To export Uncategorized

‘Is it just me?’ Scott Johnson responds to Joe O’Hara

While many are calling for Scott Johnson to be banned, in the interest of fairness, I have chosen to publish his latest comment. It is only fair since the article he commented on, is in part about him.

Scott Johnson has done, actually, a line by line rebuttal of the post Joe O’Hara responds to carping critic Scott Johnson

The original story is in bold, Scott’s responses are in regular font.

By Scott Johnson

Scott Johnson recently criticized Joe O’Hara on this forum, following Joe’s posting of a story on Nancy Salzman.

Scott Johnson [SJ]: I didn’t criticize Joe, I asked him to come clean about his El Paso conviction. And now look at what we’ve learned, more potential prosecutor abuse. But others – females and beta males – would rather read about a private concert that Joe was late to, and Nancy being pissed she didn’t get the presents she thought she deserved. I’m not nearly as interested in that compared to prosecutorial misbehavior, but I guess that’s just me.

First Scott carped on Joe for his conviction on what I firmly believe were trumped up federal charges in Texas. [If asking for information is carping, so be it.] I am personally convinced Joe was the victim of both NXIVM – which had previously bankrupted him – and falsely indicted him – and the DOJ’s coercive plea bargaining tactics.

SJ: Then why stay silent about this abuse? It will only get worse for others by not saying anything, just like the dearth of criticism about MLM scams. Is THAT what you want? I don’t, but I guess that’s just me.

Scott wouldn’t likely know much about Joe’s challenge against a ruthless federal prosecutor, quite possibly NXIVM influenced, and a bias, if not corrupt judge set to hang Joe down El Paso way.

SJ: Not only that, I didn’t know. That’s why I ask questions, to find out additional information. I know, that’s a strange way to obtain information, by asking questions, but I guess that’s just me.

The whole charge against Joe was insane. It concerned a mere $5,000 political contribution – made in the open, fully reported, made by check [not cash].

SJ: How did Joe’s $5,000 political contribution get turned into a $2.89 MILLION restitution payment? Others may not care, but I guess that’s just me.

The official who accepted the money was quite possibly corrupt but Joe got no benefit from him.

SJ: A corrupt politician? Say it ain’t so, Joe. I think most politicians are corrupt, but that’s just me.

The sum was insignificant.

SJ: The sum looks like it was also just a small part of the story, but others may not share that view, I guess it’s just me.

It was a legal contribution.

SJ: Did the DOJ say it was an illegal contribution? Others may be mesmerized by the $5,000 shiny object, but I’m not. I guess that’s just me.

There was no quid pro quo.

SJ: A lot of people, besides Joe, pleaded guilty. If not quid pro quo, then what did they plead guilty to, receiving years of prison time and paying millions of dollars? Others may not see the lack of balance, I guess that’s just me.

But there was a vengeful DOJ.

SJ: Vengeful or bought off? I don’t see that Joe did anything against the DOJ for them to be vengeful for, but I guess that’s just me.

Joe was facing 20 years and a wrathful, biased, likely politically motivated judge.

SJ: See above comment regarding the DOJ. Ditto, but I guess that’s just me.

So he took a plea bargain.

SJ: And remained quiet publicly about it as far as I know, why is this? Why aren’t others asking this question, or is it just me?

A sure 2.5 years versus a risk of 20.

SJ: Joe could have spent 2.5 years putting together his story of NXIVM and DOJ corruption. Did others ask why he didn’t do this, or is that just me?

Innocent people in America do this every day with a DOJ run amok.

SJ: If they don’t speak up, it will only get worse. Do others not see this, or is that just me?

We have now achieved in America the exact opposite of Blackstone’s rule.

SJ: Thanks to not speaking up. I expect this to happen, is it just me?

Blackstone wrote that “it is better that 10 guilty men go free than one innocent suffer.”

SJ: I agree with this and am willing to speak up about it, but it appears it’s just me.

The Department of Justice in America has reversed that principle.

SJ: If people don’t speak up, what do you expect? It will only get worse if we don’t speak up, right? Does anybody agree, or is that just me?

In the interest of conviction statistics, in the interest of career, and the obloquy of admitting a mistake, the DOJ now practices in effect the reverse of Blackstone: It is better that 10 innocent persons are convicted [plea bargains] than one guilty one go free.

SJ: Let’s just stay quiet and maybe it will stop. Is that stupid thinking, or is it just me?

