SoylentNews

SEATTLE—It's not every day I hear about unannounced Nintendo products over guac. Thanks to a chance encounter last month, I've been sitting on one of the weirder scoops in my 25-year writing career—one that will simultaneously set many gamer tongues wagging and bore other gamers to death. It's about Nintendo, and I should start by making abundantly clear that I didn't get the information double-checked or verified by anyone who has particular access or insight into the gaming company's plans (neither did I ask my uncle who—promise, swear—works as Mario's personal driver). But I have been turning over this minuscule scrap of information in my mind ever since. What I heard is both simultaneously a resounding "duh" for a company like Nintendo and yet also possibly illuminating about the industry giant's near-future plans. So I invite you to sit with me, grab a chip, and pick at this bowl of game-industry-news guacamole.

The other day I was at a friend's bar, whose clientele had dwindled greatly, and asked where everybody was lately? He said that a lot of them had died, which was certainly true. Most were elderly. I saw one guy about my age there a few months ago who hadn't left his house for over a year, because he was a chimera. Delta probably has him locked up at home again.

Then today I log on to S/N and there aren't many comments in any story. I feel like Dr. Crusher in that Star Trek episode.

A federal bankruptcy judge on Wednesday approved a $4.5 billion opioid settlement that provides sweeping lifetime legal immunity for the billionaire Sackler family behind Purdue Pharma.

“This is a bitter result,” Federal Judge Robert Drain said Wednesday in a lengthy explanation of his approval of the settlement. "I believe that at least some of the Sackler parties also have liability for those [opioid] claims… I would have expected a higher settlement.”

The Sacklers owned and were largely directing Purdue Pharma in the late 1990s when the company allegedly began aggressively and deceptively selling its highly addictive opioid painkiller, OxyContin. Purdue, which has twice pled guilty for wrongdoing in marketing OxyContin, is largely seen as sparking the nationwide epidemic of opioid addiction and overdoses. The opioid crisis has killed nearly 500,000 people in the US in the past two decades [cdc.gov].

The Sacklers, who are currently worth about $11 billion, have estimated that they earned more than $10 billion from opioid sales, according to NPR [npr.org]. They will largely get to keep most of their billions in the settlement and shield it from future opioid-related legal challenges.

I'm upgrading the CPUs on my server. They are no faster, but they have more cores, and better features, including (claimed) better memory controllers.

Opteron 6134 are being upgraded to Opteron 6276

Image of one of my CPUs here: https://ibb.co/8BQ2wQw

It took several attempts to get the spots to show up in a photograph, and I don't know why that one finally worked. The light/dark contrast is reversed, however - the round spots are darker than the the surrounding lighter colored contacts when I look with the naked eye.

I have on my workbench 8 used CPUs which I have just finished cleaning with rubbing alcohol, to remove old thermal paste. The lid sides are all moderately clean, dullish aluminum looking lids, and the gold contacts on the other side. Of concern, are discolorations on the golden contact side. My cheap cameras won't capture what I'm seeing, so I'll just describe it:

There is a pattern, 5 long by 4 wide, of circles, just about the size of a pencil eraser. All 8 CPUs have this pattern, some more clearly seen than others. On one CPU, the pattern is almost absent, with only about four of these spots barely visible in one quadrant. The rest vary from all 20 circles being pretty clearly visible, down to about 10 being clearly visible, the rest only visible if you tilt it just right, and squint.

OK, just for fun, I took one of them, and looked at it under flourescent lighting, then under LED lighting, and finally under incandescent lighting. The pattern stands out pretty consistently under all three lighting sources.

Searching for images on Duckduckgo, I can almost see this pattern on some of the thumbnails, but when I click on the actual images, they seem to disappear. Am I the victim of some crazy optical illusion?

Has anyone seen this, and know what it is? Would I be seeing it with new CPUs? When choosing which CPUs to drop into the sockets, should I pick the CPUs with the clearest markings, or those with the faintest markings? Do they mean anything at all?

Also, two of the CPUs have additional smudges, which I presume to be fat-finger smudge marks, left by whoever installed the CPUs into their previous homes. Those are probably just body oil left behind, which cooked into the die over years of use.

