>>8761616

This video is being spammed, a concerted effort - a 'can't embed' drop, and a helpful anon who kindly embeds it, more than once…

Has anyone bothered to dig on this?

He's spilling the beans on Hollywierd, yet is still employed in Hollywierd - seems a bit odd given the nature of the content?

This video, whilst containing lots of stuff anons will identify with (but nothing new), reminds me of the video a few months back of the Epstein / mafia insider - he was an actor and that video was BS - this has a similar feel to me.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0809371/

>>8761863

I watched it this morning and I'm not questioning the content anon, it is very well put together.

>>8761915

I too have been a helpful anon, but it is getting to the point of being spammed - of course that could be to discredit it….

>>8761991

> The objections I"m seeing posted here seem rather shilly.

I asked if anyone had looked any further, not shilly. Hollywierd are usually quite ruthless when it comes to 'whistleblowers' so I find it strange he's still apparently working in Hollywood.

>>8762059

and din't remove the 'for'

>>8762070

*didn't

I wonder where the Failing New York Times got for this one?