Two Lawsuits That Passed Each Other Like Ships In the Night: One was a criminal indictment and the other a civil fraud case; Both involved wire fraud and Black Ops blarney

Ships that pass in the night, and speak each other in passing, only a signal shown, and a distant voice in the darkness; So on the ocean of life, we pass and speak one another, only a look and a voice, then darkness again and a silence.  Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

At 6:30 a.m. on October 15, 2015, the FBI served Wayne Shelby Simmons of Annapolis, Maryland, with an arrest warrant for falsely claiming that he had worked for the CIA for 27 years.  In addition to being indicted for major fraud against the government, wire fraud, and a firearms offense, counts six and seven (wire fraud) charged that he had also defrauded his girlfriend of $125,000 in a bogus investment scheme.

Wayne Shelby Simmons was formerly a Fox News commentator based on his fraudulent credentials as a CIA agent.

Wayne Simmons pleaded guilty on April 29, 2016, and was sentenced to 33 months incarceration in a federal prison, plus three years of supervised release, the forfeiting of two firearms,  $175,612 in criminal proceeds, and ordered to pay  restitution to his victims.

The arrest in October of 2015 was widely publicized at the time, and I can recall talking with a professional journalist about the Wayne Simmons indictment, and comparing him to another man with similar unvetted credentials; Wayne Willott aka W the Intelligence Insider, who most recently was passing himself off as Juan O’Savin on Field McConnell’s Abel Danger program.   had been promoted on the Hagmann Report as America’s James Bond; yet his credentials as CIA had never been vetted by the public due to the anonymous cover he was provided by Alternative News Media programs.

In contrast to W the Intelligence Insider, Wayne Simmons was openly bold in showing his name and face in public appearances, and was able to pass off his false credentials on numerous persons and organizations who did not bother to investigate his resume.  As he gained greater prominence on FOX news as a CIA Insider guest analyst, it allowed him to attempt to obtain work on legitimate government projects.

Around the same time as the Wayne Simmons arrest, another con artist was dealing with a civil fraud lawsuit against him

About six weeks after the Simmons arrest, on December 1, 2015, Thomas Schoenberger was providing a Deposition for the Isabelle Gauthier civil lawsuit in which the Complaint against him included allegations of breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, fraud by concealment, conversion, and breach of fiduciary duty.

As with Simmons, Schoenberger had defrauded a woman which he had a personal relationship with.  Likewise, Schoenberger had received around $400,000 via a bank money transfer for what was eventually revealed to be a bogus investment scheme; those two elements constitute wire fraud.

Thomas Schoenberger also told stories to many people of his involvement in clandestine government operations connected to the Department of Defense and the Pentagon.  Apparently the arrest of Wayne Simmons did not deter Schoenberger from engaging in internet “black ops”,  for in mid-2016, a mysterious Pentagon Insider ANON showed up on Jim Blake’s YouTube channel.  Jim Blake is a good friend of Schoenberger, and has featured another acquaintance of Schoenberger’s, former CIA officer Robert David Steele, as well as sovereign citizen Anna Von Reitz, who fraudulently calls herself a Judge.

The statute of limitations for mail and wire fraud is five years [U. S. C. §3282] and the transaction which represents wire fraud in the Gauthier case, transpired over six years ago, and is now beyond the reach of that criminal statute.  As a reminder of the seriousness of federal wire fraud charges, fines are capped at $250,000 and imprisonment is not to exceed 20 years.

According to the Isabelle Gauthier vs. Thomas Schoenberger civil lawsuit, “On June 19, 2014, in reliance on Schoenberger’s agreements, representations, and promises, Plaintiff caused to be transferred 300,000€ (equivalent to about $408,240.00 in U. S. dollars on that date) from her bank to a Wells Fargo account held by Schoenberger.  Thereafter, Schoenberger made numerous representations to Plaintiff, orally and in writing, about her interest in the Oasis Project, her investment, and the benefits she was to receive therefrom.”  [Gauthier v. Schoenberger, Case BC564759 November 24, 2014 ORIGINAL]

This lawsuit was filed on November 24, 2014, and it was not until more than a year later, on December 1, 2015, that Thomas Schoenberger gave testimony, under oath, in a Deposition to the Plaintiff’s attorney, Jeffrey Wittenberg.

Thomas Schoenberger at a protest. Date is unknown.

One of the things which became apparent is that the defendant had converted Gauthier’s monies to his personal use, which included wasting it upon a losing streak at  casino slot machines.

A number of the questions asked by the attorney taking Schoenberger’s Deposition stemmed from paragraph 4 of the Complaint, which had declared, “Plaintiff and Schoenberger previously had a personal relationship, but were never married.  When they met, and through the course of their relationship, Schoenberger told Plaintiff that, among other things, he was a music composer, an inventor, a well-connected international businessman, and worked with the government of the United States with secret dealings of a confidential nature in Iraq.  Based on, and without limitation, the matters alleged in this complaint, as well as having been directly so informed by third parties, Plaintiff is informed and believes, and that basis alleges, that apart from being a composer, Schoenberger’s statements relating to his work and dealings were false and misleading, and were designed to cause Plaintiff to develop trust and confidence in Schoenberger.”

That other “ship in the night” lawsuit 

It was on October 14, 2015, that United States of America v. Wayne Shelby Simmons was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division. [USA v Wayne Simmons]

The criminal indictment against Simmons involved major fraud against the government, but for purposes of comparison with the civil lawsuit against Schoenberger, we are primarily concerned with two aspects:  wire fraud and black ops blarney.

Counts 6-7 (Wire Fraud)  of the Simmons indictment state that “From in or about November 2011 through in or about December 2013, in the Eastern District of Virginia and elsewhere, the defendant WAYNE SHELBY SIMMONS knowingly devised and intended to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud victim E. L. and to obtain money and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises.”

“It was part of the scheme and artifice to defraud that: a. the defendant falsely represented to E. L. that he was a former agent of the CIA, and used his supposed affiliation with the CIA to bolster his credibility with E. L.; (b). the defendant falsely represented to E. I. that he was involved in real estate investment projects and offered E. L. an opportunity to make a $125,000 investment…”

The press release CIA Impostor Sentenced to Prison for Fraud issued by the Department of Justice on July 15, 2016, stated “Wayne Shelby Simmons, 62, of Annapolis, Maryland, a former Fox News commentator who has false claimed he spent 27 years working for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), was sentenced today to 33 months in prison for major fraud against the government, wire fraud, and a firearms offense.  Simmons was also ordered to serve three years of supervised release, to forfeit two firearms and $175,612 in criminal proceeds, and to pay restitution to his victims.”

