Link for document: sweigert change of venue 917 2018
Show the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together. Isaiah 41:23
Robert David Steele, in an April 2018 Westminster Seatings video for the ITNJ stated at the 2.20 mark, “I have been a spy, I am out from under cover. I’m under a lifetime secrecy agreement…”. This statement about his obligations to the CIA was made as he sat as the Chief Counsel for the International Tribunal for Natural Justice.
As a signatory to the ITNJ Constitution, Steele has approved Article 7 (2) that By affirming an oath in accordance with the present Article, Judges and Officers acknowledge that said oath shall take precedence over any and all other oaths or commitments that the Judge or Officer in question may have made to any other court or government or professional body or private association.
This raises the question as to whether the ITNJ Oath of Office takes precedence over Robert David Steele’s CIA secrecy oath.
Also, we must consider whether this same oath takes precedence over U. S. perjury laws which are a foundational safeguard in court proceedings. As we know, Robert David Steele and his non-profit organization Earth Intelligence Network are the plaintiffs in a United States federal civil lawsuit.
Why would anyone take such a loyalty oath to ITNJ, a legally problematic international tribunal which had its beginnings rooted in Sovereign Citizen legal theories?
The last time I was observing Robert David Steele, he had been entertaining great visions of reforming the United States of America on multiple levels. After the last Presidential election, Steele’s visions were ignored by Trump who refused to meet with him. In an interview with Joseph Ford Cotto in June of 2017, Steele had shared several of his great plans, and number 3 on his list involved the CIA and his desire to be the head honcho of their operations, as shown in this screenshot.After the election, the CIA waited nervously to see if President Trump would give Robert David Steele the time of day. One can imagine that CIA coffee breaks featured coins being tossed in the air to decide who would be the winners comprising the 50% who were fired, or the losers who would have to implement Robert David Steele’s grandiose visions. No doubt, a collective sigh of relief was heard in the heavens when Trump rebuffed Steele.
Here is what Robert David Steele had discussed with Benjamin Fulford in Japan, as noted in my A Man Called Sue article on March 21, 2018:It appears that Robert David Steele has been sidetracked from the Benjamin Fulford visionary intersection, and has been working on his alliance with former rock musician Sacha Stone, founder of the International Tribunal for Natural Justice.
Finger prints of the gods
The Claims of the Living blog has documented in a series of articles, the beginnings of the legal and operational foundations of ITNJ, prior to the American team, led by Rebecca Cope, being ousted by Sacha Stone. Cope is an advocate for the sovereign citizen theories promoted by a self-proclaimed “Judge” in Alaska, named Anna Von Reitz. Visual signs which serve to identify the practitioners of Sovereign Citizen ideology can be seen in the photograph below of blood-red fingerprints beside several signatory names to the ITNJ Constitution. The Robert David Steele defamation lawsuit in U. S. district court
On September 1, 2017 Robert David Steele and his non-profit Earth Intelligence Network filed a $15,350,000 defamation lawsuit against Jason Goodman, Patricia A. Negron, and Queen Tut, a woman believed to be known as Carla A. Howell. This lawsuit was amended on April 13, 2018 in document 39. One of the changes was that Queen Tut was declared to be Susan A. Lutzke, the damages were increased by 3 million dollars, more recent defamation evidence was introduced, and the following addition to the Plaintiff’s work history and accomplishments was introduced to counter a new accusation made by defendants:
What is misleading about the title of Chief Counsel, is that in the case of Robert David Steele, he is neither an attorney, nor a legal scholar. And when it came time for him to file a federal civil court lawsuit, he hired attorney Steven S. Biss who has been disciplined by the Virginia Bar to represent him, rather than trying to impress the federal judge with his fake title.
The same persons seen during the #UNRIG campaign are found connected to ITNJ
As we take a look at Steele’s Chief Counsel position at the International Tribunal for Natural Justice, three other names show up in the history of this organization that I am familiar with. Robert David Steele would also be familiar with the writings of Anna Von Reitz, as her name was referenced in his own blog, and in addition, he has been interviewed by Victurus Libertas who promotes sovereign citizen ideology, including that of Anna Von Reitz. As shown here in an official International Tribunal for Natural Justice (ITNJ) photo we also see Cynthia McKinney who helped to promote Steele’s #UNRIG election reform efforts, and also Youtuber, David Seaman who played an important part in pushing the fake Pizzagate scandal.
