Letter from Washington Jail

 

The following is a letter, apparently from Nathan DeGrave, who is a political prisoner being held at a jail in Washington, DC. He has not been convicted of any crime, but he says he has been held for over nine months because he entered the US Capitol, along with a film crew, through, he says, an open door, while making a documentary film on January 6.

The letter, released October 29 via the Twitter account of a criminal defense attorney named Brad Geyer, contains disturbing allegations about the inhuman conditions experienced by prisoners in the facility, including physical and mental abuse by Department of Corrections Officials. Some of DeGrave’s allegations seem to have been confirmed already by the US Marshal Service, which, according to the Washington Post, recently conducted an investigation that found “unacceptable conditions” at the jail. The US Marshals are now moving 400 federal inmates to a different facility in Pennsylvania. But not the January 6 political prisoners.

DeGrave’s letter:

Dear fellow Americans:

I never thought I’d write a letter like this, but we’re living in very different times. This is my cry for help.

My name is Nathan DeGrave, and as a non violent participant at the Jan 6th rally, I’ve spent the last 9 months detained as a political prisoner in pod C2B at the DC Department of Corrections (DOC) otherwise known as DC’s Gitmo.

The conditions here for Jan 6ers have been inhumane. In fact, some inmates are even begging to be transferred to GUANTANAMO BAY, where even THEY have more acceptable standards.

Class action LAWSUITS are being filed against this prison; and even the ACLU has gotten involved. [Representatives] Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene have since attempted to gain access to this facility and inspect the conditions of the jail, only to be denied.  The vile filth of what has become our daily life is being illegally HIDDEN from the members of OUR OWN CONGRESS.

So let me tell you about what me and many of the other Jan 6ers have been experiencing in DC’s Gitmo. It is my hope that with MEDIA EXPOSURE and the awareness of the American public, that SOMETHING may be done and this never happens to anyone ever again.

OUR CONDITIONS – For the first 120 days in DC’s Gitmo, Jan 6ers experienced DAILY LOCKDOWNS for 23-24 HOURS before being allowed to leave our small 120 sq. ft cell. The PHYSICAL and MENTAL ANGUISH that results from this kind of SEVERE ISOLATION has caused many people to go on a RAPID mental decline.

As a result, a large percentage of us are HEAVILY MEDICATED with anti-anxiety and anti-depressant drugs, which helps to cope with the psychological and mental ABUSE we endure.

Many times, the little rec we DO receive is STRIPPED AWAY if our cell isn’t up to the standards of the guard on duty. This changes from day to day. Jan 6ers have lost rec time and out of cell activity ANY TIME news interviews about the jail are aired on TV, people speak up about our conditions, or rallies are held in our name. We’ll probably have a lockdown upon the publishing of this letter. So I have already warned those I know in advance.

Masks are WEAPONIZED and used against us, even though we NEVER leave the facility. Officers have walked in with the SOLE INTENTION of needing to write 20-30 disciplinary reports against Jan 6ers, which adversely effects our chances of release and causes loss of privileges, phone time and commissary. Masks need to be covering both the nose and mouth AT ALL TIMES or we are threatened and locked down in our cells. Jan 6ers are always respectful to the employees around us, but CO’s maintain the need to invent reasons for discipline.

PRIVILEGED LEGAL DOCUMENTS have been CONFISCATED and gone missing from various cells, and HIGHLY SENSITIVE discovery (video evidence under attorney/client privilege) is watched by employees during our legal calls.

Jordan Mink, for example, had all discovery TAKEN by ERT officers on August 23rd despite the objection of his attorney. They handcuffed him, searched his room, and then proceeded to take all video evidence in his possession. Additionally, legal visits take 2-3 WEEKS or more to be scheduled, leaving little time to discuss our defense and prepare for trial.

The EXTREME medical neglect in this facility has caused a variety of adverse illnesses and disease. Some show signs of scurvy. And some even have Covid like symptoms, but medical personnel have refused to treat it.

Christopher Worrell, for example, is an inmate with Cancer, who also broke his hand in prison and requires surgery. Both have been completely ignored. Federal judge Royce Lamberth got to the point where on October 12th, he filed contempt of court charges against the warden of the DC DOC, claiming that Worrell’s civil rights have been violated, and demanding the U.S attorney general inquire further about his and other possible violations.

Another inmate, Peter Stager, WAITED FOUR MONTHS to receive his CPAP breathing machine, and has needed an MRI since spring, which has also been ignored by staff.

The harsh, unlivable conditions of our unit has caused health hazards that defy Department of Health regulations. And on at least five occasions, RAW SEWAGE has overflowed our unit, causing human fecal matter to flood the floors and rooms. That’s also in addition to the MOLD on cell walls, as well as the rusty pipes, and DIRTY WATER that flows from these sinks. White rags TURN BROWN when exposed to the water from our faucets.