“Wayne Simmons is a fraud,” said Dana J. Boente, U. S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.  “Simmons has no military or intelligence background, or any skills relevant to the positions he obtained through his frauds.  He is quite simply a criminal and a con man, and his fraud had to potential to endanger national security and put American lives at risk in Afghanistan.”

Regarding the funds he obtained through wire fraud and misrepresentation from his girlfriend, he simply spent her funds on himself.

So we have two cases, one civil, and the other criminal, that involve wire fraud, bogus investment opportunities to women, and false credentials. Both men pocketed the money gained by deceit and spent it upon themselves.  One received an out-of-court settlement judgment of $400,000, and the other, incarceration in a federal prison.  Although the prison sentence for Simmons involved other counts involving major fraud against the government, it is interesting that the Grand Jury included the $125,000 fraud against an individual to be in violation of Title 18, U. S. C. §§ 1343 and 2.

How has Thomas Schoenberger represented himself to various associates?

Steve Outtrim of website, published on June 22, 2019, an article titled Latest Weapon in the InfoWar:  Data Maps. Outtrim stated:

Months ago, Esteban Trujillo began interviewing associates of Cicada 3301, and publishing the results on his website.  After I had written an article referencing Cicada 3301, Trujillo questioned my reference to a statement regarding Bruce C. Clarke, Jr. as being one of the purported founders of Cicada 3301, saying that he could not find any forensic evidence to support that assertion.

Here is what Thomas Schoenberger stated in a December 18, 2018, legal Petition against the Elsebeth Nellsen Schoenberger Trust, in the Superior Court of Napa.  In his Amended Petition, item 7, Schoenberger stated, “In 2005, Thomas met his parents in Vienna and introduced them to Bruce Cooper Clarke, former Deputy Director of the CIA.  Bruce was Wolfgang’s Godfather and a close personal friend of Thomas.  Bruce never told them exactly who he was, but they developed a close friendship.”

So Schoenberger has claimed to have had a close personal relationship with CIA research director Bruce C. Clarke, Jr. and further in the same Amended Petition, in item 22, he declared, “On Valentine’s Day 2011, Thomas went to see Elsebeth to give her a card and some chocolate.  He had been contacted by the Pentagon for an operation in Afghanistan.

He added, “Thomas told Elsebeth that Faranak might also be going.  Thomas indicated that he could not discuss details with her, but asked if Elsebeth could take care of Wolfgang for a week, if necessary.  Elsebeth agreed to watch her grandson.  Although Thomas cannot provide details of his assignment, both Faranak and his friend, well known movie producer, Warren Zide, were involved, and can testify to that fact.  A week later Elsebeth contacted Thomas, angry.  She claimed that Thomas was, “making the whole thing up.”  Thomas was shocked and in wonder that Elsebeth did not sound like the mother he knew.  Elsebeth admitted talking with Steve, whom convinced her Thomas was crazy.”

As will be seen later on in this article, when Thomas Schoenberger provided his 2015 Deposition in the Gauthier lawsuit, which was three years earlier than the 2018 lawsuit against his late mother’s trust, the only names he directly provided in connection with the April 2011 government operation was Bijan Kian, attorney Beverly Saxon Leonard, and Seval Oz.

In the same June 2019, Steve Outtrim article which mentioned that the former CIA Director of Research, Bruce C. Clarke, Jr. was the founder of Cicada 3301, and added that Thomas Schoenberger had worked for the Pentagon, he also stated this opinion:

In another article, LARPWars Part 2-Moving the Goalposts, published on on July 28, 2019, Steve Outtrim provides this information on Thomas Schoenberger:

Other witnesses to Thomas Schoenberger’s discussions of his black ops world

In a December 2015 Deposition for the Gauthier lawsuit, Brian Weiner, who had interacted with Schoenberger in a business capacity, was asked by attorney Jeffrey Wittenberg as to whether “Thomas Schoenberger ever told you he had worked with the military in any way”.  Weiner replied on pages 110-113,  that it was intimated that Schoenberger was “working for a triple letter organization inside the United States” and that he had been part of “Black Ops”, “special ops”, and had worked for the Department of Defense.

One of Thomas Schoenberger’s former girlfriends, known by the internet handle  Elizabeth Vering, used various social media platforms to viciously defend Schoenberger’s words and actions against anyone who questioned his credentials.

In one lengthy comment to Samizdat, she said in part, “Nor has TS ever been or claimed to have been military.  He was a DoD asset and embedded with military at times.  He was also wounded overseas far worse that you ever were AFAIK, multiple times.  Come to think of it, that should be verifiable with medical records, but that’s not anywhere near the top of anybody’s priority list right now.”  

So when, where and how was Schoenberger wounded overseas as a DoD agent?

Let’s review the December 1, 2015, Thomas Schoenberger Deposition for the Isabelle Gauthier vs. Thomas Schoenberger lawsuit, and see if he explains when he was  wounded overseas multiple times, as a DoD asset, embedded with the military.

The questioning was done by the Plaintiff’s attorney, Jeffrey Wittenberg, and on page 31, line 10, we read:

Q.  Let me rephrase the question.  Did you ever serve in the military?

A.  As a professional soldier?

Q.  Well, I’m going to let you tell us how you think you served in the military, if you’ve served in the military in any capacity.

A.  I think it’s a broad question.  I think that if you say did I–did I serve in any fashion for The Pentagon?  Is that what you’re asking?

Q.  So, do you understand what the military is?

A.  Yes.

Q.  Okay. Have you ever served in the Army?

A.  No.

Q.  Have you ever served in the Air Force?

A.  No. Or the Navy.

Q.  Never served in the Navy, correct?

A. No.

Q.  And you’ve never served in the Marines?

A.  No.

Q. Okay. Is there any branch of the military in which you served?

A.  The military is presided over by The Pentagon.  I want to make it very clear what you’re asking.  I’m wondering if you can rephrase the question.

Q.  Did you–let’s ask about The Pentagon.  Did you work at any time as an employee in The Pentagon?

MR. PARMLEE:  Objection.

WITNESS:  Not as–

MR. PARMLEE:  Vague as to “employee”.  You can answer the question.


Q.  What was your relationship with The Pentagon, if any?

A.  I was charged with putting together a program that was going to be the basis for clandestine activities near the border of Iran.