One of the arguments which Rebecca Cope had set forth was that she did not want an ITNJ requirement that judges must have legal qualifications from existing recognized institutions. It was her desire to allow “special individuals”, such as the self-educated and self-proclaimed “Judge” Anna Von Reitz, to be appointed as one of ITNJ’s judges. Note that presently ITNJ had no problem granting non-attorney Robert David Steele the title of Chief Counsel, allowing him to have an appearance of expertise and authority while adorned in a black robe during their formal meetings.
The ITNJ Constitution has loop holes to accommodate the indiscretions of its Chief Justice
Presiding ITNJ Chief Justice Sir John Walsh of Brannaugh has engaged in numerous eyebrow raising activities, including creating Greenwich University which failed to meet Australian academic standards and for which he appointed a convicted fraudster as chancellor. A UK website, Hoaxteadresearch.wordpress.com, in their April 11, 2018 article written by El Coyote, titled ITNJ ‘Chief Justice’ stripped of ability to practice law, extensively documents John Walsh’s Australian barrister history which caused him to be a focal point in a Senate inquiry.
Perhaps this is the reason why the ITNJ Constitution removed the words “I swear” from their Oath of Office, preferring the more nebulous wording of “I affirm”. The following comment given in an Australian Senate committee meeting regarding the perjury of Sir John Walsh may have influenced that choice of wording. Despite all this backdrop of ITNJ shenanigans, when it came to Robert David Steele’s federal civil court Amended Complaint, he complained that, “Defendant’s exhibit nothing but scorn for the Plaintiffs and the legal system. They call this action a ‘fake lawsuit’.”
Presumably, the Plaintiff thinks he is respectful of the United States federal court system by which he seeks a legal resolution of his complaint, despite his own questionable association with antigovernment sovereign citizen legal theorists.
Practitioners of sovereign citizen legal theories often include incarcerated felons and vexatious litigants who have caught the attention of the judicial system with their paper terrorism as well as the watchful eye of FBI investigators, so perhaps Steele should not press this assertion too far.
ITNJ Symbolism as representing occult concepts and Roman Catholic images
Let’s look at the symbols employed for the ITNJ, and their meaning.
The Humanitad Free Press and the U. S. nonprofit Committee to Support the ITNJ (EIN 81-0804071 with principal officer Santiago Azpilueta of 17423 Spirit Lane SE, Yelm, WA) jointly publish an online magazine called The Sovereign Voice. The ITNJ.org website provides this answer to a common question:Here is another symbol of ITNJ:
Where else do we find these two birds combined with a giant pine cone? Here is a photo of the Fontana della Pigna, which is described in Wikipedia as “a former Roman fountain which now decorates a vast niche in the wall of the Vatican facing the Cortile della Pigna, located in Vatican City, in Rome, Italy.”
Returning to our discussion of ITNJ Chief Counsel Robert David Steele, and his participation in the Westminster Seatings of April 16-18, 2018, a short video on the ITNJ YouTube channel can be viewed where Steele makes the following introductory remarks:
(1.20)…we have people in the United States of America that breed children in order to sell them and when they are sold, they come without birth certificates which means it’s easier to kill them and have no one ask where they are…
(1.36)…importing children by the plane load again children with no documentation…
(4.28) …the need to restore the sovereignty of We the People…
It seems the 2018 Westminster Seatings was seeking to make use of its American nonprofit status to provide a show as a court of inquiry, rather than displaying the workings of a formal judicial court, as intended in the beginning. Rebecca Cope and the American team of volunteers were working to set up a court system similar to existing legal courts, such as the grand jury model, but with added features to protect We the people from corrupt judges who are nonremovable from office. These efforts were thwarted by founder Sacha Stone, who preferred giving his ITNJ Chief Justice a life term, despite Sir John Walsh’s checkered history in Australia.
So this loosely organized “inquiry” put on their show last April, and Robert David Steele asserted that child trafficking in the United States is hidden using the method of not applying for birth certificates or other types of documentation. This statement is a peculiar one, given Steele’s alliance with sovereign citizens, for it is primarily the sovereign citizen movement in the United States that is defying the legal requirement for birth certificates for newborns.
In the past year I have been reading various legal documents posted in two of Robert Baty’s Facebook groups; Kent Hovind’s Worst Nightmare and Understanding The Baby Holm Case. The primary reason for my interest in these two groups is that the members provide many insights into real life anti-government individuals and groups, including tax protestors, sovereign citizens and anti-child protective services advocates.
