Gabe Hoffman vs. Zachary McQuaid aka Zack Quaid

On December 19, 2019, a lawsuit was filed in the Ontario (Canada) Superior Court of Justice as Gabriel Alan Hoffman, plaintiff vs. Zachary McQuaid, defendant.  The full complaint can be read here:  [hoffman v mcquaid dec 19 2019].

The day after Hoffman vs. McQuaid was filed, I received an email dated December 20, 2019, from Thomas Schoenberger aka Parody Lives.  This was not a private communication, as this email was also sent to Steve Outtrim, Z, and Titus Frost.  Schoenberger explained, “I have also included Mr. Outtrim and Zack Quaid, who was recently threatened by Gabe and Gabe also attempted to intimidate Zack and has now truly shown some psychopathy by impersonating a lawyer and threatening to sue Zack for a million dollars.

In truth, Gabe Hoffman had not impersonated a lawyer, for the Ontario Court document states that the Plaintiff is represented by the law firm Mason, Caplan, Roti LLP, located in Toronto, Ontario.

Damages of $1,000,000 are requested in the Complaint, for defamation, and common law harassment, intimidation, and persecution, and invasion of privacy all by means of the making, creating, publishing and posting on the internet or the world wide web malicious and false words, postings, statements, photos, blogs, videos comments, pins and depictions.”

Thomas Schoenberger’s email contained several attachments of public domain documents, and he remarked, “It’s stark evidence that there was a campaign under written by Gabe Hoffman and directed by Manuel Chavez to falsely vilify me.  The repeated attacks on me coincided with the mysterious death of Isaac Kappy and plainly, and for yet unknown reasons, Gabe Hoffman was actively choreographing how the attacks would be plotted and then carried out.”

The screenshot below shows where Schoenberger attempted to “guilt trip” me for writing factually based commentary on his activities.  I do not owe Thomas Schoenberger an apology. Rather than being gainfully employed, he has spent months moving from place to place to avoid the legal consequences of his own actions. 

Gabe Hoffman filed a defamation lawsuit against Thomas Schoenberger on October 28, 2019. Schoenberger has kept a low profile to avoid service of that lawsuit, and has been accusing others of doxing him.  His friend Wyatt Earpp in Melbourne, Australia, accused this author of doing just that.  If his whereabouts were actually known, he would have been served the legal papers from various parties which await him. The fact that this has not occurred is proof that no one has doxxed his location.

Tracking the Leopard Meroz is a Christian commentary, and as such, I am going to address the defamatory religious slurs in Zack Quaid’s internet communications, which are the basis on which he requested donations from Christians, for his personal crusade against Gabe Hoffman, and not for Christ’s sake.

The Zack Quaid YouTube channel has been removed for violating the terms of service, so I am unable to display links to his former videos, as the foundation for my observations. Thus I will be relying on the facts contained in the nine page Schedule A of the Canadian lawsuit, Hoffman vs. McQuaid, which details the Twitter and YouTube messages of Zack McQuaid.

It is notable that those defamatory messages were published by a Canadian against a citizen of the United States.

My comments on the facts contained in Schedule A do not in any way represent the plaintiff’s legal argumentation of his Complaint.

What influence did Thomas Schoenberger have on Zack Quaid’s crusade against Gabe Hoffman?

As noted earlier, Gabe Hoffman has filed separate defamation lawsuits against both Thomas Schoenberger and Zack McQuaid.

In mid January 2020, about a month after the Canadian lawsuit was filed, both Zack Quaid and Thomas Schoenberger (on his now defunct Grabbler Babe YouTube channel), announced that Schoenberger was traveling by car to Toronto from an  undisclosed location, with an entourage, which included an apparently unemployed attorney who had nothing better to do. The stated purpose of this unusual and expensive journey was to receive a package of emails from Zack Quaid.

So after a long journey, with Schoenberger showing a photo of fallen snow encountered along their route, they all arrived at last arrived in Toronto. Here is a photo which  Zack claimed was taken on his phone proving that Schoenberger was as fit as a 40 year old.

The unfit version of Thomas Schoenberger around age 59


Zack McQuaid claims that the men accompanying Schoenberger showed great respect for him, but one man had remained quiet the whole time.  After sharing a lovely dinner with this mafia-styled entourage, Zack handed over his evidence package to the Godfather, and they returned home.


The videos of Zack Quaid are strangely reminiscent of Thomas Schoenberger’s narratives

The Schedule A of Hoffman vs. McQuaid covers the Zack Quaid emails and videos from  October 12, 2019 through December 16, 2019.  I am going to pull out some of the Jews versus Christians messages, for our examination.

