialdom are now well
know even among the snoozers and comatose. But the snoozers can't connect the dots
that infestations of pedophiles and perverts in government is by design. A number
of U.K. police investigators have been openly murdered over the years for stumbling
onto high-level pedophiles. ..."
"... As I have often mentioned on these pages previously, I do believe pedophiles
and various other perverts are actively recruited into positions of power so that
they can be compromised and controlled by the criminal cabal. ..."
ProPeace | Jul 28, 2016 10:04:50 PM |
Did I already mention this?
Trump, Epstein And The Lolita Express | Winter Watch
The case of well-connected Jewish billionaire Jeffrey Epstein made a
splash about a year ago. Convicted of sex with under-aged girls, since
then related news has been largely suppressed. Epstein is in a position
to compromise high level people by providing under-aged girls for the
likes of Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton. Dossiers and lewd photos with
teenyboppers may be called upon as needed.
I actually believe these
activities are a requirement for entrance into the Crime Syndicate inner
circle. In fact, this goes along way in explaining how an obscure Arkansas
governor who can't keep it in his pants can go on to become president
of the United States and his wife the leading presidential candidate
now. According to John Perkins in Confession of an Economic Hitman,
the motives of psychopaths at the top of pyramid are sex, money and
Now it has been revealed that Bill Clinton was in reality a dedicated
regular reveler on Epstein's jet, Lolita Express. The mainstream media
has suddenly "discovered" that instead of being an infrequent "acquaintance"
of Epstein, Clinton was listed on the flight logs 26 times in just three
years. One wonders why such a story wasn't revealed much earlier?
Curiously, faux nationalist Donald Trump also has some Epstein involvement,
including a rape accusation (at an Epstein party) that so far has gotten
little Dominant Media (aka MSM) play. Trump's other friends were described
In addition, another one-two punch story is emerging of Clinton Foundation
slush funds being used for "investments" with Bill's alleged mistress,
and yet another member of the Tribe, Julia Tauber McMahon, known as
"The Energizer." With the sleaze coming in all directions, is the takedown
of the Clintons at hand; and if so, why and by whom? Is somebody else
is in the wings to replace Hillary? Does the Epstein slime blob end
up slurping Trump?
The pedophile scandals among the U.K.'s elite and officialdom
are now well know even among the snoozers and comatose. But the snoozers
can't connect the dots that infestations of pedophiles and perverts
in government is by design. A number of U.K. police investigators have
been openly murdered over the years for stumbling onto high-level pedophiles.
As I have often mentioned on these pages previously, I do believe
pedophiles and various other perverts are actively recruited into positions
of power so that they can be compromised and controlled by the criminal
cabal. For more background on this general topic, see "Belgium's
Dutoux Pedophile and Child Rape Case: A Road Map for Deep-State Criminality,"
"Crime Syndicate Sexual Entrapment Operations" and "Wikispooks: Covert
In exploring sex offender Epstein's background story, what's particularly
interesting is how out of the blue this former math teacher was given
important positions in the organization of Jewish cabalist multi-billionaire
Ace Greenberg during the 1970s and '80s. As you may recall, the Greenberg
syndicate included Bear Stearns, the firm that nearly brought down the
world economy. Greenberg was the plutocrat who took down Elliott Spitzer
by way of a scandal. As the U.K.'s Independent reports:
Among [Epstein's] pupils was the son of Bear Stearns chairman
Ace Greenberg. In 1976, after a few years teaching the children
of the wealthy, he accepted a job offer from Mr. Greenberg that
allowed him to oversee their money.
Four years later, he was made a partner, but by 1982 he had
left to set up his own boutique investment company, J. Epstein and
Co. He reportedly only accepted clients prepared to invest a minimum
of $1 billion, though many profiles of Epstein admit a lack of hard,
verifiable facts about his business have added to the air of mystery."
Epstein was not just a run-of-the-mill sex offender but someone with
friends in high places that he liked to entertain in a certain manner
and who shared his proclivities.
Also notable and named in a lawsuit involving Epstein is the well-known
Zionist Israeli Hasbara mouthpiece and Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz,
who represented Epstein in his 2007 sex-offender case.
The claim from Jane Doe No. 3 (who joined three others) alleges that
Dershowitz himself participated in sex acts with underage girls. As
Epstein's legal representation, Dershowitz then arranged a secret non-prosecution
agreement (NPA) with the federal government in the cases of JD No. 1
and No. 2. According to the complaint, Dershowitz managed to influence
immunity from prosecution for all co-conspirators, including himself.
Prince Andrew also attempted to influence the U.S. judicial process
in the matter through lobbyist ties. Epstein served 13 months under
"... The Clintons and the Reality of a Long Marriage ..."
Only the sex-obsessed writers at Cosmopolitan could try that line out... In the article
The Clintons and the Reality of a Long Marriage, the women's magazine attempts to
make the case that the Clinton marriage is actually one that everyone should look up to.
Apparently, hating philandering men is no longer a part of the feminist agenda. At least, as long
as one's wife is running for president.
... ... ...
But virtuous Hillary Clinton stuck by her man! She "could have put her husband's recklessness behind
her like a bad haircut and moved on to continue her change-making and achievements without him too.
But she stayed." And now, the sweet old couple "get to be doting grandparents together, mutually
supporting each other in their latest acts, and potentially becoming the first married to couple
to ever both be President, which will make a good Christmas letter."
Hillary shouldn't be painted
as "a doormat, a punching bag, a fool" for staying married to Bill. It's a sign of strength and nobility!
Or a savvy politician who is trying to be elected President.
The writer's marital counseling goes on. "In the Clinton's marriage model, you screw up. You forgive.
You grow. And you grow old, together, making new memories and celebrating old ones with the same
person you've known since she was "a girl," someone you fell in love with many years ago in the spring."
As gag-inducing as this is, it can't be a surprise. A serial adulterer who's still a popular national
figure and married? That's Cosmo's idea of a hero.
, 2016-07-25 16:31:01
have to disagree with Bernie, DWS didn't do the right thing - she just got
caught, the right thing would have been to put a stop to planted stories
with no attribution and ensure a level playing field. Anyone US side want
to tell me if the thing about Bill Clinton meeting Epstein on numerous occasions
is actually true?
RecordStoreGuy , 2016-07-25 16:43:39
It's true, they travelled in Epstein's private jet, which was called "Lolita"
(not very subtle).
He also left his secret service goons behind when he went on these trips.
"... The U.S. Navy stewards who served as butlers at the White House were usually the first to discover physical evidence of Clinton's philandering, says Byrne. ..."
"... According to Byrne, the lipstick was clearly not the shade worn by Lewinsky or Hillary. He believed it belonged to a young White House receptionist who was also having an affair with Clinton. ..."
"... Identifying for the first time something he says was dubbed the 'jogging list', he recalls how, early in Clinton's first administration, women 'dressed as if they were going clubbing or working out' would wait by the White House south-east gate for him to take his daily exercise. ..."
"... His bodyguards would collect their names and carry out security checks on them. 'Agents . . . insinuated that this list was used by President Clinton to try to meet these women,' says Byrne. ..."
"... The account chimes with previous claims that the Clintons fought on at least one occasion over his affair with Lewinsky. Byrne gilds Mrs Clinton's aggressive image by recounting how - some years later - she and her husband visited the Secret Service's firing range. ..."
"... For Hillary - gaining in the polls over Donald Trump and potentially just months away from becoming America's first female President - 11th-hour revelations about how the Clintons behaved in the White House last time round may be enough to have her hurling more than vases and Bibles. ..."
The U.S. Navy stewards who served as butlers at the White House were usually the first to
discover physical evidence of Clinton's philandering, says Byrne.
One, who he names as Nel, shared that evidence with Byrne, revealing that over a period of time,
he had been finding and secretly cleaning White House embossed towels stained with lipstick.
Anxious to protect the presidency from embarrassment, Nel was washing them by hand rather than
sending them to the laundry.
According to Byrne, the lipstick was clearly not the shade worn by Lewinsky or Hillary. He
believed it belonged to a young White House receptionist who was also having an affair with Clinton.
... ... ..
There were many other women besides Lewinsky, Eleanor Mondale and the unnamed receptionist, says
Identifying for the first time something he says was dubbed the 'jogging list', he recalls
how, early in Clinton's first administration, women 'dressed as if they were going clubbing or working
out' would wait by the White House south-east gate for him to take his daily exercise.
His bodyguards would collect their names and carry out security checks on them. 'Agents .
. . insinuated that this list was used by President Clinton to try to meet these women,' says Byrne.
He recalls an incident in December 1997 when he heard on his two-way radio that Monica Lewinsky
was at one of the White House gates.
The guard had been instructed to delay her entrance . . . because Mr Clinton was already ensconced
with Eleanor Mondale. Suspecting the truth, Lewinsky - according to Byrne - furiously gestured at
herself and told the guard: 'What's he want with her when he has this?' (Mondale's affair with Clinton
was strongly rumoured at the time although she denied it. She died of brain cancer in 2011.)
Was Hillary aware of his philandering? Byrne suspects that she knew about some of her husband's
affairs but not Lewinsky, who, at 22, was young enough to be their daughter.
... ... ...
The account chimes with previous claims that the Clintons fought on at least one occasion
over his affair with Lewinsky. Byrne gilds Mrs Clinton's aggressive image by recounting how - some
years later - she and her husband visited the Secret Service's firing range.
Mrs Clinton chose an old Thompson sub-machine-gun and, 'smiling ear-to-ear' let rip, pumping bullets
into the male target's crotch area. Witnesses laughed, looked away in embarrassment or glanced at
the President, says Byrne.
Almost as ferocious as the Clintons' fight related by Byrne is the current battle between the
Democrats and Republicans over this explosive book.
And it's not just historic allegations being thrown around. Even at 69, Mr Clinton's sex life
is still proving controversial, with his charity foundation recently facing questions over a $2 million
donation to a company partly owned by a woman alleged to be his mistress.
The Clinton camp has dismissed the memoir as 'fantasy' without addressing specific claims. Also,
some media supporters have noted that some of Byrne's claims contradict what he told the 1998 official
inquiry that led to Bill Clinton's impeachment.
(Others argue that Byrne, who clearly likes Mr Clinton much more than his wife, was lying to protect
him at the time, but feels no such qualms about damaging Hillary).
Some former Secret Service agents allege Byrne was too low-ranking to see everything he claims,
and accuse him of recycling old rumours.
Others, however, have rushed to his defence.
Dan Emmett, a respected former agent and Secret Service historian, says Byrne spent 'many hundreds
of hours' just feet from the President, adding: 'He was without question in a position to see and
hear at least some of the things he claims.'
For Hillary - gaining in the polls over Donald Trump and potentially just months away from
becoming America's first female President - 11th-hour revelations about how the Clintons behaved
in the White House last time round may be enough to have her hurling more than vases and Bibles.
"... On Monday, Raffi Williams, deputy press secretary for the Republican Party, tweeted, "Woman Suing Jeffrey Epstein For Sexual Slavery Claimed Bill Clinton Must Have Known" and linked to a post that in turn referred to a Daily Mail story from 2011. The Drudge Report went for the more sensational "BUBBA AND THE PALM BEACH PEDOPHILE" and linked to the same story. Conservative viral news sites Twitchy and IJReview piled on, as did pundits at conservative websites, including Breitbart and the Blaze . ..."
"... But unsealed court documents revealed that he had been the subject of a much larger federal probe into alleged prostitution and could have faced 10 years in prison or more, if the case had gone forward. After his guilty plea, two of his alleged victims, who had were underage at the time of their encounter with Epstein, sued him in federal court, claiming that he had a "sexual preference and obsession for underage girls" and that he had sexually assaulted them (and many others). Epstein has consistently denied criminal wrongdoing and downplayed his 2008 conviction, telling the New York Post that he is " not a sexual predator ." ..."
"... Clinton's relationship with Epstein is old news. It's long been publicly known that Clinton and other notable figures hobnobbed with Epstein. Still, the new headlines the case has generated have given GOPers a fresh opportunity to try to link Clinton to a sex scandal. Williams, the GOP spokesman, was attempting to draw attention to a three-year-old story that does not implicate Clinton in any lawbreaking. That article, which relies on court documents, recounts the story of Virginia Roberts, who alleged that she became Epstein's sex slave at the age of 15 and that Clinton had once had dinner with Epstein and two girls whom she believed were underage (but she didn't know their ages). But, according to the Daily Mail, Roberts said that "as far as she knows, the ex-President did not take the bait." Roberts did say that she believed Clinton had to have been aware of Epstein's alleged illegal activities, but provided no evidence to support her assumption. ..."
Conservatives think they've found new ammunition for their campaign against
the Clintons-a new Clinton sex scandal. Or sort of.
On Monday, Raffi Williams,
deputy press secretary for the Republican Party,
tweeted, "Woman Suing Jeffrey Epstein For Sexual Slavery Claimed Bill Clinton
Must Have Known" and linked to a post that in turn referred to a Daily Mail
story from 2011. The Drudge Report went for the more
sensational "BUBBA AND THE PALM BEACH PEDOPHILE" and linked to the same
story. Conservative viral news sites Twitchy and
IJReview piled on, as did pundits at conservative websites, including
Breitbart and the Blaze.
What has the right in a tizzy is a six-year-old lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein,
a former Democratic donor who
has been accused of luring underage girls to his island resort to give massages
before ultimately sexually assaulting them. Epstein, a billionaire hedge fund
manager, pleaded guilty in 2008 to soliciting an underage woman and served 13
months in prison. But unsealed court documents
revealed that he had been the subject of a much larger federal probe into
alleged prostitution and could have faced 10 years in prison or more, if the
case had gone forward. After his guilty plea, two of his alleged victims, who
had were underage at the time of their encounter with Epstein, sued him in federal
claiming that he had a "sexual preference and obsession for underage girls"
and that he had sexually assaulted them (and many others). Epstein has consistently
denied criminal wrongdoing and downplayed his 2008 conviction, telling the
New York Post that he is "not
a sexual predator."
Last week a new anonymous allegation was introduced in the case, with a court
filing charging that Prince Andrew, Queen Elizabeth's second son, had sexually
abused an underage girl when he was a guest at Epstein's house in the US Virgin
Islands. (Prince Andrew has denied any wrongdoing.) And on Monday, The Smoking
resurfaced old court documents revealing that Epstein's phone book included
telephone numbers and email addresses for Bill Clinton. ("Now that Prince Andrew
has found himself
ensnared in the sleazy sex slave story of wealthy degenerate Jeffrey Epstein,
Bill Clinton can't be too far behind," the site declared.)
Clinton's relationship with Epstein is old news. It's long been publicly
known that Clinton and other notable figures hobnobbed with Epstein. Still,
the new headlines the case has generated have given GOPers a fresh opportunity
to try to link Clinton to a sex scandal. Williams, the GOP spokesman, was attempting
to draw attention to a three-year-old story that does not implicate Clinton
in any lawbreaking. That article, which relies on court documents, recounts
the story of Virginia Roberts, who alleged that she became Epstein's sex slave
at the age of 15 and that Clinton had once had dinner with Epstein and two girls
whom she believed were underage (but she didn't know their ages). But, according
to the Daily Mail, Roberts said that "as far as she knows, the ex-President
did not take the bait." Roberts did say that she believed Clinton had to have
been aware of Epstein's alleged illegal activities, but provided no evidence
to support her assumption.
Clinton and Epstein were indeed once close. The former president used Epstein's
private jet. And the presence of numerous teenage girls on the financier's private
island might have struck a visitor as unusual or even troublesome.
"... Make Love Not Porn: Technology's Hardcore Impact on Human Behavior ..."
Most political sex scandals follow a predictable narrative: An illicit sexual encounter is
followed by exposé, and then the inevitable apology and atonement.
From what we know about Anthony Weiner's transgressions, the mayoral candidate deviated from
these stages in one key way: With copious use of the web, he appears to have satisfied his urges
without actually having sex. The X-rated photos and explicit messages he exchanged with young
women online don't appear to be a means to an end - no prelude to trysts in seedy hotel rooms or
parked cars (offers of apartments aside) - but rather, they were the end.
Thanks to technology, it's a sex scandal without any sex.
Weiner's particular form of indiscretion - using
websites to expose himself to more than a dozen different women - reveals how social networks
have become portals to new kinds of sexual encounters while forging fresh forms of sexual
His online dalliances underscore a new age of sanitized sex, where sexual relationships have
been reduced to their most abstract elements and all necessity for physical contact has been
eliminated. In contrast to an earlier generation that experimented with spouse-swapping, group
sex and free-love communes in the 1960s and '70s, today's online generation is embracing sex with
no one. Flirtation, foreplay and consummation can be tidily reduced to a few typed sentences and
graphic photos, or perhaps even a phone call, if a couple really wants to go the extra mile. To
satisfy their desires, a growing number of people, like Weiner, don't need intercourse -
they just need the Internet.
Andrew Sullivan observed in 2011, when Weiner's racy pictures first surfaced, "The online
world creates an outlet for the feelings that sexual adultery or sexual adventure create - but
without actual sex, without actual intimacy, without our actual full selves."
seems to have sent at least one illicit photo to a woman without any encouragement
whatsoever, seems to have a thing for exhibitionism. Some might see in his behavior the online
equivalent to donning a raincoat in an alleyway and flashing women who walk by, but others
suggest he represents something else: A man whose deviance could only exist in the online world,
which makes spontaneous flashing possible without the effort involved in the more traditional
variety. "I'd bet my whole Ph.D. that he wouldn't be standing on a corner doing that," notes
Barry McCarthy, a sex and marital therapist, and professor of psychology at American University.
Instead, Weiner, like so many others online, has become accustomed to on-demand sexuality,
where relationships with another person are convenient, controllable and entirely on his terms.
We're adopting an Amazon.com or Seamless Web approach to our sex lives, expecting that sexual
fulfillment can be ordered up over the Internet like sneakers or pad thai. And Carlos Danger's
dalliances with people like Sydney Leathers suggest that, increasingly, they can be.
"He was never going to take this into the real world, but he wanted to express himself as a
sexual being, and technology gave him the ability to do that," said Cindy Gallop, founder of
MakeLoveNotPorn, a platform for "real-world" sex videos, and author of Make Love Not
Porn: Technology's Hardcore Impact on Human Behavior. "[Sex] is like anything else on the
Internet: It's very easy to get a quick hit everywhere."
It's especially easy to get a quick hit on one's own terms. Weiner minimized the risk of
rejection by relying on social media to serve up the women to him - he generally approached women
who'd followed or praised him on Twitter and Facebook. The web allowed him to form relationships
with real women who were mostly fantasy, responsive avatars that wouldn't spoil the illusion with
annoying habits, physical imperfections or emotional demands. The online nature of the affairs
also allowed him to indulge these fantasies on his schedule, anywhere and anytime he pleased. And
he operated in an atmosphere of unreal reality, just virtual enough to seem innocent and unreal,
and just real enough to make the fantasy a fulfilling one.