UPDATE:

CPUs are installed, and seem to be doing exactly what they are supposed to do. I chose the 4 with the most similar, most uniform markings on them. Actually, I installed them twice - first time the machine failed to post. Supermicro's page said that I needed to update my BIOS to use 6300 series CPUs, so I assumed that 6200 would be good. Wrong. Put my old CPUs back in, update BIOS with the only option available, replace the newer CPUs, and held my breath. I had to change BIOS settings, but when finished, the machine went right to the desktop.

Whatever those markings are, they won't be seen again any time soon!

Factchecking the media’s antigun factcheckers
For today’s media, factchecking is an entry-level job.

Most media factcheckers are liberal, woke, in their early 20s and politically biased. Most have never even touched a weapon, yet they wade into gun and Second Amendment issues as though they’re the reincarnation of Jeff Cooper or Bill Jordan. But unlike these distinguished gentlemen, the factcheckers usually get it wrong.

This is the problem, because even though most factcheckers are fresh out of college and lack any real journalism experience, they wield tremendous power. If a factchecker determines that a progun story is false or misleading, social media giants like Facebook or Twitter will limit its reach and the story won’t be seen on any feeds. It will go largely unread. That’s a lot of power for a kid who’s usually not old enough to even purchase a firearm.

The legacy media’s sudden obsession with factchecking wasn’t caused by any journalistic desire to seek and publish the truth. For at least one media giant, it was a financial decision.

Case in point: Gannett’s factcheckers for hire

In March 2020, Gannett announced it was partnering with Facebook to “identify misinformation.”

“As a media organization with unparalleled local-to-national reach, we take our commitment to providing people with truthful information very seriously, and fact-checking is integral to the journalism being done by USA TODAY and in Gannett newsrooms across the country,” Maribel Perez Wadsworth, Publisher of USA TODAY, said in a press release.

USA TODAY, Gannett’s flagship paper, created a dedicated factchecking page on their website, and assigned a managing editor to oversee the project.

Facebook was jubilant.

USA TODAY, Gannett’s flagship paper, created a dedicated factchecking page on their website, and assigned a managing editor to oversee the project.

Facebook was jubilant.

“Continuing to expand our fact-checking program is an important part of our work to fight misinformation,” Keren Goldshlager of Facebook Integrity Partnerships said in the press release. “We welcome USA TODAY to the program and value their cross-country coverage and perspective on misinformation spreading at the state level.”

What the public wasn’t told – what I learned while I was still working at a Gannett newspaper – was that Facebook paid Gannett millions of dollars for the partnership. Gannett couldn’t have cared less about the “distribution of false information on social media.” They viewed this payoff as their due, because Facebook had cost them millions of dollars in lost advertising revenue. These were dollars Facebook “owed us,” Gannett editors were told. Facebook benefitted because they were able to tout that they had enlisted actual journalists as factcheckers. Most of the stories they chose were political. Many involved President Trump – many still do.

Today, Gannett’s factcheckers are young and inexperienced, since seasoned journalists want to write their own stories, rather than being a whiny hall monitor censoring other people’s work. As a result, the only folks available to fill the positions are the aforementioned kids.

Case in point: Biden’s 9mm handgun ban

During a CNN townhall July 21, Joe Biden said he wanted to ban 9mm handguns.

“The idea you need a weapon that can have the ability to fire 20, 30, 40, 50, 120 shots from that weapon, whether – whether it’s a 9 mm pistol or whether it’s a rifle, is ridiculous,” Biden said. “I’m continuing to push to eliminate the sale of those things.”

The NRA wrote about Biden’s statement. The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms wrote about it. House Republicans issued a statement. I wrote about it. Dozens of other progun sites wrote about it, and millions of Americans shared and discussed Biden’s comments on Facebook and other social media.

Turns out we were all wrong, according to David Funke, a 20-something factcheck reporter who covers online misinformation for USA TODAY. According to his bio, Funke previously worked for the Poynter Institute’s PolitiFact. He has never worked as a real journalist.

“Independent fact-checking organizations, gun policy experts and the White House have debunked the claim that Biden wants to ban 9 mm pistols,” Funke wrote. He then found an expert to agree.

“President Biden has never proposed the ban of 9 mm pistols or other caliber pistols,” Daniel Webster, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Prevention and Policy, reportedly told Funke in an email. “He certainly has never taken pistols away from people who are legal gun owners.”