We first encounter a Twitter message from the @stepho_11 account which states, Christians in Soviet Union were killed by execution.  Christians in Europe converted to atheism.  Christians in USA turned into Shabbos Goyim.  Wherever the Jews go, they extract revenge upon Christianity.  Another Twitter of the same date, October 12, 2019, states, And that dirty rodent Gabe Hoffman!

Interestingly, on that same date, Thomas Schoenberger’s YouTube channel, Just a pianist, featured a photoshopped image meant as a slur against Gabe Hoffman and his capital management company. The heading states, Investigate Gabe Hoffman.

Now there are some awkward fallacies in this “history” of Jews taking vengeance against Christians which Zack McQuaid had presented in his October 12th Twitter message.  He ignores the fact that the first Christians were Jews.  Later on, the church became predominantly Gentiles. I do not know what the religious background of Zack McQuaid is, but I am personally familiar with Baptists and Protestants, and when they speak of persecution, the focus is usually on the history of the Roman Catholic Church, and not on religious or atheistic Jews.

The next day on October 13, 2019, a Zack Quaid YouTube video was published on Gabe Hoffman which references Isaac Kappy’s conflict with Gabe Hoffman, in addition to the topic of Jewish extremism and the Jewish root of pedophilia in Hollywood.  At the 1.36 mark, the statement is made, “Gabe Hoffman must be investigated for the death of Isaac Kappy.”

That latter remark mirrors Thomas Schoenberger’s public statements. Isaac Kappy was known for making defamatory statements against numerous persons, and his untimely death has become a focal point for an escalating  war of words between various persons who were acquainted with Kappy.

On October 16, 2019, a video titled Esteban, discusses “CIA Spook tied to Gabe Hoffman rumored to be Pedo protector and Jewish mobster.”, and in the October 20, 2019, video Unbecoming a Soldier, numerous allegations bring in the names of several other persons which Thomas Schoenberger has discourse with.  These allegations were directed at Esteban Trujillo de Gutierrez, a former United States Army Ranger who received a silver star, and in retirement is working on a history of the Cicada 3301 online puzzle, which involved Thomas Schoenberger.

On November 3, 2019, the Twitter account @stepho_11 remarks, “Holy shit TS.  I never saw this.  Gabe falsely accused you again.  What a Jewish terrorist.  That’s not being racist.  That’s calling a spade a spade.  In the name of Judaism, Gabe attacks Christians.  We have to stand up to this monster, all of us Christians!”

Why is Zack Quaid addressing Thomas Schoenberger, as if he is a Christian?

On January 23, 2020, I wrote an article The CROSS of the JUDAS CURSE:  Where two forces meet,  as a continuation of a previous article on the online puzzle, Cicada 3301.  In this second installment, I was moving across a philosophical territory, and introduced the relationship between the death of Jesus Christ on the cross and the Greek word stasis as where two forces meet.

An excerpt from this article in the screenshot below demonstrates that Thomas Schoenberger, despite his pretentions, is NOT a believer in the divinity of Jesus Christ, and the record of the Bible; for he denies the foundation of Christianity, which is the Resurrection. 

So if Zack Quaid is looking up to Thomas Schoenberger as an example of what it means to be a Christian, he has been greatly mislead.

On November 8, 2019, Zack Quaid mentions in a video, several names and then remarks, “Steve Outtrim believes Thomas is the main target and I think Steve is on to something.  Why, Why, is Thomas such a threat to the Satanists?” A few days later on November 12, 2019 in a video titled, I am hunted, McQuaid requests, “Fellow Christians, I need both your morals and financial blessing so that I can continue to cast our demons like Gabe Hoffman.  Please send donations to my email which is:”

Since when does a Christian need funding to speak an opinion or to pray against unholy forces?  I am beginning to wonder if this style of defamation is some sort of low level false flag operation, meant to cast aspersion against genuine Christians because of the unChristian behavior of the messengers.

A November 13, 2019, video called, An Open Secret or a murder cover up?  #GabeHoffman, states,”a Jewish terrorist named Gabe Hoffman has sent his rodent demons to attack and traumatize my family…is that what Isaac went through?”

The implication is that Isaac Kappy died as a result of murder, rather than as a suicide, and that his death had been preceded by demonic attacks issuing from Hoffman. There are those who venerate Isaac Kappy as a martyr who lost his life for exposing pedophilia in Hollywood.  And now Zach McQuaid was portraying himself as a target, just like Isaac Kappy.