These virtual affairs aren't only more convenient, but the crescendo of a sexual relationship
- eliciting desire, stoking connection and eventually reaching orgasm - requires less
participation from the people involved than ever before. There are no rendezvous in
out-of-the-way motel rooms and no heavy petting. Only typing.
What we have seen of Weiner's trysts has revolved around a kind of "sex" that was clean, cold,
practical and utterly efficient. The leaked transcripts of Weiner's chats with Leathers don't
read like the torrid, passionate correspondence of star-crossed lovers separated by circumstance.
They're transactional and to the point. Weiner seemed to indulge a fantasy, then quickly get back
to planning his political comeback.
For a public struggling to make sense of Weiner's online affairs, the virtual element makes
them appear dirtier, says Rachel Hills, author of a forthcoming book on sex and Generation Y. Yet
online dating app wildly successful among college students and twenty-somethings, perfectly
embodies the rise and appeal of Weiner's brand of sex-free sex: The app, which connects people
who find each other mutually attractive,
can make people feel wanted without ever requiring them to speak to another person directly.
Feeling desirable is now achievable through an app. Lonely? Insecure? Just log on, rate a few
faces and wait for someone to like you back.
Tinder, one Tufts University sophomore explained to me this past spring, is used "more
as an ego boost-type situation than a dating situation or a way to connect with people." The
same could be said of Weiner's activities online.
Though these online relationships may seem as two-dimensional as the sites on which they play
out, their effortlessness and simplicity raise a key question: Will they make offline
relationships seem more appealing, or less? Is the absence of a warm body a downside or more of a
perk? A John Edwards type might have had to soothe his lover's feelings or explain why he had to
leave in the middle of the night. When Weiner had had enough, he could just shut down his
Except, of course, Weiner's disgrace delivers yet another reminder of another aspect of the
online realm. Just as it beckons as a place full of seemingly unlimited encounters achievable at
any moment, it also functions as the ultimate archive, a repository of every embarrassing
exchange, accessible to anyone connected.
The medium that enabled sexless sex scandals will also preserve them forever.
"... Seen from a French point of view, I must say that this whole Weiner story illustrates to perfection what we can call the "American hypocrisy." On the one hand, you are offended by a man sending a few sextos (which is not a devious behavior!) and promoting virtue whenever you can but on the other hand, you're doing nothing to limit the influence of Hollywood-made erotic and pornographic production, you're watching Jerry Springer trash-talk on TV on a a daily basis and you're delighted to see what teenage icons such as Selena Gomez and Miley Cirus became (they went from being stupid and delicious products to being the latest, outrageous Madonnas with no talent...). ..."
It surely is this summer's major headline! Former U.S. representative and NYC Mayor candidate
Anthony Weiner has been caught sexting with young girls again and again despite the fact he his married
to a caring and supporting woman. So what? Is this really a big deal? Does it really need to be the
most commented subject across America at a time where Detroit is falling down and leaker Snowden
is reminding us of some scary Cold War nightmares?
Seen from a French point of view, I must say that this whole Weiner story illustrates to perfection
what we can call the "American hypocrisy." On the one hand, you are offended by a man sending a few
sextos (which is not a devious behavior!) and promoting virtue whenever you can but on the other
hand, you're doing nothing to limit the influence of Hollywood-made erotic and pornographic production,
you're watching Jerry Springer trash-talk on TV on a a daily basis and you're delighted to see what
teenage icons such as Selena Gomez and Miley Cirus became (they went from being stupid and delicious
products to being the latest, outrageous Madonnas with no talent...).
This is pure nonsense!
There is something America must understand: you can cheat on your wife and still be a good politician.
Remember JFK and Bill Clinton? They both had affairs while at the White House but in the meantime,
they are unanimously considered as top of the notch U.S. presidents. Weiner, Clinton, JFK. These
men illustrate the fact that politics is dirty and so is sex! (And so is 1 in 5 readers of this op-ed
since 1 American out of 5 is said to sext on a regular basis!)
Kristen B on March 6, 2012
Book that Changed My Life
I originally bought this book in May of 2011. I can't remember exactly why it spoke to me,
but I know I was looking for self esteem boosting books. I think maybe the title resonated because
I realized I was having some trouble with perfectionism. Accepting mistakes, compassion for myself,
forgiving myself, but also pushing forward to being a better person, a better worker, friend,
girlfriend, etc. It resonates today because I see how much of a perfectionist I can be, and how
much trouble I am having forgiving myself for past mistakes, and trying not to label myself because
of them. I am having trouble sufficiently feeling the guilt enough to change, letting that feeling
in, but then forgiving myself, and not letting those behaviors define who I am as a person.
How did the book address this?
- -I think these quotes from the book really get to the heart of the message: "Perfectionism is,
at its core, about trying to earn approval and acceptance.... Healthy striving is self-focused--How
can I improve? Perfectionism is other-focused--What will they think?... Perfectionism is addictive
because when we invariably do experience shame, judgment, and blame, we often believe it's because
we weren't perfect enough. So rather than questioning the faulty logic of perfectionism, we become
even more entrenched in our quest to live, look, and do everything just right." Brown, Brene (2010-09-20).
The Gifts of Imperfection (p. 56-57). Hazelden. Kindle Edition.
- -What I got from this is that perfectionism tricks us into thinking we have it all: we can feel
connected and invulnerable and in control. BUT, it is ultimately unsatisfying because it #1) it
is a lie. We aren't in control or invulnerable, or perfect. And #2) it requires us to change who
we are -- and the connection we most desire is a connection based on being truly known by another
person. So in order to feel connected AND known, we have to accept the reality that we are imperfect,
and we are vulnerable, and we are not in control.
- -And while connection is obviously a huge source of joy, Brene also talks about the other kinds
of joy that perfectionism halts in its tracks: meaningful work, enjoyable hobbies, creative endeavors,
etc. Again, because perfectionism tries to give us a sense of control, and thereby tries to prevent
the possibility of loss, we often don't even try to have joyful things, or we deny the level of
joy something is giving us in order to feel less hurt when it leaves.
- -And the book has a lot of great suggestions as to ways get past the feelings of inadequacy perfectionism
is rooted in, and also ways to lean into the vulnerability of imperfection. Another great topic
the book covered (and that it alerted me to) was the importance of shame as a barrier to self
acceptance and love and joy. (But as you will see below, I really recommend its sister book for
more on this piece). And I love Brene's emphasis on authenticity as a goal. It is fascinating
Where I still don't feel resolution:
- -One of the things she mentions to get when you are feeling shame is getting connected, sharing
your story. But I have a few concerns about that:
- -She doesn't explain in detail WHO has earned the right to hear your story and HOW to cultivate
those friendships. If you are reading the book is stands to reason that you may very well not
have those friendships. If you are cultivating your authenticity and dealing with feelings of
inadequacy, you may have surrounded yourself with inauthentic and judgmental people because of
your need for approval from these types.
- -Even if you are at some stage where you have a few compassionate and caring friends (which I
do feel lucky enough to have), it requires them to always be open to your shame at the moment
you need them without regard to the "stuff" they bring to the day. If you are feeling shame about
X today, and so are they, your attempt at connection may trigger their shame even deeper and they
will "imperfectly" push you away. I wanted her to talk more about those situations. It is great
when you can have an empathetic ear to listen, and it feels amazing, but even with the world's
best friends, you cannot always expect that will be available to you whenever you need it.
- -And then even if you catch your friends on a day where they are feeling great, or can be present
to your needs and your shame, what if you are a "gusher," and you are at the beginning stages
of dealing with your inadequacy issues, and you feel shame "a lot"? You can become an emotional
drain to them, and push them away. I wanted some more information about self-soothing in shame
situations, or how to manage connecting with friends in those moments.
I am still not sure how I am going to be able integrate this intellectual understanding into a
daily practice. When I do something "wrong", especially something I have done wrong a hundred
times before, will I be able to lean into the guilt, instead of the shame? Will I be able to lean
into the vulnerability? Will I be able to be present to the vulnerability around me?
I know a big part of this is simply practice. And finding strategies that resonate. But the first
step for me is an intellectual understanding, and this is certainly worth reading if that is something
that is important to you.
[Jun 05, 2016] Stand By Your Man
[Jun 05, 2016] I Beg Your Pardon, I Never Promised You A Rose Garden
Man Kills The Thing He Loves
Yet each man kills the thing he loves
By each let this be heard.
Some do it with a bitter look,
Some with a flattering word.
The coward does it with a kiss,
The brave man with a sword!
- A man can be happy with any woman as long as he does not love her.
- One person loves, the other person lets themselves be loved...
Find somebody over 28 who understands and likes being the receiving end of that equation. Somebody
who doesn’t have to use anger and put-down and covert manipulation to justify ‘allowing themselves
to be loved’. Someone who can just sit back and enjoy it. Then maybe, just maybe, I will too.The
Unauthorized Letters of Oscar Wilde - C. Robert Holloway - Google Books
- Everything in the world is about sex except sex. Sex is about power.
- Loveless marriages are horrible. But there is one thing worse than an absolutely loveless marriage.
A marriage in which there is love, but on one side only; faith, but on one side only; devotion, but
on one side only.
- The very essence of romance is uncertainty.
- Whenever a man does a thoroughly stupid thing, it is always from the noblest motives. -- Oscar
Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1891
- Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes. Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere's Fan,
1892, Act III
- No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly.
- Life is never fair...And perhaps it is a good thing for most of us that it is not.
- Children begin by loving their parents; as they grow older they judge them; sometimes they
forgive them. -- Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1891
- Men marry because they are tired; women because they are curious. Both are disappointed.
― Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
- When a woman marries again, it is because she detested her first husband. When a man marries
again, it is because he adored his first wife. Women try their luck; men risk theirs. Oscar
Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1891
- Marriage is the triumph of imagination over intelligence. Second
marriage is the triumph of hope over experience.
- Men always want to be a woman's first love - women like to be a man's last romance.
- When one is in love one begins by deceiving oneself. And one ends by deceiving others. That is
what the world calls a romance.
- The one charm about marriage is that it makes a life of deception absolutely necessary for both
- Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry,
their passions a quotation. Oscar Wilde, De Profundis, 1905
Hillary Clinton is an "unbelievably nasty, mean enabler,"
and Donald Trump isn't going to let her get away with it!
The presumptive GOP nominee went on a blistering Twitter rant Tuesday, after
a Clinton Super Pac released its first attack aids aimed at him.
"Amazing that Crooked Hillary can do a hit ad on me concerning women
when her husband was the WORST abuser of woman in U.S. political history,"
The presumptive GOP nominee was referring to Bill's
numerous trysts with women over the years. Trump accused Hillary of being
the reason for Bill's infidelities, and shamed her for mistreating the women
Bill cheated with.
"And just remember this," Trump said. "She was an unbelievably nasty, mean
enabler, and what she did to a lot of those women is disgraceful."
So what did Bill have to say about being called
the WORST abuser of woman in U.S. political history? When MSNBC asked him
for a comment during a campaign event in Puerto Rico, the former president smiled
at first declined to say anything. Then he sidestepped the issue.
"No I won't [comment]," Clinton said. "I think people are smart enough to
figure this out without my help."
But that didn't stop the Trump tweets from firing! Later in the day, Trump
lashed out again at the Clintons for their economic policies.
"... By Nancy Kay from DivorcedMoms.com ..."
Kay from DivorcedMoms.com
Could you be
dating a narcissist and not even know it? After starting to
date again after divorce , I often found myself drawn toward highly successful
professional men who are competitive in business and strongly determined to
continue to build their own financial empire. Their determined, confident attitudes
and visible business successes appealed to my strong desires for security and
stability. A recent first date I went on was with this type of guy. My date
with a dentist turned into a three-hour marathon of misery for me when he insisted
that we sit in a back booth that he had reserved in advance with the hostess
by visiting the restaurant the night before and then he told our server that
he would leave an extra generous tip if she served our meals at a very leisurely
pace. Right away he launched into a one-sided brag fest about how he got elected
president of his college fraternity and why he easily scored highest in his
graduating class on the dental board exam. He then dropped names of all the
famous people he knows who live in our city and then went on to reveal the names
of all the famous people his dad knows too. By the time the pasta finally arrived,
I wanted to collapse into my plate from sheer boredom and exhaustion. After
that mind-numbing experience, I ran to my car and swore off dating for several
months. Unfortunately this was just one more very disillusioning
date with a narcissistic man . I had already experienced many others. Several
times I dated a man exclusively for three to six months, expecting things to
become more serious over time, only to have them abruptly break things off with
very little explanation or distance themselves with vague excuses about why
they couldn't continue to spend time with me. After spending many frustrating
weeks trying to figure out how to get each of these men I had dated exclusively
to connect with me on an emotional level so that our relationship could continue
to grow, I finally discovered that there was a big disconnect between the type
of relationship I was expecting to unfold and what these narcissistic men were
able to contribute in terms of intimacy, emotional connection and respectful
two-way communications. I discovered that I was living on crumbs and pretending
it was a whole nutritious meal. Are you dating a narcissist? Here
are six warning signs: 1. He is pre-occupied with how
things around him appear and how he is perceived by others. He aggressively
pursues financial success and is not content with what he already has acquired
or achieved. He has a strong craving for admiration, praise and his home, car,
clothes and high status are a direct measurement of how successful he appears
to others. 2. He exploits or takes advantage of others to get what he
wants. Narcissists are highly skilled at using others' talents; taking
advantage of their desire to avoid conflicts and their good natured helpfulness
as a means to an end to achieve their own goals. 3. He does not appreciate
or even see your unique abilities and natural gifts. Highly self-absorbed,
narcissists are so driven by how they can use others to benefit themselves that
your own individual strengths, abilities and achievements are often ignored
or dismissed as inconsequential. 4. He resents authority and despises
correction or being told what to do. He is reluctant to accept any
blame or criticism and strongly prefers to be in control of things and those
around him at all times. Having his faults pointed out to him or even having
to admit that he made a mistake can set him off into a fit of rage.
5. Petty arguments often erupt into power struggles. The narcissistic
man thrives on being right so disputes are rarely resolved. Mediation and counseling
rarely helps to improve communications with a narcissist because this type of
person sees themselves as under attack and can't stand for their actions to
be subject to the opinions of others and held up to the light. 6. He
disregards your healthy needs for attention and affection. Since narcissistic
men often lack empathy and the self-examination necessary to create an intimate
relationship, you'll often find yourself running on empty. Attempts to get more
affection from him often leads to him creating a secret life to run to and evading
your questions about what is really happening or not happening in your relationship.
If you recognize these signs in a man that you are dating, it is helpful to
remember that narcissists have very rigid expectations (especially for themselves)
and so this type of man rarely changes his ways. Understanding or experiencing
intimacy and love within the context of a balanced and healthy relationship
is not on the agenda of a narcissist. Unfortunately, many times we keep trying
to change a narcissistic man into who we'd like them to become or the reverse
- trying to twist ourselves like pretzels into a perfect version of what he
wants instead of cutting our losses. Recognizing the traits of a narcissistic
man and realizing how deeply rooted they are is critical so that we can begin
taking back control of our own life and start to move forward in a healthier
< Have you ever had a situation that goes something like this?: You meet
someone and it feels like the stars align. This person is so into you and
lavishes you with attention, romance and gifts. The relationship moves very
quickly and it feels like you have met "the one." Months down the road when
things have settled in comfortably, things start to change. The person who
used to adore and worship you now fluctuates between needing you desperately
and devaluing you. Perhaps as time goes on, the person who you thought cared
so much becomes more emotionally unavailable, distant and cruel. The "Jekyll"
part of the personality starts to overtake the "Hyde." How did this person
who used to be so wonderful and made such an effort to be with you all of
the sudden turn out to be so opposite than what you thought? This can leave
someone confused, hurt, angry and depressed. If this situation sounds similar
to something you have experienced, you may be or may have dated someone
with narcissistic tendencies. Here are some of the warning signs:
1. They are madly in love with you right off the bat and the
relationship moves very quickly: People with narcissistic tendencies
use fantasy like projections when picking a mate. Usually it takes a certain
amount of time to fall in love with someone. Sure, you can feel chemistry
and a connection with someone but to fall in love with who a person truly
is (flaws and all) takes some time. A person with narcissistic tendencies
loves the intense feelings and the attention. Sadly, their intense interest
in you is more so about them and their needs than it is about you.
2. They fluctuate between adoring you and devaluing you:
People with narcissistic tendencies are very hot and cold. They
can be mean and critical one second and then sweet and loving the next.
This becomes very confusing because you are still seeing glimpses of the
wonderful person you first fell in love with but you are also getting to
see another side that makes you feel bad about yourself.
have little ability to empathize and everything is on their terms:
Someone with narcissistic tendencies doesn't really see things
from your world or from your point of view. Everything is about them and
what they want. They ignore your needs in the relationship and only focus
on getting what they want or what works best for them. They will always
be their number one priority and everyone else will always come after that.
4. They cheat, lie or manipulate and don't feel remorse:
Narcissists don't really empathize so when they do something to
hurt you, they don't really feel remorseful. This can actually be the most
hurtful part because it may make you feel like they never cared about you
at all. Moving on can be very hard because a lot of people feel that they
need closure or apologies that they will never get from narcissistic people.
5. When it's all over, it's like you never mattered: A
classic case narcissist mostly uses people for their own gain and has very
little emotional connection to those that are in their lives. Because of
this, they discard people in their lives very easily. I recently watched
an episode of the new HBO show Girls and in this particular episode, one
of the characters who had broken up with her serious long-term boyfriend
2 weeks prior now finds he already has a new girlfriend. Shocked that he
could move on so quickly from something so serious she exclaims. "you're
a sociopath!!" and walks away. Even though she was the one who broke up
with him, she is shocked that it feels like their relationship meant nothing
to him at the end of the day and that she was easily replaceable. People
recovering from narcissistic relationships are often in shock that someone
who once claimed to love them so much has moved on so quickly and without
any sense of remorse.
How to spot a narcissist:
I always tell my clients to take the time to really get to know the people
they are dating before getting too emotionally invested or putting all their
eggs in one basket. There are definitely fairy tale stories out there of
two people falling madly in love with each other right at the get go and
spending their lives happily ever after, but that is generally not the norm.
Keep your guard up the more intensely the person is into you and the earlier
on it occurs. Past relationship patterns are also very important to look
at. As mentioned above, people who are narcissistic are intense very quickly
and end up leaving a trail of shattered relationships and people who are
left to pick up the pieces (and often need quite a bit of therapy after
being in the destructive path of a narcissist). If you get an idea of the
dating history of someone and it follows a certain pattern, pay attention
to that. Yes, people can change, but past relationship patterns can raise
a lot of red flags. The reason people have a hard time of extricating themselves
from a narcissistic relationship is because it is hard to get past the fact
that someone who used to be so wonderful and loving can turn so cold, hateful
and lacking in remorse. These people hang on because of the glimpses they
get of the good side and hold out the hope that if they were only "good
enough" or "better", or unconditionally accepted and loved this person then
they could get the nice and kind person back.