Now is not the time to discuss it, but I have evidence that NXIVM was working through lawyers to help insure Joe was indicted on these phony charges.

SJ: Why NOT? Now is past due the time to discuss it. Or is that just me?

It was Nxivm’s policy to incentive lawyers and consultants to get an indictment on one of their enemies.

SJ: I think NXIVM should have been turned in for that a long time ago. Or is that just me?

Joe was an enemy.

SJ: Joe should have been far more public about being NXIVM’s enemy, in my opinion. Does anybody agree, or is that just me?

My bet is that money changed hands when Joe was indicted.

SJ: If your thesis is correct, I can’t see why money didn’t change hands. Isn’t that obvious, or is that just me?

But, knowing nothing of the background, Scott Johnson wrote:

SJ: Why would I know about the background? Does anybody think I should have known, or is that just me?

“Joe, you left out the part about being sorry for ripping off the school system in El Paso, TX.”

SJ: This would have been the perfect place for Joe to answer the question as Frank did for him, throughout this story. Does anybody agree, or is that just me?

Joe O’Hara replied,

SJ: Except he replied in an unresponsive manner. Shame on you counselor, you should know better. Does anybody agree, or is that just me?

1) Have you ever considered the possibility of there being a link between El Paso and NXIVM?

SJ: My response: “Then spill the beans about the El Paso and NXIVM connection, I’m sure I would be more interested in that than some party where Nancy threw a hissy fit.” I learned that technique in Amway, answer a question with a question, it keeps you in control of the conversation, except in this case all it did was expose Joe as being evasive, does anybody agree with this assessment, or is that just me?

(2) Why do you think that I have to explain every aspect of my life to you just because I occasionally post a story about NXIVM? If you don’t like what I write, don’t read it.

SJ: My response: “I didn’t ask you to explain every aspect of your life, just the part where you were caught ripping off a school system, became a convicted felon, and spent a few years in prison. Go ahead and throw rocks, but don’t pretend that you’re a good guy. A little honest confession is good for the soul, as they say.” I like what anybody writes, it exposes them for what they are, right Joe? Or is that just me?

Scott further commented on the story.

SJ: Note that Frank hasn’t posted my response yet. I think he should, or is that just me?

He was referring to the part of Joe’s post where he observed Kathy Russell working as almost a slave in Nancy Salzman’s garden – deprived in the hot sun of something to drink.

SJ: Actually, I only referred to the gardening story in general, not the specific part about Nancy being a jerk by not offering Kathy something to drink, and there were several parts to the gardening story. Should others be concerned about being taken out of context, or is that just me?

Scott wrote, “If Joe had shared this story several years ago, it may have saved a lot of people from harm. [I believe that is a true statement, but perhaps it’s just me.] But like most people, he didn’t.”

SJ: Ditto the above comment.

Finally Joe replied at length to Scott.

SJ: And it’s about time. Or is that just me?

Before getting to Joe’s response I think it is important for me to note that Joe is certainly one of the handful of people that actually had a hand in taking down NXIVM.

SJ: Not very much publicly, at least that’s my view. Or is that just me?

He has been at it longer and harder and suffered more for it than anyone I can think of.

SJ: Then he should have the most to be rewarded for by publicly exposing NXIVM, right? Or is that just me?

Even Toni Natalie, who fought the longest, would probably have to acknowledge that Joe fought as hard or the hardest and suffered as much or more than even she did.

SJ: I’m sure Toni has lots of stories she hasn’t told as well, right Toni? Or is it just me?

And Toni did say that if she had to choose anyone to be in a foxhole with – it would be Joe O’Hara.

SJ: The idea of a foxhole isn’t to ONLY hide, it’s to shoot back as well. Or is that just me?

Joe never forgets what side he is on.

SJ: I doubt anybody in a foxhole would forget which side they’re on, or is that just me?

In any event, Scott knows nothing of this.

SJ: hat’s right, that’s why I ask questions. Isn’t that how to obtain information, or is that just me?

How could he?

SJ: Ditto the above comment.

He wasn’t there during the thick of the fight.

SJ: Nor did I claim to be, that’s why I ask questions. Don’t others ask questions to gain information, or is that just me?

When it was actually dangerous to be an enemy of NXIVM.

SJ: Joe should have been more public with his campaign, I think it would have exposed the corruption much better. But perhaps that’s just me.

Scott often condemns people for posting anonymous comments.

