We frequently become the victims of fake news. The most recent attack — I’ll explain the use of that word throughout this article — has come from Norma Jean Shaw and Roger Bianchini of The Royal Examiner, articles that are being published to retaliate against us for exposing corruption in Front Royal, Virginia. We will take their article, section by section, and provide the response we would have given if this media outlet would have taken the time to request a statement from us, which is what real journalists would do.
We did not allege intentional fabrication, but we stated that Jennifer McDonald was being dishonest. McDonald allegedly claims that Curt Tran was dishonest and she only repeated him. We feel it’s fundamentally dishonest for a leader of an economic development agency to not take the time to do research on the statements she makes. Considering that the community depends on her and trusts her to deliver accurate information, people who are investing money in the Town of Front Royal, she has a responsibility to not only vet the information she provides, but to accept full responsibility when the information she provides is incorrect, as would any honest leader. People like me, someone who has ready access to investment money, depend on her words to make sound investment choices, and if she is not bringing me accurate information, she is playing games with my money, and my financial future. It’s quite convenient, for McDonald, with her current stance, that if the bottom drops out of the deal, and the town loses, all she has to do is point at Tran and say, “He did it.”
We were not attacking the Superfund but we were delivering known facts about the Superfund. Telling the truth about the EPA is not attacking them. In our experience, after investigating hundreds of Superfund sites, we have found, along with many other well respected environmental activists, that the Superfund project has been than effective, to the point that it’s hard to trust the EPA’s statement about a site. A quick example would be the Ashville CTS cite, where the EPA told residents for eight years that the TCE in the ground water was not dangerous to the public health, but then showed up one day and evacuated the community, revealing that the residents had spent years of their lives breathing extraordinarily high levels of cancer causing TCE, while the EPA told them they were safe.
We did not attack a large swatch of the community. We feel this was added to the article to mislead the community into thinking we were attacking them, when if fact, we were trying to help them not be ripped of by a bad business deal. We did not attack several media outlets, noting once again that telling the truth is not an attack. We commented on the Sentinel repeating the local government, and we questioned the Northern Virginia Daily calling the report by the Royal Examiner “internet rumors.” To add to this, since all of this has happening in the middle of an almost full media black out, we are now questioning the credibility of all of the local media outlets.
I have to admit that at first we felt that Roger Bianchini was really digging into the issue, but since the publication of our original article, we’ve learned that quite a bit of information was missing, like the simple confirmation that the ITFederal website site was already registered, in direct conflict with McDonald’s statements. I should have said the articles appeared brave. That was my contextual error. Though, I’m having trouble telling if Roger is trying to write in a circular way, dancing around points, or if he is just not particularly skilled at delivering well flowing narratives.
I did happen to test in the 96th percentile in the US, with a Stanine of 9, for reading and comprehension, when I was a child, or the top 4% of the country, and even I find his articles hard to follow, as if they are almost overly decorated with grammar obstacles intended to prove to himself, and the rest of us, that he is a good writer, when he is a good writer and doesn’t need to do that. You’ll note, I am not attacking him, This is my honest assessment. To be fair, I failed the 9th grade writing proficiency test, four times, because I have dyslexia, so who am I to judge?
We did not state that the EPA was in league with Jennifer McDonald. We just pointed out that those were the two people we were left to trust. For example, If we spoke with two different unrelated people and they both told us the same thing, just because they happen to agree does mean they were working together. We also did not say the EPA failed to clean up the site. We stated that based on experience we tend not to trust the words of the EPA. I wonder, again, if Roger is just having trouble interpreting our statements, or if he is being intentionally obtuse, just like McDonald. Based on the behavior he is allowing in the comment sections of his articles, we are leaning toward the latter, because after all, would you prefer being accused of being willfully corrupt rather than only being regarded as an idiot?
This is where we start delving into fake news territory. For some reason, our articles have been perceived as personal vendettas, but I do not know Jennifer McDonald, so how could it be personal? In reality, the only experience I’ve had with the EDA was one of my neighbors who is on the EDA, and I like the guy. I had no perception that the EDA was bad until Councilwoman Egger came to me and told me she asked questions and was treated with disrespect by McDonald, had her name trashed by members of the EDA, she was threatened by members of the town council, and had media hit pieces published about her, which if you haven’t noticed, is the exact same thing they are doing to me, so I believe her, 100%.
What is interesting, is that I also didn’t like the person who came to me, because of the way the local media portrayed her, so the moment I met her, listened to her story and realized who she was, I suddenly saw the truth, and remembered what it felt like to have fake news published about me, like the ABC WEWS news piece in 2013, where we called them to do a new piece about PCB’s in the lake, they interviewed us about PCB’s in the lake, re-edited the interviews to make it look like they’d asked us about illegal dumping, and then directed the local citizens to the very corrupt officials who had been blowing us off in the first place.