The November 24, 2019, Zack Quaid video is especially disturbing as a set of allegations against several named persons.

In conclusion, Zack McQuaid has not only placed the reputation of Gabe Hoffman in a bad light, he has also set a wrong example of how Christians are to behave. The same goes for McQuaid’s mentor, Thomas Schoenberger, who likes to use the imagery of the Bible. Sooner or later both men will be held accountable for their words.  Let this serve as a cautionary warning: False weights are never to be placed in the balances of justice.









13 thoughts on “Gabe Hoffman vs. Zachary McQuaid aka Zack Quaid

  1. Thank you in anticipation of letting me post this lengthy reply. If you don’t want it here please let me know and I will post it at my own blog instead.

    There have been some major developments related to the case discussed here and the article itself in the last few days.

    The young man being sued has stated on Twitter today that he is afraid for his life after being doxxed from this blog.


    I understand that court documents are a matter of public record, and I am not trying to imply that you did something wrong. But, given that the man has expressed to you he feels his life is in jeopardy…is it really necessary to continue to publish the documents without any redaction of Personal Information?

    You are probably within your rights to publish. Doxxing law seems to be undefined in most US states, and I’ve never looked into Canada. It is your choice whether you redact information to protect people’s privacy even if there is no legal requirement.

    Do the Courts always incorporate Christian values? Or sometimes should mercy and humanity play a part in decisions of Judgement?

    When accounts with Hollywood/MainStream Media connections and reach into potentially tens of millions tweet a link to this site which is posting somebody’s home address unredacted…and then those celebrity mega-platforms follow that up with tweets encouraging their fans to “look up the building in Google Maps”…it seems to me that there is something more going on than meets the eye. Justice is not being handed solely to the Court for consideration. Instead, those who can manipulate the Court of public opinion will do so with impunity. This seems to tip the balance on the scales of justice in a way that civilization has not had to face before.

    The rich will always be able to out-psyop the poor and use [purchased?] social media platforms to dominate those with smaller followings…but that doesn’t mean they can be bullies.

    I like you JW and support what you are doing with your blog. I think we respect each other even though we have different positions on some matters. In matters of integrity, ethics, goodness, advancing the human spirit, I’d like to think that we’re on the same page: embracing this as a desirable outcome of our consciously chosen activities.

    This young man is genuinely afraid for his life and has been expressing suicidal thoughts. Perhaps someone could argue “he deserves it because he criticized a rich person online without evidence”. Which punishment is worse? The sting of a critic’s barb? Or death? Which is more just?

    It is not for you and I to decide the merits of such matters, it’s up to the Court – and this is now before a Court. These are untested waters in cyberspace. Can you stalk a victim to death, without consequence? If one published an alleged victim’s home address in a document hosted on one’s web site, and said victim later end up harmed or even dead at that location…would one’s hands be clean?

    “oh it’s just the building, not the apartment number”

    Do you know how easy it is to find a person living in an apartment building? It’s as easy as going to that building. Perhaps if one has never tried to do something like that, one doesn’t think about things like that.

    If I walk into the courthouse and sue someone and put their home address, OK, it’s a court document, that information is no longer a secret. I get that, I am not disputing it, nor attributing any blame to this site.

    If I put it out across multiple social media channels to a combined following of > 100,000 people – that is different from a regular court procedure. It’s probably a much broader audience than you’re used to with most of your posts here. The justice system was not designed to factor these kinds of influencer platforms in to concepts of “Fairness” or “due process”.

    Technological capability is butting heads with the legal frameworks that currently surround information. A fascinating time, and there are many marquee cases that can advance the legal edifice – such as Dave Sweigert’s vs Jason Goodman.

    Someone living in a $40 million house going against someone he’s already publicly defamed as allegedly “suffering from mental illness”? For what? Even if (for argument’s sake) the plaintiff is 100% in the right and the defendant is 100% in the wrong…so what? Does this advance Christian values, or Justice – something that should transcend even religion?

    Obviously Mr McQuaid can’t pay $1 million, he probably can’t even repay the filing fee – which would probably pay for a couple of minutes of Mr Hoffman’s annual property taxes. So what is this use of the Court system doing? Silencing critics? Is it going to achieve some sort of Justice when the criminal system can’t?

    This case seems like a cunning use of Information Operations where the powerful can decimate the weak without cost. The cost to the weak is ruinous, probably permanent. It may also be destructive to the lives of family and friendships around them – further heightening any mental wellness concerns.