We are undergoing SEVERE NUTRITIONAL DEFICIENCIES and STARVATION. For breakfast this morning, I received a tray of flavorless paste, two slices of bread, and a slice of bologna. Lunches usually consist of rice and beans, but we’ll get cold chicken/beef patties if we are lucky. For dinner, we are sometimes fed a diet of cheese sandwiches, and bologna and cheese 4 to 5 times per week.

Without commissary, people like myself are FORCED TO STARVE. I suffer from HEADACHES and NAUSEA on an almost REGULAR BASIS from the malnutrition and constant hunger I am subjected to. I have lost ALMOST 15 POUNDS since I’ve been detained.

Our rights to personal hygiene are also totally neglected. Razors are PROHIBITED, and inmates are forced to either go unshaved and grow long beards, or use a razor free cream that BURNS and IRRITATES the skin. But many other jails have allowed the use of razors without incident. Haircuts are also PROHIBITED from unvaccinated inmates.

For me, it’s been nearly 9 months. I look VIRTUALLY UNRECOGNIZABLE in the condition I’m in. I fear even my family would not recognize me.

Contact with the outside world, from legal visits to seeing loved ones is HIGHLY RESTRICTED. After in-person visits, legal or otherwise, we are forced to undergo humiliating STRIP SEARCHES, despite ALL visitors being thoroughly checked for contraband. If it’s a legal visit, we are placed in a 14 day quarantine, with no out of cell time; EVEN IF your attorney is VACCINATED and tests NEGATIVE for Covid. Visits with friends or family members, for unvaccinated inmates, are NEVER ALLOWED.

As a result, many people have skipped critical meetings with their council, and NEVER get an opportunity to see friends or family. VIDEO VISITATION, while available to the rest of the jail, is RESTRICTED in the Jan 6 pod. Mail is delayed for MONTHS, and phone calls are limited to a MAXIMUM of pre approved 12 numbers. If there’s anyone else in our extended family or otherwise we’d like to call, we’re pretty much out of luck.

RELIGIOUS SERVICES, protected by the 1st amendment, are NOT provided to Jan 6ers. Neither are in person classes or other activities available to the rest of the jail. An inmate named Ryan Samsel, instead attempted to organize his own bible study inside the pod, until he was viciously BEATEN and LEFT FOR DEAD by correctional officers. He suffered a broken eye socket and brain damage as a result of the vicious attack. He’s now permanently blind in one eye. On another occasion, Scott Fairlamb was confronted by an officer in the middle of the night, and his life was threatened, once the officer’s body cam was disabled. Many, like myself, are afraid they could be the next victim.

And last but not least, we experience racism from many guards on a daily basis, being the ONLY WHITE REPUBLICANS in the entire jail. The false narrative is has been passed around the jail and to corrections officers that we are “white supremacists” (we are NOT). The inmate population is predominantly black, so we are at risk being here because of this false narrative. The guards are mostly liberal migrants from Africa who have been conditioned to hate us, and hate America.

Jan 6ers have been mocked, beaten and ridiculed by guards for singing the National Anthem. The Corrections Officers despise our politics and the love we have for this country. At one point, an officer even yelled “[REDACTED] AMERICA!”, and threatened to lock us down FOR A WEEK if we attempted to sing the National Anthem again.

THE TRUTH ABOUT MY STORY – Finally, I feel like I should touch briefly on the government and prosecutor’s portrayal of who I am as a person.

No, I am not a terrorist, extremist or any of the other names I’ve been called by the government. More than anything, I am a red blooded patriot and I love this country more than anything.

I am being unfairly prosecuted and definitely overcharged. I never assaulted anyone, destroyed property, or stolen anything. I walked through wide open doors to enter the Capitol, along with my camera crew hoping to get the rally on video. I was never even armed at any point inside the Capitol.

Our goal was to make a documentary, and get likes and shares on social media. Yes I wore a costume (that the prosecutor refers to as paramilitary gear and body armor) but it was for the movie and was nothing of the sort. And yet, 9 months later here I sit, with 10 years worth of charges and no hope for a future. The surveillance footage shows absolutely no signs of assault, and despite attempts by media companies to get it released to the public, the government has denied it.

I think that’s because they are fully aware that this footage is questionable at worst, and exonerates me at best. Please don’t be fooled by the media. I am a loving and peaceful person with no history of violence.

This weaponized DOJ and their blatant resentment of my respect for President Donald Trump is putting me in a situation that makes me feel helpless in my current situation.

HOW YOU CAN HELP – Despite me and other Jan 6ers experiencing these unthinkable conditions, all of us remain POSITIVE and HOPEFUL that, in the end, JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL. We maintain a LOVE for this country and the Constitution like no other. The only thing keeping us going is our undying patriotism, the camaraderie between one another and our faith in God.

