Body Language – Ben Szemkus on NXIVM Party with Stormy Daniels, Keith Raniere & Allison Mack

Body Language - Ben Szemkus Testimony 2007 NXIVM Party with Stormy Daniels, Keith Raniere & Allison Mack
play-sharp-fill

Note: All comments in my videos are strictly my opinion.[cryptothanks]

 

TelegramNotificationsGet instant notifications the moment a new video is released!

Odysee Channel

If you are looking for an older video. This is the place to find it.

VIEW CHANNEL

Latest Premium Videos

Latest Free Videos

30 Comments
most voted
newest oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kd7ign
Kd7ign
5 years ago
Reply to  Mr No Name

Just wow. It gets deeper and deeper.

Jennifer Bailey
Jennifer Bailey
5 years ago

What a well done analysis! Thank you for making the video. I also find him credible and I think the implications of his story are huge. The New York Democrats are working with an abusive, New York based, sex cult. The witness also said that Huma Abedin was there and she is a close associate of Hillary Clinton, who was a US Senator from New York at the time.

Kathleen Grigg
Kathleen Grigg
5 years ago

Sex cults aren’t a Democratic thing.. they are an elite thing

Tim Laabs
Tim Laabs
5 years ago

Any chance you can analize Whoppi Goldberg and Judge Pirro in response to what happened on the View?
🙂

Debbie Madonio
Debbie Madonio
5 years ago
Reply to  Tim Laabs

Yes, I would love that also, Mandy!

Elizabeth Nurmi
Elizabeth Nurmi
5 years ago
Reply to  Tim Laabs

I was just thinking about that!!! I would love to see it!

GOMF3602
GOMF3602
5 years ago

I don’t do self videos, but if I did, I doubt if I would do one with a pistol (and a flash drive?) sitting on the table behind me unless I wanted people to know that I was armed and prepared to defend myself. If he was watching himself, he must have noticed the pistol in the background so I’m guessing it was on purpose. You have me curious and I will check out his video. Thanks, Mandy.

Tonya Wilson
Tonya Wilson
5 years ago

did anyone notice the gun on the end table? and he really likes green.

Jude
5 years ago

porn stars are nothing if not “approachable” lol. This is very interesting for sure. That Stormy was used to try to destabilize a presidency AND is involved in NXIVM highly suspicious.

Jim Reiter
Jim Reiter
5 years ago

The location in Hamden CT is legit (Hamden Plaza, Skiff Rd)

https://www.mallsinamerica.com/connecticut/hamden-plaza-shopping-center

Possibly these: https://www.apartmentfinder.com/Connecticut/Hamden-Apartments/Chestnut-Hill-East-Apartments

Recruited at Yale Library is interesting. A LOT of .gov and scions of powerful people (legacies) go there. Bushes, Clintons, the list is very very long.

@ 10:58 “we start talking about Teleology?”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleology

I think he still likes the old g/f too.

Mark Allen
Mark Allen
5 years ago

Thanks, Mandy. Hope you are doing well.

Ronaldo Olson
Ronaldo Olson
5 years ago

Great and timely selection! didn’t know anything about this guy, but I wonder – Do you think he’s still a smoker ? Why is smoking so much a part of this conversation – almost as if he just very recently quit, or is still struggling with it ? :thinking-1:

Stacey Michaels
Stacey Michaels
5 years ago
Reply to  Ronaldo Olson

The question is……do you think he is still ALIVE??????

rockethtown
5 years ago

This guy had a girlfriend ?

Gregg Jones
Gregg Jones
5 years ago

Great timing here Mandy, seeing as Allison Mack is now facing 15 yrs for sex trafficking and her pal, Segrams heiress, Clare Bronfman just got ‘popped’ on RICO charges pertaining to NXIVM. Now if Stromy DD is involved with this, and is trying to take down Trump, that should see the light, and she can be breaking rocks at Leavenworth too.

Debbie Madonio
Debbie Madonio
5 years ago

That whole video made me giggle. As usual I loved hearing your take on it. Thank you!

Julie Scheffler
Julie Scheffler
5 years ago

Thank you so much, very interesting as always.

Jude
5 years ago

I just heard this young guy is missing and presumed dead. Pray for him, that he lives, is safe and for his family. such a courageous man. I hope he’s ok.