    The cost to the powerful attacker is inconsequential. $400, for Florida. Why not sue dozens?! Does it even matter if the Plaintiff follows each of 50 cases through to jury trials? What point is being proved with this?

    Is the Plaintiff here correct, that the Defendant shouldn’t have talked smack about him online?

    I mean, not for me to judge, but for rhetorical sake let’s say yes.

    The defendant does not have $1 million dollars. He does not even have $100. He had to ask for donations from his fans just to get a Wi-Fi connection.

    Did he really do any damage? Is this lawsuit truly about an injustice, that must be made just?

    Is it right that he should be literally fearing for his life, at the mercy of a digital army of online trolls? Clowns with rap sheets and body counts. Maybe they’re associated with the Plaintiff, maybe they aren’t; maybe they are but that can’t be proven to the standard needed in a Court.

    Regardless: people are dying around investigations into child sex trafficking networks of the global elites. Isaac Kappy, Tracy Twyman, Monica Peterson, Joe Hagmann, Max Spiers, Kate Spade, Anthony Bourdain, Jeffrey Epstein, Chris Cornell, Chester Bennington, Peaches Geldof. “oh they were all LARPers”. “oh they were all suicides, just coincidences”

    Does this case you are reporting on seem just? Will the Justice System be used to deliver Justice to someone who has been unjustly wronged, and suffered terribly as a result? How will the lives of the parties be affected by this Deliverance?

    Is this a legitimate lawsuit, or stalking wrapped up in a veneer of lawfare? The powerful preying on the weak.

    I don’t know the answer myself, but I sense in you JW a kindred spirit in considering these as actually some of the most important issues of our time. Even though to 99.9% of the world this is irrelevant philosophy.

    This is not the first time in history that an artist was starving and relied on his patrons to survive, and hopefully help shield him from the wrath of a Feudal Lord parodied by his art.


    …there is not a huge history in humanity of impoverished artists being sued by wealthy Feudal Lords. I can acknowledge that perhaps I have some personal bias here; but even so, I can’t think of an example. Maybe JW or her erudite audience can think of one and share below as a reply.

    The person suing has made one of the worst investment calls of this Millenium…possibly ever. I will defend that opinion all the way to the Supreme Court if I have to, because the evidence is unquestionable. He told people to short Tesla stock at $300, as I write this is more than $800 less than a year later. A terrible stock prediction made in front of a global audience of millions of professional investors would surely damage one’s career and earnings potential infinitesimally more than some tweets and YouTube videos made by an allegedly “mentally ill” person that were seen by a handful of people.

    The Plaintiff told a mass market audience on CNBC that Tesla was about to run out of cash and be bankrupt in May 2019. Tesla ended the year with an extra $2 billion cash in the bank.

    In November 2019, this professional hedge fund manager who states in court documents that he is a frequent guest on investment shows like CNBC, went on the Defango show and made the statement that he was going “ALL IN” (a Texas Hold’em poker reference) on his short of Tesla when the price was around $350.

    (possibly this one:


    It would be hard to point to a regular CNBC guest since the channel was launched in 1989 who has been so consistently wrong on their predictions, and yet somehow still is given airtime.

    Most hedge funds operating in the industry standard manner that I am familiar with from my own career would have profited enormously from the exponential rise of TSLA stock, while managing the downside with put options. As far as I can tell from reading what is publicly available at the SEC, this fund went all in on Tesla puts and was never simultaneously long. It appears that Assets Under Management which were once worth > $300 million are now worth < $100 million and consequently no longer need to file with the SEC. Perhaps they turned these disastrous puts into cash, I have no knowledge as I can only read the public filings. They made one dated 2/14/2020 which indicated they did indeed exit their long position in Chris Cline's company Foresight Energy Partners, fortutitously before Mr Cline's unfortuitous passing on July 4 2019.

    Source: SEC Feb 14 2020

    Mr Hoffman has publicly derided Mr McQuaid for suffering from a mental illness. Whether this allegation is true or not, this is inappropriate in any circumstances; let alone in this situation where an alleged multi-millionaire is suing an unemployed person.

    Did Mr McQuaid’s videos really damage Mr Hoffman’s reputation more than his own recent humiliating public failures in his profession, made on his own volition as a celebrity to a global audience?

    If CNBC never booked Mr Hoffman again, would it be because he made one of the worst investment calls of the Millenium on their show, and appeared many times to continually promote it to millions of investors in his industry? Or because a young man in Canada made some critical YouTube videos, that a few hundred people who are not in his industry saw?