It turns into a vicious cycle
and the more you get into a relationship, the harder it is to get out of.
Being in a relationship with a narcissist will make you feel crazy and most
narcissists actually don't actively leave relationships; they wait to be
left first. It can be really hard to get out of a relationship like this
and if you have never been in one, it's hard to know how. If someone makes
you feel worthless or crazy and you know they are not treating you with
respect, or empathizing with you, that might be hard to change. Learning
to spot negative patterns early and having the strength to know what you
deserve in a relationship is one of the best things to do if you find yourself
involved with one of these people.
Recovery after a narcissistic
Recovery after a narcissistic relationship can be very difficult. Many
people are driven to therapy because they have been left completely shattered
and fragile after a relationship with a narcissist. The most important thing
to remember is that it's not about YOU. This has everything to do with the
flaws of the narcissist and their inability to make real, meaningful connections
with others. What they have done to you is what they have done and will
continue to do in all their relationships unless they recognize this within
themselves and get help. The problem is, most narcissistic people never
recognize that they need to change. Remember that you deserve a relationship
that builds you up, that makes you feel safe, and that brings you happiness
and warmth. A person who is narcissistic cannot give this to you, simply
because they are not capable of it.
**This article originally appeared on
"... "You're the prettiest. The sexiest. The skinniest. The best mom. The funniest." ..."
"... "You have such a sexy voice. Not too high, nor too low; it's just perfect. My friend Courtney's voice is super high-pitched and she has this weird way of talking through her teeth. Annoying." ..."
"... "You have a great body. I guess I'm used to having more to hug with my ex!" ..."
What do you get when you cross a sociopath with a narcissist? The least funny
joke and the worst kind of hybrid: a narcissistic sociopath, narcopath for short.
Both a narcissist and sociopath have an inflated sense of how important they
are, as well as a constant need for praise and admiration. One commonality between
the two is their ability to fool others in order to get what they want, without
remorse. But what sets them apart is that a narcopath is unable to handle criticism
or be viewed in a negative light, whereas a sociopath couldn't care less who
thinks what or how they're perceived. When you hear the word narcopath you may
picture a deranged, knife-wielding lunatic - at least that's what I pictured
before I met my own. Unfortunately, this couldn't be further from the truth.
Narcopaths are boogie men in disguise and wolves in sheep's clothing. Their
abuse is sometimes so subtle that you don't see it until the curtain closes
and your world is torn apart. Still unsure if you're in a relationship with
a narcopath? Here are ten telltale signs that you might be.
Things move from zero to one hundred in seconds.
From the beginning, nothing is normal with a narcopath. Things progress at
warp speed, hop-scotching over the usual stages of a relationship. Instead of
slowly getting to know one another, you go from the first date to planning your
future together within weeks of meeting. And when your gut warns you things
are moving too fast, you tell it to shut up because you've finally found your
2. They're a broken record of compliments.
A narcopath will sweep you off your feet, place you on a pedestal, then worship
you from down below. They'll tell you the things you've always wanted to hear,
saying them over and over and over again. But listen closely and you'll notice
there's not much variation in these love monologues, and their sweet-nothings
sound more like a script than anything from the heart. "You're the prettiest.
The sexiest. The skinniest. The best mom. The funniest." If everything
feels staged and too good to be true, it probably is.
3. They flatter you with comparisons.
There's no period at the end of a compliment. Instead, a narcopath compliments
you by comparing you to someone else in their life. In my case, he'd say things
like, "You have such a sexy voice. Not too high, nor too low; it's just
perfect. My friend Courtney's voice is super high-pitched and she has this weird
way of talking through her teeth. Annoying." Or, "You have a great
body. I guess I'm used to having more to hug with my ex!" Praising you
by putting down others is a huge red flag, not to mention incredibly distasteful.
And while it's no doubt flattering to hear these praises, keep in mind that
one day they'll be offering them to someone else and using your name to fill
the second blank.
4. Your chemistry between the sheets is off the charts.
You've never felt this much passion with anyone else. Pushing all the right
buttons in just the right ways, it's like they're reading your mind and its
desires. The reason sex is so mind-blowing, at least in the beginning, isn't
because they know what to do with their hands; they know what to do with your
mind . They'll make you feel like you're the only one who's ever existed
to them. Yes, narcopaths are indeed that great - at acting, that is. By mirroring
your every emotion they're able to make their own emotions seem genuine and
fool you into thinking yours are real.
5. Their eyes are windows to nothingness.
My Narc-in-a-Box would stare at me with such intensity I'd become nervous,
fidget, and quickly turn away. Speaking directly into my eyes with a deadpan
and unwavering stare, I don't think he blinked once during our four months together.
At times his gaze was so piercing that his pupils practically vanished. But
sadly, behind all that intensity lied a vast amount of dark nothingness. I turned
away from that stare because it made me feel uneasy in all the wrong ways.
6. They always lead the conversation back to themselves.
On the surface, a narcopath seems hyper-focused on you and genuinely interested
in learning all there is to know. Yet the moment you begin divulging this information,
they quickly interrupt with a story of their own. It's like a revolving door:
They ask you a question to gain the opportunity to talk about themselves. They're
quick to interject with their thoughts and opinions, and always have a similar
experience to share with you. Experiences that, once dissected, are nothing
more than sweetly camouflaged one-uppers and indirect ways to let you know that
they know better.
7. They have a checkered relationship history.
I've never met anyone with such an odd and storied relationship history.
He traveled to Texas after meeting a girl online, then met his ex-wife online,
and later flew in another girl he met online (through a quiz website!) all the
way from Europe, before finally meeting me online. Narcopaths often leave long
trails of broken relationships behind them, but of course they were never the
ones responsible for breaking them. And no matter how long ago it ended, they'll
claim all their former flames still burn strongly for them from afar.
8. They use big words that have little substance.
Have you ever read something that initially seems incredibly deep and profound,
until you reach the end and realize it's nothing but a nonsensical jumble of
fancy words? A narcopath craves superiority and thrives on being smarter than
everyone in the room. The only the problem is that often times they're not,
forcing them to fake it and pray no one catches on. On the surface, a narcopath
seems highly intelligent and cultured, but dig deeper and you'll discover it's
nothing but fluff.
9. They give because it makes them look better.
Give and you shall receive. Or, in the narcopath's case, give and tell everyone
within a thousand mile radius who you gave to and exactly how much. A narcopath
doesn't give because it makes them feel good on the inside; rather, they give
because it makes them look good from the outside. No kind deed goes unnoticed,
because they'd never allow it. Whether it's helping an old lady cross the street,
giving a homeless person a buck, or donating to their children's PTA, they'll
make sure someone knows about their generosity.
10. They're no stranger to the silent treatment.
Narcopaths love to dish it out. You may see glimpses of this passive-aggressive
form of punishment early on in the relationship, or it might come on suddenly
out of left field. Either way, the silent treatment is without a doubt the most
vile and abusive trait that narcopaths possess. Like a child, anytime they can't
get their way or feel threatened, they stomp away with their arms crossed and
punish you with a deafening silence. The harder you reach out, the more you
cry, and the angrier you become, the better they feel. It's normal for your
partner to get angry, sulk, or brood sometimes. What isn't normal is using silence
as a weapon to punish and control you, then sitting back and gaining pleasure
from your pain.
This article originally appeared on
"... Need help? In the U.S., call 1-800-799-SAFE (7233) for the National Domestic Violence Hotline . ..."
Late last year, I wrote a
piece where I shared a perspective, based on
growing research , that
narcissism isn't simply a stubborn trait, but a style of coping. The seeds
of that idea turned into a
scheduled for release in spring next year. Since I promised a follow up, I'm
taking a brief break from the larger project to deliver on my promise. Here's
a glimpse at what's to come. If you think your partner's a
narcissist , you might want to try these seven strategies. Check For
Abuse : None of what I'm about to suggest is likely to help if the person
you love is physically or emotionally abusive. Not all narcissists, even those
Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) , resort to abuse. But some do -
and if you're on the receiving end, your first step should be to explore
what makes it hard for you to leave . If you're facing abuse, it doesn't
matter whether it's driven by your partner's narcissism, chronic pain, or drug
addiction - the problem is the abuse, plain and simple. And the abuser is 100
percent responsible for his or her choice. Until that changes, you probably
won't feel safe enough - nor should you - to take the kinds of risks I'm recommending
here. Check for Denial: Most people recognize denial when they see it.
It's easily the most famous of all the defense mechanisms. The alcoholic who
protests, "I just enjoy the taste of fine wine!"; the terminally ill patient
who assures everyone, "It's just a cough"; and the narcissist who, despite having
alienated all her friends and lost her job, proclaims, "I'm just fine" - all
are exhibiting denial. The more denial a narcissist displays, the less hopeful
you should feel about change. How bad is denial? In
adolescents , it
predicts some of the most ruthless, demanding forms of narcissism - adults
who happily admit "I find it easy to manipulate people." Make sure your partner
can admit something's wrong, even if it's as simple as saying, "my life isn't
where I hoped it would be." Contrary to what you might think,
some narcissists do seek therapy . Which kinds? The "vulnerable" ones, riddled
with shame and fear; they freely admit they have problems instead of
burying them beneath near-delusional denial. In fact, they're also
more likely to stick with treatment once they start. Beware the Manipulator
Across studies , narcissists who score high on measures of entitlement and
exploitation (or, EE, as researchers call it) have the highest levels of aggression,
a strong impulse to cheat, and even, when angered, a penchant for stealing or
sabotaging property at work. In fact, EE
accounts for most of the worst behaviors a narcissist can display. Manipulative
narcissists are also
more likely to score higher on measures of Psychopathy and Machiavellianism.
The former is a cold callous personality linked to criminal behaviors, while
the latter, as you can guess from the name, describes a cutthroat, "do whatever
it takes" personality. Along with narcissism, these two traits comprise personality's
dark triad . Not all narcissists are cold and manipulative. But the ones
who are pose the greatest threat because they're so practiced at play-acting
and deceit you'll have a hard time separating fact from fiction. Check Their
Willingness to Change: This one might seem obvious, but it's crucial enough
that it bears mentioning. The easiest way to test a partner's capacity to change
is to seek help from a couples therapist - or any therapist for that matter.
Even people who aren't narcissists can be leery of therapy, so this one shouldn't
be considered a litmus test. If your partner's willing to work with you, though,
your odds at improving the relationship have probably jumped by an order of
magnitude. Check Your Anger: "You've always been the paranoid, jealous
type," sneers your partner after you openly wonder about the amount of time
he's spending with his attractive coworker. Our natural tendency, when faced
with such shocking indifference to our fear of losing love or needing more closeness
and comfort, is to protect ourselves. For many people, this means donning battle
armor and launching an attack. "You're the most selfish person I know! I don't
know why I'm with you!" As understandable as the protective measures are, they
cut us off from crucial information: Can our partners hear our sadness and fear
and feel moved? If there's any way at all to reach through the detachment, it's
by sharing our feelings at a more vulnerable level. Try this: "You mean so much
to me; I hear you talking to her and I'm scared I'm not enough for you." Or,
"Your opinion means the world to me; when I hear you talk to me that way I feel
so small and worthless in your eyes." Most partners, if they can feel anything
at all, will melt when they hear comments like this. They don't just convey
your pain with greater clarity; they remind your partner why the behavior
hurts - because it comes from the one person who matters most. How effective
is this kind of communication? Across decades of studies,
of couples who learned to share the sadness and fear beneath the anger,
healed their broken bond and enjoyed happy, closer relationships. Likewise,
recent studies , narcissists who focused on caring and closeness ("communal
behavior") actually scored lower over time on several measures of narcissism;
those who saw their partners as communal (compared to those who didn't)
said they'd be less likely to cheat . Check Your Silence: Say you
come home from a hard day at work, and your boyfriend, grumbling about the weekend
plans being up in the air, starts lecturing you about how indecisive you are.
"You sure take a long time to make decisions, don't you?" Condescending remarks
like this don't always enrage us. When our self-esteem is already crumbling,
they often shut us down completely; we crawl away, crestfallen, or slip into
hours of silence. But we have to find a voice again if we want things to get
better. Research suggests
that silent withdrawal is just another way of coping with feeling sad or
fearful about our connection with people we love; your best bet, as with anger,
is to go beneath the impulse to shut down and share the upset. "I'm feeling
so put down right now I'm afraid you've stopped caring about me altogether."
Why is this so important? Though they appear to be universal ways of coping
with fears about the people we love, anger and withdrawal also
up our partners' insecurities . The result? Our loved ones fall back on
their usual way of protecting themselves - like criticism or indifference -
instead of hearing our pain. If they're narcissists, that means they resort
to their favorite MO - narcissism. Be Honest with Yourself: If you've
tried a more loving approach to sharing what hurts in your relationship, and
the narcissist in your life still won't soften, you truly have done everything
you can. This might be the only hope for change. Those of you who wrote
in to say you already tried this and it didn't work have made a valiant effort;
you may have exhausted your supply of empathy from working so hard. If so, my
heart goes out to you. But staying in an unhappy relationship comes at a steep
including your self-esteem. Ask yourself, honestly - are you staying because
your partner's doing his best to change - or because it feels too hard to leave?
Even if the people we love want to change, none of us should be expected
to endure the same hurts over and over. Narcissistic arrogance and hostility
elicit our worst behaviors ; they get beneath our skin, working away like
a thousand needles. The natural response is to pull away or lash back; but if
you do your best to share the pain openly, letting your loved ones see your
softer feelings, you're giving them their best - and only shot - at hearing
you. If they can't understand your pain then, perhaps they never will. As sad
and difficult as it feels, you might need to take care of yourself by leaving.
Because regardless of which habit steals their attention away from genuine love
and intimacy, if our loved ones can't risk change, their problems are here to
stay. Need help? In the U.S., call 1-800-799-SAFE (7233) for the
National Domestic Violence
Hotline . If you like my posts, let me know! Let's connect on
And be sure to
sign up for my newsletter, for more tips and advice, as well as information
on my forthcoming
book , about understanding and coping with narcissism in all its forms,
in our friends, lovers, colleagues-and even ourselves. HARPERWAVE AND HARPER
UK, SPRING 2015
Follow Dr. Craig Malkin on Twitter:
[May 17, 2016] Emotion-phobia by Dr. Craig Malkin
The overall pattern of narcissistic behavior is emotional instability and aggressive behavior caused
by insecurity and weakness rather than any real feelings of confidence or self-esteem. One very interesting
and revealing feature of a narcissist (as well as several other types of psychopaths) is emotion-phobia
"... Narcissists abhor feeling influenced in any significant way. It challenges their sense of perfect autonomy; to admit to a feeling of any kind suggests they can be affected by someone or something outside of them. So they often change the subject when feelings come up, especially their own, and as quick as they might be to anger, it's often like pulling teeth to get them to admit that they've reached the boiling point - even when they're in the midst of the most terrifying tirade. ..."
Emotion-phobia: Feelings are a natural consequence of being human, and we tend to have
lots of them in the course of normal interactions. But the very fact of having a feeling in the presence
of another person suggests you can be touched emotionally by friends, family, partners, and even
the occasional tragedy or failure. Narcissists abhor feeling influenced in any significant way.
It challenges their sense of perfect autonomy; to admit to a feeling of any kind suggests they can
be affected by someone or something outside of them. So they often change the subject when feelings
come up, especially their own, and as quick as they might be to anger, it's often like pulling teeth
to get them to admit that they've reached the boiling point - even when they're in the midst of the
most terrifying tirade.
"... In the final analysis, emotionally bonding with an abuser is actually a strategy for survival for victims of abuse and intimidation. The "Stockholm Syndrome" reaction in hostage and/or abuse situations is so well recognized at this time that police hostage negotiators no longer view it as unusual. ..."
"... Stockholm Syndrome (SS) can also be found in family, romantic, and interpersonal relationships. The abuser may be a husband or wife, boyfriend or girlfriend, father or mother, or any other role in which the abuser is in a position of control or authority. ..."
"... In relationships with abusers, a birthday card, a gift (usually provided after a period of abuse), or a special treat are interpreted as not only positive, but evidence that the abuser is not "all bad" and may at some time correct his/her behavior. Abusers and controllers are often given positive credit for not abusing their partner, when the partner would have normally been subjected to verbal or physical abuse in a certain situation. An aggressive and jealous partner may normally become intimidating or abusive in certain social situations, as when an opposite-sex coworker waves in a crowd. After seeing the wave, the victim expects to be verbally battered and when it doesn't happen, that "small kindness" is interpreted as a positive sign. ..."
"... During the relationship, the abuser/controller may share information about their past - how they were mistreated, abused, neglected, or wronged. ..."
"... Sympathy may develop toward the abuser and we often hear the victim of Stockholm Syndrome defending their abuser with "I know he fractured my jaw and ribs…but he's troubled. He had a rough childhood!" ..."
"... Keep in mind: once you become hardened to the "sad stories", they will simply try another approach. I know of no victim of abuse or crime who has heard their abuser say "I'm beating (robbing, mugging, etc.) you because my Mom hated me!" ..."
"... In abusive and controlling relationships, the victim has the sense they are always "walking on eggshells" - fearful of saying or doing anything that might prompt a violent/intimidating outburst. For their survival, they begin to see the world through the abuser's perspective. They begin to fix things that might prompt an outburst, act in ways they know makes the abuser happy, or avoid aspects of their own life that may prompt a problem. If we only have a dollar in our pocket, then most of our decisions become financial decisions. If our partner is an abuser or controller, then the majority of our decisions are based on our perception of the abuser's potential reaction. We become preoccupied with the needs, desires, and habits of the abuser/controller. ..."
"... Controlling partners have increased the financial obligations/debt in the relationship to the point that neither partner can financially survive on their own. ..."
"... The legal ending of a relationship, especially a marital relationship, often creates significant problems. ..."
"... The Controller often uses extreme threats including threatening to take the children out of state, threatening to quit their job/business rather than pay alimony/support, threatening public exposure of the victim's personal issues, or assuring the victim they will never have a peaceful life due to nonstop harassment. ..."
While the psychological condition in hostage situations became known as "Stockholm Syndrome" due
to the publicity, the emotional "bonding" with captors was a familiar story in psychology. It had
been recognized many years before and was found in studies of other hostage, prisoner, or abusive
situations such as:
- Abused Children
- Battered/Abused Women
- Prisoners of War
- Cult Members
- Incest Victims
- Criminal Hostage Situations
- Concentration Camp Prisoners
- Controlling/Intimidating Relationships
In the final analysis, emotionally bonding with an abuser is actually a strategy for survival
for victims of abuse and intimidation. The "Stockholm Syndrome" reaction in hostage and/or abuse
situations is so well recognized at this time that police hostage negotiators no longer view it as
unusual. In fact, it is often encouraged in crime situations as it improves the chances for
survival of the hostages. On the down side, it also assures that the hostages experiencing "Stockholm
Syndrome" will not be very cooperative during rescue or criminal prosecution. Local law enforcement
personnel have long recognized this syndrome with battered women who fail to press charges, bail
their battering husband/boyfriend out of jail, and even physically attack police officers when they
arrive to rescue them from a violent assault.