Dena Sewell
Dena Sewell
5 years ago

He also said Anthony Wiener and Huma Abiden were at that party as well!!I am not surprised at any of this knowing what we now know.Ben Szemkus is missing for over a week ..he disappeared without a trace the night he released the lie detector test on his youtube channel…I hope he is just in hiding and he is safe some where

JassiJo
JassiJo
5 years ago

ONE Big tsunami is so accurate. Another great Video.. thank you .

Stacey Michaels
Stacey Michaels
5 years ago

Apparently, this dude is missing now.
Remember, stormy drain had a tattoo as did the other women in nxivm?

Kathy Chesnut
Kathy Chesnut
5 years ago

Hi – I looked at his entire video and I think the operative word for him is what Mandy stressed, “believes his story”.
In the full video of the meeting which he said happened in 2007, he mentions several times Anthony Weiner and his wife being there, specifically saying that Weinberg called her both his wife and then by her name, Huma. But the fact is Weiner and Abedin weren’t married until 2010, and began dating in 2008.
Ben may believe his story but he got facts wrong. In the video he also has an odd ‘high’ look to his eyes.

RonG
RonG
5 years ago
Reply to  Kathy Chesnut

“he got facts wrong” ???

“Weinberg” ??? … we’re all able to get things wrong aren’t we … Ben didn’t refer to Weiner as “Weinberg”.

“began dating in 2008”??? … but according to Vogue (Aug 2016), Huma states they met in 2001 and Vogue asserts that “Over the years that followed, though, they kept crossing paths.”. Huma then says “One of the things that, because we became friendly, I found striking about Anthony was how smart he was, what a great debater he was. He was smart, he was passionate,” … “When he wanted to do something that he thought was the right thing to do, he would not give up. The kind of dedication and passion he had for helping people, I found very attractive and inspiring.”.

“called her … his wife … but the fact is [they] weren’t married until 2010” ??? … I imagine this is something we can all subconsciously do (ie. recognise current relationships) when recalling the past, but you are correct that this one ‘fact’ is incorrect.

Given Huma describes Weiner in the way she does, who is to say that Weiner didn’t call Huma his “wife” at the 2007 party … wouldn’t be the first time Weiner lied about something would it?

Finally, given their DNC and other connections, coupled with the knowledge of Weiner’s promiscuity, it’s not unreasonable to suggest they were both at this 2007 party is it?

We all need to not be too quick to judge what is ‘fact’ or ‘wrong’ …

Elizabeth Nurmi
Elizabeth Nurmi
5 years ago
Reply to  RonG

Who cares if they were married or not? Don’t get yourself caught up in the details that don’t matter. They were there together, married or not. Very creepy and suspicious.

Kathy Chesnut
Kathy Chesnut
5 years ago
Reply to  RonG

Oops! Darn auto-correct. Weiner not Weinberg.
Hi. Facts, to me, are an important issue. How can they not be? We can stretch this scenario to be whatever we desire it to be, but that is dangerous ground, for you or me. This video is supposed to be about discerning truth.
It would be a shaky thing to begin surmising how he might have ended up calling her his wife when she wasn’t. The fact they knew each other since 2001 (which I knew) but began dating in 2008 no way allows for such a stretch of conversation in 2007. We don’t want to become apologists for a situation it’s best to be neutral about. We are here to appraise. It’s correct to pay attention to facts and details or we risk allowing our own viewpoint to color the events.
I’m neutral about the situation and implications of what this person may be describing. I have no vested feeling in this issue or the politics. I didn’t really know what he was talking about until googling it later. I base what I said entirely on what I saw. I think caution is in order before going further than that.

RonG
RonG
5 years ago
Reply to  Kathy Chesnut

The problem is that you are basing your ‘facts’ on what is known on public record about their marriage rather than what Weiner actually said to Ben … which we don’t know … but we do know that Weiner is a liar.
For someone that is supposedly ‘neutral’, your repeated comment that ‘he believes his story’, your jab about him ‘looking high’, and that your focus on him ‘getting the facts wrong’ suggests otherwise.

Sonny
Sonny
5 years ago

Analysis? What a joke. Second hand “information”. Are you kidding me? I’d call it second hand babbling bullshit.