My mom worked at a large insurance company in Omaha at the time and had always made offhand comments about the CEO being a closet deviant. One time she made mention of the CEO throwing "parties" at the building late into the night. These parties are mentioned by the victims in their testimony. All or at least most of this story is true and it's absolutely heart breaking.
Why did you repeatedly dodge Felix's question about republican's treatment of LGBT? Why do you follow such weird reactionaries on your Twitter account? This is unrelated but you're very bad at public speaking, stop trying to express multiple thoughts at once.
For the British version, read 'Who Framed Colin Wallace' by Paul Foot. The words 'Kincora Boys Home' still makes a *lot* of UK politicians very very nervous.
That BMW dealership owner is more powerful than just a car dealer owner... Many scholarships are given to local community teens thru them. Larry King is very involved in his church in WV.
I find the amount of angry comments denying the entire Franklin case darkly hilarious, if it weren't for the fact that the Wikipedia page on the event has been edit-warred into gibberish and is being watched over by an ex-federal park ranger, now Department of Homeland Security employee who goes by the handle "MONGO". He has been at Wikipedia since it's early 2000s glory days, and based on the blog he wrote, he hates Muslims and was/is a George W. Bush fan. Between this case and the Jeffery Epstein fiasco, I think it's blatantly obvious that there are high-end pedo rings servicing both political parties and the extremely wealthy and there is probably overlap between them.
@@stevejoseph4514 Yes, there is a lot of money and influence behind operations such as these. Its very likely that there were actual p3d0s in these comments slinging mud at Nick and this case.
This kind of behavior is common for establishing trust in criminal networks. How do you trust people in a criminal network? Can't exactly go to the law and report them if they betray you. One solution is to force those who join to commit a heinous act to blackmail them with. If everyone has dirt on them then everyone can be controlled/expected to keep the organization a secret, if only out of fear of the dirt being discovered. This is what is meant by the saying 'thick as thieves'
It's because his reach has been limited to non-MSM outlets, like Chapo, MSSP, War Mode, Tim Dillon etc. I think there's a reason he's been on a bunch of Rogan adjacent pods, but he's never been invited to the big show. They'll let you preach to your small congregation, but it becomes an issue when you start telling 10s of millions of people they're paying 1/3 of their income to unrepentant child molestors.
Remember hearing about this in the documentary "Who Took Johnny" about the Johnny Gosch disappearance. Great episode, one of the best in a while Edit: Just rewatched "Who Took Johnny" and spotted Mr. Bryant. Great work!
Ep 389 of Matt and Shane's Secret Podcast featured Mr. Bryant, and they covered the Sandusky scandal as well. Absolutely another case of a network being depicted as a single perpetrator.
While credit for first bringing the Franklin/Boystown horror story to the wider world's attention must go to the late John Decamp, I appreciate Nick Bryant for keeping attention focused on it. It isn't a story, after all, that's ever going to be given airtime on the mainstream corporate media truth control networks.
"Everyone who disagrees with me is CIA" a dumba$$ guide to debate. Tell me do you clown on people who accuse everyone they don't agree with of being "Russian bots."
@@MJH-kr4zg No but when a journalist like Nick Bryant produces has made such a compelling case and your only retort is, "no - it was declared a hoax," you look like you're arguing in bad faith. If you want to contest the case he's made then fine, but you better have something more solid than calling it a conspiracy theory. We're post-Epstein, bruv - that doesn't work anymore.
Wm Colby was murdered by a Seal Team. The Seal Team didn't know who the target was at the time. Kay Griggs told this story and many others in 1998 and it's on You Tube.
I have a used copy of The Franklin Cover-Up. It has a signature on the inside cover which I presume is his but I cannot fully decipher it. One letter looks like a large sloppy J, definite W and a scribble with a p at the end. Does anyone have a genuine signature of his with which I can compare to see if it is authentic?
I thought it was only the Nebraska one, but being that Boys Town is Catholic-affiliated and "guided by Father Flanagan's faith-driven vision" (from their website), I'm sure abuse happened at a lot of them. 😞
Why did this guy repeatedly avoid answering the question about the phenomenon of Republicans accusing trans/gay/etc. teachers and those defending them of "grooming" or being predators with zero evidence? Felix asked the question twice and he completely dodged it both times and proceeded to do what almost sounded like excusing that horrific s*it. He went straight to reiterating the prevalence of this type of abuse, which is valid, but in that context it sounded like him defending the attack on gay and trans people and teachers, and those rightfully calling out that WITCH HUNT.