Q.  Okay.  When did this charge first occur?

A.  Early 2011.

Q.  And did you have written correspondence with The Pentagon about this?

A.  Yes.

Q.  Do you have that written correspondence in your possession, custody or control?

A.  No.  I have only one thing that I have given to Mr. Parmelee.  (Page 33, line 8)

Page 33, line 20

Q.  So what is the document you gave to your attorney?

A.  The document explains how myself and another individual were going to meet with the Governor of the province of a place near the border of Iran with an idea of doing a concert.  But it’s more complicated than that.  There were 17 nations involved.  So if you ask me if I was a professional soldier, Mr. Wittenberg, no.  If you ask me if I was involved in operations that had to do with national security, the answer is yes.  Furthermore, I will also reveal to you that I didn’t get paid and I wasn’t looking to get paid.

Q.  Did you ever go to–on this mission–this clandestine mission you’re describing?

A.  I aborted the mission.

Tracking the Leopard Meroz:  An unpaid volunteer for an operation involving 17 nations has the authority to abort an overseas mission which was to serve as a cover for a Pentagon approved clandestine activities near the border of Iran?  What level of security clearance was granted an unpaid volunteer, that he is allowed to discuss this mission publicly?

Q.  Okay, And when did you abort the mission?

A.  June 10, 2011.

Q.  Okay.

A.  18 days later Taliban hit where we would have been.  Six–two or three with RBG’s and then three with grenades.

Q. And what did you do to abort the mission?  Let me rephrase.  How did you go about aborting the mission?

A.  I told my teammates that Tali had–or Taliban had found out about us.  I was communicating with things–with people that I knew, and I had figured out that there had been loose lips.  So, they–we were going to be scheduled to stay at the Intercon Hotel in Kabul.  And that was cancelled.  And on June 28, 2011, a wedding party that had rebooked was blown up by six Taliban.

Q.  What were the names of the team members you’re describing?

A.  I’m not at liberty to divulge that because that’s, you know–

Q.  Who is the contact you had at the Pentagon?

A. Am I allowed to–because that’s a hard one to do.  You know, I think–

MR. PARMALEE:  You are under oath and–Can we take a quick break?  It’s up to you.

THE WITNESS:  I’m not trying to be–

MR. WITTENBERG:  I don’t think we need a break over this.


Q.  Either you have a name for me or you don’t.  Do you–you’re telling a story about a clandestine mission where you were going to play music in Afghanistan, but you’re not giving a single name of any person involved with you, you won’t tell us or show us the document that you claim to have.  (Page 36, line 6)

(Page 36, line 21)

Q.  So this is relatively straightforward.  Do you have any contact name at The Pentagon with whom you were communicating?

A.  The person is no longer at The Pentagon.  The person’s name is Bijan, B-i-j-a-n, Kian, K-i-a-n.

Q.  When was the last time you communicated with this individual?

A.  2011

Q.  And did you communicate by telephone or email or both?

A.  I don’t remember.

Q.  Other than this clandestine mission you’re telling us that you were–is it correct that you were approached by The Pentagon to go on this clandestine mission you’re telling us about?

A. Uh-huh.

Q.  Okay.  And when did they approach you?  Do you recall the date?

A.  Early spring in 2011.  The-

Q.  So, approximately April?

A.  Yes.  Mr. Wittenberg, here’s what I’m going to ask you.  I am more than happy to give you secondary parties of people who are our teammates.  But if you’re going to try to contact Mr. Bijan Kian, I think a better approach rather than doing that is I had another lawyer at the time who has documentation that was–she was not only a witness to what was going on, but she actually provided legal counsel for a second member of our team. (Page 38, line 2)

(Page 38, line 19)

Q.  So other than this clandestine operation you were asked to go on in 2011, have you done any other service for the military?

A.  Not for the military.

Q.  Okay.  Have you ever conducted any business outside of the United States?

A.  What do you mean “conducted business”?  Because, as Ms. Gauthier can tell you, I was concerned that ISIS was metastatising and would end up going into Europe to do soft terrorism and then coming into America to do soft terrorism.

Q.  And when did you begin this–What would you call this work that you’re talking about?  Would you call it antiterrorism work that you were doing?

A.  Counter-terrorism work.  But essentially–

Q.  Were you doing it for yourself on your own?

A.  No.  I was attempting to do it as a–for humanitarian reasons, but also saying you can’t just have–you just can’t do a 501-c3, you have to have a network that will not only pay for weapons and training, but also I felt Turkey was doing nothing.  I was aware that Turkey was supplying ISIS with oil.  I was looking at-

Q.  When did your start this work you’re now talking about?

A.  2014.

Q. Approximately what month?

A.  January.

Q.  So in January 2014 this is an idea you had, correct?

A.  Actually even earlier.

Q.  Okay.

A.  Late 20–November 2013.

Q.  Okay. And what evidence do you have of any of the work that you were doing on this counter-terrorism project?  Do you have any writings?

A.  Yeah, I think I have writings on it.

Q.  What do you have?

A.  Notes.

Q. Your own personal notes that you took?

A.  Yeah.  I met with–with Kurdish resistance fighters in Turkey.

Q.  So you traveled to Turkey in 2014?

A. Yeah.  (Page 40, line 25)

(Page 43, line 18)

Q.  So, when is–were you ever in Iraq?

A.  No.

Q.  Okay. Were you ever in Iran?

A.  No.

Q.  Were you ever in Afghanistan?

A.  No. I planned to be.

Q.  Did you ever work for the U. S. Government other than your–what you’ve already told us about your clandestine mission with The Pentagon?

A.  No.  The whole point of what I was doing with ISIS was going to be brought to the U. S. Government saying, “This is what I’ve done.”  You know, I wanted their involvement.  But, no.

Q.  Okay.  So let me just try to summarize this.  You were never an employee of the U. S. Government, an employee being somebody who is paid a salary to work, right?  As a Pentagon person who goes to work on a daily basis?

A.  Yes.

Q.  You were never employed by the Pentagon; is that correct?

A.  To be specific, I was not employed.  They asked me to volunteer.

Q.  Okay.  And that was the only time you ever worked with the U. S. Government was the clandestine mission in–regarding, I guess, Afghanistan 2011, correct?

