NXIVM News – Raniere Out of SHU, Clyne Tells Story, Porter Won’t Attend Hearing, Salzman Sells Property to Pay Fine

Really disheartening that it’s taken so long for K to be free from SHU

Allison Mack is incarcerated in Dublin, California near Oakland and San Francisco.

Nearby in Walnut Creek, mobs are rampaging through a department store looting everything that is not nailed down and painted.

WATCH: ‘Mass Looting’ Moves to San Francisco Bay Suburbs; ‘It Was Insane’
A looting spree in the San Francisco Bay Area continued for a second straight night on Saturday — this time, reaching the suburbs.

A “mass looting” took place at about 9:00 p.m. Saturday evening at the Nordstrom store in Walnut Creek, California, an affluent suburb east of Oakland.

The looters’ method is apparently to travel in large convoys of vehicles, block roads, and then seize whatever they can before leaving.

CBS San Francisco reported:

Dozens of looters swarmed into the Nordstrom store in downtown Walnut Creek Saturday night, terrorizing shoppers, ripping off bag loads of merchandise and ransacking shelves before fleeing in a several vehicles waiting for them on the street.

Walnut Creek Lt. Ryan Hibbs told KPIX 5 that police began receiving calls about the looting at around 9 p.m. He said there were approximately 80 individuals who ran into the store and began looting and smashing shelves.
https://www.breitbart.com/crime/2021/11/21/watch-mass-looting-moves-to-san-francisco-suburbs-it-was-insane/

Give us your latest update into your investigations into the deaths of

Kyle Brennan
Flo Barnett
Shawn Lonsdale
Ken Ogger

You’re not a Scientology operative sent here to distract from these murders, right?

Everyone on this blog looks forward to your discoveries.

Any timeline on the pending indictments?

Nicki Clyne is not aging well.

She was never particularly attractive to begin with, so…

Frank – Given the cases of cancer among the older women who were close to Vanguard, would you feel safe in eating food prepared by him?

El Heraldo
dé México

Nxivm, caso pendiente en la UIF
Hace justo un año, el entonces titular de la Unidad de Inteligencia Financiera (UIF), Santiago Nieto Castillo, abrió una investigación
Columna Invitada
COLUMNA INVITADA
OPINIÓN

·
20/11/2021 · 00:13 HS

Hace justo un año, el entonces titular de la Unidad de Inteligencia Financiera (UIF), Santiago Nieto Castillo, abrió una investigación por los millonarios montos de dinero que de México salían a Estados Unidos para financiar Nxivm, la “secta” liderada por Keith Raniere.

El caso de Nxivm es el mayor escándalo internacional protagonizado por un puñado de juniors mexicanos que sirvieron a Raniere, procesado en Estados Unidos por explotación sexual y otras conductas criminales. La vertiente financiera es la principal, si no es que la única, investigable en México.

Historia conocida: como programa de coaching o superación personal, Nxivm tuvo una clientela destacadamente mexicana procedente de los siempre cercanos ámbitos político, empresarial y artístico. Emiliano Salinas Occeli, hijo del expresidente Carlos Salinas de Gortari, operó durante años la empresa Programa de Éxito Ejecutivo (ESP, por sus siglas en inglés) una especie de franquicia de Nxivm en México, cuya sede se ubicaba en un discreto inmueble de las Lomas de Chapultepec, muy cerca de la avenida Reforma y el Periférico.

Por su sala de conferencias, decorada con los cordones de cada nivel al que se podía acceder por un monto cada vez más grande, pasaron personalidades de diferentes partidos políticos y dinastías empresariales. Emiliano Salinas era socio en ESP con Alejandro Betancourt, ambos también socios en Prorsus Capital, una empresa de fondos de inversión bajo la que se agrupa la firma MoneyBack, beneficiaria de una concesión de Hacienda para devoluciones de impuestos a turistas internacionales justificada en evitar la doble tributación.