It is these same anti-government ideologues that constantly accuse the government of child trafficking and kidnapping. Such accusations often are distorted information campaigns waged on social media platforms. On the lower end of the spectrum many of these false accusations come from felons, drug addicts, persons with poor parenting skills, etc. who are looking for a scapegoat for their own personal behavior. On the higher spectrum, we find a number of well-educated persons ranging from engineers, lawyers, former CIA agents, etc. who are promoting internet campaigns of unfounded accusations against legitimate authorities. All of this distracts from the serious issue of the criminal conduct of those in positions of power and authority.
Robert David Steele has asserted in his Amended Complaint that “he is a vocal advocate for the exposure and criminal prosecution of pedophiles and everyone who aids and abets such horrific crimes”. Yet during his 2017 #UNRIG campaign he made numerous undocumented, hearsay accusations against members of Congress. This raises the question about his own motives and methods of dealing with what should be the criminal prosecution of pedophiles, rather than the forgiveness of their transgressions without regard to the justice needed for victims of pedophilia.
On June 2, 2017 Joseph Ford Cotto did a series of interviews with Robert David Steele for the San Francisco Review of Books.com. His last one, Interview: X Spy Robert David Steele explains why Cynthia McKinney should be Donald Trump’s vice president, included the following words of Steele:Note that Robert David Steele’s motto with regard to Truth and Reconciliation is everyone gets the truth, no one goes to jail. This is a philosophical theme that is played out in the ITNJ public proceedings, when Chief Counsel Steele emphasized that “this is a court of inquiry, it’s not an adversarial court, it’s a non-profit educational event”. In other words, ITNJ is impotent as a judicial body, despite the first paragraph in the ITNJ Preamble of their Constitution, which declares Let this message go forth from this time and place to all the peoples of the world that to right the wrongs done to them and in vindication of their rights and the enforcement of just causes and to hold accountable those responsible for breaches of human rights it is proclaimed that the International Tribunal for Natural Justice is hereby established pursuant to this Constitution.
During the above San Francisco Review of Books interview, Robert David Steele claimed that “At least six top Republican Senators are world-class pedophiles who have probably participated in child ritual murder..”. Did Steele ever report his knowledge of these crimes to law enforcement officials in order to bring these so-called world-class pedophiles to justice?
The disregarding of the rules for evidence, which protect the accused from hearsay and false facts
Article 17 of the ITNJ Constitution is on Evidence and Admissibility, which gives the general rule allowing all evidence as admissible. There is a broad, and ill defined qualification to allow for dismissing frivolous complaints. However, because ITNJ is operating presently as a one-sided inquiry, rather than as a judicial court that weighs the reliability of evidence, this means that Hearsay evidence is admissible, without being subject to cross-examination by the person(s) being accused. Robert David Steele’s own statements about pedophilia involving members of the U. S. Congress appear to represent undocumented accusations and represent hearsay.
The threat to the uniqueness of America’s laws and jurisprudence by slipshod International Tribunals and foreign laws attempting to override common legal wisdom
Here are a few statements to ponder excerpted from a Fordham International Law Journal, Volume 29, Issue 3, Article 4, 2005 called Sovereignty and the American Courts at the Cocktail Party of International Law: The Dangers of Domestic Judicial Invocations of Foreign and International Law, by Donald J. Kochran. (linked here: fordham international law 2005
page 507: With increasing frequency and heightened debate, U. S. courts have been citing foreign and “international” law as authority for domestic decisions. This trend is inappropriate, undemocratic, and dangerous.
page 508 footnote 9: Professor Berkowitz explains: Critics raise a number of serious objections. First, officials of international institutions (to say nothing of NGOs) charged with promulgating international law lack democratic accountability…Second, as most international institutions –possessing neither police force nor military–lack the capacity to enforce their rulings and resolutions, their legal pronouncements are impotent and make a mockery of the rule of law…
page 513: When the British colonies in North America chose to cast off their chains by revolution, they chose to create a sovereign Nation-State that was beyond the shackles and controls of outside influences.
page 515: Importation of these over-laws in recent judicial decisions is entirely inappropriate for a country that has a constitution and a commitment to govern itself.
page 522: After describing multiple court rulings that would need to be overturned if the Court were to consistently rely on foreign sources of authority, Justice Scalia continued: The court should either profess its willingness to reconsider all these matters in light of the views of foreigners, or else it should cease putting forth foreigners’ views as part of the reasoned basis of its decisions. To invoke alien law when it agrees with one’s own thinking, and ignore it otherwise, is not reasoned decision-making, but sophistry.
page 526: As Judge Robert Bork has opined, the Framers may be turning over in their graves: “The most ominous aspect of Roper…is the Court majority’s reliance upon foreign decisions and unratified treaties…If the meaning of a document over 200 years old can be affected by the current state of world opinion, James Madison and his colleagues labored in vain.” It is a Constitution the courts should be expounding, not other people’s laws.