Straight up, if Egger had come to me and told me is was Joe Elliott from Def Leppard who did this to her, I would have went after Joe Elliott from Def Leppard, because my job is going after corrupt media outlets and corrupt public officials. Just doing my job, here. Just doing my job.
In this case, obviously, I knew the McDonald’s side of the story, since that was all that had been published. Getting the other side of the story for my piece was speaking with Councilman Egger. Of course, in all of this the only communications I have received from anyone connected to Ms McDonald, are death threats, being told that local rednecks were watching my house, and were going to break my nose, and having her friend’s call me a “retard,” because she’s a crook.
The way many people have expressed Jennifer McDonald to me is that she is a woman who has an answer for everything but also claims to know nothing at the same time. She’s a perfect double talking public official, who is no different than the typical corrupt public official we’ve witnessed all over the country. In Roger’s need to continually minimize who we are, and our vast experience, he’s failed to understand that we have dealt with hundreds of public officials all over the county, which makes it easy for us to spot patterns in the way that public officials tend to communicate without saying anything at all.
Let’s discuss Roger’s continued use of passive aggressive language, which reminds me of my daughter’s mother. If I pointed out she had cheated on me with her husband — it’s a long story — she would yell, “are you still harping on that?!” She said this to make me sound as if I was being absurd for pointing out that she had violated the trust in our relationship. The point is that the NVDaily reported on her statement that she said the “Nuclear Defense Department,” an organization that does not exist, and pointing out that lie is not “harping.”
As someone who used to work for a transportation company, as a liaison for the GSA, I know that if one is dealing with the name of an agency on a regular basis that it’s very unlikely that they would suddenly forget the name of the agency. For instance if I was working with Federal Prison Industries (FPI), one wouldn’t hear me say “Department of Prison Labor.” If I was working with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) one wouldn’t hear me say “Department of Trucking.” For a woman who is so involved with this deal it seems very strange that she would suddenly not remember the name of the agency.
Of course, even with the correction, it’s very strange because the Defense Special Weapons Agency was closed down and merged with the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) by DoD Directive 5105.62 of September 30, 1998, so regardless of what she is saying, she is still claiming that Tran has a contract with an agency that was disbanded in the late 1990’s. Of course, am I harping on this, or does it just continue to contribute to the honestly level of Jennifer McDonald? Is calling a liar a liar really an attack, or is it just the truth?
We are also coming to the realization that I am the only person in the entire town who is qualified to vet the ITFederal deal because of my vast understanding of the functioning of acronym agencies, and contract procurement, which is why I am so good at catching corruption, and how I got to this position in life, with many reputable people commenting over the years that I am a “brilliant investigator.”
As far the status of VDNSystems DBA ITFederal, vs. ITFederal as its own LLC, the answer is simple:
Tran’s company was VDNSystems DBA ITFederal, until Ms. Egger called him out on the EB5 business, which led him to register ITFederal as its own LLC. When the deal started it was one organizational structure but then a second ITFederal was formed, which of course takes us into splitting hairs, much like Bill Clinton stating that he “did not have sex with that woman” based on the legal definition of sex that was provided to him with he testified. Technically, he did not lie, just as much as Jennifer McDonald did not lie when she said “our ITFederal doesn’t have a website,” because it didn’t. VDNSystems DBA ITFederal had a website, but the new ITFederal did not, even though in reality it’s — essentially — the exact same company. Taken even further Tran can claim “that’s not my website” because it’s registered to a Kat Tran.
All of this leads me to one specific point, maybe there are people out there who fall for that kind of double speak, but apparently, that top 4% of the country comprehension level allows me to see right through that kind of talk. Now, if you humor me, imagine how I feel perceiving the world in a way that only 4% of the people in the US that can understand things from my perspective. Suddenly, that explains why I live at the top of the mountain by myself!
I don’t have much to say about this section other than what I see Tran and McDonald, as people who think they are smarter than everyone else, and can manipulate people like they are Obi-Wan Kenobi, who continually play dumb. Maybe they could debate each other, all day, but if they were placed in to a room with me, they’d both lose.
Back to the passive aggression: tirade. Many people perceive me, at first as a right wing nut job, because I fight corruption at the US EPA, which over the years has been a massive perception issue about my work. For one thing, many people do not know about the Superfund project. I know this from 500,000 miles of travel to over 2000 cities, meeting tens of thousands of people. Since no one knows about it, I get lumped in with the vapor trails, and 911 truthers, a lot, until people see the Naitonal Priorities List on the EPA website. Then, that perception is gone. I don’t fault Roger for saying that, but I assure you the most offensive thing about his article is that he called me right winger. I am simply a Democrat that takes on corruption in my own party. I’m not playing by the rules when I don’t blame everything on the Republicans, and that confuses people.
