Jones's confession raises the stakes significantly for the under-review possibility that—based on photo analyses—Jones's lieutenant Owen Shroyer may have been inside Trump's ops center on January 6.
Please, God, hire an editor. I'm a recent subscriber who respects your journalism. But your incessant need to "backstory" your way into each new development drives me nuts. I don't want to have to wade in 350 words to get to "Trump and Jones were in direct contact on Insurrection Day..." And I don't think I should have to. If I'm on a phone, forget it. Even laptop on sofa, I get your email (always, alas, mimicking CNN: 'Breaking News!'), click, and...word salad.
Dude, I subscribed. I *know* you reported each of these things exclusively, previously, and every other way you tout your prior story and cred. Props to you, but we all know they're from PROOF. Can't you just hyperlink the previous stories/developments in a quick recap and get on with it?
I say all this in good spirit. You're doing seemingly solid work that I either won't see elsewhere or will read here first. Good for you. But *my* time is valuable, too. It's almost like you need both a short version and a long version. I'd love to keep up by being able to dip in and out of your stories as I, essentially, am following with the larger one.
I'm also new to Substack; maybe this is format. Still, one cry from a reader/subscriber to tighten these the fuck up.
From another reader here…I appreciate Mr. Abramson’s detailed analysis, and don’t want his information condensed to 280 characters like a Twitter post. Obviously you feel differently, which is your prerogative. I gather you have not read his books, which also are detailed.
In no way am I suggesting a Twitter length recap. And I have read earlier stories beginning to end. I do find subsequent updates on an evolving story to be tiresome in their recaps. I also realize that a new reader would want to know about those preceding incidents. I would welcome learning whats *new* sooner when I've already done a "close reading" on what preceded it. I'm fine with storytelling, and while I have not read his books, I would expect them to be told that way. Every single word can stay in the stories for all I care, after a brief summary of the "breaking news" that was teased on Twitter or by email. Then, fine, the backstory. Every word of it.
It's just Editing 101 to me, to sustain your widest possible (paying) readership.
BTW, as a writer, producer, briefly-a-lawyer-sidetrack as a public defender type lawyer, for journalist *and* DJ (!), I like Seth a lot. His playlists are a hoot. I'm not going anywhere. I'm just expressing how I feel, and we feel differently.
I have read Seth's writings on Twitter for a few years now. My $0.02 is this: years ago, I found Seth's Tweets beautifully written and made me laugh. Then Seth started researching tRump and wrote the books, which took a toll on him as the material was horrible. His books are, so information filled that they are a little dry to read at parts, to be honest. If I understand correctly, there is a word limit in publishing books with their amount of content. I would recommend reading his books if you prefer to the point information sessions. It almost feels to me that Seth has learned to write this way because people argue/nitpick how connections made. Plus, some people cannot always remember many names and data points, so Seth is extra thorough.
Thank you for your response. Yes, we feel differently. I hesitated to reply to your post, but thought I would express an opposing view as I did disagree. I am older & like to see stories in depth as opposed to articles that just give a few lines where people who dive no deeper miss so much. That does not reply to you, & I appreciate your point.
While the headlines offer decent clues to what will be discussed, I could also see how a brief summary or an "elevator pitch" of the story's main points as a lead-in to the "Introduction" section would be good. But I can also do without it. With these stories, there are so many characters who often have crossed paths in several different ways, it can certainly get confusing or a reader can forget some of the many links. I've read two of Seth's books and it's an extremely tough balancing act to keep the reader informed of all the moving parts and also not get bogged down in constant recaps.
Jean, I'm with you. I graduated Sigma Tau Delta in English. If I don't have the time to really do a close reading on something then I don't read at all, especially regarding something as important as this. And it is Seth's close reading that makes him a Meta-journalist and so damn thorough.
A solution that Substack could provide (via an update to its platform) would be content blocks that toggle to show or hide content.
Notion provides this toggle functionality, for example. It’s great for providing additional content, in context, without interrupting the flow of the main content.
I understand (and agree with) Seth’s goal of proving the background details in his articles. I also understand the slight nuisance for the reader.
