joely
38.2K posts
1) One of the most jaw-dropping discoveries I made while researching “The Autism Vaccine” took place in Austria. I was initially intrigued by the autism story when I realized that the first time aluminum had been used in a U.S. pediatric vaccine was 1932.
Your doctor measures cholesterol because it predicts who gets carried out of the hospital. Insulin, by contrast, mostly predicts who will buy a glucose monitor on the internet. LDL has causal evidence, randomized trials, and therapies that reduce heart attacks and death. Insulin has influencers, fasting curves, and arguments about what “optimal” even means. We don’t ignore insulin—we measure its consequences: glucose and HbA1c. Because medicine prefers endpoints over vibes. If insulin were as actionable as cholesterol, it would be on every lab panel already. It isn’t. That’s not a conspiracy—it’s a clue.
Dan, in your first call, which I think is the first and last occasion you and I ever spoke: (1) you seemed upset that I had received and had released FBI whistleblower information about the pipe bomb investigation. (2) I informed you that your staff had threatened to criminally investigate my staff as retribution against me (for pipe bomb or Epstein activity?) (3) you threatened to personally finance a defamation suit against reporters on behalf of a suspect. Perhaps it was also a veiled threat to sue me. You said “those depositions aren’t going to fun for the people involved” or something like that. In any case, Deputy FBI Director shouldn’t be financing civil lawsuits against reporters covering cases the FBI is working on. (4) you said you were going to call every agent in and get to the bottom of the whistleblower issue. (5) you offered me a briefing but I was going to be tied up until at least 6pm on the Epstein files transparency act, so I asked how late i could get the briefing and you said you were going to leave the office at 5pm. (6) I asked you a few questions on the call and your answers indicated to me that you were perhaps less informed than me on some of the issues, or you were going to be less than forthcoming. A few hours after the call, I received and released new FBI whistleblower information regarding the all-hands meeting (which matched what you told me in #4 above), related to concern that the meeting was called to “out” the whistelblowers. Your second (attempted) call was the evening I achieved 218 signatures on the Epstein discharge petition and I had been busy thwarting Mike Johnson’s last ditch effort to derail the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Not sure why your call log shows 1:36am. You called me in the evening, maybe 8ish? note - my staff also had the unfortunate pleasure of receiving numerous late night calls on Signal from FBI staff telling them there was absolutely nothing in the Epstein case and that I should back off.
All the large accounts that present themselves as truth-seeking journalists or commentators, then quote posts like this and act utterly baffled—“What the hell!?” “WTF!?” “What’s going on here???”—are frauds. It took me less than a minute to see what the court documents actually said and understand what they meant. They do not show that the bullet was not fired from the gun. They show only that the bullet was too fragmented to confidently link it to ANY gun. This is not uncommon, and DOES NOT mean the bullet didn’t come from Robinson’s gun. Of course the defense attorneys are going to spin this as evidence that Robinson is innocent. That is what defense attorneys do. They scrape together every possible fragment of doubt and present it as if it were fully exculpatory. It’s not. Defense lawyers are paid to downplay or ignore evidence pointing to guilt, exploit people’s cognitive biases, and make fallacious arguments sound persuasive. This information about the bullet doesn’t erode the case for Robinson’s guilt in any way. It is totally neutral on that front. And it in no way invalidate the mountain of positive and mutually corroborating lines of evidence we do have for Robinson’s guilt. You should expect more from the commentators you follow, and hold them accountable by refusing to give them your attention in the future. If they could not be bothered to spend even one minute checking the facts before spreading confusion to you and millions of others on X, they do not deserve your attention. They are nothing more than grifting engagement farmers.