There is a battle presently being fought in our U. S. courts of law against sovereign citizen legal theories, which attempt to subvert time honored procedures for determining the facts and legal arguments in judicial proceedings. It is high arrogance for such individuals to establish international tribunals which tend to subvert justice in order to publicize extremely serious hearsay accusations against persons who are not provided the legal safeguards to ensure that justice and truth prevail in their case.
Plaintiff’s Seventh Request for Judicial Notice in the D. George Sweigert vs. Jason Goodman RICO lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court (South Carolina) on August 31, 2018.
Four Artifacts were shown relating to two primary points of interest. Artifact One displays a transcription of a YouTube video of Jason Goodman phoning the Capitol Heights Police Department in Maryland. Artifact Two shows the Maryland State law against making a false statement to a law enforcement officer.
Below is a screenshot of the transcribed phone conversation between Jason Goodman and a police officer. Although the phone conversation relates to the death of Jenny Moore as an associate of George Webb, note that Goodman brings in the name of the Plaintiff of this lawsuit, saying that he has been “very aggressively harassing me and I believe is coordinating a group of individuals to harass me and I have evidence to support that belief”.
Artifact Three displays a YouTube video of Jason Goodman and his guest, True Pundit’s Thomas Paine. Artifact Four is a copy of the Buzzfeed article which had recently disclosed the true identity of Thomas Paine as being that of Michael D. Moore, 51, who had been convicted of copyright infringement after his arrest by the FBI.
Links to full court documents:
Yesterday, September 6, 2018, Document 66 was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division, Case 3:17-cv-00601-MHL.
This one paragraph Entry of Default reads: IT APPEARING by affidavit of counsel for the plaintiff, Robert David Steele, that the defendant, Susan A. Lutzke, has failed to appear, plead or otherwise defend this action within the prescribed time allowed as otherwise provided in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, default is hereby entered against defendant, Susan A. Lutzke.
“He is a merchant, the balances of deceit are in his hand: he loveth to oppress.” Hosea 12:7
I am a collector of discarded books from the Hattiesburg, Mississippi library, and so for ten cents, I acquired the 2008 Federal Rules of Evidence with Advisory Committee Notes and Legislative History (Christopher B. Mueller and Laird C. Kirkpatrick). On page 251, the 1961 lawsuit Dallas County v. Commercial Union Assoc. Co., Ltd. was cited as part of a discussion on hearsay exceptions. In this particular case, the Court had found that an unsigned newspaper article published 50 years earlier did not fit within any of the recognized hearsay exceptions. However, the Court concluded, “the article was trustworthy because it was inconceivable that a newspaper reporter in a small town would report a fire in the courthouse if none had occurred“.
There are two primary components that ensure the trustworthiness of journalistic reports. The integrity of the reporter sits on one scale of the counterbalances, while the fact-checking capability of the readers is set on the other scale. In the example of the small town newspaper noted above, the article was unsigned, but the accountability resided with the publisher whose personal reputation would be well known in the community. And then secondly, it is significant that the newspaper readers were within the same proximity to the material facts of the article as was the reporter.
The Balances are two scales which hold opposing weights, held up by the hand of Justice. This concept is seen in the court system where material facts and legal arguments are evaluated, and in the financial sphere with its double-entry accounting system where every entry has a corresponding and opposite notation to a different account. And then of course in the physical world of Newtonian physics, the third law observes that “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
Much of what is described as Alternative Media News reporting is untrustworthy in detail and scope, because the internet’s set of “balances” are inherently deceitful. The primary blame for this state of affairs lies with the partiality of the propagator of the news reports itself, who presently are able to broadcast to a vast audence with little or no personal cost to themselves, and are allowed to operate behind a curtain of a false public image.
Although there are commentaries and forums that serve as restraining forces against the promotion of lies on the internet, the relationship of these websites to a writer of the original report is often just the anomalous tie provided by using the same tag words, which allows search engines to group similar topics together. The “face-to-face” relationship that exists between local newspapers and their readership base has been severed in the internet world.