Maybe a bulleted summary of key points could help?
Anyway. The owner of this problem is really Substack, IMO. It’s their responsibility - and in their business interest - to provide tools to content creators that maximize readability, comprehension, visual communication, etc.
Don't worry you guys, we're all doing incredibly well in this current mind-f*ck of a world. Things will get better over time. One fine day we'll all be able to leave our Trump/Covid hair-triggers behind us and the sun will shine on us all once more. We really are all in this together, all doing the very best we can from where we stand. Beers and chardonnays, sunshine, ubiquitous vaccinations, the trickle-down of civility from the Biden admin and us all consoling one another and all re-discovering our innate kindness. Gotta remember just how profoundly we've all been f*cked with -- we're all the walking wounded! A little lashing out once in a while is okay.
As a Casting Director for Hollywood (whom had to find matching stand ins and stunt person matches for actors); not to mention a 40-year practitioner of the Buddhist behavioral scientist version of face formations akin to the Ennio-gram; I would say those two men in the photos are the same man. If I could see a photo from the rally of his thumbs, I could tell you with certainty, because they are unusually shaped paddle-thumbs. But yeah, the hairline, nose-shape, lip shape, etc; chin, jeans, are the same.
So I looked at over 50 photos on the net carefully of Owen, if I could post them here I would. He is really thin in one, bulked up and fit in another, and flabby in a third. Typical of drug addicts/ actors/ fitness freaks, etc.
I agree. The only part playing with my head giving doubt are his eyebrows and the bridge from the nose to them; the lighting is throwing that off for me.
I can see why! I'm researching the "earlobe" comment, too. Both of you could be right. But in my experience, people can have dissimilar looks given camera angels and even camera format, like actress Kate Blanchett... we casting people call them Chameleons.
This "rats scurrying in tunnels" reference alone speaks volumes.
He could have said politicians are evil bla bla bla without mentioning tunnels.
You can't hide in tunnels to avoid "we the people" you only use the tunnels to get to a location where you would "hide" ... the plan by the Oath Keepers et. al. spoken outloud much?
People in Congress are not "scurrying in tunnels" -- they use the tunnels to walk in between offices lol one is decorated with wall art by grade schoolers and one leads to cafeteria -- all of it public knowledge, but he's basically outlining what would eventually happen at the actual insurrection itself -- folks running for there lives anywhere they could.
Seth, I’m an artist & I noticed confirming markers in both pics! It’s the same guy. Artist see things others don’t, I view human features similar to face recognition software. Also, He carries his cell phone in the same front pocket so much so that in both pics his jeans have permanent wear marks from it— Like Cowboys snuff/skoal cans. It leaves a perfect permanent mark in jeans that can not be refuted. No one else can create those same marks as no one carries their phone the same way. I’ve combed through many photos of him from Getty & others & I’m confident it’s him right down to his height! His earlobes are identical in both pics as well! Lol
I noticed the marking on his pants too. In the second photo it’s pretty blurry but when comparing the photos it looks to be the same fading of the denim.
Yes, you are right about artists, and I just came to the same conclusion! The guy at the top image has paddle thumbs and the bottom has spatula fingers and paddle thumbs in his other pictures! The lobe thing could be lighting.
keep digging, seth!! think a slow motion review of staffing, permits, funding and marketing of event would also lead back to satan. he always uses middlemen, but his people took over the event, and modified the permit which was never going to the capitol. and his campaign staff were running things. also hear manafort has event planning company??? i think this is a very rich vein to explore. it will show his fingerprints on all of it. but stone, lindell, jones, flynn, giuliano et al someone will have to spill the beans under oath/subpoena. i think some little people in the WH might have even overheard some things and saw some things. someone was organizing all of this. since the insurrection was a tv show, think we know who that is. the biggest production of his life.
It is close but only at first glance. different ears completely.. lobes attached in one & not attached in other! different noses, different head shape. lastly, different age.