    I do not profess to be any kind of expert in the law but I definitely take a scholarly interest in it. I haven’t yet spent $1 million on lawyers in my lifetime but I’m getting darn close. As I get older my budget for this sort of thing shrinks. Once you learn enough, your efficiency skyrockets. FWIW every $100,000 you spend on lawyers gives you a lot more understanding of the law. #YMMV, but if you ever come into some money, my free advice is prioritize lawyer efficiency.

    Again, for the sake of argument…let’s say Mr Hoffman has the law on his side. So what? What then? How do his activities make the world a better place? He’s supposed to be some sort of philanthropist…right?

    We are trying to report truth while following these fascinating stories in which all the players we cover profess to themselves bringing TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. But as chroniclers of the truth, we know that is false in many cases.

    I’m not asking you to choose sides. Just to please sympathize with a young man who feels that his life is hanging in the balance over this. All you have to do is redact the address, you can get Acrobat Pro to edit PDFs if you can’t do it with Reader.

    Yours sincerely,
    Steve Outtrim

    • Steve, You are always welcome to post your opinions here. My only request with regard to comments is that one sincerely explain their position so that the reader can understand why there might be a difference of opinion. After that, the reader can make their own determination on the matter.

      • I forgot to add that I will see if I can redo the pdf to eliminate the address. I do respect privacy concerns, however, I am not so sympathetic with those who defame and place others in jeopardy from anonymous internet hideouts. This is hypocritical at the very least.

          • Steve,

            I was on my way out this morning to church when I answered your comment. Now that I am home again, I looked into whether the legal complaint address given for the defendant could be regarded as “doxxing”. Apparently the address is a large complex, and no apartment number was identified. And then I just noticed that Thomas Schoenberger published a video last night on this subject, and it seems that all of this “concern” is just the usual whining and whimpering and drama that has been ongoing for some time now.

            The defendant decided not to defend himself in court, although most certainly someone like yourself could have hired him an attorney. Thus, by choosing to default, rather than standing up for his public statements, I have decided to leave the complaint “as is”. The defendant is a full adult and responsible for his words and his actions. I attempted to warn him of the manipulations and lies of Thomas Schoenberger. Have you done that, or are you encouraging the defendant to manipulate others by exhibiting an unmanly whining?

            On February 6th I filed a criminal complaint with the FBI against an “antigovernment” individual, who I am not publically naming. I provided an inch of paperwork on that complaint. Although that antigov person is not directly tied to this issue, they have been all over the place creating problems under anonymous handles. I am getting very weary of anyone who targets others online with defamation, which in the US is unprotected speech.

            Thus if you can dissuade some of these persons from their defamation, that would be wonderful for those of us on the receiving end.

            • All this fake virtue signaling, “a poor Christian artist is sued by a wealthy Jewish financier!” is transparent. McQuaid, as is noted, decided to default by declining to respond to the court. The court document even advises him that he can seek a public defender to represent himself.

              Instead, McQuaid simply opts not to play. Declining to respond is in fact a response, and a very poor one. Denial may prove to be supremely expensive. Putting his head in the sand is not wise. But McQuaid is not in this conflict alone—he has supporters, managers, even, who manipulate him and his deteriorating life for their own malign motives.

              What are those motives? I wish that I knew. It would help make sense of this mess. It appears that antisemitism is a constant undercurrent, however, and I know where I stand on antisemitism. Steve Outtrim, for all his Christian moralizing, never once says the word. But then, I unmasked Steve Outtrim as a potential antisemite myself months ago. He denies it. But as he himself says: by their acts shall we know them.

              I say elsewhere that I am concerned about McQuaid’s poor decisions, and I am. That is not insincere manipulative virtue signaling on my part. All this fake emotion harnessed to partisan conflict is merely another dimension of an asymmetrical dispute, it is merely one more tactic, and Steve Outtrim, in this comment which throws the Christian card with such perverse gusto, is unmasked as simply another protagonist.

              People are fighting here. This is conflict. What are we fighting about? Can we agree on that much? Apparently not. It would be helpful if we could at least define the margins of this battlefield, but some reading this are immediately going to turn around and fake virtue signal over it.

              So Ms. Weaver performed a helpful service by publishing a public court document that happens to doxx one of the pugilists. Shame! Shock! Dismay! Throw victim cards! Horrendous! Did she herself commit a crime? Indeed, no. She simply advises us that others are committing crimes, and unlike many others, she is sparse with her commentary and simply points us at the public document.