Professor Webster is not exactly the unbiased expert Funke would have you believe.

Webster is also the Bloomberg Professor of American Health and a Professor in the Department of Health Policy and Management. His areas of study include “the prevention of gun violence, gun policy, gun acquisition and carrying by underage youth and other prohibited persons, intimate partner violence, and youth violence prevention. He developed one of the first courses on violence prevention in a school of public health. Dr. Webster was also co-editor and contributor to Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy and Evidence and Analysis.”

Webster actually believes background checks will keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

“When criminals get guns, they get them from friends, family, or from an underground market source. Without universal background check requirements, there is little deterrent to selling guns to criminals or gun traffickers. State laws mandating universal background checks deter the diversion of guns to criminals,” Webster wrote in in a June 26, 2014 article titled: “Guns Kill People. And If We Had Universal Background Checks, They Wouldn’t Kill So Many.”

An examination of Funke’s factchecking topics reveals he is as biased as his so-called expert.

Funke’s stories have targeted: MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, Donald Trump, QAnon, election fraud, anti-vaxxers, gun owners and the NRA, while providing cover for Biden, Kamala Harris, mask mandates, mandatory vaccinations and Dr. Fauci.

Funke did not respond to several requests seeking his comments for this story.

“I’m a reporter/editor who fact-checks and writes about online misinformation for USA TODAY. When I’m not debunking viral memes, tracking disinformation or editing fact checks, I’m probably cycling, binge-reading or walking my hounds,” his LinkedIn page states.

Politics, not science

Factchecking is nothing new. For more than 100 years newspapers, and especially magazines, have employed factcheckers, although they operated behind the scenes, before stories were published. They weren’t public-facing like their counterparts are today, and they certainly never wrote bylined stories.

Today’s factchecking process is far from scientific – keep in mind they factcheck editorials, opinion pieces, satire and even memes.

Once a checker finds a story they don’t like, usually because it offends their leftwing politics, they call a likeminded source or two, get a couple quotes and then, as young Mr. Funke demonstrated, label the entire story false. To be clear, these are judgement calls by young reporters of stories they cherry-picked themselves.

Once the story is published, it’s not a kid like Funke saying the story is wrong, it’s now USA TODAY, the Washington Post or the Associated Press labeling it false. In Funke’s case, millions of Americans heard Biden say he wanted to ban 9mm pistols, yet a 20-something reporter and an anti-gun professor concluded we were all wrong. The gun banners know this, and they tout every progun story the factcheckers label false. They use them as ammunition in their calls for more antigun laws and regulations.

There are other concerns.

In a scientific paper published in January, two journalism scholars found that for more than one-third of all factchecking stories published by PolitiFact that involved a “complex proposition” – statements that involved multiple claims – PolitiFact assigned only one truth rating to the entire statement, rather than singling out the false portion of what was said. “This is problematic as the reader might misinterpret the truthfulness of an individual claim. PolitiFact also checks claims that we considered uncheckable,” the authors noted. Labeling a complex statement as entirely false, is, again, cherry-picking and deceptive.

The “uncheckable” stories the authors referenced are clearly opinion pieces. For example, if I write a column that says guns save lives, the factcheckers may not agree with my opinion, but the column is not false. It is my opinion. Labeling opinions as false makes even less sense than factchecking memes.

The new censors

“The media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty more innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of the masses.”

Malcolm X said that of the news media in the 1960s, and it’s even more true today. He’d be shocked by the political powerhouse today’s media has become.

Nowadays, the antigun left – aided and abetted by their supporters in the legacy media – are using factcheckers to shut down any speech they disagree with. That’s censorship, pure and simple, but they don’t care. They consider anything they find offensive false, untrue, a lie, something that needs to be concealed from the public. They consider the public nothing but a bunch of ignorant rubes who need to be shielded from offensive statements, because they’re too stupid to decide for themselves what is true and what is false. The media considers it their duty to be society’s sole arbiter of the truth. I’ve always considered this elite, ivory-tower and paternalistic attitude one of the media’s greatest failings.

Readers should be able to decide the truth for themselves. They don’t need it rammed down their throat, especially by kids who are barely old enough to shave. In short, the ability to make up one’s own mind is freedom, and we all know how the antigun left feels about freedom.