My thoughts also. The "cowlick" and the facial hair around the mouth/chin are similar, but the cheeks are different. Every picture I find of Owen, his "chipmunk" cheeks are obvious. I don't see them here. I also agree the guy in the room looks much older than any of the pictures I've found of Shroyer. Shroyer also has more facial hair on the sides than this guy. BUT he is familiar. I've seen him elsewhere in the insurrection. I need to take the time to remember where.
Dude has some crazy AI software that assists him in identifying facial microexpressions and things of that nature. You should reach out to him and see if he can help with the Owen Shroyer mystery. If anyone can, I bet he could. I think you should do that! Good luck with your investigating.
That's what I thought! However, the TOPS of the ears are slightly different, but that could be angle. Owens are pin-head ears at the top the other guy with Rudy seems to not have them pinned to his head as much.
Seth, I’m an artist & I noticed confirming markers in both pics! It’s the same guy. Artist see things others don’t, I view human features similar to face recognition software. Also, He carries his cell phone in the same front pocket so much so that in both pics his jeans have permanent wear marks from it— Like Cowboys snuff/skoal cans. It leaves a perfect permanent mark in jeans that can not be refuted. No one else can create those same marks as no one carries their phone the same way. I’ve combed through many photos of him from Getty & others & I’m confident it’s him right down to his height!
Seth, re Guy in White Shirt wearing Hotel Guest pass: I’m looking at the letters printed on the right sleeve and see a possibility that these could spell “POLICE”
question: why would satan need an office in the willard hotel for the "event" when they had a VIP tent, etc. need to see cell phones of everyone that day.
question: why didnt the secret service move satan out of the WH during the insurrection instead of just letting him watch tv?? that implies secret service in on insurrection. because any normal secret service detail would have moved him to a secure location.
Please, God, hire an editor. I'm a recent subscriber who respects your journalism. But your incessant need to "backstory" your way into each new development drives me nuts. I don't want to have to wade in 350 words to get to "Trump and Jones were in direct contact on Insurrection Day..." And I don't think I should have to. If I'm on a phone, forget it. Even laptop on sofa, I get your email (always, alas, mimicking CNN: 'Breaking News!'), click, and...word salad.
Dude, I subscribed. I *know* you reported each of these things exclusively, previously, and every other way you tout your prior story and cred. Props to you, but we all know they're from PROOF. Can't you just hyperlink the previous stories/developments in a quick recap and get on with it?
I say all this in good spirit. You're doing seemingly solid work that I either won't see elsewhere or will read here first. Good for you. But *my* time is valuable, too. It's almost like you need both a short version and a long version. I'd love to keep up by being able to dip in and out of your stories as I, essentially, am following with the larger one.
I'm also new to Substack; maybe this is format. Still, one cry from a reader/subscriber to tighten these the fuck up.
@ haru
From another reader here…I appreciate Mr. Abramson’s detailed analysis, and don’t want his information condensed to 280 characters like a Twitter post. Obviously you feel differently, which is your prerogative. I gather you have not read his books, which also are detailed.
In no way am I suggesting a Twitter length recap. And I have read earlier stories beginning to end. I do find subsequent updates on an evolving story to be tiresome in their recaps. I also realize that a new reader would want to know about those preceding incidents. I would welcome learning whats *new* sooner when I've already done a "close reading" on what preceded it. I'm fine with storytelling, and while I have not read his books, I would expect them to be told that way. Every single word can stay in the stories for all I care, after a brief summary of the "breaking news" that was teased on Twitter or by email. Then, fine, the backstory. Every word of it.
It's just Editing 101 to me, to sustain your widest possible (paying) readership.
BTW, as a writer, producer, briefly-a-lawyer-sidetrack as a public defender type lawyer, for journalist *and* DJ (!), I like Seth a lot. His playlists are a hoot. I'm not going anywhere. I'm just expressing how I feel, and we feel differently.
@haru,
I have read Seth's writings on Twitter for a few years now. My $0.02 is this: years ago, I found Seth's Tweets beautifully written and made me laugh. Then Seth started researching tRump and wrote the books, which took a toll on him as the material was horrible. His books are, so information filled that they are a little dry to read at parts, to be honest. If I understand correctly, there is a word limit in publishing books with their amount of content. I would recommend reading his books if you prefer to the point information sessions. It almost feels to me that Seth has learned to write this way because people argue/nitpick how connections made. Plus, some people cannot always remember many names and data points, so Seth is extra thorough.