Stockholm Syndrome (SS) can also be found in family, romantic, and interpersonal relationships.
The abuser may be a husband or wife, boyfriend or girlfriend, father or mother, or any other role
in which the abuser is in a position of control or authority.
It's important to understand the components of Stockholm Syndrome as they relate to abusive and
controlling relationships. Once the syndrome is understood, it's easier to understand why victims
support, love, and even defend their abusers and controllers.
Every syndrome has symptoms or behaviors, and Stockholm Syndrome is no exception. While a clear-cut
list has not been established due to varying opinions by researchers and experts, several of these
features will be present:
- Positive feelings by the victim toward the abuser/controller
- Negative feelings by the victim toward family, friends, or authorities trying to rescue/support
them or win their release
- Support of the abuser's reasons and behaviors
- Positive feelings by the abuser toward the victim
- Supportive behaviors by the victim, at times helping the abuser
- Inability to engage in behaviors that may assist in their release or detachment
Stockholm Syndrome doesn't occur in every hostage or abusive situation. In another bank robbery
involving hostages, after terrorizing patrons and employees for many hours, a police sharpshooter
shot and wounded the terrorizing bank robber. After he hit the floor, two women picked him up and
physically held him up to the window for another shot. As you can see, the length of time one is
exposed to abuse/control and other factors are certainly involved.
It has been found that four situations or conditions are present that serve as a foundation for
the development of Stockholm Syndrome. These four situations can be found in hostage, severe abuse,
and abusive relationships:
- The presence of a perceived threat to one's physical or psychological survival and the belief
that the abuser would carry out the threat.
- The presence of a perceived small kindness from the abuser to the victim
- Isolation from perspectives other than those of the abuser
- The perceived inability to escape the situation
By considering each situation we can understand how Stockholm Syndrome develops in romantic relationships
as well as criminal/hostage situations. Looking at each situation:
Perceived Threat to One's Physical/Psychological Survival
The perception of threat can be formed by direct, indirect, or witnessed methods. Criminal or
antisocial partners can directly threaten your life or the life of friends and family. Their history
of violence leads us to believe that the captor/controller will carry out the threat in a direct
manner if we fail to comply with their demands. The abuser assures us that only our cooperation keeps
our loved ones safe.
Indirectly, the abuser/controller offers subtle threats that you will never leave them or have
another partner, reminding you that people in the past have paid dearly for not following their wishes.
Hints are often offered such as "I know people who can make others disappear". Indirect threats also
come from the stories told by the abuser or controller - how they obtained revenge on those who have
crossed them in the past. These stories of revenge are told to remind the victim that revenge is
possible if they leave.
Witnessing violence or aggression is also a perceived threat. Witnessing a violent temper directed
at a television set, others on the highway, or a third party clearly sends us the message that we
could be the next target for violence. Witnessing the thoughts and attitudes of the abuser/controller
is threatening and intimidating, knowing that we will be the target of those thoughts in the future.
The "Small Kindness" Perception
In threatening and survival situations, we look for evidence of hope - a small sign that the situation
may improve. When an abuser/controller shows the victim some small kindness, even though it is to
the abuser's benefit as well, the victim interprets that small kindness as a positive trait of the
captor. In criminal/war hostage situations, letting the victim live is often enough. Small behaviors,
such as allowing a bathroom visit or providing food/water, are enough to strengthen the Stockholm
Syndrome in criminal hostage events.
In relationships with abusers, a birthday card, a gift (usually provided after a period of abuse),
or a special treat are interpreted as not only positive, but evidence that the abuser is not "all
bad" and may at some time correct his/her behavior. Abusers and controllers are often given positive
credit for not abusing their partner, when the partner would have normally been subjected to verbal
or physical abuse in a certain situation. An aggressive and jealous partner may normally become intimidating
or abusive in certain social situations, as when an opposite-sex coworker waves in a crowd. After
seeing the wave, the victim expects to be verbally battered and when it doesn't happen, that "small
kindness" is interpreted as a positive sign.
Similar to the small kindness perception is the perception of a "soft side". During the relationship,
the abuser/controller may share information about their past - how they were mistreated, abused,
neglected, or wronged. The victim begins to feel the abuser/controller may be capable of fixing their
behavior or worse yet, that they (abuser) may also be a "victim". Sympathy may develop toward the
abuser and we often hear the victim of Stockholm Syndrome defending their abuser with "I know he
fractured my jaw and ribs…but he's troubled. He had a rough childhood!"
Losers and abusers may admit
they need psychiatric help or acknowledge they are mentally disturbed; however, it's almost always
after they have already abused or intimidated the victim. The admission is a way of denying responsibility
for the abuse. In truth, personality disorders and criminals have learned over the years that personal
responsibility for their violent/abusive behaviors can be minimized and even denied by blaming their
bad upbringing, abuse as a child, and now even video games. One murderer blamed his crime on eating
too much junk food - now known as the "Twinkie Defense". While it may be true that the abuser/controller
had a difficult upbringing, showing sympathy for his/her history produces no change in their behavior
and in fact, prolongs the length of time you will be abused. While "sad stories" are always included
in their apologies - after the abusive/controlling event - their behavior never changes! Keep in
mind: once you become hardened to the "sad stories", they will simply try another approach. I know
of no victim of abuse or crime who has heard their abuser say "I'm beating (robbing, mugging, etc.)
you because my Mom hated me!"
Isolation from Perspectives Other than those of the Captor
In abusive and controlling relationships, the victim has the sense they are always "walking on
eggshells" - fearful of saying or doing anything that might prompt a violent/intimidating outburst.
For their survival, they begin to see the world through the abuser's perspective. They begin to fix
things that might prompt an outburst, act in ways they know makes the abuser happy, or avoid aspects
of their own life that may prompt a problem. If we only have a dollar in our pocket, then most of
our decisions become financial decisions. If our partner is an abuser or controller, then the majority
of our decisions are based on our perception of the abuser's potential reaction. We become preoccupied
with the needs, desires, and habits of the abuser/controller.
Taking the abuser's perspective as a survival technique can become so intense that the victim
actually develops anger toward those trying to help them. The abuser is already angry and resentful
toward anyone who would provide the victim support, typically using multiple methods and manipulations
to isolate the victim from others. Any contact the victim has with supportive people in the community
is met with accusations, threats, and/or violent outbursts. Victims then turn on their family - fearing
family contact will cause additional violence and abuse in the home. At this point, victims curse
their parents and friends, tell them not to call and to stop interfering, and break off communication
with others. Agreeing with the abuser/controller, supportive others are now viewed as "causing trouble"
and must be avoided. Many victims threaten their family and friends with restraining orders if they
continue to "interfere" or try to help the victim in their situation. On the surface it would appear
that they have sided with the abuser/controller. In truth, they are trying to minimize contact with
situations that might make them a target of additional verbal abuse or intimidation. If a casual
phone call from Mom prompts a two-hour temper outburst with threats and accusations - the victim
quickly realizes it's safer if Mom stops calling. If simply telling Mom to stop calling doesn't work,
for his or her own safety the victim may accuse Mom of attempting to ruin the relationship and demand
that she stop calling.
In severe cases of Stockholm Syndrome in relationships, the victim may have difficulty leaving
the abuser and may actually feel the abusive situation is their fault. In law enforcement situations,
the victim may actually feel the arrest of their partner for physical abuse or battering is their
fault. Some women will allow their children to be removed by child protective agencies rather than
give up the relationship with their abuser. As they take the perspective of the abuser, the children
are at fault - they complained about the situation, they brought the attention of authorities to
the home, and they put the adult relationship at risk. Sadly, the children have now become a danger
to the victim's safety. For those with Stockholm Syndrome, allowing the children to be removed from
the home decreases their victim stress while providing an emotionally and physically safer environment
for the children.
Perceived Inability to Escape
As a hostage in a bank robbery, threatened by criminals with guns, it's easy to understand the
perceived inability to escape. In romantic relationships, the belief that one can't escape is also
very common. Many abusive/controlling relationships feel like till-death-do-us-part relationships
- locked together by mutual financial issues/assets, mutual intimate knowledge, or legal situations.
Here are some common situations:
- Controlling partners have increased the financial obligations/debt in the relationship to
the point that neither partner can financially survive on their own. Controllers who sense their
partner may be leaving will often purchase a new automobile, later claiming they can't pay alimony
or child support due to their large car payments.
- The legal ending of a relationship, especially a marital relationship, often creates significant
problems. A Controller who has an income that is "under the table" or maintained through legally
questionable situations runs the risk of those sources of income being investigated or made public
by the divorce/separation. The Controller then becomes more agitated about the possible public
exposure of their business arrangements than the loss of the relationship.
- The Controller often uses extreme threats including threatening to take the children out of
state, threatening to quit their job/business rather than pay alimony/support, threatening public
exposure of the victim's personal issues, or assuring the victim they will never have a peaceful
life due to nonstop harassment. In severe cases, the Controller may threaten an action that will
undercut the victim's support such as "I'll see that you lose your job" or "I'll have your automobile
- Controllers often keep the victim locked into the relationship with severe guilt - threatening
suicide if the victim leaves. The victim hears "I'll kill myself in front of the children", "I'll
set myself on fire in the front yard", or "Our children won't have a father/mother if you leave
- In relationships with an abuser or controller, the victim has also experienced a loss of self-esteem,
self-confidence, and psychological energy. The victim may feel "burned out" and too depressed
to leave. Additionally, abusers and controllers often create a type of dependency by controlling
the finances, placing automobiles/homes in their name, and eliminating any assets or resources
the victim may use to leave. In clinical practice I've heard "I'd leave but I can't even get money
out of the savings account! I don't know the PIN number."
- In teens and young adults, victims may be attracted to a controlling individual when they
feel inexperienced, insecure, and overwhelmed by a change in their life situation. When parents
are going through a divorce, a teen may attach to a controlling individual, feeling the controller
may stabilize their life. Freshmen in college may be attracted to controlling individuals who
promise to help them survive living away from home on a college campus.
In unhealthy relationships and definitely in Stockholm Syndrome there is a daily preoccupation
with "trouble". Trouble is any individual, group, situation, comment, casual glance, or cold meal
that may produce a temper tantrum or verbal abuse from the controller or abuser. To survive, "trouble"
is to be avoided at all costs. The victim must control situations that produce trouble. That may
include avoiding family, friends, co-workers, and anyone who may create "trouble" in the abusive
relationship. The victim does not hate family and friends; they are only avoiding "trouble"! The
victim also cleans the house, calms the children, scans the mail, avoids certain topics, and anticipates
every issue of the controller or abuse in an effort to avoid "trouble". In this situation, children
who are noisy become "trouble". Loved ones and friends are sources of "trouble" for the victim who
is attempting to avoid verbal or physical aggression.
Stockholm Syndrome in relationships is not uncommon. Law enforcement professionals are painfully
aware of the situation - making a domestic dispute one of the high-risk calls during work hours.
Called by neighbors during a spousal abuse incident, the abuser is passive upon arrival of the police,
only to find the abused spouse upset and threatening the officers if their abusive partner is arrested
for domestic violence. In truth, the victim knows the abuser/controller will retaliate against him/her
if 1) they encourage an arrest, 2) they offer statements about the abuse/fight that are deemed disloyal
by the abuser, 3) they don't bail them out of jail as quickly as possible, and 4) they don't personally
apologize for the situation - as though it was their fault.
Stockholm Syndrome produces an unhealthy bond with the controller and abuser. It is the reason
many victims continue to support an abuser after the relationship is over. It's also the reason they
continue to see "the good side" of an abusive individual and appear sympathetic to someone who has
mentally and sometimes physically abused them.
Is There Something Else Involved?
In a short response - Yes! Throughout history, people have found themselves supporting and participating
in life situations that range from abusive to bizarre. In talking to these active and willing participants
in bad and bizarre situations, it is clear they have developed feelings and attitudes that support
their participation. One way these feelings and thoughts are developed is known as "cognitive dissonance".
As you can tell, psychologists have large words and phrases for just about everything.
"Cognitive Dissonance" explains how and why people change their ideas and opinions to support
situations that do not appear to be healthy, positive, or normal. In the theory, an individual seeks
to reduce information or opinions that make him or her uncomfortable. When we have two sets of cognitions
(knowledge, opinion, feelings, input from others, etc.) that are the opposite, the situation becomes
emotionally uncomfortable. Even though we might find ourselves in a foolish or difficult situation
- few want to admit that fact. Instead, we attempt to reduce the dissonance - the fact that our cognitions
don't match, agree, or make sense when combined. "Cognitive Dissonance" can be reduced by adding
new cognitions - adding new thoughts and attitudes. Some examples:
- Heavy smokers know smoking causes lung cancer and multiple health risks. To continue smoking,
the smoker changes his cognitions (thoughts/feelings) such as 1) "I'm smoking less than ten years
ago", 2) "I'm smoking low-tar cigarettes", 3) "Those statistics are made up by the cancer industry
conspiracy", or 4) "Something's got to get you anyway!" These new cognitions/attitudes allow them
to keep smoking and actually begin blaming restaurants for being unfair.
- You purchase a $40,000.00 Sport Utility Vehicle that gets 8 miles a gallon. You justify the
expense and related issues with 1) "It's great on trips" (you take one trip per year), 2) "I can
use it to haul stuff" (one coffee table in 12 months), and 3) "You can carry a lot of people in
it" (95% of your trips are driver-only).
- Your husband/boyfriend becomes abusive and assaultive. You can't leave due to the finances,
children, or other factors. Through cognitive dissonance, you begin telling yourself "He only
hits me open-handed" and "He's had a lot of stress at work."
Leon Festinger first coined the term "Cognitive Dissonance". He had observed a cult (1956) in
which members gave up their homes, incomes, and jobs to work for the cult. This cult believed in
messages from outer space that predicted the day the world would end by a flood. As cult members
and firm believers, they believed they would be saved by flying saucers at the appointed time. As
they gathered and waited to be taken by flying saucers at the specified time, the end-of-the-world
came and went. No flood and no flying saucer! Rather than believing they were foolish after all that
personal and emotional investment - they decided their beliefs had actually saved the world from
the flood and they became firmer in their beliefs after the failure of the prophecy. The moral: the
more you invest (income, job, home, time, effort, etc.) the stronger your need to justify your position.
If we invest $5.00 in a raffle ticket, we justify losing with "I'll get them next time". If you invest
everything you have, it requires an almost unreasoning belief and unusual attitude to support and
justify that investment.
Studies tell us we are more loyal and committed to something that is difficult, uncomfortable,
and even humiliating. The initiation rituals of college fraternities, Marine boot camp, and graduate
school all produce loyal and committed individuals. Almost any ordeal creates a bonding experience.
Every couple, no matter how mismatched, falls in love in the movies after going through a terrorist
takeover, being stalked by a killer, being stranded on an island, or being involved in an alien abduction.
Investment and an ordeal are ingredients for a strong bonding - even if the bonding is unhealthy.
No one bonds or falls in love by being a member of the Automobile Club or a music CD club. Struggling
to survive on a deserted island - you bet!
Abusive relationships produce a great amount on unhealthy investment in both parties. In many
cases we tend to remain and support the abusive relationship due to our investment in the relationship.
Try telling a new Marine that since he or she has survived boot camp, they should now enroll in the
National Guard! Several types of investments keep us in the bad relationship:
- Emotional Investment
- We've invested so many emotions, cried so much, and worried so much that we feel we must see
the relationship through to the finish.
- Social Investment
- We've got our pride! To avoid social embarrassment and uncomfortable social situations, we
remain in the relationship.
- Family Investments
- If children are present in the relationship, decisions regarding the relationship are clouded
by the status and needs of the children.
- Financial Investment
- In many cases, the controlling and abusive partner has created a complex financial situation.
Many victims remain in a bad relationship, waiting for a better financial situation to develop
that would make their departure and detachment easier.
- Lifestyle Investment
- Many controlling/abusive partners use money or a lifestyle as an investment. Victims in this
situation may not want to lose their current lifestyle.
- Intimacy Investment
- We often invest emotional and sexual intimacy. Some victims have experienced a destruction
of their emotional and/or sexual self-esteem in the unhealthy relationship. The abusing partner
may threaten to spread rumors or tell intimate details or secrets. A type of blackmail using intimacy
is often found in these situations.
In many cases, it's not simply our feelings for an individual that keep us in an unhealthy relationship
- it's often the amount of investment. Relationships are complex and we often only see the tip of
the iceberg in public. For this reason, the most common phrase offered by the victim in defense of
their unhealthy relationship is "You just don't understand!"
Combining Two Unhealthy Conditions
The combination of "Stockholm Syndrome" and "cognitive dissonance" produces a victim who firmly
believes the relationship is not only acceptable, but also desperately needed for their survival.
The victim feels they would mentally collapse if the relationship ended. In long-term relationships,
the victims have invested everything and placed "all their eggs in one basket". The relationship
now decides their level of self-esteem, self-worth, and emotional health.
For reasons described above, the victim feels family and friends are a threat to the relationship
and eventually to their personal health and existence. The more family/friends protest the controlling
and abusive nature of the relationship, the more the victim develops cognitive dissonance and becomes
defensive. At this point, family and friends become victims of the abusive and controlling individual.
Importantly, both Stockholm Syndrome and cognitive dissonance develop on an involuntary basis.
The victim does not purposely invent this attitude. Both develop as an attempt to exist and survive
in a threatening and controlling environment and relationship. Despite what we might think, our loved
one is not in the unhealthy relationship to irritate us, embarrass us, or drive us to drink. What
might have begun as a normal relationship has turned into a controlling and abusive situation. They
are trying to survive. Their personality is developing the feelings and thoughts needed to survive
the situation and lower their emotional and physical risks. All of us have developed attitudes and
feelings that help us accept and survive situations. We have these attitudes/feelings about our jobs,
our community, and other aspects of our life. As we have found throughout history, the more dysfunctional
the situation, the more dysfunctional our adaptation and thoughts to survive. The victim is engaged
in an attempt to survive and make a relationship work. Once they decide it doesn't work and can't
be fixed, they will need our support as we patiently await their decision to return to a healthy
and positive lifestyle.