Today’s media has short-circuited one of journalism’s most basic tenets, which says the best way to counter any offensive speech is by more speech. Unfortunately, if the speech involves guns or gunowners, today’s media prefers to censor rather than debate.

https://www.saf.org/factchecking-the-medias-antigun-factcheckers/

Show of hands: Who thinks that biased "fact checkers" are only used to push the gun control controversy? Yes children, the above applies to all so-called "fact checkers", on every issue which requires "fact checking". You're constantly being lied to, on every issue that matters.

“Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.”
― Pravin Lal

Gab Receives A Letter From Congress
By Andrew Torba August 27, 2021

Yesterday evening Gab received a letter from the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Protest at the United States Capitol.

You can read the letter here. PDF

By way of further background about our company, Gab exists to promote freedom of speech, by which we mean all speech which is protected speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. No more, no less.

Accordingly we have a zero-tolerance policy towards threats of violence and unlawful speech. As to controversial but nonetheless legal speech we believe, as Justice Brandeis did, that “sunlight is the best disinfectant, electric light the most efficient policeman.”

We have been boycotted by virtually every company in Silicon Valley because of our adherence to this moderation policy. In their zeal to bend to “woke” political agendas or outside pressure groups, our contemporaries in the Valley forget the social importance of letting off steam and of exposing bad ideas, and bad people, to public scrutiny.

As we are a free to use online publishing platform, it is inevitable that criminal actors will seek to abuse our services, as indeed they abuse all online services.We work hard to ensure that our services are denied to these bad actors.

For example, in the lead-up to the inauguration, we were made aware of a number of accounts which sought to spread division and fear through the use of unlawful threats. All accounts of this type that have been discovered have been banned on discovery, including at least one account which published threats against a number of U.S. election officials and was the subject of significant media coverage, including media coverage which incorrectly stated that we failed to take action against the subject account.

We look forward to getting in touch with the Committee in the coming weeks especially given the recent news that the FBI has found “scant evidence that the Jan. 6 event at the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.”

Andrew Torba
CEO, Gab.com
Jesus is King

We anticipate that responding to this letter will cost a significant amount of money for legal expenses. If you would like to help us cover these costs we would appreciate you making a donation or upgrading to GabPRO to support us.

There are more links embedded in the article, visit this link to see them all: https://news.gab.com/2021/08/27/gab-receives-a-letter-from-congress/

I can't remember exactly when I first stumbled across distributed computing. SETI@home was the first, then came BOINC, Rosetta@home, and others. Some I ran for a short time, others I ran for quite a long time. When I came to SoylentNews, someone had started up a team at FOLDING@HOME, and I decided to join the team.

Why bother, some might ask. Well, science. Despite all the problems being exposed with the science community in recent years, science promises to find solutions to all sorts of problems. Problems such as cancer, malaria, and COVID-19. I don't have a science degree, and I don't have a laboratory to experiment in, so why not contribute computing power that might cure a disease? It costs me little, and some little bit of that computing power just might help to cure - something! If not one of the well-known diseases that plague mankind, maybe one of the more obscure conditions that make a few individual's lives miserable and/or very short.

Well, I am just about to pass 1 billion points earned for the team. To celebrate, I'm asking that some of you join the team and contribute! If you have a new computer, with a new GPU, you can contribute a lot. If you have an older machine, with or without a new GPU, you may contibute less - but every bit counts. Or, if you have a small fleet of machines at your disposal, you could be instrumental in pushing the team into the top 200 again, or even into the top 100!

Currently, SN is ranked at 392 with 3,216,120 total points. That represents a loss of rank from, I think, 220, before COVID-19 hit. On these pages you can see teams that are overtaking us, and teams that we are overtaking. In the long term, there are more teams catching up to us, than teams remaining for us to catch.

I want to emphasize that this is a team. Salutes to everyone who has contributed to SoylentNews team. On this page you can click columns to see who has contributed the most points, who is producing Points Per Day, or however you might wish to see the rankings. NCC74656 was our top contributor for several months, then he went silent. cmn32480 was our most consistent high performer, literally for years, before he stopped. TomTheFighter is a long time contributor, as is RamdomFactor and the rest.