Please…SHARE THIS LETTER with EVERYONE you know: friends and family, senators, representatives, political organizers, civil rights groups and media outlets.
The truth HAS to get out. And the jail MUST PAY for what they are doing to this country’s citizens.

As a result of this unlawful detainment the last 9 months, I have lost everything. The successful business I spent 13 years of my life working on, my apartment in Las Vegas, social media accounts with a lifetime of memories… you name it.

The government has essentially CANCELLED ME. Not only that, but following the arrest, my best friend of 12 years robbed my apartment, stole my cat, and hacked my personal Instagram with 100,000+ followers. Since then, I often go between feelings of hopefulness and moments of depression. I wonder if I can ever recover from this, but I have to remind myself to never give up.

There are major medical complications I now struggle with as a result of the jail’s neglect of my health since being here. If there is any way I hope to recover, my only hope are the ones who are reading this. I was on top of the world once upon a time, and that life seems now only like a distant memory.

If there’s anything you can do to help, I would appreciate anything at all. Inmates here are being extorted with lack of nutrition, forcing me to spend most of what’s left on commissary which I can no longer afford.

I need desperate help with my legal expenses and just help staying alive in here with commissary and all the expenses I still have on the outside as my livelihood and life has been stripped away from me. Thank you for [anything] you can afford, even if it is a few dollars it goes a long way in here.

Sincerely and with love,

Nathaniel DeGrave

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 61 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Sandy Member
    Sandy
    @Sandy

    Vince Guerra had a post on this on October 29, with lots of comments.  https://ricochet.com/1082504/a-letter-from-an-american-political-prisoner-in-d-c/

     

    • #1
  2. Max Coolidge
    Max
    @Max

    Sandy (View Comment):

    Vince Guerra had a post on this on October 29, with lots of comments. https://ricochet.com/1082504/a-letter-from-an-american-political-prisoner-in-d-c/

     

    Thanks! I missed it :-( 

     

     

    • #2
  3. Vince Guerra Member
    Vince Guerra
    @VinceGuerra

    Max (View Comment):

    Sandy (View Comment):

    Vince Guerra had a post on this on October 29, with lots of comments. https://ricochet.com/1082504/a-letter-from-an-american-political-prisoner-in-d-c/

    Thanks! I missed it :-(

    34 likes, 139 comments and no promotion because…reasons. Max, you should get in touch with David Clements with The Prisoner’s Record about it on your podcast. He’s deep into this story.

    • #3
  4. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    But there’s definitely more to talk about.

    • #4
  5. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    We have had political prisoners, in solitary, refused bail. for `10 months for what amounts to criminal trespass at worst.

    Felix Dherzinski would be proud.

    • #5
  6. Jim George Member
    Jim George
    @JimGeorge

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):
    34 likes, 139 comments and no promotion because…reasons.

    I found this most interesting (the comment about “”reasons”) and found the discussion (I did not read every comment but the ones I did read were spot on) and I write this note to you as I put up a post in August going into some fairly elaborate detail why I thought the killing of Ashli Babbitt was murder and it got many likes and a great deal of most interesting discussion. I found out later I was not the only one who thought it should have been promoted. After a long period of discernment, as I was hesitant to sound like some kind of a snowflake with “hurt feelings” I decided to ask the simple question, what are the standards by which a promotion decision is made; I was referred to the Editor in Chief and sent him a note asking him just that. As I did not receive the courtesy of a reply, I sent a follow up inquiry to @jon, and I never have received a response of any kind. In our law practice, which I will be the first to admit took place in the Stone Age compared to what I understand law practice to be like these days, a refusal to even acknowledge correspondence was considered, at the very least, poor form, if not downright rude. So the point I am trying to make here is to ask you here is whether you ever found out what those mysterious “reasons” were– inquiring minds want to know! I have some pretty strong suspicions having to do with the fact that, in certain “polite” circles, it is almost as “tacky”, as we Southerners like to put it, to talk about January 6 and to even question the idea that it was an “insurrection” as it is to even mention any question of the legitimacy of the 2020 Presidential election. However, I was taught not to trade in speculation so all I have is that suspicion. Thanks for listening and thanks for your great work here on Ricochet, Jim

    • #6
  7. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens
    • #7
  8. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Some of my “conservative” friends who hate the Orange Man are just now learning about the political prisoners, because the awful conditions and abuse at the DC gulag were mentioned on CNN. (They moved 400 prisoners, but not the Jan. 6th prisoners.)

    And I was like “you’re finally catching up to news that many of us have been following for most of 2021! Congratulations.”