              Maybe Mr. Outtrim should redirect his righteous angst against the Canadian legal system? Because we will never see him admitting that Zack McQuaid made a supremely poor decision when he decided to slander, libel and defame a wealthy financier in antisemitic terms.

              He expresses so much dismay over McQuaid’s dilemma, which McQuaid created himself through his own corrupt actions, but never do we see this great Christian recommending to McQuaid, “maybe you should get a lawyer to help craft yourself an exit out of this thing.” Outtrim, in fact, is worth multiple tens of millions of dollars. Why does this great Christian not hire a lawyer for the poor bullied ZacK McQuaid?

              Is it because Outtrim is merely an observer? Is he himself not a party to this dispute? I beg to differ. Outtrim is as complicit in this asymmetrical dust up as anyone else, his Christian charity is lacking, and he should be ashamed, using Zack McQuaid as a pawn in a conflict that Outtrim pretends not to recognize.

              One thing that I think most of us can agree upon: some protagonists in this battle are extremely creative in their choice of weapons.

              One more thing will become gradually more apparent as time passes: some who pretend to be disinterested observers on the sidelines are themselves as complicit in this absurd dispute as anyone else.

              Jacqueline Weaver should not redact a public legal document. It is not her place to do so. Her role as a disinterested observer is to make observations, even to share commentary. Not to presume to edit the primary source documents at the base of this great struggle. She is not the authoress of those documents.

              If Zack McQuaid does not want his legal address to appear on a legal document, he should do what an adult would logically do and retain a public defender who can assist him in his penurious battle over antisemitic defamation. His lawyer’s address should appear on that document. Not his.

              By refusing to engage like an intelligent person Zack in essence doxxed himself, and I decline to pity him for it.

              Outtrim, in attacking Ms. Weaver on her own blog, is manipulating McQuaid’s feigned helplessness and using it as a weapon like just another partisan participant in this absurd debacle.

              Now, pile on.

  2. Attacks by me on JW: 0
    Anti-Semitic comments made by me: 0
    Close Jewish friends of mine: 4
    Rabbis giving a blessing at my wedding: 1
    Money donated to truthers since March 2017: $0

    Why do JW & Esteban both think that I should pay for the legal defense for a person I have never met or spoken to, who lives on the other side of the world from me? Do they have any personal experience with paying other peoples’ legal bills?

    Why does Esteban challenge my Christian faith for asking someone to show compassion?

    All I asked for was for JW to redact Zack’s address, because he is in fear for his life after his home address was published on this site. Note that it is not the publishing of his address in a court document that concerns him. It is the hosting of it here, unredacted, which was then broadcast through a large social media apparatus.

    If you’ve never been doxxed yourself, it is perhaps hard to relate to what Zack is going through. However this is not just some simple Internet spat. Zack has called out the Hollywood pedo ring. People who did that over the last couple of years ALL suddenly died: Isaac Kappy, Tracy Twyman, Jenny Moore, Joe Hagmann, Chris Cornell, Chester Bennington, Anthony Bourdain, Avicii & others.

    Esteban seems to egging Zack on. It’s almost like he’s wishing for there to be another Isaac Kappy situation:

    “If he dies, oh well, he deserved it, because he slandered a rich guy” – is that who you want to be?

    Did Zack do something wrong? That is for the Court to decide, not bloggers. It seems here he is being found guilty before even getting the chance to mount a defense; and punishment is being dispensed against him already. The Court would never impose capital punishment for this crime, but the Court of public opinion sure can – if you believe it is possible to stalk someone to suicide.

    “Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place to wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, said the Lord” – Romans 12:20

  3. You corrupt, deluded, partisan jackass. “Suicide” is Zack’s word, he claims that he is not suicidal, which I am happy to hear, while you and your co-conspirators throw the term around and encourage suicidal ideation in a weak-minded minion with a psychiatric history of institutionalization. You seem to desperately hope that Zack does kill himself, as that would be ultimate ammunition in your psy-war against Gabe Hoffman. ”Pathetic” does not begin to describe you.

    You are despicable. Me egging him on? I reply when I am addressed. When the poor pathetic so sympathetic Zack asked me to leave him alone, I told him to stop tweeting @ me and I would. As long as he continues making videos referencing me and tweets about me at the behest of his marionette master Mr. Schoenberger, I will reserve the option to respond, and I will do so in ways that he will not like. The solution for the pitiable Zack McQuaid is to keep my name out of his mouth and my image out of his videos.