Its deeply disappointing to see leftists champion LGBT rights one minute and then set that aside the next if they need to buddy up to those of a more reactionary persuasion. Chapo will decry homophobia and mock people like Rod Dreher for it but then give Oliver Stone a big warm welcome even after they agreed how homophobic he is, because hes a big JFK conspiracy guy and they love that. They will make a big display of ripping apart some hack concervative movie about abortion but then have Liz Bruenig on the show half a dozen times. They will say that reactionaries and hate mongers are demonizing trans and queer parents and teachers but then have this guy on who repeatedly sidesteps the question about queer parents or teachers grooming students. I overall like Chapo but it does make me very wary how easily they seem compromising their stated values.
conspiratorial communities are socialized against that. Like if you go to a new age fair, you won't meet anyone that will openly tell you the person in the adjoining booths are charlatans. The problem with some of this shit is some of it IS true. Rich people DO like to push the limits of behavior, for sure. Rich men get hookers, and they don't vet the supply, they don't go "get me some free range, cage free hookers" and there are high-end pimps and procurers, always have been. The question becomes a question of "Groups" and "rings" and what all those things mean. When you have a guy like lindsay, he's co-opting the true parts to implicate any opposition as part of the untrue, or unproven, parts. You could choose to see that as incidental, but then you run into: Why does he carefully avoid mentioning the same behavior on the right? Ockham's razor would seem to tell you: He's right wing himself, and/or they pay him.
Probably because it's not his area of expertise/research. I think it was pretty clear when he said that Qanon was 'definitely misguided'. He's pushing back specifically against the 'child trafficking is fake' Atlantic article. He's cautioning against the liberal tendency to just react and say the opposite of what conservatives are saying. (Because a lot of the time you'll end up wrong and you're ceding ground to anti-communists) There likely is an epidemic of child abuse if the CDC's numbers are to be believed, some of that could be occurring at schools. Is this abuse occurring because there are more LGTBQ teachers with blue hair? No, it occurs because the economic base of our country is based on exploitation. By immediately reacting to conservative talking points we should proactively undercut their message When conservatives say "Teachers and society are grooming children", we shouldn't respond "No, they're not" we should say "Yes, they are and it's your fault just as much as the Democrats!"
"I called up this psychologist [about The Finders] and he said 'no, no, no, no comment' and hung up the phone. So obviously something had happened to him between the time that I talked to him and the time he talked to the Washington post." Obviously? Or maybe it's embarrassing to be associated with the Finders case? Or he's sick of talking about it? Most of Bryant's case appears to be argument by innuendo. Update: I went down the rabbit hole so you don't have to: The guest mentions Rusty Nelson, the alleged photographer in posession of photographic proof, who Ownes also names in her original interview with Cariadori. Caridori's plane crashed after his meeting with Nelson. First, it seems from Owens original statement that Nelson was an aquantance of Owen's former boyfriend. Second, Nelson today claims to still have these photographs stashed in safe locations. Apparently, it is safe to talk about having these photos, but not safe to retrieve them. Nelson claims to have witnessed child auctions at Area 51, and satanic rituals at Bohemian Grove. You can find his interview online. My guess is that the pictures that Caridori had were never found because they never existed at all.
why would you guess at that last part seems like a leap you skipped the part about Caridori's missing briefcase? sounds like you are arguing by innuendo at that last point if you are trying to hand-wave away the missing belongings at the crash site
@@TheReaperKinlord I just think it's more probable given what Rusty Nelson says in his later interview. (He can prove everything right now, probably get really famous and rich, but refuses for "reasons?" Come on now.) As to the briefcase, do we actually know that Catiadori "always" had it with him? Who said that Cariadori always used the bag? Did he take a different bag to accommodate his son's items? Could the case have been destroyed in the crash somehow? Point is there are a lot of possibilities that seem just as probable as a pedophile cover up.
In Bryants book he is very clear that over the past few years nelson has said alot of things that should be discounted or ignored, however, his claim that he was meeeting caridori in chicago to give him photos is corroborated by several associates of caridori
@@JC-hh5lu you are a debunker, you have decided based on prior assumptions(not facts) that this whole thing is a hoax, therefore nothing will change your mind - close associates of caridori knew he was going to meet nelson in chicago , he told them the trip went well, nelson was a blackmail photographer, there isnt "smoking gun" evidence because caridori is dead but its not an outlandish assumption
Did they have recovered memories? In the Satanic panic they encouraged testimony, they didn't demand they recant and imprison the children. I haven't looked to confirm so I don't know, but if the witnesses are being threatened if they don't exonerate people it's quite opposite.
The Satanic Panic didn't target republicans, evangelicals screaming about the devil always went after soft targets (gays, trans people, atheists, metal heads, goths) not the top brass of the National Republican Party
It happened during that era, but unlike the McMartin Preschool case, they actually had credible witnesses to the child molestation by Lawrence E. King (the guy who ran the Franklin Federal Credit Union and later embezzled millions out of it). King is still stowed away in a mental institution.