    • #8
  9. Gary Robbins Reagan
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    I find it disappointing that Ricochet has elevated a letter from Nathan DeGrave to the Main Feed.  Mr. DeGrave starts his letter stating:

    My name is Nathan DeGrave, and as a non violent participant at the Jan 6th rally, I’ve spent the last 9 months detained as a political prisoner in pod C2B at the DC Department of Corrections (DOC) otherwise known as DC’s Gitmo.

    A non-violent participant?  A political prisoner?

    All of the defendants in the Capitol Riot are listed in a detailed database at https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases.  There we discover that Mr. DeGrave was charged with nine crimes, namely, “Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Certain Officers; Civil Disorder; Obstruction of an Official Proceeding; Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building or Grounds; Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building or Grounds; Disorderly Conduct in a Capitol Building; Impeding Passage Through the Capitol Grounds or Buildings; Act of Physical Violence in the Capitol Grounds or Buildings; Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building.”

    Mr. DeGrave had a hearing asking to be released pending his trial.  Here is the trial court’s 39 page opinion after the hearing.  https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-dcd-1_21-cr-00090/pdf/USCOURTS-dcd-1_21-cr-00090-3.pdf  The opinion from the Court is quite concerning as to the risk of further violence.  The last couple of pages state the following:

    “b. Risk of Future Violence

    “The Court also agrees that the evidence proffered by the government establishes a serious risk that in the future Mr. DeGrave may again engage in violence. The government argues that Mr. DeGrave’s prior acts of traveling across the country with weapons to “stop the steal” on behalf of former President Donald Trump, who has engaged in “continued inflammatory rhetoric about a stolen election,” raise an articulable threat of future violence. Gov’t Second Suppl. at 9; see also Apr. 26 Hr’g Tr. 39:10-39:19. The government suggests that this risk is particularly salient because Mr. DeGrave proclaimed as recently as January 24, 2021 that he considered Mr. Trump his “idol” and has stated that he believes mainstream news outlets are lying about the outcome of the 2020 election. Id.; see also Apr. 26 Hr’g Tr. 38:22-39:19.

    “Of course, Mr. DeGrave has a First Amendment right to express his views on politics, the 2020 election, and the government. The Court need not consider Mr. DeGrave’s political preferences to conclude that he poses a serious risk of committing acts of violence in the future. His conduct speaks for itself. As recently as January 6, Mr. DeGrave participated in an assault targeting the institutions of government. Mr. DeGrave was not carried away in the excitement of the moment; rather, his statements show that he planned to confront and perpetrate violence at the Capitol. See Gov’t Opp. at 9-10 (“‘Are you down for danger bro?’ . . . ‘Im [sic] bringing bullet proof clothing . . . yes’”); id at 10 (“Who can shoot and has excellent aim and can teach me today or tomorrow. . . . this is for a very patriotic cause”); id. at 13 (“It is time to put an end to this once and for all.”). “[E]ven if [Mr. DeGrave’s] statements were themselves protected, the First Amendment does not prohibit their consideration as evidence of motive or intent.” United States v. Chansley, 21-cr-3, 2021 WL 861079, at *9 (D.D.C. Mar. 8, 2021) (citing Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476, 489 (1993)).

    “Mr. DeGrave’s statements also demonstrate that he held a misguided belief that he should take matters into his own hands to defend the country against perceived corruption in democratic institutions. See Gov’t Opp. at 9 (“It’s time the American people rise and stand up for this country. We’re tired of the corruption.”); id. at 11 (“We’re ready to do what is necessary to save the country.”); id. at 13 (“We’re out here protecting the country. . . . we’re here to defend this city; defend any city in this country.”). And Mr. DeGrave “did not simply hold these misguided beliefs; he acted on them.” United States v. Sabol, 2021 WL 1405945, at *17. He assaulted police officers inside the Capitol, forcibly gained access to restricted spaces, and called on other members of the mob to steal papers and laptops from the Senate Chamber. See Sealed Video 1; Sealed Video 2; Movie & TV 2021-04-23; Sealed Video 3; GP020391 Video. These Case 1:21-cr-00090-PLF Document 44 Filed 05/14/21 Page 36 of 39 acts distinguish Mr. DeGrave from other individuals who may hold similar views about the 2020 election, but who are not likely to drive across the country in a vehicle filled with weapons and assault law enforcement officers, as Mr. DeGrave did, on the basis of those beliefs.

    “Mr. DeGrave, “who actually assaulted police officers and broke through windows, doors, and barricades” on January 6, and “who aided, conspired with, planned, or coordinated such actions,” is “in a different category of dangerousness than those who cheered on the violence or entered the Capitol after others cleared the way.” United States v. Munchel, 991 F.3d at 1284. The D.C. Circuit in Munchel drew “categorical distinctions between the violent and non-violent January 6 participants[,] explaining that the former are categorically more dangerous.” United States v. Fairlamb, 21-cr-120, 2021 WL 1614821, at *5 (D.D.C. Apr. 26, 2021). Individuals such as Mr. DeGrave who fall unambiguously into the more dangerous category are particularly likely to pose a risk of future violence. See Judgment, United States v. Worrell, 21-3020 (D.C. Cir. May 5, 2021) [Doc. No. 1897399] (affirming district court denial of reconsideration of detention, in part because the district court found that the defendant “actually assaulted police officers,” citing Munchel).