As far as his assessment of the Superfund, there is no one outside of the EPA that knows Superfund like I do, and I can direct you to EPA officials and scientists who will tell you that. In fact, since I haven’t expressed this publicly before, I am actually considering taking a job with the EPA, as I type this. I don’t need it, but I have a “particular set of skills,” and the EPA knows this.
Skipping over the passive aggression, again, and to answer this mystery officials question, I never said I don’t trust the government to clean things up, I don’t trust the EPA when they tell me something is cleaned up, for many reasons. As a caveat, since it’s EPA contractors that are actually conducting the remediations, it is corporations that are cleaning up these sites, with the EPA acting as an overseer, and you’d think they’ know this!
If one wanted an example look that the site in my childhood neighborhood of Caste Homes. They found toxic waste in the ground water, but they did not clean it up, they assigned a process called monitored natural attenuation (MNA).
Superfund chemicals, like everything else in the Universe, have a half life, and naturally degrade over time, so when they assign MNA to a site, this means they let physics do the job, and test it every five years. This means that as long as physics keeps working, the clean up will always be on schedule. In fact, at an MNA site, the only two ways a clean up could not be on schedule is if the laws of physics cease to exist in the aquifer, or they had failed to removed the source of the pollutant. If they’ve removed the source, unless the aquifer suddenly started traveling at 185,999.9 miles per second, causing time to appear stand still to the observer, it’s impossible for the clean up to not be on schedule. In this way, the ground water can still be polluted but cleaned up at the same time, like Shoedinger’s ground water plume.
Even more so, this bring up another question about MNA sites. The EPA will come into town, tell people that a site is a danger to the community, test it, apply MNA, and then suddenly, even though the state of the ground water hasn’t changed, the site is now safe. To take the point even further, a scientist who I will call Willy in Philly told me that he has witnessed numerous times that the EPA has tested two different sites, and found that the one with a PRP (Potentially Responsible Polluter) will be deemed a danger to the public health, while the orphaned site, the one with no one to bill for the clean up under CERCLA, will be determined to protect the public health, establishing that the EPA’s ability to recoup funds plays a role in which sites are deemed health hazards.
A final example are the plumes of Chromium-6 in the ground water in California. When the levels in Hinkley and San Fernando Valley were higher than allowable levels, due to ineffective methods of remediation, rather than attempt the improve the quality of the clean up, they simply raised the allowable levels, meaning that The EPA changed one number and suddenly the sites went from a danger, to safe. Of course, if you wanted me to go on and type a full doctoral dissertation on the reasons that the EPA is hard to trust, I can, but please, Roger, tell this EPA official who called me willfully ignorant that their own willful ignorance of who I am, and the vast level of experience I have, has prevented them from understanding that they owe me a public apology.
And that is my main criticism of generalizations. First of all, at no time in my life, not for one moment, have I been typical, except possibly that I am a male who likes fast cars, titties, and hot wings. And since I am an activist, I do have oversight, it’s you dick head. The media is my oversight. If I am full of it in one of my writing pieces, it’s your job to call me on it, and not personally attack me, or degrade who I am. And you’ll note, he’s still not called me on one single fact, because I’m right.
All of my assertions are not based on absolute truth, but are based on the truth I am able to express to the best of my abilities. So, now that I have expressed all of the above we understand this wasn’t a hit job, and that I am fighting as hard as I am because I am trying to, apparently, protect you from yourselves. There was nothing vindictive about what I did, and the “lying lair caught lying” bit is called click bait, and it’s the only way an activist can get attention, especially in a town with the political make up of Front Royal. Considering that Norma Jean Shaw claims to be a “social media strategist,” you’d think she might have caught that.
As far as your opinion of what is rational, you fucking have comments on your page about my father who died two months ago, who I loved very much, in spite of the fact that he abused me my entire life, and just as I was finally coming to terms with the loss, you brought it all back, and reminded me that the internet vigilante group who is helping you attack me, invaded my alcoholic family six years ago, destroyed all of our healing, and tore us apart, so they are getting extra pleasure knowing that they are rubbing that it’s them that wrecked my family right in my face, while you are the useful idiot that is helping them do it.
If you want my final assessment of the situation. Jennifer McDonald and Curt Tran are hoodwinking The Town of Front Royal, and if I stand up and point that out to try to save the town, somehow I become the enemy. I said it last night, McDonald could shit in Roger’s hand, force him to eat it, and if I tried to stop that from happening, he’d bully me out town and high five Jennifer McDonald.
In closing, The Town of Front can pick either McDonald and Tran, or me, to listen to. If they go, the town gets a fair shot to develop the site into something real. If I go, mark my words, Front Royal screwed, and you did it to yourselves.
Either way, I’m still investigating that Superfund site, regardless of what anyone says, and if we find evidence of danger to public health, we’re going to fight to halt construction until the site is safe for human occupancy, and the harder these people fight me, the harder I am going to fight back, because the leadership in Front Royal’s actions speak much louder than their words.