Presently, I am the top performer - simply because I have a couple of nice GPUs that I keep running. One GeForce RTX 2070 Super, and two GeForce GTX 1650. I'll bet some of you have equal or better GPUs that could blow me away! So, I'm challenging all of you to join the team, show me up, and at the same time push the team closer to the top 100. And, let's not forget the old team mates - you can come back any time, guys!

Ooops, I think I forgot the link to my own stats! https://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_summary.php?s=&u=699545

August 20, 2021
9:43 PM CDT
Last Updated 3 hours ago

United States
Exclusive: FBI finds scant evidence U.S. Capitol attack was coordinated - sources

By Mark Hosenball and Sarah N. Lynch

WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) - The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

"Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases," said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. "Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages."

Stone, a veteran Republican operative and self-described "dirty trickster", and Jones, founder of a conspiracy-driven radio show and webcast, are both allies of Trump and had been involved in pro-Trump events in Washington on Jan. 5, the day before the riot.

FBI investigators did find that cells of protesters, including followers of the far-right Oath Keepers and Proud Boys groups, had aimed to break into the Capitol. But they found no evidence that the groups had serious plans about what to do if they made it inside, the sources said.

Prosecutors have filed conspiracy charges against 40 of those defendants, alleging that they engaged in some degree of planning before the attack.

They alleged that one Proud Boy leader recruited members and urged them to stockpile bulletproof vests and other military-style equipment in the weeks before the attack and on Jan. 6 sent members forward with a plan to split into groups and make multiple entries to the Capitol.

But so far prosecutors have steered clear of more serious, politically-loaded charges that the sources said had been initially discussed by prosecutors, such as seditious conspiracy or racketeering.

The FBI's assessment could prove relevant for a congressional investigation that also aims to determine how that day's events were organized and by whom.

Senior lawmakers have been briefed in detail on the results of the FBI's investigation so far and find them credible, a Democratic congressional source said.

Well, there goes the whole insurrection narrative. There can't possibly be an insurrection without conspirators conspiring, or colluders colluding, or organizers organizing. There actually has to be a plan, you know? Of course, facts mean nothing in the face of feelz.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-fbi-finds-scant-evidence-us-capitol-attack-was-coordinated-sources-2021-08-20/

https://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-fbi-finds-scant-evidence-100621499.html

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/exclusive-fbi-finds-scant-evidence-u-s-capitol-attack-was-coordinated-sources/ar-AANxaCL

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/fbi-january-6-capital-attack/2021/08/20/id/1033141/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/fbi-scant-evidence-capitol-riot-centrally-organized-plot

https://thepostmillennial.com/fbi-scant-evidence-capitol-riot-centrally-coordinated

https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/fbi-finds-scant-evidence-u-s-capitol-attack-was-coordinated/

Sorry folks, I don't see Fox News listed in my first couple pages of search results.

The evacuation of Saigon was chaotic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1xuTJqZ20M

The evacuation of Kabul was chaotic.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/what-joe-biden-didnt-say-about-the-chaos-in-afghanistan/ar-AANoty2

Savannah asks intelligent questions. Jacob does damage control. Fiasco. Debacle. Watch the MSN video to see desperate civilians trying to get aboard the plane that is leaving.

At 1:08 we hear Sleepy Joe say, "The likelihood that we'll see the Taliban overrunning everything, and owning the whole country, is highly unlikely."

At 1:19 Joe says, "There's going to be no circumstances where you see people being lifted off the roof of the embassy in Afghanistan"

We abandoned our allies in Kabul, just like we abandoned them in Saigon, just like we abandoned our allies in Iraq after the first Iraqi war.

It's embarrassing as hell, but Korea was the last time we stood by our allies. Everyone else gets thrown under the bus when we get tired of fighting.

Let me repeat it again: Afghanistan should have been a punitive campaign. Go in, get bin Laden, and GTFO. Osama was the whole reason for going in, he should have been priority one from start to finish, and when the mission was accomplished, we should have bailed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCJ_ywoqdbs

Thanks, George.

Thank you Barrak.

Thank you too, Donald.

And, thank you very much, Sleepy Joe. You've had 6 months to orchestrate this withdrawal, but all you can do is blame the Afghanis.

