**Blockbuster** SNAP’s Clohessy Resigns In Wake of Lawsuit Scandal That SNAP Took Lawyer Kickbacks and Exploited Victims

SNAP lawsuit : David Clohessy

Out goes the nasty: SNAP director David Clohessy abandons ship

In the wake of last week's blockbuster lawsuit by a former SNAP director, Gretchen Hammond, alleging that SNAP was engaged in an elaborate kickback scheme with Church-suing contingency lawyers, SNAP's longtime National Director David Clohessy has announced his resignation.

Jesse Bogan at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch was the first to report the news of Clohessy's embarrassing departure.

Clohessy's reckless disregard for truth

Gretchen R. Hammond : Gretchen Hammond

Speaking truth to power:
Ex-SNAP insider
Gretchen Hammond

Clohessy was the ever-present face of SNAP at press conferences issuing crazy, hyperbolic, and often false statements to an all-too-willing media, whether it be wildly accusing Church officials of being evil or recklessly accusing innocent priests of being pedophiles.

(As we reported just a few months ago, a federal judge ruled that SNAP and Clohessy falsely accused an innocent priest of being a pedophile and had "made these statements negligently and with reckless disregard for the truth.")

As Hammond's lawsuit finally demonstrated, Clohessy's real motivation was not a real concern for victims of sex abuse but his hatred for the Catholic Church and his desire to generate publicity and raise money for SNAP.

And now Clohessy has given shifting and conflicting statements to the press regarding the timing and circumstances of his resignation. We laughed out loud when Clohessy actually cited "high cholesterol" as a contributing factor to his resignation. But more interesting was his claim that he tendered his resignation last October, yet we see that Clohessy is still listed (screenshot) on SNAP's web site as we write this tonight (1/25/17).

And, as gentle reminders, in addition to colluding with lawyers in kickback schemes, repeatedly lying to the media, and falsely accusing numerous innocent priests of being pedophiles, Clohessy has:

  • refused to report his brother Kevin to police even though he knew "for years" that Kevin was sexually abusing innocent boys;
  • admitted under oath that he released false information to the media;
  • sued for the right to harass and intimidate parishioners at Sunday Mass;
  • repeatedly refused court orders in lawsuits against him and SNAP;
  • published the phone numbers and email addresses of accused clerics on the SNAP web site to incite harassment of Catholic priests;
  • suggested that Philadelphia Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua was faking his cancer to avoid appearing in court (Bevilacqua died in his sleep less than 36 hours after Clohessy's unbelievable remark);
  • smeared an innocent woman and her day care business by falsely claiming that a suspended Catholic priest was living there;

and much, much, much more.

Developing …


  1. Mark Taylor says:

    I found out about David Clohessy's resignation from Catholics4Change. There are 4 comments, 3 wrote with high praise for him but the 4th would agree with you about your namesake: https://catholics4change.com/2017/01/24/david-clohessy-resigns-from-snap/#comment-111717

  2. Isaiah Bennett says:

    One down, Blaine and Dorris to go.

  3. Harold czaplicki says:

    It is not only horrific, it is unconscionable that people with little or no sense of decency could destroy hundreds if not thousands of people with allegations that may have had some truth but certainly were not the extent the gravity or the horror that was polluted by snap and its members. We know of numerous priests removed from Ministry for accusations from years ago that had more to do with boundary issues than it did with quote rape unquote as was charged by snap and its Affiliates. The lawyers, snap and all those connected with this unconscionable effort made millions and millions of dollars to the detriment and destruction of thousands of people including true victims of sexual abuse not only by clergy but also others as well

    • Dan says:

      Harold, are you joking? Pope rat-zinger laicized 400 perverted creeps and thousands more pedophiles and perverts, got away with their crimes through excuses, lies and cover-ups. When are you catholics going to wake up to reality and stop playing – See no evil, Hear no evil, Speak no evil – especially when it concerns the blatant malfeasance of your hierarchy. I can't understand how obviously wicked cults can fool so many. My guess is the Bible rings true when describing the power of Satan and his demons. Thank God that His power trumps all evil and wickedness. Step out into the Light, while there is still time to do so.  servant

    • Dan says:

      I have to ask, is publyin' your mentor?