Family and Friends of the Victim
When a family is confronted with a loved one involved with a 'Loser' or controlling/abusive individual,
the situation becomes emotionally painful and socially difficult for the family. (See "
Are You Dating
a Loser? Identifying Losers, Controllers and Abusers ".) While each situation is different, some
general guidelines to consider are:
- Your loved one, the "victim" of the Loser/Abuser, has probably been given a choice - the relationship
or the family. This choice is made more difficult by the control and intimidation often present
in abusive/controlling relationships. Knowing that choosing the family will result in severe personal
and social consequences, the family always comes in second. Keep in mind that the victim knows
in their heart the family will always love them and accept their return - whenever the return
- Remember, the more you pressure the "victim" of the Loser/Abuser, the more you prove their
point. Your loved one is being told the family is trying to ruin their wonderful relationship.
Pressure in the form of contacts, comments, and communications will be used as evidence against
you. An invitation to a Tupperware party is met with "You see! They just want to get you by yourself
so they can tell you bad things about me!" Increasing your contacts is viewed as "putting pressure"
on their relationship - not being lovingly concerned.
- Your contacts with your loved one, no matter how routine and loving, may be met with anger
and resentment. This is because each contact may prompt the Loser/Abuser to attack them verbally
or emotionally. Imagine getting a four-hour lecture every time your Aunt Gladys calls. In a short
time, you become angry each time she calls, knowing what the contact will produce in your home.
The longer Aunt Gladys talks - the longer your lecture becomes! Thus, when Aunt Gladys calls,
you want to get her off the phone as quickly as possible.
- The 1980's song, "Hold on Loosely", may be the key to a good family and friend approach. Holding
on too tightly produces more pressure. When the victim is out of the home, it's often best to
establish predictable, scheduled contacts. Calling every Wednesday evening, just for a status
report or to go over current events, is less threatening than random calls during the week. Random
calls are always viewed as "checking up on us" calls. While you may encounter an answering machine,
leave a polite and loving message. Importantly, don't discuss the relationship (the controller
may be listening!) unless the victim brings it up. The goal of these scheduled calls is to maintain
contact, remind your loved one that you are always there to help, and to quietly remind the controller
that family and loved ones are nearby and haven't disappeared.
- Try to maintain traditional and special contacts with your loved one - holidays, special occasions,
etc. Keep your contacts short and brief, with no comments that can be used as evidence. Contacts
made at "traditional" times - holidays, birthdays, anniversaries, etc. - are not as threatening
to a controller/abuser. Contacts that provide information, but not questions, are also not as
threatening. An example might be a simple card reading "Just a note to let you know that your
brother landed a new job this week. You might see him on a Wal-Mart commercial any day now. Love,
Mom and Dad". This approach allows the victim to recognize that the family is there - waiting
in the wings if needed. It also lessens the lectures/tantrums provided by the Loser as the contacts
are on a traditional and expected basis. It's also hard to be angry about brother's new job without
looking ridiculous. Also, don't invent holidays or send a reminder that it's Sigmund Freud's birthday.
That's suspicious…even in my family.
- Remember that there are many channels of communication. It's important that we keep a channel
open if at all possible. Communication channels might include phone calls, letters, cards, and
e-mail. Scheduled monthly shopping trips or outings are helpful if possible. The goal is to maintain
contact while your loved one is involved in the controlling/abusive relationship. Remember, the
goal is contact, not pressure.
- Don't feel the victim's behavior is against the family or friends. It may be a form of survival
or a way of lowering stress. Victims may be very resistive, angry, and even hostile due to the
complexity of their relationship with the controller/abuser. They may even curse, threaten, and
accuse loved ones and friends. This hostile defensiveness is actually self-protection in the relationship
- an attempt to avoid "trouble".
- The victim needs to know and feel they are not rejected because of their behavior. Keep in
mind, they are painfully aware of their situation. They know they are being treated badly and/or
controlled by their partner. Frequent reminders of this will only make them want less contact.
We naturally avoid people who remind us of things or situations that are emotionally painful.
- Victims may slightly open the door and provide information about their relationship or hint
they may be considering leaving. When the door opens, don't jump through with the Marines behind
you! Listen and simply offer support such as "You know your family is behind any decision you
need to make and at any time you make it." They may be exploring what support is available but
may not be ready to call in the troops just yet. Many victims use an "exit plan" that may take
months or even years to complete. They may be gathering information at this point, not yet ready
for an exit.
- We can get messages to people in two ways - the pipeline and the grapevine. The pipeline is
face-to-face, telling the person directly. This seldom happens in Loser situations as controllers
and abusers monitor and control contacts with others. However, the grapevine is still open. When
we use the grapevine, we send a message to our loved one through another person. Victims of controlling
and abusive individuals are often allowed to maintain a relationship with a few people, perhaps
a sibling or best friend. We can send our loved one a message through that contact person, a message
that voices our understanding and support. We don't send insults ("Bill is such a jerk!) or put-downs
("If he doesn't get out of this relationship he'll end up crazy!) - we send messages of love and
support. We send "I hope she/he (victim) knows the family is concerned and that we love and support
them." Comments sent on the grapevine are phrased with the understanding that our loved one will
hear them in that manner. Don't talk with a grapevine contact to express anger and threaten to
hire a hit man, and then try to send a message of loving support. Be careful what and how the
message is provided. The grapevine contact can often get messages to the victim when we can't.
It's another way of letting them know we're supporting them, just waiting to help if and when
- Each situation is different. The family may need to seek counseling support in the community.
A family consultation with a mental health professional or attorney may be helpful if the situation
becomes legally complex or there is a significant danger of harm.
- As relatives or friends of a victim involved with a controller or abuser, our normal reaction
is to consider dramatic action. We become angry, resentful, and aggressive at times. Our mind
fills with a variety of plans that often range from rescue and kidnapping to ambushing the controller/abuser
with a ball bat. A rule of thumb is that any aggression toward the controller/abuser will result
in additional difficulties for your loved one. Try to remain calm and await an opportunity to
show your love and support when your loved one needs it.
- In some cases, as in teenagers and young adults, the family may still provide some financial,
insurance, or other support. When we receive angry responses to our phone calls, our anger and
resentment tells us to cut off their support. I've heard "If she's going to date that jerk, it's
not going to be in a car I'm paying for!" and "If he's choosing that woman over his family, he
can drop out of college and flip hamburgers!" Withdrawing financial support only makes your loved
one more dependent upon the controller/abuser. Remember, if we're aggressive by threatening, withdrawing
support, or pressuring - we become the threatening force, not the controller/abuser. It actually
moves the victim into the support of the controller. Sadly, the more of an "ordeal" they experience,
the more bonding takes place, as noted with both Stockholm Syndrome and cognitive dissonance.
- As you might imagine, the combination of Stockholm Syndrome and cognitive dissonance may also
be active when our loved one is involved in cults, unusual religions, and other groups. In some
situations, the abuser and controller is actually a group or organization. Victims are punished
if they are viewed as disloyal to the group. While this article deals with individual relationships,
the family guidelines may also be helpful in controlling-group situations.
You may be the victim of a controlling and abusive partner, seeking an understanding of your feelings
and attitudes. You may have a son, daughter, or friend currently involved with a controlling and
abusive partner, looking for ways to understand and help.
If a loved one is involved with a Loser, a controlling and abusing partner, the long-term outcome
is difficult to determine due to the many factors involved. If their relationship is in the "dating"
phase, they may end the relationship on their own. If the relationship has continued for over a year,
they may require support and an exit plan before ending the relationship. Marriage and children further
complicate their ability to leave the situation. When the victim decides to end the unhappy relationship,
it's important that they view loved ones as supportive, loving, and understanding - not as a source
of pressure, guilt, or aggression.
This article is an attempt to understand the complex feelings and attitudes that are as puzzling
to the victim as they are to family and friends. Separately, I've outlined recommendations for detaching
from a Loser or controlling/abusive individual, but clearly, there are more victims in this situation.
(See " Are You
Dating a Loser? Identifying Losers, Controllers and Abusers ".) It is hoped this article is helpful
to family and friends who worry, cry, and have difficulty understanding the situation of their loved
one. It has been said that knowledge is power. Hopefully this knowledge will prove helpful and powerful
to victims and their loved ones.
Please consider this article as a general guideline. Some recommendations may be appropriate and
helpful while some may not apply to a specific situation. In many cases, we may need additional professional
help of a mental health or legal nature.
Gone Girl is best watched for two of its two and a half hours.
"... The dialogue is snappy and razor-sharp. The acting is awesome, from the main characters all the way down to minor roles. ..."
"... A movie about passion, lies, obsession, the death of love, and living with sociopaths, this is a remarkable movie. It also reinforces my belief that I never ever want to get married ..."
"... Ben Affleck, a capable actor and a fine director, knows what is to be caught in the media's unforgiving line of fire and has earned poor reviews in the past for exuding a certain bordering-on-self-parody, macho-man overconfidence and self-satisfaction, so he is an ideal choice to play the husband, an individual who is either a decent man in over his head or a chiseled sociopath who can barely hide his smile in front of the cameras. ..."
"... My favorite films of his are still Zodiac and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, but this plants its flag close to the top. ..."
"... Tyler Perry plays a jovial, smirky Johnny Cochran-type lawyer, who makes huge amounts of money defending men accused of killing their wives ..."
"... The Gone Girl screenplay had plot holes big enough to drive a truck through. In fairness, it was well acted and it started off well enough, shining a light on the deterioration of a marriage, how the media picks and chooses its heroes and villains for ratings, and just how easy it is to manipulate a public that thinks appearing on The Bachelor will lead to true romance. The send up of Nancy Grace and her ilk alone is worth sitting through. ..."
"... More than that, I perceive it as a condemnation of marriage, romantic relationships, and the (alleged) fakery of them. ..."
"... It is also a blatant commentary on sensational media and public hysteria/groupthink (I.e., "sheeple" and witch hunts). There is also a strange comment on parenting, if you compare nick's mother to his father and Amy's parents. ..."
"... There's another part of the movie, much smaller than what was advertised, which was why I wanted to see the movie in the first place. The role the media plays in these kind of situations. I was led to believe that it was an examination of the subject. It's not. ..."
"... Ben Affleck does a fantastic job playing Nick Dunne, a somewhat employed writer married to the no-so-right-in-the-head Amy (Rosalund Pike). The one thing Amy can do well is mess with your life. She messes with Nick's to the point the world believes Nick has killed her and he has to hire high profile attorney Tanner Bolt, played extremely well by Tyler Perry. ..."
"... Gone Girl is best watched for two of its two and a half hours. ..."
"... Great for 1.5 hours and the rest was trash. ..."
"... Gone Girl is brilliant, for 3/4 of the movie. The rest, of the story falls off the tracks and then struggles to reach the end...struggles, because it pushes the boundaries of weakness of Nick(Affleck). ..."
"... It sparks questions in you as you watch, as to just how well do you know your spouse? How well do they know you? ..."
"... It's a cast of talent with Ben Affleck Neil Patrick Harris, Carrie Coone, Rosamun Pike, Tyler Perry and others that highlights every angle of this demented story. ..."
"... There were parts that dragged on somewhat. The movie has a longer running time than most. ..."
"... Gone Girl is directed by the same man who brought you Fight Club, Social Network (the Facebook movie), and Se7en. ..."
"... In many instances, the film was making a statement (an unbiased one at that) on everything wrong with modern-day media, law enforcement, marriages, and the image of gender roles in society. Tough stuff! The only complaint I can make about the film is how it is not really all that cinematic and the film's uncertain ending. But then again, the ending can be seen both ways either as a metaphor about reality's way of saying no one is either good or bad or an attack on the senses with a strange turnaround for a particular character. ..."
TOP 1000 REVIEWER on October 12, 2014 Format: Amazon Video
A twisty and twisted new classic Nine Things About the Movie "Gone
Girl" (USA, 2014)
CMM, December 10, 2014 Format: Blu-ray
1. One of the best movies of 2014, this multi-layered, wickedly brilliant
film is a great adaptation of the 2012 novel.
2. It was directed by David Fincher. He collaborated with Trent Reznor
and Atticus Ross again for the smoothly foreboding soundtrack. Fincher has
developed a unique cinematic style, and this movie is a showcase of it.
3. The heart of the movie is a mystery - a wife disappears from her home
on the morning of her anniversary. But not only do we not know who did it,
we don't even really know what happened.
4. The movie flips back and forth between the husband's perspective and
the wife's, slowly unfolding its secrets like a black, poisonous flower.
5. Besides the core mystery, the movie is also a commentary on media
hype, along with trial by popularity. Nancy Grace probably wishes she could
sue somebody for this movie.
6. Perhaps more chilling than the mystery is the depiction of what has
to be the most dysfunctional marriage in cinematic history.
7. The movie is almost 3 hours long, but it doesn't feel like it. The
plot is tight - no scene is wasted. The dialogue is snappy and razor-sharp.
The acting is awesome, from the main characters all the way down to minor
8. Part of the reason the movie works so well is that the author of the
book, Gillian Flynn, also wrote the screenplay. It's set in Missouri and
feels pretty authentic, probably because the author is from Kansas City.
9. A movie about passion, lies, obsession, the death of love, and
living with sociopaths, this is a remarkable movie. It also reinforces my
belief that I never ever want to get married.
Gone Girl is the Complete Package. Gone Girl took the world by storm.
And I'm not just talking about the film. The book (I highly recommend this
read) by Gillian Flynn quickly became one of the bestselling novels of 2012.
Through word of mouth, people left and right were finding out about this
tale of a dark and twisted marriage. It was seen almost everywhere, so I
was no surprise that the rights would be snatched up (by Reese Witherspoon,
nonetheless). And the stage was quickly set for David Fincher to work his
dark directing magic.
D. H., October 4, 2014 Format: Amazon Video
The story tells of a married couple, Nick and Amy Dunne, on their fifth
wedding anniversary. That morning, Amy mysteriously vanishes, leaving behind
a rather suspicious trail of evidence.The authorities and the media quickly
swoop down on Nick, who seems nice enough, but is oddly evasive and may
not be telling the whole truth. As events unfold, you will be left wondering
how well you truly know the person you love.
With jaw-dropping performances from Ben Affleck, Rosamund Pike, Tyler
Perry, Carrie Coon, Neil Patrick Harris, and Patrick Fugit, you will be
in for a treat. These actors portray their respective roles with such power
and perfection, and I was pleasantly surprised. I think you will be as well.
I expect to see award nominations for these players within the coming weeks.
If not, I will riot.
Not only is the acting fantastic, but the score paints a beautiful picture
as well. Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross (who scored Fincher's last two films--The
Social Network and The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo) have returned to deliver
an astounding and haunting score that perfectly suits the story. Equally
peaceful and disturbing, it mirrors the characters' behaviours as their
secrets are unveiled.
Gone Girl is the complete package. Creepy, witty, breathtaking, you will
finish this movie with your jaw open. I guarantee it. Truly beautiful, Fincher
has outdone himself. I recommend purchasing this at your earliest opportunity.
David R. Eastwood, March 29, 2015
I have not read the Gillian Flynn novel Gone Girl. Not out of any particular
aversion. I just never found my way around to it. So I entered this film
adaptation by premiere stylist and suspense conjurer David Fincher quote-unquote
blind beyond a general knowledge of the story involving a suburban Missouri
man who becomes a suspect in his wife's mysterious vanishing. And beat by
beat, scene by scene, twist by twist, the film blew me away. It is an airtight
and atmospheric blend of the hilarious, the macabre, and the romantic. It
satisfies first as a crime mystery. With a perverse, yet playful hand, it
transforms the essential and inevitable questions of the genre (who is who?
who is where? who has done what? who is alive? who is dead?) into delightful
webs of opaque morality and disturbing brutality. There are other concerns
and components, too, and this joins such films as Sweet Smell of Success
and To Die For among the best indictments of media sensationalism and the
way it can bastardize humanity. It achieves this via acidic and vivid (and
therefore highly enjoyable) illustration of its points rather than didactic
The film is buoyed by spot-on casting decisions. In a strange way which
pays enormous dividends, many of the stars seem to be chosen based on their
undesirable traits. Ben Affleck, a capable actor and a fine director,
knows what is to be caught in the media's unforgiving line of fire and has
earned poor reviews in the past for exuding a certain bordering-on-self-parody,
macho-man overconfidence and self-satisfaction, so he is an ideal choice
to play the husband, an individual who is either a decent man in over his
head or a chiseled sociopath who can barely hide his smile in front of the
And the beautiful Rosamund Pike can seem distant on screen, a type of
icy English rose to be admired and never touched, and she is therefore ideal
as a so-picture-perfect-as-to-be-unknowable wife pushed to unusual and dangerous
places. Hers is a particularly alarming and inspired turn (the actress'
best since the undervalued Barney's Version), and it would be a shame if
she were not recognized by the Academy with her first nomination early next
This line of casting thought extends to other plays in the substantial
ensemble. Why not, for example, hire Tyler Perry, who has turned himself
in a household name with outsize charisma and a self-forged aura of spiritual
authority, to play a showboating A-list lawyer? Throughout Gone Girl, the
roles fit so very snugly.
And behind the camera, Fincher is in as fine a form as ever. My favorite
films of his are still Zodiac and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, but this
plants its flag close to the top. His antiseptic, meticulous, and perfectionist
shot compositions turn the banal suburban environments into under-lit and
malevolence-infused spaces, and every scene (whether overtly suspenseful
and violent or of a quieter domestic variety) has an incisive and taut quality.
This is a long film at 148 minutes, but never an overweight or ponderous
one. It holds viewers' heads and hearts with vice-grip intensity from frame
one onward and leaves us (or me, at least) at once amused, energized, and
KTFaye, February 14, 2015
Format: Amazon Video
THOROUGHLY NASTY, REPULSIVE, & SMARMY ... BUT WITH A VERY CUTE LITTLE ORANGE
The plot of David Fincher's film GONE GIRL (2014) is one more variation
of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's old Sherlock Holmes story "The Problem of Thor
Bridge." One among many ... and perhaps the nastiest.
As all the blurbs reveal, Ben Affleck plays a husband named Nick Dunne,
who is suspected of killing his wife Amy, played by Rosamund Pike, when
she mysteriously disappears under highly suspicious circumstances.
Although the cast is uniformly talented, nearly all of the characters
are unlikeable ... and several of them are downright repulsive. Tyler
Perry plays a jovial, smirky Johnny Cochran-type lawyer, who makes huge
amounts of money defending men accused of killing their wives
... the shark-like, frenzied TV scandal-mongers are totally disgusting
... and the couple who are the parents of Amy (the missing wife) are blood-sucking
horrors who have used their daughter for their own financial benefit for
Only two of the main characters are "normal" and basically "neutral"
in their presentation: Margo Dunne, the sister of Ben Affleck's character,
played by Carrie Coon, and Rhonda Boney (!?), the female detective who is
in charge of the investigation, played by Kim Dickens. The only wholly likeable
character is the little orange cat of Nick and Amy, which only has about
5 minutes of on-screen time.
The solution to Amy Dunne's disappearance gradually comes to light over
the next TWO AND A HALF HOURS, and without giving any spoilers here, I will
assert that it is a repulsive conclusion to the film.
