A decorated Iraq war veteran named Sascha Riley is publicly claiming to have been trafficked as a child in a Trump/Epstein criminal enterprise—and their detailed testimony names some of the most powerful figures in American politics, including Donald Trump, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, and Republican congressmen. The unverified allegations were published on Substack by […]
FWIW
I stopped reading the first time after this sentence. Which is a shame, because what you write otherwise seems well-balanced and reasonable for what you’re focusing on.
Sorry, this statement seems meaningless, or even misinfo, because the term is used in credible reports.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2025/apr/10/deep-cover-kgb-spy-recruited-son-peter-herrmann-illegals
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/21/new-york-police-officer-china-tibetan-immigrants-spying-charges
I still think the use of “handler” in addition to the other movie and conspiracy parts is just further support of fiction getting mixed in with his story.
Why not just say “the people who took me to places”.
I’m not going to go back to look at this nasty stuff for this purpose. But that’s reasonable, if it fits that context. My issue was with generally equating the term ‘handler’ as a crackpot conspiracy speak, when that’s literally a widely used term. :)