SJ: Factually wrong. I call people cowards for not using their real name or a consistent fake name. But that’s not just me, that’s the facts.

But if he faced the terrorism by litigation and by extra-legal means, narrowly focused on a few individuals, with the Bronfman money and Raniere’s hatred of people – Scott might better understand the reason for prudence.

SJ: If everybody spoke up, the Bronfman money and Raniere’s hatred couldn’t keep up with them. I faced the much wealthier Amway scam and demanded an extremely favorable (to me) settlement. I know what it’s like to stand up to a Goliath – and win. But perhaps that’s just me.

Why people even today are still frightened.

SJ: People today should be much less afraid, as Raniere has been rotting in jail for almost a year and the Bronfmans et al are being closely watched. Now is the time to come out in my opinion, or is that just me?

These Nxivm bastards could influence courts, prosecutors, State Troopers, even the Department of Justice – and who knows what they would do – if the courts and prosecutors failed them?

SJ: If it’s really that bad, then why not just close down this website and throw in the towel? Or is that just me?

Scott has made a lot of noise about Amway.

SJ: Not enough, or they wouldn’t be operating. If others helped, they could have been shut down by now in my opinion, or is that just me?

So have a lot of others.

SJ: Ditto the above answer, and let the record show I have reached out to many, with precious little results. Does that suck, or is that just me?

Amway is a much bigger operation than Nxivm and has not been known to do the illegal, unethical things Nxivm does to its enemies.

SJ: I’ve previously listed several examples of deaths caused by MLMs (not to mention numerous divorces, bankruptcies, debt, destroyed relationships, etc.) when accused that other MLMs aren’t as bad as NXIVM, and got no replies. Amway is smarter at hiding things than NXIVM, even though they don’t claim to have the smartest man in the world leading it. Besides, why do illegal, unethical things to just your enemies? Why not do them to anybody who does business with you? Do you know what I’m referring to? Or is that just me?

It’s safe to criticize Amway.

SJ: No, it isn’t safe, except for my lawyer’s checking account. I got sued for speaking, remember? Or is that just me?

For many years, until Joe and others made it different, it was very unsafe to criticize Nxivm.

SJ: How did Joe make it “different?” I don’t know how he did that, or is that just me?

In any event, Scott chides Joe for not telling a certain story earlier.

SJ: I also carped/chided/criticized (just asked a question) a couple of months ago, and got no answer. Do others think Joe should have responded to the earlier story, or is that just me?

This finally prompted Joe to write a longer reply to Scott – which deserves in my opinion – its own separate post:

SJ: I agree, and I think my response does as well, or is that just me?

Joe wrote:

SJ: Finally, right folks? Or is that just me?

“These are the kind of comments that confirm just how uninformed you are when it comes to the history of NXIVM.

SJ: I never claimed to be informed, that’s why I ask questions, to be better informed. Don’t others ask questions for the same reason, or is that just me?

“Beginning in early 2005, Toni Natalie and I started turning over every bit of information we had to a variety of governmental agencies and officials (This information was compiled into several 5″, 3-ring binders).

SJ: Where is the link to all of those several 5″, 3-ring binders? What’s the downside of providing more information. Joe has already served his time. All this does is cover up more apparent corruption, which is the exact opposite of what needs to happen. You should have put it online as well to get public support, as well as others who could agree with and add to your stories. Does anybody agree, or is that just me?

“This included federal agencies and officials, New York State agencies and officials, and agencies and officials in Albany County and Saratoga County.

SJ: And you’re claiming all of them are on the take? Does that sound outlandish to anybody else, or is that just me?

“In addition to turning over materials, we also participated in numerous meetings to explain everything we knew about what was going on – and to answer questions about NXIVM’s operations.

SJ: What specifically did you explain? Others probably would like to know, or is that just me?

Once again, this included federal officials, New York State officials, and officials from Albany County and Saratoga County.

SJ: Ditto the above two comments.

“Along the way, Toni and I identified a few people who were willing to put their careers – and, in some cases, their lives – at risk to take on NVIVM.

SJ: Good, we need more people like them, in my opinion. Or is that just me?

This included Dennis Yusko and Jim Odato from The Times Union, Chet Hardin from Metroland, and John Tighe from Saratoga In Decline.

SJ: Are all of those reporters/media types and not other NXIVM victims? I think there were numerous other victims you should have recruited, or is that just me?

Later, Frank Parlato also stepped up to the front-line of the battle.