I viewed the film with a small group of adults (approximately 55 people),
and especially during the final 45 minutes some parts of the film caused
nearly the whole audience to laugh at the preposterous events and new revelations.
The scenes with Neil Patrick Harris seemed to get the highest number of
In my judgment, this film is quite smarmy and a huge waste of one's time.
Not even the sweetness of the little orange cat can compensate for the general
nastiness of the characters and their actions.
Ripley7700 on March 5, 2015
Format: Amazon Video |
Like the marriage in the movie, it starts well, then completely falls apart
The Gone Girl screenplay had plot holes big enough to drive a truck
through. In fairness, it was well acted and it started off well enough,
shining a light on the deterioration of a marriage, how the media picks
and chooses its heroes and villains for ratings, and just how easy it is
to manipulate a public that thinks appearing on The Bachelor will lead to
true romance. The send up of Nancy Grace and her ilk alone is worth sitting
But then it all falls apart. I won't spoil it for those who haven't yet
seen it, but the complete unraveling of film after the "twist" actually
became laughable with such huge gaps in common sense, implausible occurrences,
security camera footage that not a single cop decided to look at, and just
plain linear storytelling of getting from A to B that it's actually boggling.
It wasn't the twist itself, that was actually pretty clever, it was all
the lapses that came after.
Even in a work of fiction there logic rules that need to be followed,
and therein lies my issue with Gone Girl. It's difficult to elaborate on
everything that's wrong with the last third without revealing what happens
after the so-called big twist. (Just google Gone Girl plot holes and you'll
find plenty of examples). But the film ends with an eye roll instead of
a bang. There's suspending disbelief, which I'm happy to do if there is
other convincing evidence, and then there's beating disbelief to death with
a tire iron--which is what Gone Girl gives you in the end.
I understand that Gillian Flynn translated her book to screen and reworked
the whole last third, which is exactly where it all falls apart. Perhaps
being a staff writer at Entertainment Weekly for 20 years -- where the emphasis
is clearly on get it out fast rather than get it out right -- dulled her
logic and skills! Either way, while some Oscar snubs are occasionally puzzling,
I'm not in the least surprised that there were none for this screenplay.
Buddhasmom, March 4, 2015
Format: Amazon Video |
Split on this one...
At the end of this movie, I found myself very confused. Not about the
mystery but whether I liked the movie. It wasn't because the characters
were so complex or multi-layered that they pushed my perceptions of "good"
and "evil." In fact, I found Amy and Nick strangely two-dimensional.
I was so mystified by my mystification that I did a first: I read a bunch
of professional reviews to see if that would help me put my finger on it.
I was further surprised to see a common theme among them: is this movie
misogynist, misandrist, or misanthropic? If it is any of these, I think
it is the latter.
More than that, I perceive it as a condemnation of marriage, romantic
relationships, and the (alleged) fakery of them. In that vein, I found
it spiteful rather than satiric. It is also a blatant commentary on
sensational media and public hysteria/groupthink (I.e., "sheeple" and witch
hunts). There is also a strange comment on parenting, if you compare nick's
mother to his father and Amy's parents. That one was a bit lost on
me, and perphaps it is clearer in the book where there is more detail on
that (note: I haven't read the book).
At this point, I'm still baffled by my reaction to this movie, and the
best way I can rationalize it is that I think this is a solid suspense/murder
mystery but I didn't buy the "psychological" part of this psychological
That part seemed forced to the point that it detracted from the good
things. I admit that I liked Basic Instinct more (maybe I'm just getting
old and need to rewatch that one).
Some positives: I thought the casting was superb and the directing was
also very strong. I thought the actress who played the twin sister was particularly
good. On a final note, I found the end rather abrupt. Don't know if this
will help people who haven't watched it yet, but maybe this will help validate
other viewers who wish they could have "cracked open" their own skulls at
the end of this movie.
Don't see it alone
This movie isn't anything you'd expect. I think that's why my review
is mixed. I liked that it was not what you expected, I guess. I think I
was irritated at the female character. All of them really, but the wife
really annoyed me. It was kind of sick and really twisted. I kept saying
to myself, "okay well lets appreciate it for what it is and keep an open
mind." That was really difficult. This isn't an easy movie for me to pin
down for you. Especially because I don't want to give anything away and
to really give you a mental picture, I almost have to give stuff away. I'm
going to try to stretch my creative muscle here, though, and give you some
kind of perspective.
One half of the picture is the hero and he screws up bad, but the punishment
is horrific compared to the crime. I'm not crazy about those type of movies.
The kind of movie where the hero just keeps getting hit with new bad stuff.
Too much like my life, I guess.
The other half of the movie is a revenge thriller. You want to get behind
it, because you kind of think, "well, they deserve it.' But it's not that
cut and dry. You want to get behind it but it's hard because the way the
revenge is executed is so sick and twisted and over-the-top. It comes so
close to the edge of being completely unbelievable and so sick that the
sympathy you once held is lost completely. But a part of you still wants
the revenge taker to succeed and wants to be on their side, moreover, there
are a lot of folks out there that didn't lose their sympathy at all, which
says a lot about society in general and ones friends in particular.
There's another part of the movie, much smaller than what was advertised,
which was why I wanted to see the movie in the first place. The role the
media plays in these kind of situations. I was led to believe that it was
an examination of the subject. It's not.
So look, I don't know that I would recommend renting it 100%. I am very
much on the fence about this movie. I'm sorry. I would suggest watching
it with a bunch of your friends. It's one of those movies that you go to
with those friends who like to talk about movies. You'll have so much to
talk about so you don't want to see it all alone.
CJs Pirate, December 7, 2015
Format: Amazon Video
Gone Girl is Best Watched for Two of its Two and a Half Hours
Wanna watch a great movie? Quit this one 2/3rds of the way through. Wanna
watch something turn from very good to stupid? Watch this all the way.
Ben Affleck does a fantastic job playing Nick Dunne, a somewhat employed
writer married to the no-so-right-in-the-head Amy (Rosalund Pike). The one
thing Amy can do well is mess with your life. She messes with Nick's to
the point the world believes Nick has killed her and he has to hire high
profile attorney Tanner Bolt, played extremely well by Tyler Perry.
The acting is quite good, with the exception of Neil Patrick Harris,
who just seemed miscast as Amy's high school friend Desi Collins to whom
she turns for "help". Here's the part where everything turns weird. Shortly
after her time with Desi is the best time to stop the movie and enjoy what
had been made. Any further, and I'm not spoiling anything here, the movie
hits a wall.
Gone Girl is best watched for two of its two and a half hours.
SpaxyDaxy, January 28, 2015
Format: Amazon Video |
Amazon Customer, March 6, 2015
Format: Amazon Video |
Rosamund Pike carries it...
I really like David Fincher movies. They always have a lot of action,
a little suspense, and a sense of humor. And this one is no different. I
was confused by some parts of the movie, and displease with other parts,
mainly the ending. It was a book before it was a movie, so that's no ones
fault who were involved in the production of the movie. But I can see how
in a novel the ending would've been handled in a better way. In a novel
there's more character development, so you get to see the motivation behind
each decision that a character makes. Any movie you only really see what
the director wants you to see, and what the actors are capable of portraying.
Ben Affleck was out of his league with that powerhouse of a actress Rosamund
Pike. If she doesn't get at least a nomination, the whole system is flawed.
Had the movie been handled with a bit more care, it probably would have
been one of the greatest movies I've ever seen... that's saying a lot because
I really don't like Ben Affleck and he's on screen 80% of the movie. He
does add a snarky lightness that's needed in such a heavy movie. It's a
solid 3.5 stars. Definitely must see for originality.
Great for 1.5 hours and the rest was trash.
Ok you want an honest review. Here goes. Well acted, excellent plot...up
to a point, then it falls apart. The twists no longer are logical, they
are just dark and twisted, taking you on a journey that has lost its way,
but determined to land you at the end, an end already prepared. So it gets
there, but by the time you get there, you wonder, what happened? That's
because you are waiting for it to take a right, on to the road of plausibility.
Gone Girl is brilliant, for 3/4 of the movie. The rest, of the story
falls off the tracks and then struggles to reach the end...struggles, because
it pushes the boundaries of weakness of Nick(Affleck).
So my rating is 3 stars. I walk away feeling like I wasted the last 45
mins on junk. Prior to that, it was fascinating. The high rating is what's
wrong with people today...everyone runs in packs and no one, no one dares
to be honest, less they are an outcast. Go see it for yourself and then
dare to put an honest review here.
TeaRose, March 9, 2015
Format: Amazon Video |
Julee M on May 16, 2015
Format: Amazon Video |
Review form Book Reader
As someone who has read the book prior to seeing this film, I may have
a slightly different take on the movie then others. I found it difficult
to decide how many stars it deserved. The first act and most of the second
act are well edited from the book. The changes that are made make sense
in order to condense a complicated story into a film. But somewhere in 2nd
and totally the 3rd act the motivations for the characters gets muddled.
The book spends a lot of time letting you read what Nick and Amy are thinking.
The movie. though it tries at first, seems to give up on that element. But
it is a crucial element in understanding the ending at the very least. Nick
is self-centered and deeply flawed in the book. Amy is, a sociopath. The
depth of her manipulation, cruelty and insane notion of punishment and justice
is not explored near enough in the film. Her crazy and expert manipulation
is intense in the book. Nick never really worries what happened to her when
she vanishes and hates her. I wish the movie was able to flesh out more
of these massive personality flaws. Without this the movie in the end falls
flat. However, I don't have a good idea as to how the movie might have done
this given the time restrictions.
Intense, Dark, Cast of Talent...Must See
My husband and I heard so much about this movie. I am very fond of true
crime and we both like drama movies. We gave it a go.
It is dark. It is twisted.
A marriage of hope, happiness and on the fifth wedding anniversary it
all vanishes. Hope, sorrow, and mystery. Amy Dunne is missing the trail
of evidence leads to suspicions of her husband Nick Dunne.
It sparks questions in you as you watch, as to just how well do you
know your spouse? How well do they know you?
It's a cast of talent with Ben Affleck Neil Patrick Harris, Carrie
Coone, Rosamun Pike, Tyler Perry and others that highlights every angle
of this demented story.
There were parts that dragged on somewhat. The movie has a longer
running time than most. My husband wasn't impressed--until the ending.
I was sitting on the edge of my seat the entire time saying, "you've got
to be kidding!"....it was intense. it was well executed. It was dark. It
Visual Bureau, October 24, 2014
Format: Amazon Video
Although feels like a TV movie, its performances, look into media and the
law, and unbiased analysis on a marriage is sharp!
"Did he or not kill his wife? Is this all a set-up? More questions can
be unraveled in one of the most surprisingly complex yet straightforward
mystery-thrillers of the year. Bear in mind, I was never anticipating to
see this film just by chance after some friends brought me.
Gone Girl is directed by the same man who brought you Fight Club,
Social Network (the Facebook movie), and Se7en. A purveyor for dark,
brooding films, Gone Girl is no stranger to this with a knack for complexity
and disturbing emotions channeling through the central performances by Ben
Affleck (whose career escalated to much more respectable degrees after State
of Play and Argo) and Rosamund Pike (an up-and-coming British actress) playing
two conflicted souls frustrated over their relationship only to then, days
on end, leave a field of investigation and suspicion into the lives of Affleck's
character whether he or not had any part into the disappearance of his wife?
While the premise sounds absurdly ordinary and entirely like something
from Lifetime but unlike some of Lifetime's corny products, this film feels
more uncertain and depressing in tone and is more graphic in content. However,
any comparisons to Lifetime can be set aside with the film's surprisingly
self-aware nature and persistent dark humour, which albeit odd for a film
of this calibre, works in some ways to break the tension and melodrama.
Using Neil Patrick Harris from "How I Met Your Mother", the model from
the Robin Thicke "Blurred Lines" music video, and Tyler Perry from the "Madea"
films maybe the most bizarre choices for a high-stakes drama but it works
in a surreal way.
In many instances, the film was making a statement (an unbiased one
at that) on everything wrong with modern-day media, law enforcement, marriages,
and the image of gender roles in society. Tough stuff! The only complaint
I can make about the film is how it is not really all that cinematic and
the film's uncertain ending. But then again, the ending can be seen both
ways either as a metaphor about reality's way of saying no one is either
good or bad or an attack on the senses with a strange turnaround for a particular
Without giving much away, Gone Girl is aimed at the more ambitious viewer
and for anyone who likes their Lifetime or Investigation Discovery TV shows
with a bit more class, acting skill, and raw spirit. It sure knows how to
be pessimistic and insightful without remorse. And the message is relevant
and important too with a nice look into how marriage and relationships just
aren't a realistic goal in today's society which I wholeheartedly promote."
March 15, 2016
March 15, 2016
The author is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist. After 22 years of counseling, she wrote
this book to "identify certain behaviors on the part of unfaithful partners that tend to determine
the success or failure of their efforts to save their marriages, post-affair" (p. 9).
These behaviors include:
Origins of Marital Infidelity
- Understanding the wrongness of his unfaithfulness
- Understanding the depth of pain he has caused his spouse.
- Three barriers to understanding the damage he has done.
- How to remain resilient in spite of setbacks during recovery.
- Being realistic about recovery taking time.
- Respecting the betrayed spouse by allowing her to set the pace and type of healing needed, such
as a temporary separation.
- Telling the truth about one's unfaithfulness rather than waiting to be discovered.
- Showing remorse and shame rather than defensiveness.
- Breaking off all contact with the affair partner, including phone calls, texting, emails, and
- How to end the affair.
- Stumbling blocks to severing ties with the affair partner.
- Undoing the damage from one's lies and rationalizations.
- Accepting full responsibility for one's affair.
- Being patient with the betrayed spouse's emotions and time needed to recover.
- Being more sorry for the betrayed spouse's pain than for one's guilt of unfaithfulness.
- Growing in expressing true empathy and heartfelt apologies.
- Doing whatever it takes to rebuild trust.
- Successfully responding to the betrayed spouse's "triggers".
- Making amends with your children.
- Changing your core character.
The following marital conflicts contribute to a vulnerability to marital infidelity.
- Loneliness and sadness
- An emotionally distant spouse
- Lack of a moral code
- Lack of confidence
- Controlling and disrespectful behaviors by spouse
- Compulsive use of pornography
- Lack of balance in married life with failure to attend to romantic aspect of marriage, the
marital friendship and sexual intimacy/betrothed love
- Seriously disordered priorities with the placement of work, others, sports, children, etc.
before one's spouse
- Strong resentment and anger with a desire to punish
- Attempt to escape from responsibilities and pressures
- Strong mistrust and anxiety
- Weak faith with a failure to engage in the struggle against temptations
- Modeling after an unfaithful parent
- Failure to address marital stresses
- Close friendships with others who have been unfaithful
- Lack of understanding of the sacrament of marriage
- Unresolved family of origin sadness, mistrust or anger
- Failure to find fulfillment in fatherhood or motherhood and as a protector of one's spouse
- Previous infidelity
- Failure to communicate the Church's teaching about marriage and sexual morality.
A number of chapters on this website address these specific conflicts and hopefully will be helpful
to you.Prevalence of infidelity
Research studies demonstrate that the majority of married couples are faithful and loyal. Marital
infidelity with another person is not as common as some believe. However, a major factor in the growth
in infidelity is the use of internet pornography.
Mistakes made after infidelity
- A survey of 884 men and 1,288 women found that 77% of married men and 88% of married women remained
faithful to their spouses, Wiederman, M.(1997) Extramarital sex: Prevalence and correlates in a national
survey. J of Sex Research 34:170.
- A University of Chicago national survey found that that 75% of husbands and 85% of wives never
had sexual relations outside of marriage, Laumann,E.O., et al. (1994) The Social Organization of
Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Table 5.15,
- A highly regarded survey conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of
Chicago has found that 22% of men have had a sex partner other than their spouse while married,
compared to 13% of women. (The figures are an average of the years between 1991 and 2004, Whisman M.A., et al., (2007) Predicting sexual infidelity in a population-based sample of married
individuals. J Fam Psychol. 21(2):320-4.
- Another study revealed an annual prevalence of infidelity was 2.3% . In controlling for marital
dissatisfaction and demographic variables, infidelity was predicted by greater neuroticism and lower
religiosity, Whisman M.A., et al., (2007) Predicting sexual infidelity in a population-based sample
of married individuals. J Fam Psychol. 21(2):320-4.
A number of serious mistakes can be made after marital infidelity including,
Acute stress disorder in the victim spouse
- Insistence upon immediate separation
- Failure to see the goodness in the offending spouse
- Refusal to identify each spouse's emotional or character weaknesses
- A need to blame one's spouse exclusively for the infidelity
- Failure to identify the extent of the infidelity
- Refusal to try to understand and forgive
- Insistence upon divorce
- Unwillingness to face family of origin conflicts
- Fear of correcting the offending spouse
- Failure to love the vocation of marriage
- Failure to obtain expert advice from those loyal to marriages
- The expectation that the offended spouse should "get over it" quickly
- The lack of understanding as to how difficult it is to heal the infidelity wound
- The failure to realize that faith is essential in re-establishing trust and the marital friendships.
The victim spouse not infrequently develops a group of symptoms that constitute an acute stress
disorder. These symptoms include anxiety, dissociative and other symptoms that occurs within one
month after exposure to extremely traumatic stress including:
- a sense of detachment or unreality
- a sense of being in a daze
- inability to recall aspects of the trauma
- a regular reexperiencing of the trauma
- intense anger, rage, hatred, impulses for revenge
- profound fears
- severely damaged self-esteem.
An acute stress disorder can lead over time to the development of posttraumatic stress disorder
in which one obsesses about the past betrayal, has great difficulty in trusting and at times feels
intense betrayal anger.Post traumatic stress disorder
Marital infidelity is one of the most traumatic life experiences leaving spouses stunned, dazed
and profoundly wounded. The proverb, no wound worse than the wound of the heart is applicable.
The infidelity profound wounds the ability to trust and can lead to the anxiety disorder of a post
traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Effective marital therapy that incorporates a faith component
can often diminish the severity of this conflict. However, the wound is so severe that painful
memories associated with profound sadness, mistrust, anxiety and intense anger can be recurrent under
various types of stresses for many years or even decades. Offending spouses need to understand
this and they attempt to rebuild the marital trust.
When obsessional thinking about the betrayal memories occur in association with intense anxiety,
medication such as a serotonin reuptake inhibitor can be helpful as a chemical crutch while the trust
is being rebuilt.The four phases of healing
The healing process includes first uncovering the extent and the causes of the infidelity, next
making a decision about addressing what has been uncovered and third doing the hard work of resolving
conflicts and anger and of building trust. The final phase is accepting the trauma and believing
that some good can come from it.
In this phase it is important to identify the state of the marriage before the infidelity, particularly
in regard to the ability of each spouse to give to the marital friendship, to romantic love and to
betrothed love, which includes but is more than sexual intimacy. During this phase it can be helpful
to complete checklists the evaluate self-giving, trust, selfishness, anger and parental legacies.