A.  Yes. The only time that they’ve asked me to volunteer.  (Page 44, line 23)

(Page 409, line 9)

Q.  Okay.  Were you ever with the Department of Defense?

A.  Yeah.  That’s who I served under with the operation that was aborted.

Q.  I’m sorry.  What?

A.  That’s who I was working with with an operation–in the operation that was ultimately aborted June 28, 2011.

Q.  You’re referring to the Pentagon?

A.  I’m referring to Pentagon and Department of Defense.

On December 2, 2015, Jeffrey Wittenberg, attorney for plaintiff Isabelle Gauthier, deposed Linda Barrett, who was Thomas Schoenberger’s landlady and girlfriend.

(Page 91, line 11)

Q.  Okay, “And is just doing what he has to do to support us, like going to Syria and Iraq.”  Has he ever told you he went to Iraq?

A.  Yes, he has.  Well, he told me he went to Syria, he went to Bosnia or he fought in Bosnia or something.

Q.  So he fought in Bosnia?

A.  Yeah.

Q.  In the military?

A.  Well, he didn’t fight over there.  he went over there on some special op.

Q.  For the government?

A.  Yeah.

Q.  When did he actually say it occurred that he went to fight in special ops?

A.  While he was honeymooning.

Q.  Oh, you mean in 2014?

A.  Yeah.

Q.  When he was gone for three weeks he told you–

A.  Yeah.

Q.–he was off in the Middle East–

A. Right.

Q.  –at special ops?

A.  Yeah. For two weeks.  And then I guess she talked him into staying longer.  So I got to worry for a week.

Q.  But that was about July, August of 2014?

A.  Yeah. I think so. Yeah.  It was July.  He left, came back in August.

Q.  And he said I was away in the Middle East fighting special ops, right?

A.  Right.  No.  He didn’t say special ops then.  He said he was over there trying to help the Iraqi people or something or to stop ISIS, I think. 

Why no mention of being wounded multiple times overseas while on a DoD mission?  Thomas Schoenberger has displayed no shyness in disclosing that he suffers from porphyria aka the Vampire’s disease, a head wound that made him a musical genius, seizures, a bite by a brown recluse spider, a recent fall that required 40 stitches in his shoulder, pneumonia, covid-19…Perhaps Thomas Schoenberger was wounded multiple times in an overseas PSYOP Mind War battle?

One last oddity between CIA impostor Wayne Simmons and Pentagon ANON Thomas Schoenberger

Of interest in the Wayne Simmons story is that Kent Clizbe, a former CIA officer and intelligence contractor,  recognized that Simmons was a fraud, and began his own  investigation into his credentials.  This fascinating story is told by Alex French in his March 1, 2016, New York Times Magazine article, The Plot to Take Down A Fox News Analyst.

In that detailed account, an interesting anecdote was told about “M”, Clizbe’s former CIA boss who served as a high-ranking Senior Intelligence Service Officer.  M. realized that Simmons was a fraud and he  “alerted Paul Vallely, the retired two-star general who founded Stand Up America….  Vallely met Simmons through Fox News and invited him to serve on the Citizen’s Commission on Benghazi, a collection of military brass, CIA officers and politicians determined to uncover the truth about the September 2012 embassy attack in Libya.  M. remained suspicious when Vallely failed to respond after a month.

As many are aware, in 1980, Vallely, was a Colonel and Commander of The Psychological Group, U. S. Army Reserve, located at the Presidio of San Francisco, California, and he co-wrote a publication with Major Michael A. Aquino, titled, From PSYOP to Mindwar:  The Psychology of Victory. [see pdf: from psyop to mind war aquino and vallely].

Last year “Mind War Comedian”  Dan Cromer aka Leppo interviewed Michael Aquino on his YouTube channel, and one of the participants in that conversation was Thomas Schoenberger.

So Wayne Simmons knew the two star general Paul Vallely, and Thomas Schoenberger enjoyed engaging in a public interview of  Michael Aquino.

Just two ships passing, only a signal shown, in the blackness of the night.











Gabe Hoffman vs. Thomas Schoenberger: Documents 33-35

On August 14 and August 20, 2020, Documents 33 and 34-35 were filed respectively in the Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit, in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, in the Gabe Hoffman vs. Thomas Schoenberger lawsuit.

Document 33 (2 pages)  Non Party, Ashley Reagan Early’s Motion for Protective Order

Hoffman vs Schoenberger Doc 33 814 2020

Document 34  (14 pages)  Defendant’s Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief for Suppression Gag Order

Hoffman vs Schoenberger Doc 34 820 2020

Document 35  (3 pages)  Addendum to Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief

Hoffman vs Schoenberger Doc 35 820 2020

Thomas Schoenberger: 2011 Napa County, Superior Court of California Criminal Complaint

The People of the State of California vs Thomas Andrew Schoenberger Criminal Complaint 2011 CR155849, Superior Court of California, County of Napa

Thomas Schoenberger Criminal Complaint 2011 Napa CA

Thomas Schoenberger Criminal Complaint Minute Order May 2011

Thomas Schoenberger Criminal Complaint Plea Form

Thomas Schoenberger Criminal Complaint 2011 Probation Order

Thomas Schoenberger Criminal Complaint 2015 Violation of Probation

Thomas Schoenberger Criminal Complaint 2015 plea form

Manuel Chavez III Protection Order Against Thomas Schoenberger

Manuel Chavez III made reference to his protection order against Thomas Schoenberger today in a video.  For the sake of clarity, I am publishing a copy of that here, so readers can understand what it encompasses.

manuel chavez III protection order against Thomas Schoenberger


Beth Bogaerts vs. Thomas Schoenberger, Trevor Fitzgibbon, Manuel Chavez & Michael Levine

On March 16, 2020, a Complaint for fraud, negligence, promissory estoppel, breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, extortion in violation of penal code §518, Et. Seq., civil harassment in violation of code of civil procedure §527.6, and declaratory and injunctive relief, was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles-Central District as Case No. 20STCV10636, Beth Bogaerts vs. Thomas Schoenberger, et. al.