Example One: The Balances of Deceit Are In His Hand
One recent example of an untrustworthy internet news publication is True Pundit, who was recently called out in an August 27, 2018, Buzzfeed expose by Craig Silverman, titled, Revealed: Notorious Pro-Trump Misinformation Site True Pundit Is Run By An Ex-Journalist With A Grudge Against the FBI.
But months earlier, someone with the pseudonym exGOPer started a thread on January 23, 2018 under Politics on elitetrader.com, titling it A Brief History of right-wing’s favorite fake news site True Pundit (loved by Russians). “exGOPer” provided an extensive numbered list of his observations. Below, I pull out a few of the interesting ones from the beginning of this thread, which are useful to our discussion on the vanishing of trustworthy historical documentation.
Under (1) exGOPer notes that True Pundit began publishing on June 9, 2016. Line (3) says, “All articles on True Pundit are published anonymously. The only person publicly associated with the website operates under a pseudonym- ‘Thomas Paine.’ (Thomas Paine, a Founding Father of the United States, was instrumental in convincing the colonies to rebel against Britain.)”. Line (4) adds that “From June 9, 2016 to June 12, 2016, it seemed clear True Pundit had been started up in a hurry-it published dozens of stories but no original reporting. More than 95% of stories were simply links to other sources, while True Pundit ‘originals’ were two-sentence news summaries.”
Line (8) states, “then, on June 12, 2016, the Orlando nightclub shooting occurred- and it seemed a switch had been turned on. True Pundit had its story…”. Line (10) observes, “It must have seemed odd to any readers of True Pundit in those first 72 hours of operation to read that the Philly publication already had ‘multiple’ sources in the Philadelphia Police Dept. and *multiple* Philly-based ‘recognized security expert’ sources-but so they said.”
(11) comments, “But Mateen” [Orlando nightclub shooting story] “changed everything. Suddenly True Pundit was publishing what it said were original (‘exclusive’) stories, all of which relied-or-claimed to-on FBI sources. Not just one source, but multiple-and not just random sources, but sources close to the Pulse investigation.” (12) “The mystery of this was dispelled almost immediately, when True Pundit wrote the following in an ‘exclusive’ on Mateen after the shooting: ‘True Pundit has folks who worked for the FBI and other agencies on staff.’ It then claimed to have ‘unique insight’ into FBI operations.”
Our last line which we shall consider, (13) states, “Whether or not True Pundit really had ex-FBI staff, no reader could possible know. But what was clear was that True Pundit was obsessed with the FBI, had-at a minimum- some basic knowledge of criminal investigation, and was very, very, angry at the current state of the Bureau.”
This thread by exGOPer, continues on, point by point, making observations about True Pundit, in an attempt to weigh in the balances the trustworthiness of the reporting of Thomas Paine, now known to be Michael D. Moore. While this forum writer posts under an anonymous name, his presentation of factual observations is detailed and astute. In contrast the writer under the pseudonym Thomas Paine has presented himself in a false light by borrowing from the historical reputation of a real person in American history. There is something defamatory and insulting about a person writing under false pretenses, by masking himself with another person’s good reputation, without the consent of that once, long ago, real flesh and blood individual.
Example Two: He loveth to Oppress
I recently ran across a YouTuber using a fake name, where I was drawn to look at his videos which he had linked, via tag words, to a particular YouTube channel which I like. I am going to call the fake name channel “X” as this channel’s content is continually both factually false and/or defamatory. Apparently this person has lost at least one channel for violating nudity standards, and seems to have received numerous strikes to his videos because of their defamatory content.
On his new channel which has few viewers, X laments, “Because they are watching me, they’ve been watching me because I used to go into chats and say shit and I see that, that is a waste of a complete waste of time to say anything in a chat opposing these people and they’re controlled chats. All you’re doing is exposing yourself to, now they know who you are, or at least your fake account. Because you can try and dox me dude, try and figure out who I am. You’re gonna have a hard time.”
Channel X did a video about a published report someone else had written on journalism and the internet. He offered his commentary and judgments without apparently even reading the report. With respect to the real name of the author of this copyrighted material, the cowardly X comments, saying, “this is by either —- or his brother, it doesn’t matter which one.”