    “The Court acknowledges Mr. DeGrave’s statements in the wake of January 6 that “[t]he fact that people were killed over the week is truly sickening” and “[v]iolence is not cool whether it comes from the left or the right.” Def. Suppl. at 1. Yet the fact remains that Mr. DeGrave planned to engage in violence at the Capitol and proceeded to carry out that plan. The violence that resulted was an entirely predictable result of the steps Mr. DeGrave took. In the weeks following January 6, even as Mr. DeGrave publicly condemned the violence, he privately participated in conversations with Messrs. Sandlin and Colt about how they could “get rich and be interviewed on podcasts” by selling footage from the Capitol assault, and proceeded to exchange messages with a third party about providing such footage for a documentary. Gov’t Opp. at 16. Mr. DeGrave apparently sought to capitalize on his involvement in the riot, raising questions about the extent to which he has put that episode behind him, as defense counsel suggests. See Def. Reply ¶ 8; Mar. 25 Hr’g Tr. at 22:5-22:8. In view of Mr. DeGrave’s actions in the weeks leading up to January 6, the Court is not convinced that Mr. DeGrave is no longer a danger merely because the exact circumstances of January 6 are unlikely to recur.

    “Finally, for the same reasons that stringent release conditions would not assure the integrity of the judicial proceeding, the Court concludes that those conditions would be insufficient to prevent Mr. DeGrave from committing acts of violence if he were to be released. The Court concludes that Mr. DeGrave “is a danger to the community by reason of prior instances of violence . . . as well as a history of obstruction of justice” and that “no condition (or combination of conditions) could be imposed, short of detention, that would reasonably assure . . . the safety of the community” and the integrity of this judicial proceeding. United States v. Zherka, 592 F. App’x 35, 36 (2d Cir. 2015).

    IV. CONCLUSION

    “For the reasons set forth above, the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the safety of any other person and the community, or ensure the integrity of this judicial proceeding, if Mr. DeGrave is released pending trial. Pursuant to this Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order of May 6, 2021 [Dkt. No. 37], defendant Nathaniel J. DeGrave shall be detained pending trial.

    • #9
  10. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Kozak (View Comment):

    We have had political prisoners, in solitary, refused bail. for `10 months for what amounts to criminal trespass at worst.

    Felix Dherzinski would be proud.

    Exactly.  I read the letter (in Vince’s post) and all the comments.  I can’t shake the feeling that, while the DOJ has the whip hand now, are they really creating some real, dyed-in-the-wool, bad-ass revolutionaries?

    I’ve done more than a little study on revolutionaries (Russian, Irish, Vietnamese, etc.)  One of the traits of a revolutionary is that he/she is made; that there is a defining moment in their life (usually, some sort of interaction with the ruling class) that causes them to give up on democratic government.

    Whatever one thinks of the participants of the January 6 event, I don’t know anyone who can argue against the idea that many of them (perhaps the majority) really didn’t have much of a clue as to what their “mission” was.  Yet, very few hard core criminals have been treated in the manner that they have.

    So, what happens to these folks?  I suspect that, for many, their lives are forever gone.  No jobs. Financially ruined. Possibly, no families.

    What do they do when the DOJ is finished with them?  Meekly thank their tormentors for their largesse?  Or do they disappear and gather their strength until they are ready to exact revenge?

    I’m not sure.  However, as in the case of the IRA, some of those young men who were released by the British did not become docile subjects.  Instead, full of hatred for the Crown, they learned to build explosives and created a revolution that the British never really subdued.

    I haven’t the slightest idea what will happen when these people regain their freedom.  However, I don’t believe the DOJ knows either.  And that may prove to be problematic.

    • #10
  11. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I find it disappointing that Ricochet has elevated a letter from Nathan DeGrave to the Main Feed.

    You should boycott! Do it! Do it! Show ’em you mean business! Cancel that subscription, man! That’ll teach ’em!

    • #11
  12. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    So, what happens to these folks?  I suspect that, for many, their lives are forever gone.  No jobs. Financially ruined. Possibly, no families.

    What do they do when the DOJ is finished with them?  Meekly thank their tormentors for their largesse?  Or do they disappear and gather their strength until they are ready to exact revenge?

    I suspect several will fall into deep depression and commit suicide.

    • #12
  13. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    So, what happens to these folks? I suspect that, for many, their lives are forever gone. No jobs. Financially ruined. Possibly, no families.

