Note: All comments in my videos are strictly my opinion.
Crypto Donations
Body Language – Ben Szemkus on NXIVM Party with Stormy Daniels, Keith Raniere & Allison Mack
Other places you can find me
Note: All comments in my videos are strictly my opinion.
Crypto Donations
&feature=youtu.be
Just wow. It gets deeper and deeper.
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.
Sex cults aren’t a Democratic thing.. they are an elite thing
Any chance you can analize Whoppi Goldberg and Judge Pirro in response to what happened on the View?
Yes, I would love that also, Mandy!
I was just thinking about that!!! I would love to see it!
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.
did anyone notice the gun on the end table? and he really likes green.
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.
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.
Thanks, Mandy. Hope you are doing well.
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 ?
The question is……do you think he is still ALIVE??????
This guy had a girlfriend ?
Lol, and I think Mandy’s right, he wants her back.
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.
That whole video made me giggle. As usual I loved hearing your take on it. Thank you!
Thank you so much, very interesting as always.
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.
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
ONE Big tsunami is so accurate. Another great Video.. thank you .
Apparently, this dude is missing now.
Remember, stormy drain had a tattoo as did the other women in nxivm?
You should be able to watch this video, you don’t need to register to do that.
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.
“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… Read more »
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.
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.
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.
Analysis? What a joke. Second hand “information”. Are you kidding me? I’d call it second hand babbling bullshit.