SJ: Frank had good reasons to step up, he was scammed by NXIVM, sued by NXIVM, apparently got the government to sue him, and has access to media outlets. Where is everybody else? Hiding behind their random, fake names, accusing everybody else of using random, fake name. That’s my take, or is that just me?

“Those of us who have been engaged in this battle from the beginning are always pleased to see more people joining in to help take down Raniere’s criminal enterprise.

SJ: You’re welcome. You may not think I’m on the side of exposing NXIVM, but you would be wrong. Others may not see it that way, perhaps that’s just me.

“But we really don’t have time to respond to uninformed people who question our motives or our tactics — or who make baseless allegations about what we did or didn’t do in terms of a specific issue at a different point in time.

SJ: You just took the time and I’ve explained why you should do all of the above, and more. IF you want to win, in my opinion. Or is that just me?

“You claim to be an expert on Amway – and to have been involved in a long-term battle to take that operation down.

SJ: Yes, that’s not only a claim, it’s true. But perhaps that’s just me.

When it comes to Amway, I don’t question your history, your motivation, your strategy, or your tactics – and I certainly don’t make baseless allegations about what you did or didn’t do in your battle against Amway because I don’t know enough about that situation to raise any such questions.

SJ: Questions are how people get information, why wouldn’t you ask them? Probably because you don’t care. Does anybody think Joe cares about Amway and other MLM scams, or is that just me?

“Nor do I raise questions about any other aspect of your life that is unrelated to Amway because I don’t see why such questions would be relevant.

SJ: Have I asked you any questions about any other aspect of your life that is unrelated to NXIVM? I thought I did when I asked about your felony conviction, but it looks like I was wrong. So we really don’t know what is relevant or not, except in your legalistic manner of thinking, right Joe? Or is that just me?

“But that’s just me…”

SJ: Yes, it is just you.

About the author

Frank Parlato

20 Comments

Click here to post a comment

Leave a Reply

  • Who benefits from all this infighting among ourselves?

    NXIVM
    Raniere
    The Bronfmans
    The Salzmans
    Mack

    By stirring up this strife Scott Johnson, knowingly or not, ends up helping the very people we are trying to bring to justice.

    The people who tortured and trafficked sex slaves.
    The people who molested or enabled the molestation of children.
    The people who laundered money.
    The people who engaged in identity theft.
    The people who engaged in blackmail,
    The people who engaged in wire fraud.
    The people who perverted the justice system by bring frivolous law suits and bogus criminal charges.
    The people who bankrupted their critics by endless litigation.

    Scott Johnson is a distraction.
    To Scott Johnson everything begins and ends at Amway.
    If Scott Johnson is not working for Clare Bronfman, he should be.

    Don’t ban Scott Johnson.
    IGNORE HIM!

    As the British say, “Send Scott Johnson to Coventry.”
    To send someone to Coventry is an English idiom meaning to deliberately ostracise someone. Typically, this is done by not talking to them, avoiding their company, and acting as if they no longer exist. Victims are treated as though they are completely invisible and inaudible.

    • Sorry, Frank, if my comment seemed aimed at you. It wasn’t at all, but on second reading I realize it can seem that way.

  • So instead of just letting the chihuahua lift his leg on each new comment, you’ve given him the space to make a nice big puddle this time. Very big of you, Frank.

  • Or is that just me?

    Does everyone else think Scott Jonestown is a few bricks shy of a full load? Elevator doesn’t go all the way to the top?

    Or is that just me?

    • Tommy Pain,
      You are not alone, Scooter has some kind of disorder and has no impulse control when it comes to his need to comment on everything.

      Now Frank is defending him once again. Such bullshit.

      I stopped reading the blog for a long time and came back after I heard Frank put in a new policy that seemed to stop the trolls. Now it’s gone to shit again and today is a great example.
      Scott spent years attempting to build his Amway business and is a sore loser since his mental disorder got in his way of him being able to really make meaningful relationships with people.
      It’s a good time to start to get information elsewhere.

      Please someone else start a blog about NXIVM where we can go to not have to put up with this kind of BS

  • While many are calling for Scott Johnson to be banned, in the interest of fairness […]

    This is a common misconception journalists have. It is not their job to dig someone out to have “both sides” represented, but to find out which part is true or more likely to be true. Whenever they have a debate about vaccination on TV they should do either one of two things.
    1. Go into a poor African country and compare regions that got vaccinated to those that did not and present the results OR
    2. Do not put up one expert per side, but question quite a few and invite a representative group. This could be 99 vs 1 as long as it is honest.

