How Elite Retaliation To Truthful Speech Works, A Clear and Practical Example

This email I sent caused corruption to reach a new level. 7/29/21, previously uncirculated

Jan 2, 2023

This email also ended up bringing the feds to my yard a few days later, without any direct contact ever being made. For months, fifteen times total. Which shouldn’t be seen as a bad thing, because I had begged for help on a web form.

The names have been changed for now, but plenty of people know, and this network is the highest of high profile and crosses into other contemporary Internet Identity Warfare with high specificity. Guess who I mean?

(Names had been changed already at time of article draft)

Subject: Hi [Falchrows], I love you

Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 3:53 PM To: Jynyfrr Falchrow <jynyfrrfalchrow@gmail.com>, Ernie Falchrow <ernie.falchrow@gmail.com>, Ruth Falchrow <nfalchrow@gmail.com>, Chad Falchrow <falchrow@aol.com>

Thank you, this is to acknowledge no response to the collaborative approach request. I still have disclosure responsibilities to you. I'll dispense with the humor that's characteristic of collaboration in deference to your decision and not risk aggravation. If any retained professionals are asking, I'll continue to hold the role of gatekeeper for as long as possible, which is a luxury afforded by the lack of concern about monetary damages from anyone. I apologize if things change abruptly at any point. Flexibility has been constantly demanded in the course of this matter, and it's been trying at times.

Extraction of victims from these kind of situations is perilous. I'm not trying to prove a case, I'm explicating a practical method. I have an obligation to recount an experience accurately, and the implications of that for others aren't under my control. My goals are to completely neutralize and disable all current and historical threats to my health, security, and livelihood; to share that experience with others facing similar threats; and to do my best to help people who are threats to themselves make better decisions in shared interest. Countless opportunities have been given for the latter intrafamily over a two year period. This is strictly responsible diligence, so that can continue as there's no requirement or necessity of that being collaborative.

In best alignment with the principles of the Dual Concern model, I had been hoping to already be in collaborative mode with you to make these disclosures. I'll disclose now while respecting your selection of the avoidant mode of the model, and then provide the opportunity to provide comment that's warranted. No accusations are being made, and no one is being asked to "pick sides." The only choice for others involved in this entire matter is in how to behave in response to hearing a victim's best efforts at an accurate recounting of their own experience. This will be the sole attempt to gain comment on the specific following items to be disclosed, but this inbox will remain open to you indefinitely.

In turn,

- Chad, you're the only person who my father has ever referred to as his explicit "supporter" to me. He says it's due to your "experience with handling an accuser," and that the two of you have "commiserated" over this "shared experience," with me playing the role of "accuser" in his own "handling" of me. He says the term "handling an accuser" in your case is a reference to what he says are claims an employee of yours made against you on Glee. I shouldn't even know about this, but he talked about it repeatedly over years in attempts to shame me. He portrays it as if you're his mentor in retaliation, but his portrayals are unreliable. You're entitled to respond to his statements from the position of someone of higher presumed reliability than him.

- Jynyffr, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to say on your behalf. I don't have any idea. What would you have me do here? How would you have me portray this? If I wanted to do my best to portray your involvement in its most minimal representation, how would I do that without harming myself? In all seriousness, this would seem to be a task for the entire NYU Strategic Communications grad department.

- Ruth, based on the narration of my parents' that I heard from a very young age, it sounds like you saw something like this coming from the beginning. Wes has my father's kidney, and the most of my sympathy for his consistent transparency. I don't understand how this occurred, and I'm not necessarily expecting anyone else to either. All I ask is for history not be rewritten. I'm doing my best to minimize the impact on people whom I love of their own actions, while staying safe. My priority remains my own safety.

- Ernie, I'm counting on you to be a voice of reason. This is ranked choice in terms of behavioral response to victim claims and not a partisan affair. The victim says what happened to them, and others make choices: 1) ignore the victim's claims completely, 2) proclaim their neutrality, 3) retaliate against the victim, or 4) provide the victim meaningful support. Some people consider 1 and 2 a form of 3 but I'm neutral on that point. I'm also not in need of 4, and if it ends up being chosen strictly for strategic reasons, that can be as far as it goes.

I love all four of you, I loved Ken, and I value love and integrity above all else. In the Dual Concern model, the avoidant approach is due to low concern for self and low concern for others. Please value yourself and don't make decisions coming from a place of low self worth. I think you're worthy people, and I expect worthy people to behave in a worthy manner. Everyone does.

In response a few hours later, I got notified that a blood test from years earlier was now ready for me to take (??), clearly requiring at least one physician’s involvement:

All bets were off. Corruption had reached a new level. What was this retaliation play? I still don’t know the whole scope, and the intrigue has only intensified since then, while I go about my business now with much less fear and a lot more security after almost a year of exposing the general situation, publicly.

Sun, Aug 1, 2021 at 7:49 AM To: previous recipients;

Hello,

As I said, an abrupt change was possible and it's unfortunately already been necessitated. I'll no longer be holding the role of gatekeeper. This inbox will remain open to you for any statement you may wish to have quoted, but I will not be able to reply. To be clear, no funds from any of you are being sought, they have never been sought from you, and they would not be accepted if offered by you. Please do not make any unsolicited monetary offers, as were made in 2019 by other family members after emails about this matter; as then, they will not be considered. Please relay this message as needed to the best of your ability.

Please be well, Jake

I had to get ahead of false extortion claims, which had been made before. These people are less than immoral.

My girlfriend at the time took this photo in our backyard several days later, the first time we noticed the General Services Administration SUV parked behind our house. The empty SUV became a regular feature of our lives in the second half of 2021 and returned in early 2022 after I went public on the Internet.

Here’s me and the SUV in September 2021:

So, uh, what’s the deal? I can’t lose any more weight due to impoverishment from having my main gig forced to be exposing an employment fraud in the federal jurisdiction, and my employment history is corrupted. I tried to make the best of it, but this went on for too long, there was too much stonewalling, and people blew it.

I was not one of those people.▪️