Thank you for your response. Yes, we feel differently. I hesitated to reply to your post, but thought I would express an opposing view as I did disagree. I am older & like to see stories in depth as opposed to articles that just give a few lines where people who dive no deeper miss so much. That does not reply to you, & I appreciate your point.
Isn’t it refreshing to pleasantly disagree? Thanks back
You are most welcome! 😸
While the headlines offer decent clues to what will be discussed, I could also see how a brief summary or an "elevator pitch" of the story's main points as a lead-in to the "Introduction" section would be good. But I can also do without it. With these stories, there are so many characters who often have crossed paths in several different ways, it can certainly get confusing or a reader can forget some of the many links. I've read two of Seth's books and it's an extremely tough balancing act to keep the reader informed of all the moving parts and also not get bogged down in constant recaps.
Jean, I'm with you. I graduated Sigma Tau Delta in English. If I don't have the time to really do a close reading on something then I don't read at all, especially regarding something as important as this. And it is Seth's close reading that makes him a Meta-journalist and so damn thorough.
A solution that Substack could provide (via an update to its platform) would be content blocks that toggle to show or hide content.
Notion provides this toggle functionality, for example. It’s great for providing additional content, in context, without interrupting the flow of the main content.
I understand (and agree with) Seth’s goal of proving the background details in his articles. I also understand the slight nuisance for the reader.
Maybe a bulleted summary of key points could help?
Anyway. The owner of this problem is really Substack, IMO. It’s their responsibility - and in their business interest - to provide tools to content creators that maximize readability, comprehension, visual communication, etc.
Wow...what a dick you are!
…and so much for the civility of what had been a very civil exchange of opinions.
Don't worry you guys, we're all doing incredibly well in this current mind-f*ck of a world. Things will get better over time. One fine day we'll all be able to leave our Trump/Covid hair-triggers behind us and the sun will shine on us all once more. We really are all in this together, all doing the very best we can from where we stand. Beers and chardonnays, sunshine, ubiquitous vaccinations, the trickle-down of civility from the Biden admin and us all consoling one another and all re-discovering our innate kindness. Gotta remember just how profoundly we've all been f*cked with -- we're all the walking wounded! A little lashing out once in a while is okay.
As a Casting Director for Hollywood (whom had to find matching stand ins and stunt person matches for actors); not to mention a 40-year practitioner of the Buddhist behavioral scientist version of face formations akin to the Ennio-gram; I would say those two men in the photos are the same man. If I could see a photo from the rally of his thumbs, I could tell you with certainty, because they are unusually shaped paddle-thumbs. But yeah, the hairline, nose-shape, lip shape, etc; chin, jeans, are the same.
Here are my bonafide's: http://imdb.me/katherinewilson.com
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0933687/
Here's a video of Owen's ears, sigh, but not thumbs... https://2ubii.com/watch/owen-shroyer-trains-for-2020_BdZe9Sf8mBXwHka.html
So I looked at over 50 photos on the net carefully of Owen, if I could post them here I would. He is really thin in one, bulked up and fit in another, and flabby in a third. Typical of drug addicts/ actors/ fitness freaks, etc.
K'iya,
I agree. The only part playing with my head giving doubt are his eyebrows and the bridge from the nose to them; the lighting is throwing that off for me.
I can see why! I'm researching the "earlobe" comment, too. Both of you could be right. But in my experience, people can have dissimilar looks given camera angels and even camera format, like actress Kate Blanchett... we casting people call them Chameleons.
This "rats scurrying in tunnels" reference alone speaks volumes.
He could have said politicians are evil bla bla bla without mentioning tunnels.
You can't hide in tunnels to avoid "we the people" you only use the tunnels to get to a location where you would "hide" ... the plan by the Oath Keepers et. al. spoken outloud much?