    What do they do when the DOJ is finished with them? Meekly thank their tormentors for their largesse? Or do they disappear and gather their strength until they are ready to exact revenge?

    I suspect several will fall into deep depression and commit suicide.

    I think the DOJ would like that.  I’m not sure the DOJ will get what they like.

    • #13
  14. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    • #14
  15. Vince Guerra Member
    Vince Guerra
    @VinceGuerra

    Jim George (View Comment):
    So the point I am trying to make here is to ask you here is whether you ever found out what those mysterious “reasons” were– inquiring minds want to know!

    I first started noticing that the editors were banning posts they disagreed with back in summer 2020. I had a 30 like post at the time and I was confused given the content (Christianity and the riots) so after receiving encouragement from Samuel I contacted Jon. Like you, no response.

    After that it became common – 13, 20, 35, 45 likes on a post…it didn’t matter. If the subject was counter to Jon’s and Yeti’s (maybe a few others) ideology it was banned. That includes all posts detailing election fraud (except Saint Augustine’s, which at the time partially concluded no fraud, he’s since amended it), vaccine dangers, lots on Covid, and all posts detailing the truth about Jan 6th.

    My conclusion regarding Jan 6th political prisoners and Jon Gabriel’s editorial decisions?  He still thinks they’re insurectionists and they deserve what they’re getting. He’s given no indication otherwise.

    I believe the only reason Max’s post of this letter is on the Main Page is because he posted it there as an admin. I have no problem with that, in fact I’m delighted it is because everyone needs to know what’s happening there, even if the people running Ricochet don’t want to face it.

    • #15
  16. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):
    So the point I am trying to make here is to ask you here is whether you ever found out what those mysterious “reasons” were– inquiring minds want to know!

    I first started noticing that the editors were banning posts they disagreed with back in summer 2020. I had a 30 like post at the time and I was confused given the content (Christianity and the riots) so after receiving encouragement from Samuel I contacted Jon. Like you, no response.

    After that it became common – 13, 20, 35, 45 likes on a post…it didn’t matter. If the subject was counter to Jon’s and Yeti’s (maybe a few others) ideology it was banned. That includes all posts detailing election fraud (except Saint Augustine’s, which at the time partially concluded no fraud, he’s since amended it), vaccine dangers, lots on Covid, and all posts detailing the truth about Jan 6th.

    My conclusion regarding Jan 6th political prisoners and Jon Gabriel’s editorial decisions? He still thinks they’re insurectionists and they deserve what they’re getting. He’s given no indication otherwise.

    I believe the only reason Max’s post of this letter is on the Main Page is because he posted it there as an admin. I have no problem with that, in fact I’m delighted it is, because everyone needs to know what’s happening there. Even if the people running Ricochet don’t want to face it.

    It is not there beliefs and that is not fair to Yeti or Jon. It has to do with image and funding as Yeti has shared. Jon and Scott are doing the best that they can with this sort of thing. 

    • #16
  17. Jim George Member
    Jim George
    @JimGeorge

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):
    So the point I am trying to make here is to ask you here is whether you ever found out what those mysterious “reasons” were– inquiring minds want to know!

    I first started noticing that the editors were banning posts they disagreed with back in summer 2020. I had a 30 like post at the time and I was confused given the content (Christianity and the riots) so after receiving encouragement from Samuel I contacted Jon. Like you, no response.

    After that it became common – 13, 20, 35, 45 likes on a post…it didn’t matter. If the subject was counter to Jon’s and Yeti’s (maybe a few others) ideology it was banned. That includes all posts detailing election fraud (except Saint Augustine’s, which at the time partially concluded no fraud, he’s since amended it), vaccine dangers, lots on Covid, and all posts detailing the truth about Jan 6th.

    My conclusion regarding Jan 6th political prisoners and Jon Gabriel’s editorial decisions? He still thinks they’re insurectionists and they deserve what they’re getting. He’s given no indication otherwise.

    I believe the only reason Max’s post of this letter is on the Main Page is because he posted it there as an admin. I have no problem with that, in fact I’m delighted it is, because everyone needs to know what’s happening there. Even if the people running Ricochet don’t want to face it.

    Thank you very much for this response, which I found most interesting and which only further serves to support my conviction that we, as paying customers, should not have to play word games trying to get answers as to what a particular policy might be. And to @bryangstephens point in #16, it is all very interesting how it “has to do with image and funding as Yeti has shared” but, and forgive me for not being in on all the “inside baseball”,  whoever “Yeti” is, he sure as hell hasn’t shared anything with me about anything, and one would apparently wait forever for @jon to give one the simple courtesy of a response — any response. I am sure that being Editor-in-Chief of this site must be a 24-7 kind of job with no time whatsoever left over for common courtesies like responding to paying customers, like most Executive Officers are expected to do, but I personally have found it to be insulting and rude. And, on top of all that, what does it say about a site which holds itself out as a “bastion of free speech” when decisions are made on the basis of the personal opinions of the Editor? Free speech? As I must in fairness note, if I am wrong in any of this, I would love to hear from anyone. So far, crickets. Jim.