The most common resistance we find in this phase is in men whose infidelity is the result of weak
male confidence due to the a weak father-son attachment in the husband (with his father.) These men
tend to misdirect their anger and deep unhappiness from their father relationship onto their wives.
The confidence of many husbands may also have suffered because they did not experience success in
team sports as boys and teenagers that, unfortunately, can leave a lasting wound in the male psyche.
We ask spouses to complete the confidence checklist in the evaluate your marital friendship chapter.
This checklist attempts to reveal the many problematic behaviors and emotional responses that develop
in an unconscious attempt to escape from the pain of having a weak male or female identity.
The second most common conflict we find here is in women with controlling tendencies and secondary
disrespectful behaviors toward their husbands as a result of the failure to have a trusting relationship
with their fathers. These wives also misdirect anger meant for their fathers at their husbands.
The third conflict that is difficult to face is loneliness for comforting parental love which
contributes to infidelity. Spousal love is very powerful and comforting but it cannot resolve the
wounds of loneliness from childhood and adolescence. This childhood loneliness leads
spouses to engage in numerous harmful behaviors in an unconscious attempt to escape from this intense
- attempting to find old boyfriends or girlfriends on the internet
- spending excessive time on facebook
- using drugs or drinking excessively
- engaging in compulsive sexual behaviors
- spending excessive time outside the home in pleasurable activities
because the childhood home is associated with unhappiness.
Finally, selfishness, the major enemy of marital love, can be difficult to face but, it is a leading
cause of marital infidelity.
We regularly reading the chapters on this website which discuss the treatment of controlling behaviors,
the parental legacy of weakness in male confidence, loneliness/sadness and selfishness and anxiety/mistrust.
This is a very difficult phase of treatment for the victim spouse who has been so wounded that
he/she fears becoming vulnerable again. Also, the rage toward the unfaithful spouse can be so strong
that what is desired is distance from the spouse rather than a commitment to work on the marriage.
For Catholics the sacrament of reconciliation can be helpful in diminishing this intense anger.
The decision to work on the healing of the infidelity trauma in the sad, angry and fearful victim
spouse can be motivated by the desire to protect children from the trauma of separation and divorce,
by a compassion for wounded child within the perpetrator, and by the belief that it is God's will
to strengthen the marriage.
Fortunately, most unfaithful spouses are open to try to understand and address their conflicts
with the exception of those who are overly proud, selfish or controlling.
During this phase of therapy we present our own positive views about the possibility of resolving
the conflicts that cause infidelity. Also, we cite the work of Dr. Linda Waite on the benefits from
persevering to resolve phases of marital unhappiness.
Her research was based on analysis of data from the National Survey of Family and Households.
It measured both personal and marital happiness of 5,232 married adults during the late 1980s; 645
or 12.3% reported being unhappily married. They were re-interviewed in the mid 1990s. Some of the
findings of the University of Chicago analysis were:
- Among those who rated their marriages as "very unhappy," 80% of those who stuck it out reported
themselves as happily married five years later.
- Those spouses who separated were, on average, no happier than those who stayed married.
- Those spouses who separated and remarried were also no happier than those who stayed married.
Dr. Waite stated, "Results like these suggest the benefits of divorce have been oversold."
The early steps in the work phase include being assured that extramarital relationship has ended
and that their will be no further contact. Also, there should be full disclosure of the entire history
of the adulterous relationship including examining phone records and text messages. Then, the perpetrator
should understand the depth of the wound to the marital covenant and request forgiveness of God and
of the spouse. In addition there should be a strong commitment to self-knowledge, a willingness to
change and to practice fidelity. Each spouse should be able to discuss any weaknesses in their personal
lives or in their marital friendship.
The offending spouse needs to be open to discuss the affair on a regular basis in order to resolve
mistrust and anger symptoms in the victim. However, prudence is required in regard to amount of time
discussing the affair. Anger resolution
In this phase the first issue most often addressed is the sadness, mistrust and anger in the victim.
When the process of understanding and forgiving the offending spouse, who is motivated to change,
does not diminish the level of anger, this reaction is often the result of the fear of trusting and
becoming vulnerable to the spouse again with an associated concern of further betrayal. Those with
faith can be helped by meditating, "Lord take my anger and sadness and help me to grow in trust."
Unfaithful spouses often discover within themselves intense guilt for the harm they have inflicted
upon loved ones. They often recognize, too, they fail to address weaknesses within themselves or
within the marriage such as a lack of balance or lack of healthy self-giving to the marital friendship.
Also, the offended spouses can have sudden flashbacks to the emotional trauma as do those with
posttraumatic stress disorders. At these times the betrayal anger can return with such a great intensity
as though the marital betrayal had just occurred. Many spouses report that the only approach which
is effective dealing with such anger attacks is spiritual forgiveness, that is, giving their justifiable
anger to God.
As they come to understand themselves more unfaithful spouses may discover strong resentment within
them toward parents who spoiled them or were insensitive to them or toward a spouse who was controlling,
emotionally distant or manipulative. Then they recognize that the process of forgiveness is essential
in resolving this strong anger and in purifying the memories of the past. Building trust
Marital infidelity severely damages a spouse's ability to trust. The restoration of trust
is essential since it is the foundation for loving. One simply cannot be open to give and to
receive love unless one feels safe with one's spouse. Understanding and forgiving the offending
spouse not only diminishes anger but it also diminishes fear. However, it is not enough.
The full restoration of trust is nothing short of miraculous. That's right, we need a miracle
to restore trust so that a betrayed spouse can open his/her heart to the offending spouse. The wounded
heart of the offended spouse screams out, "Protect yourself, put up a wall!" The wounded spouse
needs to feel that his/her spouse truly appreciates the depth of the wound and is sincerely motivated
to understand and to resolve the conflicts present.Addressing loneliness
Marital loneliness can also play a role in infidelity. The major causes of this pain from the
marital relationships are emotionally distant behaviors, lack of balance with failure to attend to
the marital friendships, selfishness, mistrust and anger, controlling behaviors and a lack of faith.
While most adults who struggle with significant loneliness and unhappiness tend to blame spouses,
it is possible that a degree of marital loneliness can also arise from unresolved childhood sadness
in relationships with parents, siblings or friends. In many marriages the loneliness that leads to
vulnerability to infidelity arises from both marital stress and unresolved childhood loneliness.
We have worked with a number of couples in which the major conflict was the result of each spouse
being in different rooms in the evening with one watching TV and the other reading or working on
his/her laptop. A sense of feeling isolated and alone develops and husbands, in particular can became
involved in internet pornography and then may develop an affair with someone whom they met on the
internet.Addressing family of origin sadness
Unresolved childhood loneliness can be a significant source of unhappiness, irritability and criticism
in married life, as well as in priesthood and in religious life. This emotional pain can lie dormant
for many years of decades and then emerge later under various types of stresses.
A major mistake many spouses make is the result of the belief that a loving, giving marital relationship
should protect one from unhappiness and anger. Although spousal love is very powerful and comforting,
it has limitations and cannot enter an earlier life period and resolve childhood or adolescent loneliness
and sadness that is encapsulated by anger as a result of having an emotionally distant or angry father,
mother or sibling.
Spouses regularly become angry with their mate because of their sadness and look for ways to blame
them for it. The lonely spouse's anger grows and trust diminishes. The loyal, faithful spouse then
becomes the scapegoat for unresolved childhood anger that intensifies over time along with the sadness.
He or she is no longer treated as a special gift from God and as one's best friend, but, instead,
as an enemy who has inflicted great pain upon them. Unconscious hatred of a parent's behaviors deeply
wounds the sacred union.
Also, as the anger drives the couple apart, intensifies in the lonely spouse who may attempt to
remain loyal to the marriage for a time by engaging in numerous feel-good behaviors in a futile attempt
to escape from the childhood pain. When these behaviors fail to bring freedom from the wound of loneliness,
comfort and love may then be sought outside the marriage.
Men with rejection and pain in the father relationship usually turn unconsciously to women for
comfort although a small percentage will turn to other males, particularly those who were also rejected
in childhood by a brother or same sex peers. Women with the father disorder or brother rejection
will turn to other men for love. Some women who did not experience comforting love with their mothers
will be unfaithful with a woman in an unconscious attempt to fill an emotional emptiness in their
Spouses are encouraged to grow in self-knowledge and to examine honestly their parental and sibling
relationships in order to determine if a degree of their loneliness and irritability may be locked-in
from childhood. The most common sadness that emerges in our experience is due to an emotionally distant,
unaffirming or angry father. However, we have been seeing increasing number of young adults bring
into their marriages sadness with their mothers whom they viewed as being turned in upon themselves
because of selfishness.
When disappointments are identified, then an attempt is made to understand and to forgive the
offending parent. Since anger is strongly related to sadness and in our view in a sense encapsulates
resentment, the resolution of this powerful emotion is essential so that spouses do not remain, in
John Paul II's words, "prisoners of their past." This forgiveness process is demanding because of
the degree and intensity of the resentment that has been denied. It is described in the angry spouse
chapter on this site.
The role of faith becomes helpful, if not essential, in addressing the childhood loneliness. The
chapter on the lonely, depressed spouse on this site discusses its benefits in the healing process.
Male confidence is essential to being a loving spouse and protective parent. The cultural view
of masculinity differs radically from the Christian perspective in that it focuses on success in
sports, on a muscular physique, on sexual conquests and on financial success. The Christian view
is that male strength comes from the pursuit of a life of virtues in which the goal is to become
another Christ to one's wife, children, family, friends and colleagues.
Some men initially pursue the path of virtue, yet fall into marital infidelity because of their
failure to address their emotional conflicts. Weaknesses in male confidence from unresolved conflicts
with fathers, male siblings and male peers are major reasons for such behavior. While a wife's love
is wonderful and strong, however, it cannot enter into the childhood and adolescent stage of development
when the damage to male confidence occurred and heal the male identity wound.
Catholic husbands and fathers rely particularly on the theological virtues of faith, hope and
love and upon graces received from the sacraments.The Father Wound
We have worked with many marriages in which they husband can at some stage of the marriage experienced
deep unhappiness and irritability because of the emergence of an unresolved father wound with a failure
to identify and address it. They then blame their wives for their unhappiness, misdirect anger at
them and engage in pornography or in adulterous behaviors in an unconscious attempt to escape from
I discussed the father wound in an interview on the Fathers For Good website, www.fathersforgood.org/ffg/en/month/index.html.
The path of healing involves admitting disappointments in the father relationship, understanding
the father's childhood and then working at forgiving him. This forgiveness process is arduous but
essential because without it the husband can remain, in the words of John Paul II, a prisoner of
his past for the rest of his life.
Other strategies in healing the father wound include:
- admitting powerlessness over insecurities and anger and turning them over to God
- identifying one's own special God-given gifts and being thankful for them daily
- maintaining healthy male friendships
- asking the Lord daily to protect one's confidence
- developing a relationship with St. Joseph as another loving father throughout childhood, adolescence
and adult life
- joining Catholic men's groups.
A regular reflection upon what Catholic authors influenced by St. John Paul II refer to as the
male genius can also be beneficial.
Peer, Sports Wound
- greater distance from process of gestation and birth that enables him to act more calmly on
behalf of life;
- acting to protect life and guarantee its future;
- being a father in a physical and spiritual sense and
- being strong, firm, reliable and trustworthy.
Peer acceptance is a major factor in the development of healthy self-esteem. Unfortunately, many
gifted males experience significant emotional pain due to lack of eye-hand coordination. They may
be ridiculed because of their weaknesses in throwing a baseball, kicking a soccer ball, shooting
a basketball or passing a football or hurt regularly being chosen last on a pick up game. This peer
rejection can result in a strong weakness in male identity and in deep sadness.
The healing of such peer/sports wounds can occur by resolving anger with offenders through a process
of forgiveness, identifying and being thankful for positive male gifts/strength, reflecting that
male confidence is not determined by sports or body image, engaging in some type of athletic activity
weekly that does not require eye-hand coordination such as swimming, hiking, weight lifting, etc,
working on healthy male friendships, and for Christian husbands meditating upon the Lord being one's
best friend and as being present during painful memories during recess, on athletic fields, etc.
When the weaknesses in male confidence are resolved, husbands regularly seek forgiveness from
their wives and from God for misdirecting them anger meant for fathers, male peers and others and
no longer blame them for their insecurities and associated sadness.
In this healing process some husbands discover anger with God for allowing them to have such a
heavy cross as a lack of eye-hand coordination in childhood. Some husbands report benefit from taking
their deeply seated resentment into the sacrament of reconciliation. Acceptance
Acceptance of the pain and reality of marital infidelity is very difficult, however, it is essential
to the healing process. Some spouses try to believe that good can come from the terrible trauma.
However, those victimized by adultery can struggle with profound mistrust and rage which is difficult
to resolve. This severe betrayal pain has been shown to respond to low doses of serotonin reuptake
inhibitors, such as paxil or zoloft, and we recommend their use for severe rage and mistrust in the
victim spouse. Also, we have observed this pain diminish in Christians by uniting their suffering
to that of Christ on the cross. In addition, spiritual direction can be helpful also in coming
to acceptance of this trauma. Facing the guilt
Human nature desires the honesty that looks squarely at the sinful situation, acknowledges it
for what it is, and recognizes oneself as being in need. As Psalm 32:5 reminds us, "Then I declared
my sin to you; my guilt I did not hide. I said, 'I confess my faults to the Lord,' and you took away
the guilt of my sin" and "If you, O Lord, laid bare our guilt, who could endure it? But with you
is found forgiveness; for this we revere you," Psalm 130. For Catholics the sacrament of reconciliation
can be helpful in overcoming this guilt.Communication about the healing process
A discussion of the process of the healing of the emotional, personality and spiritual conflicts
which contributed to the infidelity should be discussed several times per week. Such communication
is essential so that the victim spouse can be reassured that intense work is being done to protect
the marriage and the family.Rebuilding the marital friendship
After working on identifying the origins of the infidelity and the diminishing anger, then it
is important to work on rebuilding the marital friendship. In this vital process it is important
that the perpetrator should have constant availability by phone and check in regularly. Also, it
is important to work on the marital friendship by improving the marital communication and time together
in the evening while at the same time improving both the romantic & intimate aspect of the marriage.
Finally, couples report benefits from daily entrusting their marriage to God and from daily committing
to trust one's spouse. Recognizing the benefits of monogamy
Dr. Brad Wilcox, the director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia,
wrote, "Monogamous, married sex is more likely to deliver long-lasting satisfaction than the quick
thrill offered by infidelity,
According to the renowned
University of Chicago Sex Survey, a monogamous sexual partnership embedded in a formal marriage
evidently produces the greatest satisfaction and pleasure. This study found that both women and men
like the emotional security that fidelity affords, and are more likely to report that they are anxious,
scared and guilty when they have had sex with multiple partners in the last year."Freedom and loyalty
While some claim that it is not reasonable or possible to expect spouses to be loyal over the
many years of marriage, John Paul II has described the many benefits of loyalty to one's spouse in
The Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World. He wrote, "The institution of marriage is not
an undue interference by society or authority, nor the extrinsic imposition of a form. Rather it
is an interior requirement of the covenant of conjugal love which is publicly affirmed as unique
and exclusive, in order to live in complete fidelity to the plan of God, the Creator. A person's
freedom, far from being restricted by this fidelity, is secured against every form of subjectivism
or relativism and is made a sharer in creative Wisdom," n. 11.J.R.R. Tolkien, author of Lord of the Rings, and marital stress
J.R.R. Tolkien has written about marital fidelity, "Faithfulness in Christian marriage entails
great mortification. For a Christian man there is no escape. Marriage may help to sanctify and direct
to its proper object his sexual desires; its grace may help him in the struggle; but the struggle
remains. It will not satisfy him--as hunger may be kept off by regular meals. It will offer as many
difficulties to the purity proper to that state, as it provides easements. No man, however truly
he loved his betrothed and bride as a young man, has lived faithful to her as a wife in mind and
body without deliberate conscious exercise of the will, without self-denial."
"Those who see marriage as nothing more than the arena of ecstatic and romantic love will be disappointed,
When the glamour wears off, or merely works a bit thin, they think they have made a mistake, and
that the real soul-mate is still to be found. The real soul-mate too often proves to be the next
sexually attractive person that comes along."The Role of Faith and Infidelity
The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains a great deal of wisdom on marriage. Here are
some powerful statements on infidelity.
"Adultery is an injustice. He who commits adultery fails in his commitment. He undermines the
institution of marriage by breaking the contract on which it is based. He compromises the good of
human generation and the welfare of children who need their parents' stable union," Catechism of
the Catholic Church, n. 2381.
"By its very nature conjugal love requires the inviolable fidelity of the spouses. This is the
consequence of the gift of fidelity of the spouses. This is the consequence of the gift of themselves
which they make to each other. Love seeks to be definitive; it cannot be an arrangement "until further
notice." The "intimate union of marriage, as a mutual giving of two persons, and the good of the
children, demand total fidelity from the spouses and require an unbreakable union between them,"
Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1646.
"The consent by which the spouses mutually give and receive one another is sealed by God himself.
From their covenant arises 'an institution, confirmed by the divine law..' The covenant between the
spouses is integrated into God's covenant with man: 'Authentic married love is caught up into divine
love,'" (CCC, n. 1639).
"The twofold communion with God and with one another is inseparable. Wherever communion with God,
which is communion with the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit is destroyed, the root and source of
our communion with one another are destroyed. And wherever we do not live communion among ourselves,
communion with the Trinitarian God is not alive and true either." Pope Benedict XVI, 2008, (Jesus,
The Apostles, and the Early Church, p. 18).
"We can realize how important prayer is with families and for families, in particular for those
threatened by division. We need to pray that married couples will love their vocation, even when
the road becomes difficult, or the paths become narrow, uphill and seemingly insuperable," (John
Paul II, Letter to Families).
Finally, a number of believing couples report benefit from asking the Lord to deepen their trust
in Him and in each other; to help them grow in self-giving and love, that is, to truly wish for the
good of one's spouse; to heal the sadness and anxiety and to strengthen the marital communication
and friendship. Also, Catholic couples report being helped by going to the Eucharist more often and
by saying a rosary together for the healing of their marriageConclusion
We believe that in the majority of marriages the severe wound of infidelity can be resolved and
divorce can be prevented.
Our webinar on divorce prevention has helped many couples in their struggle to heal the wound
of marital infidelity,,
Research studies demonstrate that couples in troubled marriages who commit themselves to improve
them are often happier five years later than couples who divorce. The process of healing deep
emotional wounds of mistrust, betrayal, sadness, loss of confidence is arduous but worth the effort.
Also, the role of faith can be particularly helpful in the process rebuilding marital affection and
the marital friendship.