  4. KURT GLADSKY says:

       I do not believe there is any truth to this. I know David and he has done more for sex abuse survivors than anyone else.

    • Richard A. Bucci says:

      LOL  That is precisely what parishioners say when clergy are accused.  Physician heal thyself!

  5. Publion says:

    I’m not sure to what ‘Kurt Gladsky’ is referring when he says that he doesn’t “believe there is any truth to this”.

    To what?

    To the fact that Clohessy resigned (on Dec.31, 2016 or in October, 2016)?

    To the fact that the St. Louis court found him to have a “reckless disregard to the truth”?

    To the claims lodged in the Chicago Complaint?

    To the fact that he has high cholesterol?

    To what?

  6. malcolm harris says:

    On Ralph Cipriano's website he made a comment, on the 24th, that Clohessy's computer files may be in the hands of the plaintiff's (Gretchen Hammond) lawyers. That may be the reason Clohessy headed for the exits. The St. Louis court's ruling against him said he had acted with a "reckless disregard for the truth" In other words that he attaacked Fr. "Joseph' Jiang, not caring that he might be violating the priest's basic human rights. Namely the right  to a fair trial.  Tthe puplic vilification of the priest would have destroyed the presumption of innocence … and the chance of a fair trial.  However the court's judgement left it to others to decide what Clohessy's motive was?

    But if these computer files show a past collusion with other torties, over similar cases, that will establish the motive. Virtually a conspiracy to violate a citizen's human rights. With the expectation of substantial profits, from the pockets of Catholics.

    When the dust settles on this the truth will be revealed. David Clohessy is a wolf in sheep's clothing. The acronym of SNAP describes his nature very well.



    • Dan says:

      You've got to love how catholics so easily use the term "wolf in sheep's clothing" when describing others. Then what words would appropriately describe catholic priest's and bishop's heinous sexual crimes against minors and all the secrecy and lies to cover-up their malfeasance. Evil vicious snakes disguised in lambswool. What can you expect from grown men who adorn themselves in satin and lace dresses. How about cleaning up your own backyard, before pointing the finger at others. Or as Christ would say, "Take the board from your own eye, before you attempt to take the splinter from another's.  servant

  7. Dan says:

    To the fact that you're a flaming, lying imbecile? Proven fact and absolutely true.

    • Dan says:

      And quoting the dweeb. Kudos to what Richard A. Bucci said 1/26 @ 12:51pm. I love publyin' how you conveniently ignore comments that are spot on, while applauding those that excuse or back your Cult of Hypocrisy. Kudos to your ignorance.

    • Dan says:

      These two replies were in regards to publyin's 1/26/17 @ 1:16pm. Thought I'd help you out, seeing how easily you can confuse posts and commenters.

    • KenW says:

      Looks like someone has ventured away from their CARM playpen….

  8. Publion says:

    As is clear and was foretold, ‘Dan’ is reduced to epithets.

    And while it is always difficult to know precisely which comment  another  comment is referring-to , it seems that the Bucci comment was spot-on precisely in the way that ‘Dan’ does not mean it to be, i.e. that the Bucci comment is actually referring to the Gladsky comment.

    At any rate, things must be getting pretty riled up in the bathroom mirror.

    • Dan says:

      Whatever. Did you foretell that in one of your false prophesies (better known to the world as flat out lies). I return epithets to those whose garbage is in the toilet. Seems like you've spent a lifetime there.  servant

    • Dan says:

      I found some time to waste to help you realize what I understand fully. Bucci is saying that "parishioners say when clergy are [rightly] accused." – "I do not believe there is any truth to this." Our priests are pedophile child molesters, but they have "done more for sex abuse survivors than antone else." In fact we've heard these same lies and lame excuses from you. "Physician heal thyself!" Sorry publyin', "The prognosis would not be positive for this patient," called PeeWee. Screw you and all your epithets.   servant

  9. Dan says:

    I don't need your help. I knew exactly what Bucci was referring to. I guess you've yet to correct your own reading comprehension problem. Did you fail grammar school?