    • #17
  18. Max Coolidge
    Max
    @Max

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    who has engaged in “continued inflammatory rhetoric about a stolen election,”

    mhmm.

    • #18
  19. Max Coolidge
    Max
    @Max

    Let’s say for the sake of argument that DeGrave is a violent criminal. (The government has not proven this.) 

    So that means he deserves to have his toilet overflow into his cell? He deserves to be mentally abused by guards? He should suffer physical abuse? What? 

    • #19
  20. Max Coolidge
    Max
    @Max

    For the record I published this to the member feed completely unaware that Vince had already posted it. Sorry, Vince. I did scroll back through recent posts to see if anyone had already posted it, but didn’t go far enough. I did want to publish it to the main feed so I could link to it from my podcast post yesterday, but I wasn’t sure if Jon would want it on the home page and it was pretty late at night when I posted it so I just put it on the member feed.

    • #20
  21. Vince Guerra Member
    Vince Guerra
    @VinceGuerra

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    It is not there beliefs and that is not fair to Yeti or Jon. It has to do with image and funding as Yeti has shared. Jon and Scott are doing the best that they can with this sort of thing.

    Of course it’s about funding, and they’re funded by NeverTrumpers like Bill Kristol so the public site reflects that, but it also reflects their beliefs, which they’re not shy about sharing in dozens of snark laden,  dismissive conversations (written, and audio) over the last year. Maybe I should post links and screenshots but I’m not that interested in revisiting them, they make me ill.

    • #21
  22. Max Coolidge
    Max
    @Max

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    It is not there beliefs and that is not fair to Yeti or Jon. It has to do with image and funding as Yeti has shared. Jon and Scott are doing the best that they can with this sort of thing.

    Of course it’s about funding, and they’re funded by NeverTrumpers like Bill Kristol so the public site reflects that, but it also reflects their beliefs, which they’re not shy about sharing in dozens of snark laden, dismissive conversations (written, and audio) over the last year.

    Kristol pays a fee for distributing his podcast, but so does Radio America pay a fee for Sara Carter and Mock and Daisy, which are two good podcasts.

    • #22
  23. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Max (View Comment):

    Let’s say for the sake of argument that DeGrave is a violent criminal. (The government has not proven this.)

    So that means he deserves to have his toilet overflow into his cell? He deserves to be mentally abused by guards? He should suffer physical abuse? What?

    Actual people here on Ricochet who call themselves conservatives say that Ashli Babbitt deserved to be shot. So . . . my guess is that we will also have people who believe DeGrave deserves to be abused, too.

    • #23
  24. Max Coolidge
    Max
    @Max

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Max (View Comment):

    Let’s say for the sake of argument that DeGrave is a violent criminal. (The government has not proven this.)

    So that means he deserves to have his toilet overflow into his cell? He deserves to be mentally abused by guards? He should suffer physical abuse? What?

    Actual people here on Ricochet who call themselves conservatives say that Ashli Babbitt deserved to be shot. So . . . my guess is that we will also have people who believe DeGrave deserves to be abused, too.

    Well that’s just disgusting. No prisoner, even convicted murders, should be abused. The political prisoners have no been convicted of anything.

    • #24
  25. Vince Guerra Member
    Vince Guerra
    @VinceGuerra

    Max (View Comment):

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    It is not there beliefs and that is not fair to Yeti or Jon. It has to do with image and funding as Yeti has shared. Jon and Scott are doing the best that they can with this sort of thing.

    Of course it’s about funding, and they’re funded by NeverTrumpers like Bill Kristol so the public site reflects that, but it also reflects their beliefs, which they’re not shy about sharing in dozens of snark laden, dismissive conversations (written, and audio) over the last year.

    Kristol pays a fee for distributing his podcast, but so does Radio America pay a fee for Sara Carter and Mock and Daisy, which are two good podcasts.

    And they’ve still got Delingpole which I appreciate, but my beef is with the censoring of quality member posts that discuss the topics they’re uncomfortable with. 

    • #25
  26. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Max (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Max (View Comment):

    Let’s say for the sake of argument that DeGrave is a violent criminal. (The government has not proven this.)

    So that means he deserves to have his toilet overflow into his cell? He deserves to be mentally abused by guards? He should suffer physical abuse? What?

    Actual people here on Ricochet who call themselves conservatives say that Ashli Babbitt deserved to be shot. So . . . my guess is that we will also have people who believe DeGrave deserves to be abused, too.