MommyReviewer, February 26, 2014
Blames the victim
To be fair this book probably isn't intended to blame the victim. But it manages to come across
that way just the same. It is very much written to make it palatable to the cheater, to stop them
throwing it across the room in defiance. And there's a place for that. But probably that's best done
by a therapist face to face so that they can pre-empt the derision and the blameshifting that goes
with it. A book is too remote for that unless it is very lucky and very well written.
I much prefer Janis Spring's book "How can I forgive you?" which has no overtones of blaming the
victim, and which completely lets us off the hook from forgiveness-pressure. The fact that she wrote
both suggests that this book had better intentions than it realizes in the execution. But nevertheless
it does more harm than good.
I would recommend "How Can I Forgive you" a hundred times over this.
Radu, October 16, 2013
Too much blame-sharing for my taste - no one forces you to have an affair! - Have the decenty to pack
your s***t and go!
This book is clearly for those who intend to save their relationship after an affair. I cannot
imagine how you can live life knowing that the person you loved and trusted has betrayed you in the
worst possible way.
The first half of the book is useful, as it provides reassurance that what you
are going through is normal.
The second half is total crap, as it tries to convince you that the
fault of the affair lays with both spouses. I can't possibly wrap my head around that! Having a relationship
and having issues to be resolved in that relationship/ marriage is one thing. CHEATING is an entirely
different thing that has NOTHING to do with ANY problems.
If you don't like the relationship you're
having, pack your stuff and head for as many other people as you please. If you stick around, then
keep your pants/ skirt on!
I wouldn't waste your money to just read about feelings you are already
experiencing, cause you know, no matter who says what, what YOU are feeling is something NO ONE in
this world should feel, it's worst than torture and only a LOSER can cause that to another human
And you know what? If you're feeling something that no one else felt, it's your damn right
to feel as angry and as upset as you do - because the other party didn't give a rats about how you
would feel. They deserve nothing but the door!
on November 17, 2015
Worth a Read - Gives Hope
Amazing book - helping my husband and I work through a recent devastating discovery of his infidelity.
I went to therapy after the revealation and she actually recommended that we both read this book.
bought it immediately, within days of finding out, and I can't tell you how much it helped me
(and him). I was feeling so lost... unsure if I would be an idiot to take him back... and this
book provided me with the light I needed.
It put so many things into words that I was having trouble
with. My husband now understands how I'm feeling and what I'm thinking better than he ever could
have without this book.
And I'm gaining a better understanding of his frame of mind as well. I've
always been someone to say "if he cheats, I'm done"... but trust me, if you think there's a chance
you could work through it, give it a chance!
It never hurts to try and although I don't know if
he and I will make it, I am hopeful. Worth reading FOR SURE.
Mom, January 6, 2013
I purchased this book after reading reviews which portrayed this book as helpful in healing work
after a betrayal. I found this book to be nothing close to the reviews. This book appears short on
both empathy and any real insight - the book approaches affairs using the attitude of blame the betrayed
spouse. The book repeatedly suggests that betrayals happen only after a spouse has been trying and
trying to reach the other spouse who is unable or unwilling to be empathetic or nurturing. There
are copious examples. One example is Ryan, who hadn't been looking for an affair but three years
into his marriage he was "ripe for the plucking by any woman who showed the promise of affection."
Dawn, Ryan's spouse was supposed to be a fun loving take it easy kind of gal but she turned out
to be "ambitious, hard working highly organized person". As Ryan had "never seen this side of her"
he discovered that Dawn has turned into "a tough taskmaster". Obviously the author feels strongly
that Ryan was entitled - even thought the author herself states that Dawn never tried to hide her
personality. Really?? Wow how sadly vested is the author in excusing infidelity and hide Ryan's ownership
of his own behavior. Obviously in the author's opinion, Dawn fell down on the job and Ryan had every
right to have an affair in reaction to his unmet needs (instead of communicating them to his spouse).
I finally put this book down when I reached the section entitled "The Top Six Solutions that Prevent
Ms. Kirshbaum glosses over the devastation of betrayals, states that blame is not useful and then
goes on to spread blame on the spouse. While a marriage has two sides and break downs in communications
are typically shared, if someone cheats or lies that is a choice that is made by that person. Stating
that there are ways to prevent someone else's choices, including betrayal is simply NOT a reasonable
statement and it is highly inappropriate and inflammatory to suggest that the betrayed spouse has
some kind of role in `causing' betrayal.
Restoring trust in relationships after betrayal takes serious work- honesty, transparency and
building a new foundation. A cornerstone of this work must involve owning behavior and, if needed,
making amends and understanding upset. Blaming and excusing behavior does not provide helpful guidance
but continues to obfuscate the situation and prevent healing.
I strongly recommend skipping this book. There are many wonderful books on healing and re-building
This is NOT one of them.
A Customer on April 30, 2002
More good sense, less pretense to
Peggy Vaughan is no marriage counselor (or psychotherapist) and it shows--she actually makes sense.
Ms. Vaughan has drawn insightfully from her extensive work with her Beyond Affairs Network. Unlike
many self-styled or state-sanctioned (i.e., licensed mental health) experts, Ms. Vaughan actually
uses more reality than dogma to inform her advice. For instance, her research shows that the leading
variable in managing to stay together well after an affair is the willingness and ability to talk
(and talk and talk and talk) about the affair for as long as needed to detoxify and demystify it.
(Her research also shows that most people trying to deal with the aftermath of an affair find mental
health types considerably les than informed or helpful, despite their beliefs in their great expertise.
As a trained and experienced psychotherapist, and a well-respected scholar, I can tell you that the
mainstream training and professional literature--not to mention self-help--on infidelity is mostly
just dogma that mental health types have concocted out of thin air, not anything anyone has actually
discovered through research.)
I do find a one thing a bit troubling. As I see it, she does not give due weight to issues of
individual moral responsibility. There are two sides to this. First, she generally denies that adultery
reflects personal failings, placing far more emphasis on social factors to explain why adultery takes
place. She does not produce an argument, so far as I can see, against the idea of personal failings;
rather she poses an alternative to that idea. But to pose an alternative to an idea is not to show
the idea wrong.
Second, while she is surely right that our culture has come to glamorize affairs rather than condemn
them, and while she is certainly right to place more emphasis on this than conventional "wisdom"
allows, it is not all that clear just what causal role social factors play, or which is the chicken
and which is the egg.
- The same social forces act on ALL of us, but only SOME of us cheat. Thus, the social forces
cannot explain why cheaters cheat. Differentiating cheaters from others requires looking at variables
on which they differ from others, not on forces common to all.
- Ms. Vaughan's "evidence" that adultery has increased significantly in the last few decades,
when sex has become more public and less closeted, depends to a great extent on generally-unrespected
researchers like Shere Hite. Her figures on the rate of adultery are higher than others I've seen
(and I've read a lot on this subject). So far as I can tell, we do not really know that there has
been a meaningful rise in adultery to accompany the rise in glamorized sexuality (including glamorized
icons of adultery).
- Even if there is a rising rate of adultery, and even if it correlates the social forces Ms.
Vaughan mentions and a rising rate of adultery, it does not follow that one causes the other. Alternative
hypotheses can explain both. One such alternative would be that both are results of increasing egoism
and hedonism, which could result from any of a number of factors--consumerism, the decline of Heaven-oriented
religious belief, decline of community life, commodity-centered views of the person growing out of
capitalist ideology, etc. Another might be that both reflect the decline of patriarchal social structures.
Surely others could be framed. The point is that we just don't know.
I nonetheless think that, on balance, she is the wisest person writing on the subject. Ms. Vaughan
possesses good data on the effects of adultery, and she possesses good sense. She also possesses
a crusader's heart. If, maybe, she goes a bit overboard, as compared to us academic types--well,
there never was a successful crusade led by timid generals.
I want to add that several months after I read this book and wrote the first version of this review,
I called upon Ms. Vaughan for help in dealing with my own situation in dealing with my wife's adultery
with my "best friend" of thirty years. Quite honestly, I believe she saved my marriage. My gratitude
to her is beyond words.
And by bizarre coincidences, it turns out that we grew up in the same place, her dad and mine were
fishing buddies, I used to buy gasoline at her dad's service station, my dad preached her dad's funeral,
and our lives have run eerily parallel courses.
As a result, as you can imagine, I thought about removing from this review any criticism whatsoever.
But I decided not to do so. I hope my heartfelt endorsement of this book means all the more precisely
because I don't simply find it ratifying my own beliefs.
I am altogether certain that this book and Ms. Vaughan's counsel did more to save my marriage than
all the dozens of other things I read in recovering from the most horrific devastation of my life.
"... Virginia Roberts's accusations about Andrew ordered to be struck from the record as judge denied her attempt to join a lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein Allegations that a 17-year-old was forced to have sex with Britain's Prince Andrew , which prompted a crisis at Buckingham Palace earlier this year, have been removed from a federal court case by a judge in the US. ..."
Virginia Roberts's accusations about Andrew ordered to be struck from the
record as judge denied her attempt to join a lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein
Allegations that a 17-year-old was forced to have sex with Britain's
Andrew, which prompted a crisis at Buckingham Palace earlier this year,
have been removed from a federal court case by a judge in the US.
Judge Kenneth Marra ordered Virginia Roberts's accusations about Andrew,
the Duke of York, to be struck from the record and denied her attempt to join
a lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein, a friend of the prince and a convicted sex
"At this juncture in the proceedings, these lurid details are unnecessary,"
Marra wrote in his order, issued at the US district court in southern
on Tuesday morning. "These unnecessary details shall be stricken."
Andrew and Buckingham Palace vehemently deny Roberts's allegations.
Marra made no ruling or statement about the veracity of Roberts's allegations.
He said the "factual details regarding with whom and where" she had sex were
"immaterial and impertinent" to her argument that she should be allowed to join
However, Marra noted that Roberts may yet appear as a witness when the long-running
case finally goes to trial.
Brad Edwards, an attorney for Roberts, said in a statement that her legal
team "absolutely respect" the judge's ruling, which had recognised Roberts's
right to take part in the case as a witness. Roberts said: "I'm happy to get
to participate in this important case."
A Buckingham Palace official said the Duke had been informed of the
court's ruling and was spending this week in private, before resuming his schedule
of public engagements next week.
His spokesman declined to comment further but referred back to repeated palace
denials of Roberts claims, including a 3 January statement that "it is emphatically
denied that the Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship
with Virginia Roberts. Any claim to the contrary is false and without foundation."
Five court filings in the Florida case, including a document filed on December
30 last year in which Andrew was first accused, were immediately sealed from
The filing at that time placed Andrew under intense pressure, forcing him
to return to his home at Windsor from Verbier in Switzerland where he was on
a skiing holiday with a party including his daughter Princess Beatrice.
The duke only resumed public engagements at the World Economic Forum in Davos
in late January where he was pursued by reporters and used a short speech "to
reiterate and to reaffirm" the existing emphatic Buckingham Palace denials of
what courtiers described as "lurid and deeply personal" claims.
Buckingham Palace broke with convention to directly address the sex claims,
and Andrew approved a statement which vehemently denied "any form of sexual
contact or relationship with Virginia Roberts". It continued: "The allegations
made are false and without any foundation."
Roberts, who is referred to in the case only as Jane Doe 3, and a fourth
woman were seeking to join two other alleged victims of Epstein in suing the
US government over a plea deal that federal prosecutors struck with the hedge
fund tycoon in 2008.
Under the plea agreement, Epstein pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution
from an underage girl. He received an 18-month jail sentence and served 13 months
before being released. He remains a registered sex offender in Florida and the
US Virgin Islands, where he lives on a private island.
The agreement was criticised as being extraordinarily lenient by attorneys
for a series of women who allege that Epstein sexually abused them when they
were under the age of consent. The FBI, which took over the investigation into
Epstein, said it had identified dozens of potential victims.
Roberts has for years alleged that she travelled around the world with Epstein
as his "sex slave" and was made to have sex with some of his influential associates,
including prominent politicians and royalty.
Marra ruled on Tuesday that the application by Roberts and Jane Doe 4 should
be denied, as it was "entirely unnecessary" for the pair to be added as plaintiffs
in the lawsuit. The women suing Epstein allege that the government's plea deal
violated their rights as victims.
Describing Roberts's allegations as "duplicative" of the existing lawsuit,
the judge said the lawsuit already sought to overturn Epstein's plea agreement
on behalf of all "other similarly-situated victims".
Marra noted in his order that US law empowers judges to "strike from a pleading
an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous
Allegations that Roberts was also made to have sex with Alan Dershowitz,
a Harvard law professor and another friend of Epstein, were also struck from
the case by Marra. The judge said a legal attempt by Dershowitz to intervene
in the case was now unnecessary.
In recent weeks the duke has carried out more engagements, including opening
the Yorkshire Air Ambulance (YAA) Air Response Unit prior to Easter and before
that leading a "Pitch@Palace" event, a Dragons Den-style scheme to match investors
with entrepreneurs using technology in the creative industries.
"... Washington Times ..."
"... The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, And How Far She'll Go To Become President ..."
One of the worst kept secrets in Washington circles is that Hillary Clinton is a lesbian.
Rumors have swirled in the past about the former First Lady's gay ways, and with a potential
presidential run coming in 2016, they have come back to haunt her.
Back in 2004, a Washington Times columnist reviewing Bill Clinton's memoir My
Life concluded that Hillary and Bill, "have had a pact for decades. Their sexy, sexy pact is
this: "He gets to fool around with women and she gets to fool around with women (plus
the occasional man) … yes, she's bisexual."
The lesbian rumors resurfaced a year later in Edward Klein's book The Truth About Hillary:
What She Knew, When She Knew It, And How Far She'll Go To Become President. In it, Klein
claimed that Hillary "wasn't maternal" "had no wifely instincts," and "many of her closest
friends were lesbians."
Klein asserted that Hillary was obsessed with lesbianism, but not in a normal way. Instead,
she was "much more interested in lesbianism as a political statement than a sexual practice …
Hillary talked about it a lot, read lesbian literature, and embraced it as a revolutionary
In the end, Klein concluded that though she has experimented with lesbianism, Hillary is
The rumors were fired up once again in 2007, when Huma Abedin, Hillary's top aide, stumbled
into the national spotlight with her husband Anthony Wiener's sex scandal. Many accused Hillary
and Huma of being lesbian lovers, with Hillary hiding her "in plain sight" by hiring her as her
The lesbian rumors got so bad that year that Hillary addressed them personally. "It's not
true, but it is something that I have no control over. People will say what they want to say,"
she told top gay magazine Advocate.
In 2013, when Hillary came out as pro-gay to the country, American Family Association radio
host Sandy Rios claimed to know for a fact that Hillary is a lesbian:
"[Hillary] has always, as far as I know back to college, endorsed and embraced all things
lesbian and gay, that is her history on this so that shouldn't be too shocking. She has played
the role of wife and cookie-making mother, I'm sorry but this is just the reality of things.
We are being caught in this vortex of homosexual advocacy, it's just amazing."
Finally, Bill Clinton's former mistress Gennifer Flowers spoke out last year about the former
first couple's sex life, and what she had to say was shocking.
Flowers claimed that Bill told her repeatedly that Hillary was "bisexual," and that he was
fine with it. He also told her that Hillary had "eaten more p*ssy than he had," a statement which
shocked the nation.
... ... ...
Softpanorama hot topic of the month
Amazon.com The Sins of Madame Bovary Edwige Fenech, Gerhard Riedmann, Franco Ressel,
Peter Carsten Amazon Digital Service
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political,
human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice
issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on
this site is distributed without profit exclusivly for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
ABUSE: IPs or network segments from which we detect a stream of probes might be blocked for no
less then 90 days. Multiple types of probes increase this period.
Two Party System
as Polyarchy :
Corruption of Regulators :
and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :
Harvard Mafia :
: Surviving a Bad Performance
Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as
Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience :
Who Rules America :
: The Iron
Law of Oligarchy :
War and Peace
Finance : John
Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand :
Oscar Wilde :
Otto Von Bismarck :
George Carlin :
Propaganda : SE
quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes :
Random IT-related quotes :
Somerset Maugham :
Marcus Aurelius :
Kurt Vonnegut :
Eric Hoffer :
Winston Churchill :
Napoleon Bonaparte :
Ambrose Bierce :
Bernard Shaw :
Mark Twain Quotes
Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient
markets hypothesis :
Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 :
Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :
Vol 23, No.10
(October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments :
Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 :
Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 :
Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan
Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers
as intelligence collection hubs :
Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 :
Inequality Bulletin, 2009 :
Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 :
Bulletin, 2004 :
Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 :
Energy Bulletin, 2010 :
Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26,
No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult :
Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 :
Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification
of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05
(May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method :
Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law
Fifty glorious years (1950-2000):
the triumph of the US computer engineering :
Donald Knuth : TAoCP
and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman
: Linus Torvalds :
Larry Wall :
John K. Ousterhout :
CTSS : Multix OS Unix
History : Unix shell history :
VI editor :
History of pipes concept :
Solaris : MS DOS
: Programming Languages History :
PL/1 : Simula 67 :
History of GCC development :
Scripting Languages :
Perl history :
OS History : Mail :
DNS : SSH
: CPU Instruction Sets :
SPARC systems 1987-2006 :
Norton Commander :
Norton Utilities :
Norton Ghost :
Frontpage history :
Malware Defense History :
GNU Screen :
OSS early history
Principle : Parkinson
Law : 1984 :
The Mythical Man-Month :
How to Solve It by George Polya :
The Art of Computer Programming :
The Elements of Programming Style :
The Unix Hater’s Handbook :
The Jargon file :
The True Believer :
Programming Pearls :
The Good Soldier Svejk :
The Power Elite
Most popular humor pages:
Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society :
of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection
: BSD Logo Story :
The Cuckoo's Egg :
IT Slang : C++ Humor
: ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? :
The Perl Purity Test :
Object oriented programmers of all nations
: Financial Humor :
Financial Humor Bulletin,
2008 : Financial
Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related
Humor : Programming Language Humor :
Goldman Sachs related humor :
Greenspan humor : C Humor :
Scripting Humor :
Real Programmers Humor :
Web Humor : GPL-related Humor
: OFM Humor :
Politically Incorrect Humor :
IDS Humor :
"Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian
Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer
Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church
: Richard Stallman Related Humor :
Admin Humor : Perl-related
Humor : Linus Torvalds Related
humor : PseudoScience Related Humor :
Networking Humor :
Shell Humor :
Financial Humor Bulletin,
2011 : Financial
Humor Bulletin, 2012 :
Financial Humor Bulletin,
2013 : Java Humor : Software
Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor :
Education Humor : IBM
Humor : Assembler-related Humor :
VIM Humor : Computer
Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled
to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer
The Last but not Least
Copyright © 1996-2016 by Dr. Nikolai Bezroukov. www.softpanorama.org
was created as a service to the UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP)
in the author free time. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively
for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License.
Original materials copyright belong
to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only
in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the author present and former employers, SDNP or any other organization the author may be associated with. We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose.
Last modified: May, 21, 2017