  10. Dan says:

    And don't forget to correct my typo on anyone, Mr. Know It All !!!!

  11. Publion says:

    ‘Dan’ nicely reveals his self-serving and flawed mentation on the 27th at 715PM:

    Did he err clearly in his reading of a comment’s text? Well … “whatever”. He has a cartoon to manage and what feels right for his fever-visions is what he will always go for.

    Does this self-appointed “servant” of the Lord increasingly reveal a queasy and repellent juvenility in his apparently long-practiced epithetical bent? Oh well – doncha see? – that’s not his fault; he just has to do that (perhaps “is called” to do it) in response to “garbage”. It’s God’s will – doncha know? – so it has to be good. His bathroom mirror tells us so.

    And so on.

  12. Dan says:

    "Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God."  2 Cor 4:2   Unlike yourself, publyin'.

  13. Agnes Milford says:


    My concern lies with victims of sex abuse.  If this is true, that victims were exploited, and SNAPis receiving kickbacks (aka- "donations") from attorneys that THEY refer victims to, the. I worry for the victims, as they have now been victimized again by a "self help" support group.   One previous local leader told me in a very disdainful tone, that SNAP is a SELF HELP support group, when I related my disappointment to her on SNAP turning away victims.  I explained that there was a victim who really needed support, and that he was a mess.  He was told that he wasn't "news worthy", and he was referred to the local support group, which at the time didn't have a leader.  If this is a "self help" group, then the word "SUPPORT" needs to not be mentioned as part of their mission!  Our personal experience was not a good one, and we were relentlessly attacked by a former SNAP leader for speaking with the reporter who was helping us expose a serial pedophile.  I will leave the details out, as I know how these shift wolves in sheeps clothing operate; they will find a way to figure out who this is, and I will continue to face road blocks in my own mission in trying to get these monster pedophiles put away.





    • Dan says:

      Dear Agnes, Sorry to hear about your trials with SNAP. Sometimes this world can be so unjust. I found the same problems dealing with our justice system. Can't understand why it's called a justice system when it can be so unjust. They only listen to one side of the story and have no concern with exposing the truth. I think Our Creator wants to teach us that true justice, for those who are truly just, will only be found through Our Lord and we may have to wait all the way until Judgment Day. Wish you the best in your trials.   Dan

    • James Robertson says:

      Agnes. This is the SNAP we dealt with in Los Angeles for years. They are a fraud alright but why would SNAP treat victims this bad if they worked for our lawyers? The only possible reason for SNAP's horrific behavior was that they and our lawyers all worked for the church. Either knowingly or unknowingly. Why else would SNAP be working from church owned property? Why wouldn't there be more than one major lawyer, Jeff Anderson, directing SNAP in not seeking to open more opportunities for victims to sue state by state? It just never happened. Getting victims to support SNAP as if that were far more important than SNAP supporting victims. Opportunism and money grubbing by SNAP for our lawyers doesn't ring true. If it did SNAP officers would have gotten far more than they did. SNAP was on a religious mission to smear victims with SNAP's hypocrisy and primarily to save the church massive amounts of $ in compensation. That's SNAP's real mission and it's only success.

  14. James Robertson says:

    Prove me wrong.

  15. Publion says:

    The comment by ‘Agnes’ provides a pretextual platform for ‘Dan’ and JR to assume their favorite Wigs and poses.

    On the 29th at 925PM ‘Dan’ takes the opportunity to put himself forward as someone else who has been oppressed and victimized by “our justice system”, sagely and insightfully opining that he simply cawn’t think why it’s “called a justice system when [had you been waittttingggggg forrrrr itttttt?] it’s so unjust”.

    Well that really clarifies things, doesn’t it?

  16. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 29th at 925PM:

    Regular readers may recall the “other side of the story”: by his own count and telling, six times ‘Dan’s behavior led to his being haled in front of a judge and sent for psychiatric observation; whether his verbally haranguing or accosting children in a schoolyard constitutes a seventh instance remains a tad fuzzy, but you get the idea.