It does not matter who wrote it??? The legal owner of the book is identified, and X has no right, without proof, to state otherwise. X continues in his nonsensical manner, “This person is saying the journalists’ enemies, so in order for you to be a journalist, right, you have to take some classes or something, you have to get a degree or something in journalism. It’s a club like the Freemasons, it’s just another club, right? And they don’t want us in their club, they don’t want us in their 1% club, you know what I mean? So for, for people on YouTube, we’re supposed to fall, you know, we need degrees in journalism before we can report on anything. That is total horseshit man, there’s plenty of people putting out good information on the internet, OK? So what does it take to get a journalist, journalism degree, I mean, what do what, what do you need exactly? What are people not- you know what I mean?”
“Because you don’t like what’s being reported because you want to keep the gatekeeping going? You know what I mean? Um, it’s bullshit man because when it comes down to it, you’re trying to control social media. That’s what this is, a set-up for future living, you know, laws, future uh regulations on free speech that’s basically what it is so you’re posing as people for free speech, but you’re really um trying to set up some regulations um, I just can’t believe people are falling for this guy, for —, for —, all these characters. I cannot believe people are falling for this shit. It’s right in your face what’s going on here….”.
Sorry Channel X, I don’t know what you mean, except that you seem to be unaware that the United States already has time tested Constitutional laws against your abuse of free speech. And what right does anyone have to alter the factual, personal history of other people?
Example Three: He Is A Merchant
Previously on August 20, 2018, I had discussed an April 21st interview by Jason Goodman of Crowdsource The Truth called Pete Santilli-FBI Informant or Framed by Hackers? In that interview Santilli commented on the use of online anonymous identities for covert operations. At the 35.32 mark, he remarked, “…it was overwhelming to me that they, that they admitted this in open court. The FBI during the Bundy Ranch quote-unquote investigation said that they had, they had over a thousand trolls in the threads, a thousand…” [Jason Goodman: “The FBI had trolls.”]..”the FBI and this is documented, the FBI had 1,000-over a thousand trolls- in the threads on anonymous accounts and they call themselves online covert investigators…” .
The astonishment expressed by Pete Santilli, regarding the use of anonymous identities by the FBI, needs to be viewed against the backdrop of his own use of false accounts to serve his personal commercial interests.
For in an audio dated November 8, 2013 which can be found at Vinnie Eastwood’s Face Book page Pete Santilli Exposed, we hear Santilli saying, “This, this list of Twitter accounts has just been stewing, okay, because I used to have at one point of time, I had like 600 Twitter accounts being manufactured and in the rotation and we had automated messaging and basically having them set up so that they didn’t look like fake accounts because they had messages going out and links and so on and so on. So that when somebody lands on it, they see that it doesn’t have like one follower and two messages. That’s a boring person, so I set up these dormant accounts and I made it look like they’re active now.”
Is there an ethical difference between setting up fake identities to covertly troll others versus using such accounts to trick persons into being directed to a profit motivated online broadcast? Anonymous identities which have the purpose of causing the disruption of the normal flow of conversation, fraud, harassment, commercial trickery, altering history and the time honored interpretation of laws are undermining the stability of our society.
At nytimes.com a January 27, 2018 article, The Follower Factory written by Nicholas Confessore, Gabriel J. X. Dance, Richard Harris and Mark Hanson, addressed the use of social media bots, by highlighting an “American company named Devumi that has collected millions of dollars in a shadowy global marketplace for social media fraud.” The authors claim, “Devumi sells Twitter followers and retreets to celebrities, businesses and anyone who wants to appear more popular or exert influence online. Drawing on an estimated stock of at least 3.5 million automated accounts, each sold many times over, the company has provided customers with more than 200 million Twitter followers, a New York Times investigation found.”
The most shocking statement in this article is that “the accounts that most resemble real people…reveal a kind of large-scale social identity theft. At least 55,000 of the accounts use the names, profile pictures, hometowns and other personal details of real Twitter users, including minors, according to a Times data analysis.” Additionally, it was asserted that “these accounts are counterfeit coins in the booming economy of online influence, reaching into virtually any industry where a mass audience- or the illusion of it-can be monetized. Fake accounts, deployed by governments, criminals and entrepreneurs, now infest social media networks.”
It would appear that in this day and age, a vast number of so called internet journalist reporters readily alter material facts, resulting in the falsification of this generation’s documentation of its national and personal histories. Years from now, this information cannot be utilized for legal or historical purposes, other than to document how modern day liars undermined American values for malicious and selfish purposes.