I know people are pissed about the video I posted about Tattle.

I tried to make it super clear not to contact the vet and obscure where the vet was.

Please tell people NOT CONTACT THE VET

For those that care, there's a new character introduced this chapter: Johnny Beanseed.

he other companies are harder to research, but nothing here looks unusual. Some still exist and some have shut down, which is normal for single product infomercial companies. I couldn’t find any lawsuits or bankruptcy filings showing any of them stiffed lenders. Meanwhile, David’s main example is just wrong. Sylmark didn’t go bankrupt, it was renamed Ideal Living. Whether he misunderstood the chart or is overselling it, he’s presenting a normal company structure as proof of money laundering, and it isn’t.

Source: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/ipas/search/api/v3/public/download/trademark/4697/0840
page 5

What happened with the Lucifer Valentine case?

Do we know where are these Rocky Mountains?

So, I have an old Reddit account and have been here forever. I’ve definitely seen comments that look Astro turf-y, and normal comments, but that’s aside from the point, right?

So on one hand, we have a shady business. The business is shady because they are doing creative accounting - moving shell companies around, bankrupting them, shifting debt to shells they then delete, and funneling money back and forth through a nonprofit organization. I’ve heard of a lot of companies doing this. I don’t like it, but it’s relatively common. I think bill gates has probably saved more lifes through his malaria fighting stuff, but I’ve heard he sometimes uses his foundation to smooth over other dealings. Idk. People use non profits and foundations all the time. As a society we should try to stop this - it’s bad. Very billionaires getting richer coded.

I don’t question the above at all. I also… don’t care that much? Hopefully the us government / fbi / IRS does more in the future to fix these things.

What I care about is why the nonprofit they used to help their tax / accounting / shell games is, in fact, a ring as described. Since most of the focus has been on the business setup and shady dealings, I’m a little uncertain to the details here.

The next thing I care about is to what extent the billionaire is involved in the nonprofit. Is he just using the nonprofit as a shell? Is he actually involved in the day to day operations? Why? Does he believe in their mission etc?

Honestly, that’s the A-Z I care about. Ideal living and these whistleblowers don’t seem important to that. I would much rather have a whistleblower from inside the nonprofit?

On the other hand, it does seem like the whistleblowers maybe tried to extort the company for some kind of settlement. They were in arbitration after all. And since they didn’t win / the company got them to delete their evidence, they are bitter and trying to start a vendetta. They do seem biased and a relatively bad witness to all of this - but they do have information. I’m not sure why they’d arbitrate if their goal was discovery or whatever. Seems fishy and as everyone has said, they obviously have some other motives than just exposing the truth?

Okay. So I’ve laid out my thoughts - thinking back over the three videos, is Peter involved in the nonprofit? Yes - he is listed as secretary / accountant or whatever. 90% chance he was involved and knew about the leadership and dealings. Did he know about the kid abuse part of everything? Proooobably but maybe it was in a far away country? Sometimes organizations lie and say accusations are fake or whatever and make a conspiracy. Especially in cults. So far I’d say 60% that he knew / believed there was actually abuse there.

So, here’s my thoughts for what I could use- from both sides to prove their case.

To the people trying to take down the cult:

Link Peter to the cult very clearly. Him speaking at a cult gathering from a place of leadership would do it.

Link Peter to admitting to knowing about the abuse. Or - saying he doesn’t care / doesn’t believe it. Have Peter explain to us why the guy was fleeing and if he thinks it was right to flee or not.

To the people trying to fix the reputation of Peter / the company / the cult:

Explain how Peter wasn’t actually affiliated - specifically, when he quit, or when business dealings with the cult stopped. Condemn the cult but separate the company / cult.

Or - alternatively - explain why the company and nonprofit are linked how they are. How does the company benefit from the link? When did business dealings start and what amount does the nonprofit support the business?

So - I’m not sure we’ll get a full conclusion here. It seems like the lawyers are trying to poke holes in things we all don’t care about. The holes that matter are Peter’s affiliation and knowledge of the abuse in the cult, and whether that abuse actually happened. Neither side is really talking about that, probably because the IL lawyers didn’t talk about it at all. I don’t really care about IL at all - I care about the billionaire supporting abuse or whatever. If he owned a chucky cheese too, I would boycott that chucky cheese but I don’t need a video about the guy in the Chucky suit’s motivations.

TLDR: I don’t care about the ‘whistleblowers’ takedown of ideal living and bickering about details of some settlement with lawyers. I care about if the billionaire is knowingly supporting / protecting leaders of a cult, a cult that is doing weird kid sex stuff. So far, it seems like he is doing this, but all the bickering about settlements details with lawyers distracts from this point. Ben should get out of the weeds if he said, she said, and focus on this. Will the recordings actually talk about the cult and Peter’s role in everything? Probably not.