The Complaint (16 pages) March 16, 2020

Bogaerts Complaint 316 2020

Declaration of Beth Bogaerts  (40  pages)  April 23, 2020

Bogaerts Declaration 423 2020

Declaration of Beth Bogaerts  (89 pages)  July 7, 2020

Bogaerts Declaration 707 2020

Thomas Schoenberger:

Defendant Thomas Schoenberger’s Limited and Special Appearance for the following purposes:  (I)  Motion to Quash Service of Process  (II)  Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction  (2 pages)  June 29, 2020

Bogaerts Motion to Dismiss Thomas Schoenberger 629 2020

Order on Court Waiver  (3 pages)  June 29, 2020

Bogaerts Order on Court Fee Waiver Schoenberger 629 2020

Court Minute Order (1 page)  July 6, 2020

Bogaerts Minute Order 706 2020

Certificate of Mailing (1 page)  July 6, 2020

Bogaerts Certificate of Mailing Schoenberger 706 2020

Trevor Fitzgibbon:

Proof of Service  (3 pages)  July 7, 2020

Bogaerts Proof of Service Trevor Fitzgibbon 707 2020

Request for Court Judgment  (2 pages)  July 7, 2020

Bogaerts Request for Entry of Judgment Trevor Fitzgibbon 707 2020

Court Judgment Default (2 pages)  July 8, 2020

Bogaerts judgment default Trevor Fitzgibbon 708 2020

Michael Levine:

Proof of Service (3 pages)  June 10, 2020

Bogaerts Proof of Service attorneys for Michael Levine 610 2020



Day 1,049 of the Robert David Steele vs. Jason Goodman lawsuit: Wild Conspiracy Theories and Threats of Sanctions

On July 15, 2020, the Court heard discussions in the Robert David Steele et. al. vs. Jason Goodman, et. al. defamation lawsuit.

That lawsuit was filed almost three years ago, on September 1, 2017, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division, as case number 3:17-cv-00601-MHL.

When the original complaint was filed against Jason Goodman of Crowdsource the Truth, Patricia Negron, and Queen Tut, (later identified as Susan A. Lutzke), the asking price was $18 million.  The Amended Complaint raised the ante several million; but now that almost 3 years has passed, Jason Goodman claims that Robert David Steele is willing to settle with him for $500,000.

Steele and Negron recently reached a private settlement. In the case of Queen Tut, she declined to answer the Complaint, and was found in default.

Trial is scheduled for August 11-13, 2020, unless Steele and Goodman come to terms in a private settlement.

According to Document 204 representing a Summary of the July 15th  hearing, matters were taken under advisement, parties were to file detailed Table of Contents by Friday at noon, and the hearing will be continued to July 23, 2020 at 10 a.m.

On July 2, 2020, thirteen days prior to the July 15th hearing, Document 196 included this warning:

Do I detect a hint of sarcasm in referencing Steele as “a self-declared Nobel Peace Prize nominee”?

The honorable United States District Judge M. Hannah Lauck has had her patience repeatedly tested by the participants in this lawsuit. When a Judge uses the word obstreperous, i.e. noisy and difficult to control, that is a clear warning that the Court is seriously considering sanctions.

For example, the Court declared in a July 2, 2020, Memorandum Opinion (Doc. 196), “Having invoked the power of a federal court to launch suit, an embarred attorney such as Mr. Biss is expected to meet all court deadlines as directed, especially  when interacting with a pro se defendant.  This quibbling over electronic format is obstreperous and a waste of judicial resources.  A self-declared Nobel Peace Prize nominee such as Steele, (Compl. ¶1), should be able to resolve these discovery differences, especially with counsel governing the process.” [bolding added].

“In the event that the Parties cannot reach agreement, both Parties will face sanctions as specified below.  Given the breakdown in communication between the Parties on such a fundamental matter, the Court will deny the Motion to Compel and declines to award attorney’s fees to Plaintiffs for their costs incurred in responding to the Motion to Compel.”

Thomas Schoenberger is named, among others, in a Jason Goodman conspiracy theory 

On page 11 of Document 196, Judge Lauck mentions that “In his Motion to Disqualify, Goodman states that the supposed conspiracy involved “[Steele], [Mr.] Biss, Negron, Webb, Sweigert, Chavez, S[c]hoenberger, Cornwell, Holmseth and others.” (Mot. Disqualify 14.)  Given the number of other individuals with knowledge of the conspiracy who Goodman could call to testify, Mr. Biss’s testimony likely would be “cumulative and add little to the other evidence” and is therefore “substantially less than necessary.”

Continuing, Judge Lauck states, “The Court does not discount the serious ethical violation Mr. Goodman’s submission raises.  But at this state of the litigation, Goodman has not met his heavy burden of demonstrating that Mr. Biss would prove a necessary witness at trial.  The Court will therefore deny the Motion to Disqualify.

Footnote 10 to the above statement says,

What all of  this references is Jason Goodman’s statement that Mr. Biss “engaged in unethical conduct by participating in the formulation and execution of a plan to bring multiple civil lawsuits against [Goodman] in jurisdictions around the United States.” (Id.8.)”.

“In support of this scheme, Mr. Biss allegedly paid an individual, Manuel Chavez III, to ‘produce false evidence against [Goodman] and to supply this evidence to [Mr.] Biss for use in this instant legal matter.”  (Id.)  Goodman claims Chavez ‘approached [Goodman] volunteering to provide emails,’ several of which Goodman attaches to the Motion to Disqualify.  (Id 10.) One of these emails reveals a communication between Plaintiff Steele and Chavez, with Steele telling Chavez, ’email to [Mr. B]iss by tomorrow 0900 eastern detailing what you have collected that connects Goodman to Brock and Arnon Milchan.  [F]eel free to tell him you want to support my case in return for a percentage.’ (Mot. Disqualify Ex. C ‘October 22, 2017 Email,’ ECF No. 165-3.)”.

This plot to extort money and chill the speech of broadcast  journalist Jason Goodman of Crowdsource the Truth is noted in the screenshot below:

For further reading of Document 196, see [ rds vs goodman doc 196 702 2020].

Goodman seeks Relief from Judgement or Order by explaining how his conspiracy theories have come to life

On July 7, 2020, Document 198 [rds vs goodman doc 198 707 2020] was filed by defendant Jason Goodman seeking “relief with good cause and based on information discovered after July 2, 2020.  This new information (bolding added) causes Defendant to believe that evidence already in the record indicates fraud on the court by the opposing party coordinated and overseen by Counsel for Plaintiff Steven Scott Biss.  This new information causes Defendant to believe Mr. Biss would be a necessary witness whose testimony would touch all relevant matters in this action and which no other party or non-party could provide.”

On page 2, Jason Goodman explained, “Defendant believes this lawsuit was a preconceived plan to use military intelligence and asymmetric warfare tactics in the legal system, social media and real-world scenarios to extort money from Defendant.  Defendant believes Plaintiff enlisted Steve Scott Biss (Mr. Biss) to orchestrate this conspiracy and that Mr. Biss will be a necessary witness whose testimony will touch every relevant matter in the Amended Complaint.”