    Which he will never do, as So Sad Zack obeys his puppet master, Fearful Zack is an easily manipulated and programmable mind slave, antisemitic Zack obediently reproduces the transcripts and storyboards delivered to him, and he apparently does it all for chump change paid by Michael Levine at the order of Thomas Schoenberger—which you appear to abet and enable and magnify for reasons that make no sense to me.

    But then, I no longer try to understand you. I got no need to gaze into that abyss. You, too, are readily manipulated by Thomas Schoenberger, you, yourself, carry out his malign suggestions, you support his bizarre campaigns, you promote his strange conspiracy theories as there are none too weird for you. You parrot his phrases, and you defend him, contorting logic and reason. Why? I no longer try to understand. But you go ahead.

    An interesting phenomenon can be observed: when I am addressed, I generally reply. Increasingly, I am learning to ignore many mentions of me, because a particular category of garbage humans like to try to provoke me. I am supposed to suffer from “PTSD rages” and “anger issues” and I am said to consume “horse doses” of antipsychotic medications. What else? I weigh 300 lbs, I am a “CIA agent,” I engage in cocaine smuggling, human trafficking, I am addicted to opiates, consort with pedophiles and Satanists, I am trying to hijack Cicada 3301 and I engage in “financial extortion” and sundry “RICO” violations. I am sure that I am forgetting something, though it does make me laugh when Stolen Valor thieves call me “Sarge” like they think it is an insult. LOL!

    Oh! I almost forgot! I am a “warlock,” a “witch,” an “occultist,” all because someone finally noticed articles that I wrote are hosted on ResearchGate and Academia! You yourself published these spectacular insights. Such devastating research! Amazing discoveries! Crawl my Facebook accounts and my blogs! Could mine even more important nuggets to spin and misrepresent to my loss! Do carry on!

    Am I provoked? LOL! Absolutely! I am provoked to laugh! Please do continue. Do not forget to claim that I am “former DHS,” as making that allegation is not illegal, like claiming that I am a “CIA agent” can be construed to be a violation of Protection of Identities. Please! Provoke me some more! Oh—and remember to prod me with cardiac symptoms leaving me vulnerable to Coronavirus, while Bangkok gets gutted by the plague. That is a good one. You guys are amazing!

    Some of these assertions become felonies within a given context, and it pleases me that these felonies stack up with previous felonies, as the legal consequences will be severe for certain monstrous colleagues of yours. You were the one who claimed that I am implicated with Michael Aquino, insisting that I “know where his cubicle was” simply because we both were assigned to the Presidio in 1986. Yes, you are prone to simplistic thinking and bizarre leaps of logic when it serves your ideological purposes. Yes, you see Satanists and pedophiles and suspicious agendas everywhere, this is, in fact, your trademark. I love it!

    All of this will soon be changing, Steve, because the legal playing field is going to be suddenly readjusted. Some folks will not like it. in fact, I am sure that you in particular will not like it. Word to the wise. But—no need to heed me.

    You brought this all upon yourself. You are responsible for what happens to you, much like pitiable Zack is responsible for his own current legal dilemma. Make certain statements, certain results follow. Do particular things, consequences ensue. You are well aware of this fundamental dynamic, in fact, you attempt to manipulate it.

    Why should you pay for obedient Zack’s legal fees? Would that not be a Christian thing to do? You can afford it. Though I do suspect that your own legal budget may begin to mount in the foreseeable future. This will depend, of course, on what you do, and what you say, and to whom, and when. Careful, Steve! For God’s sake, be careful!

    I do think that you should pay for antisemitic Zack’s lawyers, Steve. Be kind! Compensate the poor kid for abusing him and manipulating him and maneuvering him and auto-implanting hypnotic suggestions in his fragile mind! Help him! You owe him that much! It will cost you little, and help Scared Zack big-time, and your audience will applaud! I will applaud! You do want me to applaud you, do you not? Make me clap for you! You can do it, Steve. I know that you can.

    But check with your accountant—you may soon need to defray the bail bond needs of the persuasive Svengali who whispers so effectively in your pliable mind. And as I say: the legal terrain in this dispute is liable to change soon, perhaps sooner than anyone anticipates, and that may have consequences for you in particular. Do I prognosticate? I am not the one claiming a fake history with STARGATE.

    I am many things, as you and your programmer like to say, but a fortune teller is not one of them. Am I a magician? So it is said—but not like you imagine.

    Careful with the antisemitism, Steve. I got my eye on you.


    Your dearest fan.

    • Here’s you admitting to your methadone and psychotic meds regime:

      Here’s you saying you knew where Michael Aquino’s cubicle was when you were stationed together at the Presidio:

      Here’s you admitting to sorcery:

      I won’t share the many messages I have received from Zack and friends over the last week that give me genuine concern. We are doing what we can to help him.