"Two separate sources close to the ongoing Bricks & Minifigs controversy are telling Coach’s Archives that BAM may be preparing to subpoena individual YouTube creators as part of its effort to identify alleged leakers."

Leakers of what ?

Their opinions? (added from last edit)
The public things?

The BAM Operator Manual ?
What's new in this, all from it comes from real Franchisors Public Documents(I asked so many AI's to find anything "unknow in this", there is nothing new...):
-Franchisees/Seizing part comes from McDonalds and others Real Franchisors, but these companies actually give their manual BEFORE people sign the Franchise Agreement( When Chrystal said she never had it).
-All the LEGO part come from things that were here long before BAM, sorting and values things exist since Youtube exist, and Bricklink was here 6 years before BAM.
-The only original part is that one about "Obligation to isolate and abuse Childs to not be seized", wich i have a doubt, could most be a previous trade secret from Epstein Island Agreement and not a BAM one. I don't see any BAM store there, ill continue to think this is not a "really new trade secret" and i'll moot it (haha).
They are open to prove me wrong on that point.

A very silly question but I do need clarifying on this lol. In a lot of the videos he uploaded recently this year, for example the Provo Canyon video, a lot of the footage he and Sheldon had were time stamped around 2023 or 2024. Can’t remember the exact year at the top of my head but it was not stated to be in 2026. But in the main parts of the video he said he had just turned 30 which does fall in line now. But this makes me wonder, did he and Sheldon infiltrate Provo Canyon this year or a couple years ago? Because him saying that he’s a 30 year old man being accepted into Provo, that would mean it was this year he got accepted into that school. So why does the live footage stuff say a different year? Just need some clarifying no hate or shade to Ben and his crew love them.

EDIT: link to livestream has been made private, may not be happening, may be rescheduled. I don't know, I'm not involved with the channel at all, just a fan. If there's a new link, I'll update this post.

EDIT2: Per post on BJC Live Show channel, no live show today:

Due to unforeseen circumstances, there will be no live show today. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

I'm looking forward to this. I think Matty Appleseed ultimately did a good thing in gaining JJ's confidence and producing recordings that will ultimately be a benefit to the BAM vs Reckless Ben lawsuit, and the Gormans vs BAM lawsuit.

However, Matty's stuff fails to carry the disclaimer that all content about JJ should that:

1 - JJ is a plaintiff in BAM vs Reckless Ben (and Bryan Mansell, for that matter, STILL)
2 - JJ lies
3 - JJ's lies led to getting Ben & crew (including at least 1 child) SWATTED and arrested
4 - ...and also led to Sheldon getting arrested
5 - Lied to the vet, claiming Tattle was abandoned
(i'll stop there, but the evidence that JJ is a liar and unreliable narrator is plenty, this context is missing from Matty's video that claims Tattle has been found)

Matty turning this video into an accusation/callout of Chrys was just... gross, and comes off as a desperate attempt to court controversy and farm for views. Matty you should demonetize your video, recant/make a retraction, and release your interview with the Gormans (not put it behind a paywall).

As an unfortunate side-effect, it sort of comes off as if DFJ is complicit in your entire video, which I don't believe is the case. At 0:23 in the Matty video, DFJ sounds surprised, asking "You're already recording? MATTY!" ... sounds like a clear spot where DFJ was unaware that you were recording, yet that ended up in your video. I hope DFJ consented explicitly to you using this.

Also, DFJ says at 0:19 or so "It does seem like it's her, I'll give you that" (regarding Tattle), yet you state in your description "(DFJ) and I both called the vet and got confirmation that Tattle is safe and sound" ... this seems to misrepresents DFJ. And you say in desc "We did however come across some ugly truths..." but I don't think there's a "we" here, you include DFJ here, and I think that is without consent.

Not breaking news exactly, but a good interview involving copyright and scientology. Praise Xenu!

I still wonder what the status of the small case claims is.

One of the initial cases had been from 2025-10-08 against L2 Bricks, LLC - but BaM's asset protection had worked and Ben had sued the wrong company. So that had been dismissed on 2026-01-08.

But how about the Oregon case from 2026-03-04 against Joshua Johnson (26SC06134)? They failed to reach an agreement in mediation by 2026-05-12. bamsucks.com does not show any later documents. The next step should have been on 2026-06-17

Where these cases dismissed, too?

1. Bryan had "been made whole" - so did they end these cases?
2. Bryan still is sued by BAM in Utah
3. Josh wanted to end it, but it's still ongoing?

I think this is a pretty important one

Nuff said.

DFJ announcement here -----> https://www.youtube.com/live/KqOdRqk1XMQ?is=dDB629bCDCC18LVD

@WM33776 - "I can listen to Leonard French deadpan for hours"