    Well that’s just disgusting. No prisoner, even convicted murders, should be abused. The political prisoners have no been convicted of anything.

    Some have been charged with parading! Parading, man! You know how serious a crime that is!?

    • #26
  27. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Max (View Comment):

    Let’s say for the sake of argument that DeGrave is a violent criminal. (The government has not proven this.)

    So that means he deserves to have his toilet overflow into his cell? He deserves to be mentally abused by guards? He should suffer physical abuse? What?

    Actual people here on Ricochet who call themselves conservatives say that Ashli Babbitt deserved to be shot. So . . . my guess is that we will also have people who believe DeGrave deserves to be abused, too.

    I still can’t understand support for a murderer. That guy shot an unarmed woman for climbing through a window and all the legal gymnastics in the world won’t change that fact. IIRC, some whined that the killer would possibly be doxxed, if I got that term right. 

    For the record, I also can’t understand what made he do that. 

    • #27
  28. Max Coolidge
    Max
    @Max

    Django (View Comment):

    Their evidence that Worrell is dangerous is that he “raise[d] his hand in the ‘okay’ symbol” and called police officers “the commies with the guns.”

    We’re all criminals to these people. They would put every single last one of us in prison without trial for our wrongthink. And they would use this very comment as evidence against me. “He downloaded the seriousness of Mr. Worrell’s dangerous use of the ‘okay’ symbol.” 

    Commies with guns indeed.

    • #28
  29. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):
    So the point I am trying to make here is to ask you here is whether you ever found out what those mysterious “reasons” were– inquiring minds want to know!

    I first started noticing that the editors were banning posts they disagreed with back in summer 2020. I had a 30 like post at the time and I was confused given the content (Christianity and the riots) so after receiving encouragement from Samuel I contacted Jon. Like you, no response.

    After that it became common – 13, 20, 35, 45 likes on a post…it didn’t matter. If the subject was counter to Jon’s and Yeti’s (maybe a few others) ideology it was banned. That includes all posts detailing election fraud (except Saint Augustine’s, which at the time partially concluded no fraud, he’s since amended it), vaccine dangers, lots on Covid, and all posts detailing the truth about Jan 6th.

    My conclusion regarding Jan 6th political prisoners and Jon Gabriel’s editorial decisions? He still thinks they’re insurectionists and they deserve what they’re getting. He’s given no indication otherwise.

    I believe the only reason Max’s post of this letter is on the Main Page is because he posted it there as an admin. I have no problem with that, in fact I’m delighted it is, because everyone needs to know what’s happening there. Even if the people running Ricochet don’t want to face it.

    It is not there beliefs and that is not fair to Yeti or Jon. It has to do with image and funding as Yeti has shared. Jon and Scott are doing the best that they can with this sort of thing.

    It’s funny.  I was just thinking that the member side (the member posts, comments and groups) are conservative and member driven, while the site itself is profit driven; I suppose that decisions are made from a financial viewpoint with less regard to current member experience.

    • #29
  30. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Jim George (View Comment):

    Thank you very much for this response, which I found most interesting and which only further serves to support my conviction that we, as paying customers, should not have to play word games trying to get answers as to what a particular policy might be. And to @bryangstephens point in #16, it is all very interesting how it “has to do with image and funding as Yeti has shared” but, and forgive me for not being in on all the “inside baseball”,  whoever “Yeti” is, he sure as hell hasn’t shared anything with me about anything, and one would apparently wait forever for @jon to give one the simple courtesy of a response — any response. I am sure that being Editor-in-Chief of this site must be a 24-7 kind of job with no time whatsoever left over for common courtesies like responding to paying customers, like most Executive Officers are expected to do, but I personally have found it to be insulting and rude. And, on top of all that, what does it say about a site which holds itself out as a “bastion of free speech” when decisions are made on the basis of the personal opinions of the Editor? Free speech? As I must in fairness note, if I am wrong in any of this, I would love to hear from anyone. So far, crickets. Jim.

    What’s a big can of cream of mushroom soup cost these days?  5 bucks?  That’s what I pay each month for hours and hours (and hours!) of product.  I really think that 5 bucks is not a reason to kowtow to the membership.  This, the member side, is after all a money loser (per yeti).  All the Main site gets is a bit of money and a wealth of member-generated posts.

    And frankly, I’ve experienced this kind of management before, in billion-dollar corporations.  Requiring the ability and will of management personnel to keep current plans from the staff (let alone the customers) is a common practice.

    I doubt we will ever know what the current executive level plans are for Ricochet, and they themselves probably don’t even know more than vaguely.  But this is perhaps the big conflict within Ricochet: the customers feel it’s their site, and the owners and management rightly view it as their site and have different objectives than merely servicing the membership; that is, finding a way to make it turn a profit.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.