ESP operó además de la Ciudad de México en Guadalajara, Guanajuato y Monterrey, reclutando perfiles de familias poderosas, de manera destacada por la notoriedad de sus padres, las y los procedentes de los clanes presidenciales.

Hasta ahora sólo hay un estimado que fija en unos 50 millones de dólares anuales lo que ingresaba ESP por sus cursos, pero la investigación de la justicia estadunidense registró el envío de carretadas de dinero en efectivo desde Monterrey, Nuevo León hasta Albany, Nueva York, en viajes por tierra, que serían más difíciles de rastrear.

Tanto por las transferencias dentro del sistema financiero como por los presuntos envíos en efectivo, es que la UIF entró al asunto en 2020, dos años después de que Raniere fuera detenido en Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco, y recién había sido sentenciado en la corte neoyorkina.

Las atrocidades conocidas el año pasado durante el juicio de Raniere en Nueva York y que le merecieron una condena de 120 años de prisión, incluyeron como aspecto más retorcido el reclutamiento de un grupo de elite en 2015, destinado según se decía al momento de enganchar víctimas al empoderamiento de mujeres pero que en realidad sirvió como un harén new age donde las víctimas eran marcadas con un hierro incandescente.

Es ese grupo elite derivado de Nxivm, conocido como DOS, en el que se tiene acreditada la participación de varias mexicanas, tanto víctimas como coconspiradora.

En este asunto, Nieto Castillo, no la tenía fácil… Y es que miembros destacados de la muy austera 4T, empezando por el dirigente de Morena, Mario Delgado, tomaron los cursos de ESP, cuyo costo inicial rondaba los mil 500 dólares… y hubo quienes directamente se fueron a “capacitar” con Raniere a Estados Unidos, como la fallida candidata morenista en Nuevo León, Clara Luz Flores Carrales… hasta donde se sabe.

No hubo manera de limpiar la imagen de Flores Carrales, como si lo logró en su deslinde Mario Delgado, o inclusive, la cónyuge de Emiliano Salinas, la actriz Ludwika Paleta, que desde entonces inició una estrategia de reposicionamiento en redes sociales e incrementó su participación en diferentes producciones cinematográficas.

Hay también descendientes de familias poderosas por poseer medios de comunicación, una historia larga de contar y propicia para posterior entrega. Empero, basta observar que en medio de tantos intereses cruzados y sus estrategias de free washing, por este y otros numerosos casos, Nieto Castillo quedó fuera.

La cobertura de su boda en Antigua, Guatemala, el pasado 6 de noviembre, fue para el presidente López Obrador un asunto “escandaloso porque revive la ostentación y el derroche del período neoliberal”.

Agotar las líneas de investigación sobre el financiamiento mexicano a Nxivm, e inclusive sobre el origen de los montos para inmuebles, queda ahora en manos de Pablo Gómez Álvarez, el nuevo titular de la UIF, quizás como el asunto de la elite neoliberal y sus sucesiones parcialmente incrustadas en la 4T, que pone a prueba su entereza, o bien, que permitirá medir si con los precedentes mencionados le tiembla la mano.

POR ARTURO RODRÍGUEZ GARCÍA

COLABORADOR HERALDO RADIO

@ARTURO_RDGZ

https://heraldodemexico.com.mx/opinion/2021/11/20/nxivm-caso-pendiente-en-la-uif-355552.html

[translation]

Nxivm, a pending case at the FIU

Just a year ago, the then head of the Financial Intelligence Unit (UIF), Santiago Nieto Castillo, opened an investigation

Just a year ago, the then head of the Financial Intelligence Unit (UIF), Santiago Nieto Castillo, opened an investigation into the millions of dollars flowing from Mexico to the United States to finance Nxivm, the “sect” led by Keith Raniere.

The Nxivm case is the biggest international scandal involving a handful of Mexican juniors who served Raniere, who is being prosecuted in the United States for sexual exploitation and other criminal conduct. The financial side is the main, if not the only one, investigated in Mexico.