Jason Goodman then describes to the Court, the military intelligence backgrounds of  Robert David Steele [USMC, CIA, MCIA] and attorney Biss who received a BA in American History and Military Intelligence at Princeton University.

Item 4 of Document 198 states, “Defendant believes the Maneuver Warfare doctrine has been adapted by Steele and Biss and applied to a civilian attack strategy utilizing cyber harassment, real-world harassment and abusive lawsuits…Each of the non-parties who have presented themselves in this case have participated in the “variety of rapid, focused, and unexpected actions” which have made it extremely difficult for Defendant to cope.  Defendant believes any Maneuver Lawfare campaign would inherently have to be coordinated by the Counsel for Plaintiff because any other party or non-party would be subject to being called as a witness.”

Then Jason Goodman discusses the use of operational plants and double agents, and he asserts that “Mr. Biss is the Controlling Officer of Deception (COD) in this lawsuit and he has coordinated double agents including Holmes, Negron, Chavez and others.”

Nah, he couldn’t be talking about Tracking the Leopard Meroz, could he?

Finally, Jason Goodman states, “It is Defendant’s belief that each of the non-parties who submitted filings are also operational plants in the scheme.  Each of these individuals have taken actions online or in the real world to frustrate Goodman and complicate his ability to defend this lawsuit.  Each carried out a minor role in the organized harrassment and defamation of Goodman, which cumulatively have had a substantial deleterious effect.  Perhaps the most notable is intervenor applicant D. George Sweigert (Sweigert), the brother of Steele’s associate George Webb (Webb)….”.

It is doubtful that Jason Goodman can evade his accountability for defamatory statements he made in 2017, by introducing wild conspiracy theories just before this case goes to trial next month.

In addition to the persons named by Jason Goodman in these most recent court documents as co-conspirators, it must be recalled that he introduced another long list of third party co-conspirators in Document 78.  In response to those false allegations, four non-parties filed affidavits to refute Jason Goodman, including yours truly, the author of Tracking the Leopard Meroz. The Judge ruled against Jason Goodman’s conspiracy theories at that time; thus rendering the four affidavits moot.

In the meantime, Tracking the Leopard Meroz will continue its rapid, focused, and unexpected actions in reporting on any new developments in this lawsuit.

To read Documents 195-205, see Tracking the Leopard Meroz’s July 18, 2020, informational post here.



Thomas Schoenberger on “Sunlight is a good thing”…

For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.  Luke 8:17

Thomas Schoenberger is the owner of a YouTube channel which he fraudulently has named Lee Veltman Founder of Qanon Updates.

In response to yesterday’s informational post on my blog, which consisted of several court documents from the Isabelle Gauthier vs. Thomas Schoenberger lawsuit, Schoenberger again lied on his YouTube channel, claiming that I am CIA.  In addition, his over-educated Australian supporter, Wyatt Earpp, posted a comment on my blog in which she displayed her lack of reading comprehension skills.

The 2015 Deposition of Thomas Schoenberger was made under oath, and represents what he considered to be the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So why would he object to the simple re-publication of his own words, especially when Tracking the Leopard Meroz did not provide any commentary on them?

Luke 8:17

On May 27, 2020, Thomas Schoenberger posted a  YouTube video which he titled, Luke 8:17. That scripture is one of his favorite verses, saying, For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad. Why he thinks he is exempt from the implications of that statement, is a mystery that is not worth solving.

This morning, I clicked on Schoenberger’s video, The Gabe Hoffman Jeffrey Epstein Robert Maxwell connection, and lo and behold; he starts out by describing his freakish nightmares that he suffers from, whenever my name comes up.  I assume the rest of that video will be archived for one of the defamation lawsuits filed against him.

But let us not be deterred from publishing public documents such as displayed in this 33 page PDF which I link here  [see Schoenberger Petition 2019].

A Final Word on Schoenberger’s liability in the Gauthier lawsuit

On page 11 of this 33 page PDF, an October 18, 2019, Declaration of Bruce A. Miroglio, was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Napa, in Thomas Schoenberger, Petitioner vs. Stephen P. Schoenberger, Respondent.

Bruce Miroglio is an attorney licensed in California, who was representing Stephen P. Schoenberger in the matter of the Elsebeth Neilsen Schoenberger Trust.

Of interest to us is this statement under item 4, that “I have spoken to opposing counsel in Isabelle Gauthier vs. Thomas Schoenberger, Los Angeles Superioer Court No. BC564759.  A review of the court file reveals that the case was extensively litigated and Thomas Schoenberger was found liable for a fraud judgment in excess of $400,000.”

Shoenberger sued his mother’s trust, but failed to leave a forwarding address…

In regard to the contents of the PDF linked above, the reader should not be surprised to find that the Order to Show Cause:  Dismissal of Case signed by the Judge of the Napa Superior Court in regard to case #18PR000275 In the Matter of Elsebeth Nelisen Schoenberger Trust, was mailed to Thomas Schoenberger on August 29, 2019, and returned to the Sender as Undeliverable as Addressed:Unable to Forward.

The matter of not keeping the Court advised of an address change is a strike against any plaintiff who wants his complaint to be taken seriously, because it disrespects the Court and wastes the defendant’s time and resources. In this August 29, 2019, Order, the Judge advised Schoenberger of a October 31, 2019 court date, saying, “You are hereby ordered to appear in the Napa Superior Court at the time and date listed above.  You are ordered to appear then and there to show cause why the court should not dismiss this case on its own motion…”.

On page 3 of the linked PDF, attorney Bruce A. Miroglio, on behalf of the Respondent, filed a Response to Petition for Reconsideration, dated October 18, 2020.

The first two sentences of the Introduction state, “This Petition is in improper form, is not drawn in conformance with the applicable rules and statutes, is legally insufficient and contains hearsay and other inadmissible material.  The facts will establish that the Petitioner is the author of all of the misfortune of which he complains.”

The Respondent also noted that eleven court cases were located in the Napa County Superior Court involving Thomas Schoenberger, illustrating that the Petitioner “is a very experienced litigant”.

Schoenberger explains to an attorney why “sunlight is a good thing”…

As part of the exhibits, an email is shown from Thomas Schoenberger, using his Th Stg ( account, to attorney David Diamond on August 31, 2018.

The best commentary on the words of Thomas Schoenberger, are his own words. His 2015 Deposition is now sitting in the sunlight for all to read.