    Everything else is just dishonest and lazy. So do not put up Scott Johnson because he is one of a kind, but whenever he is correct. Half of the things he writes are ok and it is okay two put up one Pea article in 100, but you should really think about not going back to where this blog was and make it a mad man’s echo chamber.

    • Very good analogies, F.D.C. “Mad man’s echo chamber” is perfect. The maddening din is stilling ringing in the ears of many who won’t come near FR comments for that reason alone. The only plus about this latest torture chamber trip is Joe’s story might give sincere FR readers some idea of what they’re missing by not hearing from the Joe’s and Toni’s and Susan’s and Sarah’s and some frightened DOE’S more often for that reason.

      Last thought EVER on this topic: We left off where Dennis Burke was on here live, IMO, slandering the shit out of Jeff Peterson on a demon coke high right before our very eyes trying to work up an FBI investigation to have Peterson and/or the Prince of Darkness indicted, IMO.

      Can we please pick up that thread again and, I can’t hold it in any longer, delete if you want Frank, but Frank was hit with a superseding indictment — they can’t admit to a mistake, ever, apparently — they’re hard after his ass in retaliation for “poking the bear,” criticizing the DOJ, Cuomo, Gillibrand, all the swamp scum he’s taken on in this — according to some sources. Frank needs support for his case to beat this injustice. Peterson needs support as well to get to the truth before they get to him with their lies!

      Burke needs rehab if he can’t get Secret Service protection, IMO. His Karma includes arms dealing cover-ups and manslaughter, IMO.

  • I didn’t make it very far into this babbling nonsense.
    Maybe Scott Johnson has a developmental disorder or antisocial personality disorder.
    He is utterly lacking in the capacity for any form of polite, intelligent conversation, which includes the ability to ask questions in a non-attacking way.
    Are we sure he isn’t a liberal? He acts an awful lot like one.
    The most amazing thing about Scott Johnson is that he has survived this long, but I can only guess he doesn’t leave the house much.

    • This was the type of self-serving, disjointed double-speak response we’ve come to expect from Raniere and his ilk and now we have Scott Johnson posting this way? And much like shadowstate’s Allison Mack obsession, do we all really care what Scott Johnson thinks of anyone much less Joe O’Hara?

      Frank, I hope this is the last time you give Scott Johnson this type of platform.

  • I think there are real deep rooted feelings of shame when a person goes on the attack and criticises everything anybody says. Their first instinct is to disagree. Then they think the world is against them and they are only defending themselves. It really must take some effort to hate everyone but it all boils down to hating yourself.

  • This web site has now been officially ruined. Who is responsible for ruining it? Answer is Frank Parlato who wrecked his own blog and continually posting junk about

    * Scott Johnson vs. the world
    * The world vs. Scott Johnson

    Nobody gives a flip about Scott Johnson except Frank Parlato and Scott Johnson. Personally I came here for legal status information about the NXIVM prosecution, but now I have to wade the the Scotty crap.

    I repeat myself again – FRANK, NOBODY GIVES A CRAP ABOUT THIS SCOTTY CRAP!

  • For someone who claims he knew nothing of Joe’s woes and was simply asking an innocent, blunt question when he defamed Joe, repeatedly, riddling him with false accusations as well, Schlock sure pretends to know a whole lot about Joe and the most insignificant, gory details of his case — many, any of which favoring Joe, Scott strategically leaves out of this second inquisition attack, here.

    “Get off it, Frank! Get on the stick! Shut the fuck up, idiot! Don’t let the libtards win! Do it now! Yap, yappity, yip, yip, yap, yap, take action, you’re just all talk! Anonymous cowards! Yippity, yap, yap, Jews! NXIVM! Amway! Pussy! Mexicans! mission from God, take action! Dick! And now, this: 13 people were shot outside a synagogue this AM…”

    All talk? The only action you ever take away from hate trolling is changing your catheter bag. Last post I for one am ever going near that even smells of Scott Johnson. Yippee!

  • This (deleted) should not be allowed to comment on the Frank Report. He only serves to scare away the comments by people that this site was set up to receive. NO one wants to be on his radio show, NO one wants to continually hear him berate people. and NO one wants to deal with him trying to hijack the readers to HIS blog with his MLM BS. Please get rid of this (deleted) Frank, it has been too many times now!!!!!!!!!

%d bloggers like this: