Omg, Clarence Thomas!?! Why did nobody ever try to warn us he’s a piece of shit?? /s
OK critical thinking, stay sharp people and yes I do reference this author a lot, however, where is the proof?
By Rachel Hurley:
The Soviets called it “dezinformatsiya.” We call it salting. And somebody just salted the shit out of the Epstein discourse.
Here’s how this trick works in spy school.
Take nine true things and one lie. When someone finds the lie, they throw out all ten. Or flip it: take nine lies and one verifiable truth. When someone confirms the truth, they assume the rest must be legit too.
This isn’t conspiracy theory.
The KGB literally had a department for this. A Czech intelligence defector named Ladislav Bittman wrote a whole book about it - said that for any disinfo campaign to work, “every message must at least partially correspond to reality.” You mix the poison with sugar so it goes down smooth. Churchill called it “a bodyguard of lies.”
Now. The Sascha Riley audio tapes.
If you’ve been anywhere near political social media this week, you’ve seen people losing their minds over these recordings. Supposedly a decorated Iraq War vet recounting childhood trafficking connected to Epstein, naming names including Trump, claiming he’s testified to the House Oversight Committee. People are crying. People are demanding investigations. The emotional temperature is through the roof.
One small problem.
Not a single claim has been verified by anyone. Not courts. Not law enforcement. Not the FBI. Not a single mainstream outlet.
The “journalist” who published the audio, Lisa Noelle Voldeng, has no verifiable professional background.
Fact-checkers have flagged mismatched dates, references to military figures who may not exist, and claims so “over the top” they’re raising red flags everywhere. When supporters demand proof, they point to… the audio itself. Which is not how evidence works.
I can t but keep asking - why would someone release so much unverifiable testimony right now?
Think about it. If you wanted to protect Trump from the actual Epstein evidence - the stuff that’s documented - what would you do?
You’d flood the zone with something so sensational it drowns out the receipts. You’d make the claims so extreme they can never be proven. Then when the whole thing collapses - and it will collapse if it’s fabricated - everyone who shared it looks like an idiot. Suddenly all Epstein investigation becomes “that conspiracy theory people fell for.” The real journalism gets buried under the rubble of something designed to blow up.
That’s salting. That’s the technique.
“But Rachel, survivors should be believed.”
Survivors with depositions and court records should absolutely be believed. Virginia Giuffre’s testimony withstood cross-examination. The victims in the Maxwell trial provided evidence that led to conviction. That’s what real survivor testimony looks like when it’s legitimate. It goes through legal process. It gets verified. It holds up.
Audio recordings published by someone with no credentials, containing allegations no outlet will touch, expecting you “just believe” without verification? That’s not survivor testimony. That’s a test of how gullible you are.
The reaction alone is a tell. “I listened and cried.” “I felt physically sick.” “I believe completely.” These are emotional responses, not evidentiary ones. And content that’s optimized for emotional virality rather than accuracy is… well, that’s exactly what disinfo looks like. The KGB would be so proud.
Here’s what I know for sure: the real Epstein evidence doesn’t need help from this story. The real connections are documented. The receipts exist. And anyone trying to get you to share unverifiable claims instead of documented evidence is either not paying attention or doing someone’s work for them.
You want to nail Trump on Epstein? Use the depositions. Use the flight logs. Use his own words on tape. Use the evidence that holds up.
You want to protect Trump on Epstein? Get everyone sharing sensational claims that collapse under scrutiny, then watch the whole discourse get dismissed as hysteria.
Know the difference. Please.
I believe that Sascha Riley believes what he is saying. But that doesn’t make it true.
And not one piece of evidence that he has shared proves a damn thing.
Periodt.
Not a single claim has been verified by anyone. Not courts. Not law enforcement. Not the FBI. Not a single mainstream outlet.
Sadly, those institutions can no longer be trusted to verify anything anymore. They are all captured, corrupt and/or complicit to some degree.
Great post btw, thanks
yep. they’re salting some fakes in and around the actual shit, trying to sour the entire topic in “well there’s so much disinfo who can tell”
I believe that Sascha Riley believes what he is saying. But that doesn’t make it true.
This, for sure. I listened to the first tape yesterday and he mentions Jane Goodall studying him because he was like a monkey. He was severely abused when he was young, that much is clear. The head trauma alone could cause all of this. I have my doubts.
I made a longer comment regarding possible issues with his report from a psychologist perspective. I have a masters in cognitive neuroscience and am finishing up my PhD. If you read it and have any thoughts, please reply to it.
I read your comment about how this person is intended to make further victim claims distrusted by the public. And I also did consider this too.
However I think this individual has some mental health problems. And I discuss why this is an issue with adult victims credibility as they often also have false memories that are proven false.
I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he believes what he said and wants people to be held accountable. But it’s possible it’s all a farse with the intent to keep other victims from being taken seriously.
People don’t realize that there are a lot of mentally unstable people out there who have psychosis and can believe a lot of strange things. It’s honestly not surprising that someone might believe they were trafficked by Epstein even though they lived in a different part of the country and time frames are questionable.
In addition to this, the Epstein Files are, collectively, everything that was reported about Epstein to the feds.
Say we released “The Obama files”. Everything the feds collected about Obama. You’d find Larry Sinclair, who claims he did cocaine and had gay sex with Obama.
It’s utter bullshit, but the feds still collected the reports on it.
Just because somebody said it and the FBI collected statements on it, doesn’t make it factual. All they recorded was “hey, somebody said this.”
I feel like the safe bet is to just remove anyone that is named in the Epstein files from having the ability to hold public office or a high position in any company. Sure, some collateral damage, but really, it’s the only solution.
I know that would literally take a revolution and a change of government to achieve. But, we just purge everyone named in it that wasn’t a clear victim.
I’m even for the extreme position that if you were a person in a powerful position and your name is listed we just put you in prison for the rest of your life. Sorry. It’s my new revolutionary government and I’m making the rules. We’re not risking anything. The collateral damage of some “innocent” rich people is far less concerning to me than our new society letting rich pedophiles be free.
We can be slightly unjust for a generation while we figure out our new revolutionary government.
We’ll also reform prisons to not be complete shit holes where we let everyone get raped and treat them like animals. So, it won’t be so bad. We’ll let you read books and watch TV and shit.
Collateral damage by blunt force of law without trial is tyranny. I fully support trying all people named, but I don’t want to trade the restraints we hold on the government for an emotional attack on people who may or may not have participated in an evil conspiracy. When you surrender such protections you don’t get them back without a long and difficult fight
We try people, by jury, with firm rules. And we accept that some guilty free are better than some innocent punished.
I mean release the files, unredacted so I can make up my mind for myself. This doesn’t change anything. It still isn’t released and it would be foolish to discount them until we have seen the evidence fully.
Good comment
Grok is probably salting twitter so that when someone is tired of all the lies and they leak real unredacted evidence the perps can point to Elon and say it’s just grok making stuff up
You could have just said it’s like that episode of The Office called “Gossip”.
Yeah you’ve got a point.
Not everyone watches or remembers that. This is an excellent write-up. Thank you!
I read his whole transcript. I want to firstly be 100 clear.
-
I believe he was hurt as a child.
-
I believe he witnessed at least 1 murder of a girl. (This story was semi consistent).
-
Despite my following opinions on his report, I want to clarify again, that even with errors in his story, this does not invalidate the primary crimes against him.
Now on to my other thoughts.
There are a lot of inconsistencies in his report. Now he admits that details are foggy. He was a child after all and he also says he’s not 100% on what happened in what order.
He sounds like he has mental health problems like PTSD and possibly some psychosis.
Psychosis is specifically defined as a break with reality.
The reason I would say he is exhibiting some psychotic symptoms is because of some of the things about conspiracy theories that he says. (I elaborate on these below).
When we discuss his memories from childhood it’s important to remember that it’s incredibly easy to have false or distorted memories of childhood events. It’s the norm rather than the exception.
Again this does not invalidate his claims of being trafficked. And I believe him.
However I think he is mixed up about some things and has mixed in fiction to some of his accounts.
The interviewer starts off asking if he ever met Trump and he said no. Said he heard his name but never met him.
By the end he recounts an experience with trump and says he never knew his name. Just his face. And recognized him from tv.
He also claims that the handlers (a term used for spy agent conspiracy theories) uses mk ultra brain washing to make him violent. By using images of sex and violence paired with sounds. Another time he says his eyes were forced open with some device like from the clockwork orange. (Mkultra conditioning a sleeper agent is fiction. It’s not real. It doesn’t work.)
I think all of these parts and the parts about trump being involved are not true stories but mostly false memories. A combination cocktail with real experiences, movie lore, TV shows, and maybe bad dreams.
He says he believes they were trying to create multiple personalities for him and said he did have these.
Again. Not uncommon in kids to remember things they heard as their own biographical memory.
Side story. A friend once told me he had this memory of when he was a kid, and as an adult he was watching some 90s movie with someone and realized his memory was actually what happened to the kid in the movie. He said this really bothered him because it always felt real but then he started questioning how much of his autobiographical memories were even his own life (Common with childhood memory but not adult, I can explain why if you are interested).
Anywho.
People get really upset when you talk about false memory (like you are calling them a liar) but there is extensive research on this topic and I’m familiar with that research.
False memory is not fabrication. It’s believed to be true. It feels true. Often emotions and even “I remember what I was thinking” are present in these memories. Sometimes they feel more vivid than real memories. I could go into why that is if you are interested.
There was another incident involving someone drinking a kid’s blood.