“When exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime, you are being ruled by criminals!” - Edward Snowden

In 2019 the world saw how corrupt government officials and complicit media had looked the other way while the sex trafficking of minors took place in the Epstein saga. Turns out, all of this has happened before.

The Franklin Scandal
by Nick Bryant
629 pages

my summary:

Nebraska, 1985. Crooked banker Lawrence E. King, who would later be convicted for embezzling more than $30 million from the Franklin Credit Union, had a cousin named Barbara Webb. Together with her husband, they looked after no less than eight foster kids, whom they abused incessantly. After an incident where children had fled to a neighbor's house and spoke about the abuse, police were called and visited the Webbs. Some of the children were removed from the household but no charges were brought for child abuse. After a second incident and a visit by social workers, still no charges. After a third incident and visit by both police and social workers, more of the children were removed from the household. Then one of the girls told her new foster mother that she had been molested by Mr. Webb, and furthermore that she had been taken to parties by King where minors performed sex acts with adults. After the allegations were shared with police, a judge removed the remaining kids from the Webb household. However, a county attorney still declined to bring charges against the Webbs, much to the dismay of the social workers.

Details of these events would eventually reach the Foster Care Review Board whose members were duly horrified. In addition to the aforementioned allegations of sex trafficking, the board would also learn of a report written by a Boys Town employee who conducted her own investigation into accusations of child sexual abuse, as well as allegations from another victim. They handed this information off to the Nebraska legislature and expressed their desire that law enforcement get off their asses and treat allegations of child abuse seriously. But the state attorney general's office and the Omaha PD responded with various statements akin to 'nothing to see here, move along'

By now it was the beginning of 1989 and the Franklin Credit Union had collapsed financially. The legislature formed a committee to run its own investigation into both the demise of the credit union and the sex trafficking. A lawyer and a cop were appointed for this purpose. The FBI and local news media joined in the chorus of 'nothing to see here, move along', mocking the committee, and lambasting the general public for spreading 'rumors' and falling for 'conspiracy theories'. Soon, the investigation seemed to be going nowhere and several members of the committee resigned after an internal dispute. Then a private investigator named Caradori was brought on board.

Caradori started uncovering leads left and right, locating and interviewing additional victims. He was harassed and threatened by the FBI, smeared by the fake news, but he kept plowing ahead. Can you guess what happens next? Caradori dies in a plane crash. How convenient.

By this time a grand jury had been formed, seemingly to reach the preordained conclusion that the Franklin committee was wrong about everything and that there was 'nothing to see here'. Although King was a crook who stole millions, the FBI/police/fakenews were adamant that he absolutely, positively, did not pimp out kids. What their ostensible motivation was for rushing to this guy's defense is never explained. Though in actuality we know that King was a GOP hotshot, and that participants in the pedo parties, as described by victims, were Important People in Nebraska as well as national politicians.

So the special prosecutor called witness after witness in front of the grand jury to trash and discredit the victims. The FBI convinced two victims to change their stories and testify that they colluded to fabricate their claims as part of a get-rich-quick scheme. Nevermind the fact that these two victims didn't even come forward until three years AFTER the earliest documented allegations.

That is an extremely condensed version of the first half of the book. What follows is a detailed play-by-play of a trial whereby the state persued perjury charges against one victim who wouldn't recant her story. Then the appeals. But also the Washington DC angle...

Around the same time King was harvesting disadvantaged Nebraska kids (including from Boys Town) to use for pedo orgies and satanist rituals, there were dirty deeds going down in DC, where King also had a townhouse. Self-proclaimed CIA asset Craig Spence was hosting orgies in a bugged house in DC. He was famously found dead in a hotel room from drug overdose, having left a cheerfully vague suicide note. Henry Vinson ran a male escort service in DC until being busted for credit card fraud, at which time the Secret Service seized his files that would have revealed the identities of clients.

Vinson describes his connection to King and Spence.

Other tidbits:

One supposed lover of Lawrence E. King and two family members of victims died in strange "suicides". One victim suffocated while sitting in a hospital room.

The book contains scans of various affidavits, letters, transcripts, etc.

Conclusion:

There are many heroes in the story, upstanding citizens who tried to do their jobs properly and ensure justice was done. But in the end, they lie defeated or dead, having been outgunned and outmaneuvered by deepstate villains who largely got away with their crimes (and got promoted).