Grifters and Gifters: Is Elizabeth Vering a Trojan Horse Sock Puppet?

He that is greedy of gain troubleth his own house;  but he that hateth gifts shall live.  Proverbs 15:27

In response to a prior article, Elizabeth Vering had asked me to remove a Twitter reference to one of her email addresses, as it was linked to her true identity.   Although  I did comply with her request, I considered it a temporary measure to allow more time to reflect on the underlying issues of the Julianna Burke aka Elizabeth Vering controversy.

For those unfamiliar with the questions which have been raised, let’s begin with the apology to Esteban Trujillo, and work out from there.

The barely readable Twitter apology shown above states:  On Wed. June 10, 2020 at 04:17, Elizabeth Vering (email address deleted) wrote:

I apologize to Mr. Trujillo and retract statements that I made impugning his honor, specifically regarding the nature of his federal service, linking it to black ops.

Mr. Trujillo did not deserve that.

I regret permitting myself to be misinformed and misled.  My commonsense was overridden, and I see now that there was no good or solid basis for speculating that Mr. Trujillo was implicated in cocaine smuggling as a DEA employee, that he was or is affiliated with CIA Bangkok Station, or that CIA Bangkok Station itself engages in “Brownstone” operations.

It is apparent that his service was honorable, as attested by his decorations for gallantry in action.

I see now that I was wrong about Mr. Trujillo himself, and I truly regret statements about him that I made.

In correspondence with me, Mr. Trujillo shows himself to be an officer and a gentleman.

While my mischaracterizations were “on me”, and need to be acknowledged, I regret questioning his status as a disabled veteran, and I regret any doubt that I may have raised about disability fraud.

In our correspondence, I have had the opportunity to learn more about Mr. Trujillo as a veteran.  These facts are illuminating and clarify who the mysterious Mr. Trujillo actually is.  Although he is retired, Mr. Trujillo is a dogged advocate for disabled veterans, and he should be known for that.

Signed, Elizabeth Vering


The Originator of the Defamation did not apologize; only her sock puppet  confessed to being misinformed and mislead

Esteban Trujillo, who conversed with more than one of Julianne Burke’s pseudonyms in  this conflict resolution exercise, describes the apology by a sock puppet known as Elizabeth Vering, as an unconditional apology and retraction.  

What has been achieved is that the sock puppet has agreed to disappear into oblivion.

The originator of the defamatory communications published under the Elizabeth Vering handle, has been demonstrated to be Julianne Burke, a government employee of the state of Pennsylvania.  It is notable that she has not publicly apologized under her legal name for her willful and damaging conduct in partaking in a coordinated defamation campaign against Trujillo.

Elizabeth Vering had attacked more than one adversary of Thomas Schoenberger’s narratives. One of those is the author of Tracking the Leopard Meroz, who was threatened with physical violence.

As justification,  Vering likes to employ a form of psychological “guilting”.  In former days, she would accuse others of  re-victimizing her innocent and pure love interest, Thomas Schoenberger.  But now that Wyatt Earpp has turned his head, and she feels betrayed, she considers criticism of her behavior to be re-victimizing her.

The larger issue here concerns the implication that witnesses to the Elizabeth Vering narratives are now expected to become negationists on her behalf; that is, revisers  of history, who engage in omitting evidence that proves that something actually happened.

Well, something did happen, and the person accountable for the misdeeds of Elizabeth Vering is Julianne Burke, who thinks she has retained a right to privacy, even after she had attacked real people using their real names.

The actual record of the communications of  Elizabeth Vering displays a willful viciousness that has created a potential civil and criminal liability for her.

Any day now, I expect former love interest, Thomas Schoenberger, to complain that he was deceived by an Arabian Nights belly dancer bearing gifts, who as a Trojan Horse, had patiently waited for the gates of his walled city to open up, so she could enter into the inner sanctum of his inflated ego….


Are government employees exempt from the law if they commit offenses under a false or anonymous name?

On page 18, of an official publication of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, at, the job description and accomplishments of Julianne Burke are described as shown below.

She has removed her Linked In page, which provided a wider view of her employment. However, a screen shot of that page has been archived for law enforcement purposes.

It is fair to ask if government employees consider themselves exempt from the law, for actions taken under false or anonymous handles.  A  Pennsylvania code on harassment addresses the use of  anonymous and threatening language in items (4) and (5). Until the revelation of the legal name of the originator of the Elizabeth Vering communications became public, it was all but impossible for someone like myself, who has limited resources, to officially deal  with her anonymous threat of physical violence.

Lording it Over Trujillo with her Military and Government Training

Notice in the screenshot shown below in which I have extracted two excerpts, how Elizabeth Vering used her government and military training, as well as that of Thomas Schoenbergerto lord it over Samisdat, aka Esteban Trujillo.

Note two excerpts taken from the above message:

Third paragraph “Nor has TS (i.e.Thomas Schoenberger) ever been or claimed to have been military.  He was a DoD asset and embedded with military at times.  He was also wounded overseas for worse than you ever were AFAIK, multiple times.  Come to think of it, that should be verifiable with medical records, but that’s not anywhere near the top of anybody’s priority list right now.”

Fourth paragraph:  “I, on the other hand, was military.  In fact, one of my job specialties involved training at Fort Meade’s Defense Information School.  You have no such specialty training and job experience, which I have years of.  So this DINFOS Warrior can credibly, as a subject matter expert, allege that what you do doesn’t remotely approach the standards of journalism. You’re nothing more than an a**** with an opinion.  As a vet, it also counts for something that I absolutely condemn your actions in uniform and for the intelligence community.  You’re a criminal and a traitor to the US, whether you get away with it or not, whatever whitewash your official records says.


Elizabeth Vering claims she was trained as a DINFos Warrior which makes her a superior journalist over Trujillo. Trujillo has not claimed to be a professional journalist, but rather a writer and a historian.

[Additional commentary can be found in a May 31, 2020, Tracking the Leopard Meroz article, Elizabeth Vering:  Her Ways Are Movable that Thou Canst Not Know Them].

It goes beyond the pale of abusive language, when the speaker boasts of military training to one person, and then in a separate communication with another person says she feels compelled “to bitch-slap you with a gauntlet”. 


Elizabeth Vering’s active participation in the defense of Thomas Schoenberger

Elizabeth Vering’s intimate long distance romance with Thomas Schoenberger, despite the online evidence of his true character as it was revealed in lawsuits and official records, refutes her assertion that she was overwhelmed by his charming ways at a vulnerable time. She is a professional 40 year old woman, who I assume has had some  experiences with dating in-the-flesh men.