False memories have a long history of being associated with sexual assault and satanism.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_panic
Also, I will say though that it’s possible the people trafficking him around intentionally created these elaborate satanic scenes so that if he reported them, he would be dismissed as inventing a crazy story.
Lastly I want to say that even if it comes out that most of his story was not possible to be true, or that he has a very serious mental health diagnosis, that this does not mean none of it was true.
This is another tactic that abusers use. If the adult victim is mentally unwell, then anything they say is dismissed, Because at least some of it was proven to not be real.
It’s a way for predators to blame the victim even more.
FWIW
I stopped reading the first time after this sentence. Which is a shame, because what you write otherwise seems well-balanced and reasonable for what you’re focusing on.
He also claims that the handlers (a term used for spy agent conspiracy theories)
Sorry, this statement seems meaningless, or even misinfo, because the term is used in credible reports.
For illegals, in-person meetings with their KGB handlers were rare, and usually took place in third countries…
According to court documents, Angwang told his handler he wanted to get promoted within the police force so that he could bring “glory to China”.
False memories have a long history of being associated with sexual assault and satanism.
That’s from that lady in the 80s who worked with “recovered memories”, asked a bunch of hypnotized children a bunch of leading questions and basically placed the memories in the kids’ heads, right? All having to do with satanic ritual abuse.
I’m curious why this typically happens in childhood and not to adults tho.
Yeah there was a few psychologists responsible for causing kids to think they were in a cult. Dr Elizabeth Loftus was the researcher who has spent her career investigating false memory and how it’s created and strengthened. She also does work with eye witnesses. How witnesses can be led to form false memory of perpetrator or even what happened.
It’s honestly kind of upsetting to many people when they learn how easily memory can be manipulated and how unreliable our own memory is.
We like to think we “know” what we saw. And we would know if a memory wasn’t real. But we often do not.
-
Anyone know if this is a legit source? Because Clarence isn’t particularly surprising but is big and new?
tl;dr It seems sketchy.
The founder of notice news (and author of this story), Andrew Springer, is a real dude. He seems to have mostly worked at news organizations running their social media. He claims to be an “emmy and peabody award-winning journalist,” but he was not working as a journalist when either of those awards were won. In 2012, Good Morning America won an emmy. He was a “social media producer.” In 2013, ABC News won a Peabody for Hurricane Sandy coverage. Again, he was a social media producer. His bio/CV is here.
Looking at his author page on that site, they claim that he’s published nearly 20 stories in the last 48 hours. Seems unrealistic. Plagiarism? AI? Both seem more likely to me. They don’t have an entry with any bias monitoring organization that I can find.
As for Voldeng, I can’t find much on her but she seems like a bit of a grifter. This is her bio on her brand page:
I create what others often call impossible. I stand for my brand. I build to protect. And I protect what I know in my own knowing way, is right for me to protect.
My work spans every sweep of civilization, and beyond.
From advertising, aerospace, defense, education, energy, environment, finance, governance, law, media, science, and technology, to realms of sheer starlit wonder.
She does it all!
She sells access to different tiers (prices not listed) of “The Knight League”, which is described like this:
The League of the Almighty, on Earth.
It is a fellowship and a calling. Where warrior knights are trained in courage, discipline, and joy. Where oaths matter, crests are borne with honour, and training is effortless lived practice. Where knights rise — noble, ferocious, joyful, Jedi-esque — to stand for something higher. The Most High.
What the fuck is the Knight League? No idea. All her descriptions are master classes in assembling words to say next to nothing. The link that @loppy@fedia.io posted is another great example. I have no idea what it is but I know it wants your money.
I’d be very skeptical of either of those people in terms of vetting sources or doing serious journalism.
Idk, but this is Lise/Lisa Voldeng’s (the person who took the testimony and has the tapes) company: https://www.ultraagentindustries.com/
Idk wtf this is.
So they hired a quasi multifaceted fake multimedia company to concoct this bullshit, Is this even real?
Unknown, but the did see the same story circle around IG yesterday. The article says it is unverified.
The original interviewer is a substack nobody. She’s put out other wacko stuff.
This is nothing and a distraction. The guy probably needs help from a psychiatrist if he believes what he’s saying.
Throwing the white supremacist black man under the bus. A bit of ironic justice.
I’m just assuming at this point that everyone involved in covering up this shit is a guilty party until proven otherwise.
None of this is verified or backed by anything other than his own words. It shouldn’t take too long before someone picks this apart… assuming it’s false. Just checking CPS records to match some of this up would be easy.
I found the tent spike being kicked up Trumps butt thing to be interesting considering he was reported to have to wear diapers for incontinence at an early age. Just such a weird detail.
I’d wait for independent verification but these are serious allegations that should have been investigated decades ago. I wonder if FBI reports/tips are still within the DOJ’s illegally withheld cache of Epstein files.
Removed by mod
No, admit to ban evasion and get banned.