Known history: as a coaching or self-improvement program, Nxivm had an outstanding Mexican clientele coming from the always close political, business and artistic fields. Emiliano Salinas Occeli, son of former President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, operated for years the Executive Success Program (ESP), a sort of Nxivm franchise in Mexico, whose headquarters were located in a discreet building in Lomas de Chapultepec, very close to Reforma Avenue and the Periferico.

Its conference room, decorated with the cords of each level that could be accessed for an increasing amount, was visited by personalities from different political parties and business dynasties. Emiliano Salinas was a partner in ESP with Alejandro Betancourt, both also partners in Prorsus Capital, an investment fund company under which the firm MoneyBack is grouped, beneficiary of a Treasury concession for tax refunds to international tourists justified to avoid double taxation.

In addition to Mexico City, ESP operated in Guadalajara, Guanajuato and Monterrey, recruiting profiles of powerful families, especially due to the notoriety of their parents, those from the presidential clans.

So far there is only an estimate that sets at about 50 million dollars a year what ESP earned from its courses, but the investigation of the US justice system recorded the shipment of carloads of cash from Monterrey, Nuevo Leon to Albany, New York, in overland trips, which would be more difficult to trace.

Both for the transfers within the financial system and the alleged cash shipments, the FIU entered the matter in 2020, two years after Raniere was arrested in Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco, and had just been sentenced in the New York court.

The atrocities known last year during Raniere’s trial in New York and which earned him a 120-year prison sentence, included as the most twisted aspect the recruitment of an elite group in 2015, intended as it was said at the time to hook victims to the empowerment of women but which in reality served as a new age harem where victims were branded with a glowing iron.

It is that elite group derived from Nxivm, known as DOS, in which the participation of several Mexican women, both victims and co-conspirators, is accredited.

In this matter, Nieto Castillo did not have it easy… And the fact is that prominent members of the very austere 4T, starting with the leader of Morena, Mario Delgado, took the ESP courses, whose initial cost was around 1,500 dollars… and there were those who went directly to the United States to “train” with Raniere, such as the failed Morenista candidate in Nuevo Leon, Clara Luz Flores Carrales… as far as is known.

There was no way to clean up the image of Flores Carrales, as Mario Delgado did, or even the spouse of Emiliano Salinas, the actress Ludwika Paleta, who since then began a repositioning strategy in social networks and increased her participation in different film productions.

There are also descendants of powerful families for owning the media, a long story to tell and conducive to later delivery. However, it is enough to observe that in the midst of so many crossed interests and their free-washing strategies, for this and numerous other cases, Nieto Castillo was left out.

The coverage of his wedding in Antigua, Guatemala, last November 6, was for President López Obrador a “scandalous affair because it revives the ostentation and waste of the neoliberal period”.

To exhaust the lines of investigation on the Mexican financing of Nxivm, and even on the origin of the amounts for real estate, is now in the hands of Pablo Gómez Álvarez, the new head of the UIF, perhaps as the matter of the neoliberal elite and their successions partially embedded in the 4T, which tests his integrity, or else, which will allow to measure if with the precedents mentioned his hand trembles.

Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP

Craig C. Martin
300 North LaSalle
Chicago, IL 60654-3406
Tel: 312 728 9000
Fax: 312 728 9199
cmartin@willkie.com

November 19, 2021

By ECF
Hon. Eric R. Komitee
United States District Judge
Eastern District of New York
225 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn, New York 11201
Courtroom: 6G North
Re: Edmondson, et al. v. Raniere, et al., 1:20-CV-00485-EK-CLP
Dear Judge Komitee:
Defendant Clare Bronfman (“Ms. C. Bronfman”) submits this letter in reply to Plaintiffs’
response letter (“Plaintiffs’ Response Letter”) (Dkt. 116) in the above-referenced matter.
PLAINTIFFS FAIL TO ADDRESS DEFICIENCIES
IN THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs’ Response Letter expresses opinions rather than legal standards applied to wellpled facts.
Plaintiffs’ views of NXIVM today are an extreme departure from their long-time
devotion to an organization they once participated in and profited from for many years. Indeed,
what makes them plaintiffs is simply their change of heart—otherwise perhaps many of the
Plaintiffs might have found themselves Defendants in this action. Most importantly, Plaintiffs’
criticisms, as expressed in the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), do not state legal claims under
Rules 8, 9(b), and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure against Ms. C. Bronfman.
The FAC’s lack of factual allegations and legal citations is glaring and inexcusable.
Plaintiffs fail to address the deficiencies in the FAC raised by Ms. C. Bronfman in her October 29,
2021 letter (“Oct. 29, 2021 C. Bronfman Letter”) (Dkt. 102), to which Plaintiffs are purportedly
responding.1
In that letter, Ms. C. Bronfman noted that, among other issues, the FAC (1) is
incomprehensible—it is unwieldly in length and scope while simultaneously failing to allege facts
sufficient to support Plaintiffs’ claims; (2) makes allegations against “Defendants” without
specifying which Defendants are included within the term; (3) alleges conduct related to

1
The sole time Plaintiffs respond to a legal issue raised in the Oct. 29, 2021 C. Bronfman Letter relates to Ms. C.
Bronfman’s argument on Plaintiffs’ unlicensed practice of psychology claim (Count IV). (See Plaintiffs’ Response
Letter, Dkt. 116, at 2 & n.2.) While the New York Education Law was amended in 2002/2003, that amendment is
immaterial because § 6512 is a criminal statute with no private right of action. Courts have rejected attempts to bring
a private suit under § 6512. See Arboleda v. Microdot, L.L.C., No. 154165/14, 2016 WL 881185, at *6 (N.Y. Sup.
Ct. Mar. 8, 2016) (dismissing plaintiffs’ causes of action for unauthorized practice of medicine under § 6512
because the statute contains no private right of action). Plaintiffs attempt to circumvent this law with a negligence
per se theory. See FAC Count IV. However, a negligence per se claim cannot be based on a violation of a statute that
has no private right of action. See id. at *7. See also Silverboys, LLC v. Skordas, No. 653874/2014, 2015 WL
5222871, at *4 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Sept. 4, 2015) (“[A] violation of New York Education Law § 6512 does not constitute
negligence per se.”).

NEW YORK WASHINGTON HOUSTON PALO ALTO SAN FRANCISCO CHICAGO PARIS LONDON FRANKFURT BRUSSELS MILAN ROME

“Plaintiffs” without specifying which Plaintiffs are included within that term; (4) includes Ms. C.
Bronfman in claims unrelated to the limited factual allegations Plaintiffs make about her (and, in
particular, Plaintiffs include Ms. C. Bronfman in their sex-trafficking claims without alleging facts
suggesting that Ms. C. Bronfman was even aware of any of Plaintiffs’ sexual activities, much less
involved in them); (5) does not identify the “enterprise” that forms the basis of their RICO claims;
(6) ignores what constitutes an abuse of legal process; and (7) brings claims that are time-barred.
(See generally Oct. 29, 2021 C. Bronfman Letter, Dkt. 102.)
Rather than respond to these issues, Plaintiffs provide what they deem “a summary
statement of the case.” (Plaintiffs’ Response Letter, Dkt. 116, at 1.) Setting aside that Plaintiffs
have already filed a 189-page complaint, and then the 217-page FAC, their purported “summary
statement” misses the point. The critical inquiry for the Court is not whether Plaintiffs make any
allegations against Ms. C. Bronfman, but is, rather, whether Plaintiffs have stated a legal claim for
relief against Ms. C. Bronfman under Rules 8, 9(b), and 12(b)(6). As the Oct. 29, 2021 C.
Bronfman Letter shows, and as Plaintiffs’ Response Letter fails to plausibly refute, Plaintiffs have
not done so.
THE FAC IS BOTH UNWIELDLY AND DEFICIENT
Plaintiffs confuse length with clarity when they argue that “Defendants’ arguments are
inconsistent.” (Plaintiffs’ Response Letter, Dkt. 116, at 4.) As articulated in the Oct. 29, 2021 C.
Bronfman Letter, the FAC is unwieldy in length, wandering, and includes superfluous allegations.
(See Oct. 29, 2021 C. Bronfman Letter, Dkt. 102, at 2.) Despite its length, the FAC fails to
distinguish which Defendant allegedly did what, when, and to whom, or include sufficient facts to
put Ms. C. Bronfman on notice of what Plaintiffs are specifically alleging against her. (See id.)
Noting that the FAC is both unwieldly and deficient is not inconsistent; it is descriptive of an
incomprehensible FAC. Courts have dismissed cases for such reasons. See Edo v. New York City,
No. 16CV4155KAMVMS, 2016 WL 5874996, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 7, 2016) (“Although
plaintiff’s complaint is nearly 700 pages []long, he fails to allege sufficient facts to put the City of
New York, the sole defendant, on notice of the nature of his allegations.”); Tropeano v. City of
New York, No. 06CV2218(SLT)(LB), 2007 WL 1540524, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. May 24, 2007)
(referencing dismissal of a case because “despite the complaint’s considerable length, it fails to
allege facts suggesting a violation of any of these statutes”).
As part of their attempt to recast Ms. C. Bronfman as a central character in the FAC
narrative, Plaintiffs erroneously cite to Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52 (1997), to support
their assertion that Defendants do not need to “have known each participant’s specific role in the
venture.” (Plaintiffs’ Response Letter, Dkt. 116, at 4 & n.3 (citing Salinas, 522 U.S. at 64).) Salinas
does not stand for that assertion. Salinas, in the context of a criminal matter, explained that each
conspirator who agrees to be part of the conspiracy may be liable for the actions of his co-
conspirators. See 522 U.S. at 64. However, the Court clarified that the conspirators must “share a
common purpose.” Id. Accordingly, even though a co-conspirator in Salinas did not commit every
part of the offense himself, the Court still held him liable because “there was ample evidence that
he conspired to violate RICO” and that he “knew about and agreed to facilitate the scheme.” Id.
at 66 (emphasis added). In contrast, Plaintiffs here have failed to establish that Ms. C. Bronfman
knew about or agreed to any illegal scheme. Further, Salinas mentioned specific actions that each
co-conspirator allegedly took in furtherance of the scheme—something the FAC lacks. See id. at
52 (stating that a sheriff accepted money and petitioner Salinas accepted two watches and a truck).
Ms. C. Bronfman illustrates in her letter that the FAC does not include any such facts as to what