People in Congress are not "scurrying in tunnels" -- they use the tunnels to walk in between offices lol one is decorated with wall art by grade schoolers and one leads to cafeteria -- all of it public knowledge, but he's basically outlining what would eventually happen at the actual insurrection itself -- folks running for there lives anywhere they could.
He was giving a run of show.
Yes, knowing what I now know, that reference to the tunnels was horrifically stunning and definitely a giveaway to them being part of a plan.
All of your hard work is making things come together , Seth! I truly wish that MSM would pick up on ANY of this that you have unearthed!
Seth, I’m an artist & I noticed confirming markers in both pics! It’s the same guy. Artist see things others don’t, I view human features similar to face recognition software. Also, He carries his cell phone in the same front pocket so much so that in both pics his jeans have permanent wear marks from it— Like Cowboys snuff/skoal cans. It leaves a perfect permanent mark in jeans that can not be refuted. No one else can create those same marks as no one carries their phone the same way. I’ve combed through many photos of him from Getty & others & I’m confident it’s him right down to his height! His earlobes are identical in both pics as well! Lol
I noticed the marking on his pants too. In the second photo it’s pretty blurry but when comparing the photos it looks to be the same fading of the denim.
Yes, you are right about artists, and I just came to the same conclusion! The guy at the top image has paddle thumbs and the bottom has spatula fingers and paddle thumbs in his other pictures! The lobe thing could be lighting.
keep digging, seth!! think a slow motion review of staffing, permits, funding and marketing of event would also lead back to satan. he always uses middlemen, but his people took over the event, and modified the permit which was never going to the capitol. and his campaign staff were running things. also hear manafort has event planning company??? i think this is a very rich vein to explore. it will show his fingerprints on all of it. but stone, lindell, jones, flynn, giuliano et al someone will have to spill the beans under oath/subpoena. i think some little people in the WH might have even overheard some things and saw some things. someone was organizing all of this. since the insurrection was a tv show, think we know who that is. the biggest production of his life.
It is close but only at first glance. different ears completely.. lobes attached in one & not attached in other! different noses, different head shape. lastly, different age.
My thoughts also. The "cowlick" and the facial hair around the mouth/chin are similar, but the cheeks are different. Every picture I find of Owen, his "chipmunk" cheeks are obvious. I don't see them here. I also agree the guy in the room looks much older than any of the pictures I've found of Shroyer. Shroyer also has more facial hair on the sides than this guy. BUT he is familiar. I've seen him elsewhere in the insurrection. I need to take the time to remember where.
George Carlin was terrifyingly correct about the arrival of Fascism in America... 😬🤯🤬
Check it out- you ever seen the YouTube channel for the Body Language Guy? https://youtube.com/c/thebodylanguageguy
Dude has some crazy AI software that assists him in identifying facial microexpressions and things of that nature. You should reach out to him and see if he can help with the Owen Shroyer mystery. If anyone can, I bet he could. I think you should do that! Good luck with your investigating.
The earlobes are identical too! Lol
That's what I thought! However, the TOPS of the ears are slightly different, but that could be angle. Owens are pin-head ears at the top the other guy with Rudy seems to not have them pinned to his head as much.
Seth, I’m an artist & I noticed confirming markers in both pics! It’s the same guy. Artist see things others don’t, I view human features similar to face recognition software. Also, He carries his cell phone in the same front pocket so much so that in both pics his jeans have permanent wear marks from it— Like Cowboys snuff/skoal cans. It leaves a perfect permanent mark in jeans that can not be refuted. No one else can create those same marks as no one carries their phone the same way. I’ve combed through many photos of him from Getty & others & I’m confident it’s him right down to his height!
"Peaceful" this, "peaceful" that. I don't buy it Jonesy.
Seth, re Guy in White Shirt wearing Hotel Guest pass: I’m looking at the letters printed on the right sleeve and see a possibility that these could spell “POLICE”
question: why would satan need an office in the willard hotel for the "event" when they had a VIP tent, etc. need to see cell phones of everyone that day.
question: why didnt the secret service move satan out of the WH during the insurrection instead of just letting him watch tv?? that implies secret service in on insurrection. because any normal secret service detail would have moved him to a secure location.