In a video which was archived for law enforcement purposes, but is no longer shown by  Elizabeth Vering, she attempts to defend Thomas Schoenberger on two minor questions regarding his credibility as an accomplished piano composer greater than Mozart, and as a polyglot.  [Hint:  a polyglot is not a glutton.]

At the 03:01 mark, Elizabeth Vering addresses Lestat, the pseudonym of a Mexican national who used to work with Schoenberger on the Cicada 3301 puzzle, saying, “fuck, seriously, um you know, I assume you know how to use Google.   I mean I know Mexicans have an average IQ of 90 but that’s a really retarded claim to make even for a Mexican…”.

As a hyper-polyglot of profane languages, Vering adds at the 05:18 mark,  “just because he doesn’t speak Spanish, oh my God, who wants to speak a third-world shithole language?  There’s no reason in the world unless you actually live in Mexico or Spain to uh to speak that, to want to speak that, why not speak something a little bit more cultured? … if you spend any time at all on his YouTube channel in the comment section,  just about other every other video you’re gonna see the guy (referring to Thomas Schoenberger) talking people in his comments and fluent German and Italian; think I’ve seen French, yeah, obviously uses Latin a lot…”.

The uncultured Elizabeth Vering does not seem to understand that Spanish is a Latin based language, as well as Portuguese, French, Italian and Romanian.  These languages are referred to as the Romance languages, because they were heavily influenced by Latin, spoken in the ancient Western Roman Empire.  English also has been heavily influenced by Latin, for the same historical reason.  572 million people speak Spanish in the South and Central Americas, in addition to Mexico and Spain. The culture and history of Mexico is an interesting study.

The Thomas Schoenberger- Lestat Rift

On October 28, 2019, in a now deleted video on the former Doc Holliday channel, Thomas Schoenberger published his uncharitable views of Lestat aka Arturo Tafoyosky aka Tafoya.  I do not watch Lestat, nor am I his defender, but it needs to be taken into consideration that Schoenberger is at least twice his age, and should not have taken advantage of Lestat’s hospitality.

This now deleted video, titled  Hasta la vista baby, has Schoenberger discussing the many problems of Lestat’s personal history. But the primary motivation for that video seems to be Schoenberger’s  resentment that Lestat was provided with a YouTube channel that had a large subscriber base.  Lestat began to use that channel to post several testimonies of persons who described their problems with Schoenberger. [Those videos have been archived by others for law enforcement purposes.]

Short excerpts include, “…so this guy’s a fraud. He’s a monster…(describes Lestat’s former personal problems)…I got in his face about it and he had a whiny little meltdown and called his uncle for protection and I left in an Uber, I, uh, I was not living with him.  I stayed there for a couple of weeks and he was a horrible host you know, borrowed money from me, he never paid back.  This is a scumbag, you know, basic Mexican scumbag, you know, basic Mexican criminal…”.

Thomas Schoenberger has claimed to be a Christian, and yet there he was arriving at Lestat’s with a bad case of pneumonia for a stay of two weeks!  He should have stayed home.  Perhaps the money requested by Lestat was needed to help with food expenses.  At any rate, Schoenberger has a lot of nerve complaining about Lestat’s lack of hospitality!

It was while staying with Lestat, that the silly issues of piano playing and polyglot-ism arose and later had to be avenged by Schoenberger and Vering.  Numerous persons have observed the lack of visible proof that Schoenberger is a piano player. I have no doubt that he does play the piano, as his father was an accomplished pianist. And Schoenberger’s adversary and former business associate, Manuel Chavez III, aka  Defango, has admitted to seeing him play the piano.

Yet it is highly odd that Schoenberger is not shown online playing the piano, whether it is a Mozart Concerto or Chopsticks. One credible suggestion as to why he provides his music for free, is that these works might have been copyrighted by others who are unaware that it is being used under another name. That might explain the overreaction of both  Thomas Schoenberger and Elizabeth Vering to simple questions about his musical accomplishments.  What is it that we are not supposed to be noticing?

As an example of an over-the-top reaction to the observation that there is no online proof of his piano ability, here is an email I received August 13, 2019,  from Thomas Schoenberger under his Parody Lives email.

I have learned my lesson.  Next time I will email every piano bar in the nation with his mug shot, and ask if he has ever been seen playing the piano. I cannot take Defango’s word for it; he was the guy who claimed to be holding the genuine Spear of Destiny that he got from Thomas Schoenberger and Michael Levine of Cicada 3301, which gave him power over the nations.

Point-Counterpoint:  Elizabeth Vering and Dave Sweigert 

An archived audio of Elizabeth Vering, made about a year ago as An Open Letter to Prepper Kitty Intel, (Dave Acton aka Dave Sweigert’s YouTube channel at that time) is  interesting because she describes her relationship with Sweigert as well as with Thomas Schoenberger.

Elizabeth Vering at the 1.22 mark, says, “I’ve been a sub of yours for much longer than I’ve known Thomas-over three years, maybe going on four-from way back in the Dave Acton Checking In days.”…(1.37) ‘I’ve gotten quite close to TS though in the past year.  I’ve known him for a lit over two-maybe about two and a half years by now.  But mostly just in passing for the first year and a half, but, um, yeah.  I am responding not because I’m a little stalker, but because that’s my family-my Chosen One, so maybe, maybe it’ll be a little more official down the line at some point...”.

So Thomas Schoenberger was Elizabeth Vering’s Chosen One, the man she hoped to marry?

Based on this comment below, the time period for the audio is probably the same month as August, 2019.

Elizabeth Vering brags in the comment above to Dave Sweigert that “Unlike you, TS has a good woman behind him”.

Rummaging around in my files I found this gem, most likely dating back to 2017, given the context.

Note that Elizabeth Vering counseled Dave Sweigert, (who was using one of his many alternate handles), saying,  “Webb of trust, Dave, calm the fuck down and take your meds.  Everybody sympathizes with how difficult this has been for your family, but you’re being just as ridiculous as your brother now.  And unfortunately this is a matter of public interest that affects many people-it is much bigger than just your family’s feelings-so suck it up, buttercup.  From an ethical standpoint, you have no right to cover up and hide evidence in a matter that effects (sic) so many people.”

Esteban Trujillo, frame those words of Elizabeth Vering’s on your office wall!