      • I sincerely do hope that you do help Zack.

        As for your amazing discoveries, I simply say that I “admit” to nothing, as that makes it sound as though I had something to hide. I hide nothing. And you know that. Your reprehensible tactics are repugnant to me.

        I share the details of opiate addiction because like many veterans of combat with service connected injuries, I wrestle with constant, unrelenting pain, and that requires pain management. While Thai massage, Chinese acupuncture and meditation are profoundly palliative, opiates remain optimal components for managing intractable pain.

        I talk to many veterans in comparable circumstances. I consider it an honor to be among them, and I am pleased to assist them in any way possible—and that includes sharing personal details of my own, even when those details can be cherrypicked by despicable operators like yourself and spun to my detriment. You should be ashamed of yourself, but your malignant personality is highlighted here, and we all see that you are shameless.

        I published these details on my own blog. I hold back nothing. I have, in fact, very few secrets, and no causes for regret. If you had any honesty you would acknowledge how putrid your own lack of morality is.

        I have no idea where Aquino’s cubicle was. As I recall, he was assigned to a Psychological Operations Group (POG) as a reservist on active duty at the Presidio. I am pulling these details from memory, so I could be incorrect.

        The Presidio was a military base. A relatively small one, compared to a major base like Fort Bragg or Fort Benning, but big enough that soldiers assigned to units on opposite sides of the base would never encounter one another. I never met Aquino, never saw him, indeed at the time I did not know that he existed.

        I presume that Aquino had a cubicle, as that was the typical scenario for staff officers assigned to units like the POGs. Again, this is pulled from memory, so I may be incorrect, but at that time, 1986, Aquino would have been a senior Major or a relatively junior Lieutenant Colonel. A staff officer, not a commander pushing troops. Our paths never crossed.

        Aquino was a graduate of the Q Course, but as he was a Psyops officer, we lived in different worlds, we moved in different circles. After completing training at the JFK Special Warfare Center & School, I was assigned to an ODA, an A Team, and before I migrated into Special Forces, I was assigned to the 2d Ranger Battalion—one of the most storied units in the US Army. My background was very different from Aquino’s, my unclassified military training is posted on my Facebook page and on my LinkedIn profile, though you lack the expertise to understand it, not to mention the context to ever appreciate it.

        I cannot imagine that anyone from the special operations community will ever interpret it for you. This little exchange illustrates in indisputable terms how corrupt you are. I will certainly never enlighten you. Watching you twist in ignorance is simply too satisfying.

        It is indicative that you contort statements like this and attempt to use them like a shiv stabbed between my ribs. You are truly disgusting and vile, and your personal corruption may eclipse Schoenberger’s—and that is unspeakable. He at least can be diagnosed as a sociopath. What word describes you? I come up completely empty. You leave me speechless.

        I struggle for words to describe you. “Pathetic” does not encompass the revulsion that I feel for you. I do not think that I ever despised anyone as I despise you. You are indescribably despicable.

        The word sorcery never passes my lips, and you know it. I am not a witch, nor a warlock, words that you applied to me, and you know it. You are so intent on the micro politics of personal destruction that no lie, no exaggeration, no twisted interpretation is off-limits to you—and you represent yourself as a Christian!

        You are truly pathetic, and I am glad to understand how fiendish you are. Most of all, I am grateful that your personality is on such detailed display in this exchange.

        If you do one thing, I hope that you do indeed take care of helpless Zack. The way that you manipulate him and abuse him is inexcusable. People like him are not weapons to be used and discarded when they grow blunt from misuse! I wish that I could believe that you will do the right thing for that idiot, but you are epically untrustworthy, manifestly selfish, and indisputably bent.

        Most of all, I hope that you continue with your present associations and your current activities. That will see you inevitably ensnared in legal nightmares of your own devising, and I will relish watching you slowly self-destruct.

        Keep it up, you snake. I have a feeling that your legal bills are going to get very pricey indeed. You deserve every evil condemnation that befalls you. You are bringing it all down upon your own head.

        I just wish that I had the means to destroy you legally all myself. Unfortunately I will have to enjoy that spectacle from the cheap seats, though you can assume that I will assist in any legal way possible.

  4. Pingback: Open Letter to Prepper Kitty Intel (A Julianne Burke/Elizabeth Vering Mirror)

  5. Pingback: Responding to Citizen Zone Defamation Show | Burners.Me: Me, Burners and The Man

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.