2

actions Plaintiffs allege she took. (See generally Oct. 29, 2021 C. Bronfman Letter, Dkt. 102.)
Thus, as previewed in the Oct. 29, 2021 C. Bronfman Letter, Plaintiffs here fail to allege any
specific actions by Ms. C. Bronfman showing that she knew about, agreed to facilitate, or took
action with the purpose of pursuing the same criminal objectives as her alleged co-conspirators.
PLAINTIFFS’ NEW AND IMPROPERLY PLED PROCLAMATIONS REGARDING
DECEPTION AND INTIMIDATION DO NOT RESULT IN COGNIZABLE CLAIMS
Plaintiffs improperly attempt to plead new facts regarding Ms. C. Bronfman’s alleged
“deception and intimidation” tactics in their response letter. (See Plaintiffs’ Response Letter,
Dkt. 116, at 6–7.) Indeed, it appears that with each iteration of Plaintiffs’ narrative, Ms. C.
Bronfman and Ms. S. Bronfman are assigned greater decision-making positions. Nowhere in the
FAC do Plaintiffs allege that Ms. C. Bronfman, or any Defendant, engaged in “conniving and
outright lies to the Dalai Lama … to promote the falsehood to persuade people to ignore negative
media reports.” (Id. at 6.) Nor does the FAC allege that Ms. C. Bronfman, as opposed to a different
Defendant, specifically targeted certain Plaintiffs through litigation. See, e.g., FAC ¶ 741 (alleging
NXIVM targeted Plaintiff Toni Natalie); id. ¶¶ 745–48 (detailing lawsuit filed by Keith Raniere
against Microsoft). Plaintiffs cannot cure their deficient FAC by bringing in new facts through a
back door.2 See Bibeau v. Soden, No. 808-CV-0671 (LEK/RFT), 2009 WL 701918, at *7
(N.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2009) (finding plaintiff’s new facts pled in opposition to motion to dismiss
“improper”).
Even ignoring Plaintiffs’ improper attempt to expand their allegations through a purported
“summary statement of the case,” these new allegations do not cure the FAC’s legal deficiencies
as to Ms. C. Bronfman. For example, it remains unclear how Plaintiffs’ claims regarding Ms. C.
Bronfman’s alleged legal intimidation tactics (Count V) can overcome the one-year statute of
limitations for malicious abuse of legal process claims, or how Count IX can withstand the relevant
30-month statute of limitations. (See Oct. 29, 2021 C. Bronfman Letter, Dkt. 102, at 6.) Nor do
Plaintiffs allege any facts showing Ms. C. Bronfman took action subsequent to initiation of
litigation, as required for the legal process claim Plaintiffs bring in Count V. (See id.) Plaintiffs’
new allegations of intimidation and deception thus only further add to the morass of baseless
accusations.
PLAINTIFFS DO NOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF BIFURCATING THE
SEX-BASED AND CONSUMER-BASED SCHEMES
Plaintiffs also fail to adequately address the Court’s inquiry from the October 15, 2021
hearing regarding dividing this matter into two parts—one addressing Plaintiffs’ sex-based claims
and one addressing their consumer-based claims. (See Oct. 15, 2021 Status Conference Transcript,
Dkt. 97, at 4:8–22.) Instead, Plaintiffs state merely that “[n]one of these harmful acts were
distinct,” and, therefore, the case should not be divided. (See Plaintiffs’ Response Letter, Dkt. 116,
at 2.) However, Plaintiffs have not explained how their sex trafficking claims are inextricably
connected to their consumer-based claims—because they are not. In fact, the majority—at least

2
For example, despite never mentioning 18 U.S.C. § 1351(a) in the FAC, Plaintiffs now apparently allege that some
Defendants engaged in conduct that was “fraud in foreign labor contracting in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1351(a).”
(Plaintiffs’ Response Letter, Dkt. 116, at 6.)

3

46—of the Plaintiffs make no allegations beyond enrollment in NXIVM.3
These Plaintiffs cannot
plausibly state a claim for sex trafficking. Likewise, Plaintiffs have not alleged facts indicating
involvement in or knowledge of sex-based claims for several Defendants, including Ms. C.
Bronfman, and thus have no plausible claim against these Defendants. Bifurcation of the case
therefore makes sense to avoid confusion of the issues and the evidence.
CONCLUSION
Because Plaintiffs’ Response Letter does nothing more than feed Plaintiffs’ media narrative
regarding NXIVM with conclusory and inflammatory statements and fails to address Ms. C.
Bronfman’s legal arguments on their merits, Ms. C. Bronfman contends that the FAC should be
dismissed under Rules 8, 9(b), and 12(b)(6). At the very least, Plaintiffs’ claims should be
bifurcated into consumer-based and sex-based cases, the latter of which should not include Ms. C.
Bronfman at all.

Cc: All Counsel by ECF

Respectfully,

WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP

/s/ Craig C. Martin
Craig C. Martin

3
These Plaintiffs are: Anthony Ames; Tabitha Chapman; Kayla; Jane Does 24–26, 29–30, 32–38, 40, 42, 44–45,
47–48, 52–57, 60, 62–63; and John Does 4–7, 9–15, 17, and 19–22. Ashley McLean; Jane Does 28, 31, 39, and 43;
and John Does 3 and 16 also allege minimal facts.

4