That is terrible and lazy analysis. Satanic Panic was done by suburban moms about rock n roll and D&D. Satanic Panic wasnt something that targeted REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS lol. So are you trying to slander this guy, or are you just completely ignorant of the content of Satanic Panic? Not only that, this lazy and false portrayal of the Panic is serving to silence victims of assault. Question: are you yourself a satanist?
@@Sectionmanifold From the same Google who has been "throttling" search results for "Democracy Now!", the World Socialist Website, and Consortium News (who was also zapped by PayPal for no stated reason).
Been reading about the Franklin Scandal for awhile now. Last Podcast on the Left did a pretty good piece on it years ago. Goes into a little more detail. Also, there was a documentary that was made but didn't air that you can find here ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ZZGLszXSKJs.html called Conspiracy of Silence. Terrible quality but it does a decent breakdown of the scandal. The documentary Who Took Johnny? also adds in another piece of the twisted puzzle.
@@TildaSwintonPlayingThomYorke read Nick Bryant’s book The Franklin Scandal. Or read John W. DeCamp’s book on it called The Franklin Cover Up. Watch the Documentary Conspiracy Of Silence and look into why it never aired when it was supposed to. Look into the life & Death of congressman Craig Spence. look at his suicide note. Read Programmed To Kill by David McGowan. Look into Paul Bonacci & Alicia Owens’s Alicia Owens served 12 years in prisoner as was threatened with life and never recounted her testimonies. Nor has Bonacci.
That's how the US operated in the Reagan-Bush years, one scandal after ten others. This one is the only one people online are willing to contest, but there was the Savings & Loan implosion, Iran-Contra, CIA in El Salvador, use of Costa Rica as a base for the "secret war" against Nicaragua, all the Reagan appointees who went to jail, all the Moonies in the White House staff, the endless cash furnace that was "Star Wars"/SDI antimissile defense, our weapons sales to Saddam's Iraq, what happened in Liberia, the war in Angola, and on and on.
The reason why republicans are calling teachers groomers and stuff has to do with what the teachers are teaching and some of the ways that they are talking with their students. The grooming accusations aren't suggesting that the teachers are doing anything physical, they're suggesting that the teachers are exposing their students to age inappropriate subjects. People would figure this out pretty quickly if they bothered to listen to or investigate the accusations... Ironically, defaulting to repeating things such as "republicans are accusing gay people of grooming" rather than actually examining the accusations for yourself is the exact same behavior that Nick Bryant complains about like 5 minutes after being asked this question when he brings up that everyone dismisses the franklin scandal as a hoax without knowing a thing about it except the lies on the wikipedia page. You can agree or disagree for all I care, but don't intentionally misrepresent people so that you can score political points. If you want to adress something, do it directly.
So then did you "examine these accusations yourself"? Or did you go straight to scoring political points? Name one age-inappropriate topic that would justify calling teachers groomers? Particularly coming from the party that seems to be chock full of pedos themselves, from Roy Moore to the guy who protected Epstein in his Florida case.
For the most part, I agree. Politics/religion do not belong in public schools, whether it's Republicans trying to push prayer in schools/remove evolution from science textbooks or Democrats pushing gender ideology/liberal ideals in History & Civics classes. Both "sides" are guilty. The kids are the losers--our math, science, tech & literacy scores are slipping annually & are consistently lower than the Asian nations. We used to be #1 in healthcare & education; now we're #27 & falling (#6 in 1990). Stick to teaching the basic subjects & practical life skills & push your agendas on your own time! And pay our teachers a living wage.
How can people listen to this mindnumbing rambling? Will passes off the mic to this guy and he just starts breathlessly listing disparate aspects of the case in no clear chronological order, guy truly sucks at relaying information. This ep is a failure for anyone who actually wants to learn about the Franklin Credit Union, get someone who actually knows how to organize their thoughts
@@sethshaffer681 You have to believe the CIA is trying to subvert your favorite podcast to make all that friend simulation you do feel dangerous and cool
Nick Bryant has been following this story for over 30 years. If you don't like his interviews, read the book. You'll find it much more well developed. He was also the first person to publish Epstein's black book online. There really isn't anyone better. I've listened to quite a few of Bryant's interviews, and I can understand how it can be a challenge to relay information on a case with so many moving parts. To understand the Franklin Scandal, you really need to understand Boys Town. Here's a fun fact, did you know that as a boy, Charles Manson was at Boys Town? It opens up this whole aspect of Monarch Programming, intentional manufacture of multiple personality disorder onto children, for their later use as drug couriers, mind controlled assassins, sex slaves. Bryant doesnt touch on any of this stuff, but my point is the web gets really tangled really quickly. If you wanna learn more in depth on some of this mind control stuff, check out the book CIA doctors by Colin Ross. Or any of Ross's work on the subject for that matter.
Nah, it's perfectly normal for an accuser to receive 15 years for "perjury" by Grand Jury, that's totally a normal thing that happens every day, nothing to see there