    And yet the grossly unjust justice system did not give sufficient consideration (i.e. it didn’t agree with) ‘Dan’s side of the story: he is a prophet/servant of God His Very Own Self and was just providing “beautiful prophecy” and  “exposing the truth” to … whomever, including in one instance at least, those children in the schoolyard.

    But not to worry, “dear Agnes”; come “Judgment Day” God’s gonna get ‘em all for thinking ‘Dan’ is in need of  psychiatric intervention rather than getting his own show on prime-time TV.

    • Dan says:

      Lies and more lies, on top of lies, from liars just like yourself. You are such a lying, mocking creep and I hope your proud of continuing to add your disgusting lies to a situation you know absolutely about and did not witness. Slither back into your cesspool, Satan.   

                                              servant of the Almighty God

  17. Publion says:

    On then to JR’s of the 30th at 930AM:

    He goes on about SNAP and it’s being “a fraud” and – again – nobody here that I can recall has ever denied that.  So far, so accurate.

    But of course, accuracy isn’t really very often helpful to cartoons, and so JR quickly has to head off the straight and narrow in order to shoehorn in his own cartoon: “The only possible reason for SNAP’s horrific behavior was [had you been waitttingggg forrrrr itttttt?] that they and our lawyers all worked for the church”.

    That assertion is clearly in need of demonstration, and JR has never established it with any material that would convince any but a kindergarten mentality (no disrespect intended to kindergarteners). I would say that the only possible reason for SNAP’s horrific behavior was that it was never designed – in its post-1988, Anderson-Blaine alliance form – to be anything but a front for the torties. Otherwise you have to include all manner of folks – including Anderson, all the torties, many of the jurists and police, and so on as being tools of the Church.

    But not the media because JR has recently solved that thorny problem for himself: he has absolved the media by claiming that they were all just “hoodwinked” (see his comment of Jan. 28th at 512AM on the immediately prior thread).

    That’s the nice thing about cartoons: you can do anything you want with them, shaping them however you want or need to, and facts don’t really matter, or reality either.

  18. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on JR’s of the 30th at 930AM:

    But JR then slyly tries a new tack in order to clothe his cartoon more passably in the garments of rationality: the torties were tools of the Church “Either knowingly or unknowingly”.


    Now his cartoon doesn’t have to deal with the intractable problems with motive in explaining the actions of the torties: they might well have been “unknowingly” tools of the Church – doncha see? – so their actual motives for their actions don’t really count anyway and everyone can just forget about that problematic part of it.

    Neato again.

    Once again, we are in the hall of mirrors on the carnival midway.

  19. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on JR’s of the 30th at 930AM:

    And the Chicago Complaint – according to the attorney who was SNAP’s fund-raiser – indicates that a number of torties sent notable and substantial sums to SNAP (which perhaps – as it may come out – might conceivably have been shared with Bishop-Accountability for its own useful role or perhaps sent directly from the torties to that organization as well).

    But while Anderson certainly honed the application of the old tortie settlement strategy to a fine (and lucrative) pitch, I can’t see how he can be characterized as the “one major lawyer” who was “directing SNAP”.

    Although at the same time I can’t see what difference the point makes in the first place. Anderson made the initial alliance with Blaine in 1988, thus ensuring for any enterprising tortie anywhere in the country the services of a necessary front organization that would attract and funnel potential allegants.

  20. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on JR’s of the 30th at 930AM:

    And we see again what is apparently JR’s new hobbyhorse: SNAP and the torties – the cartoon would have it – didn’t seek “more opportunities for victims to sue state by state” (and so that proves that they were all tools of the Church, doncha see?).

    As I noted on the immediately prior thread, all but a few states have now tinkered with their Statutes of Limitation (SOLs), loosening and expanding them to make it easier to sue private or non-public institutions  (if memory serves, California slyly didn’t extend that SOL expansion to public school incidents and allegations).

    So it would appear that the torties have been successful in their efforts on that score. To what extent SNAP played a role behind the scenes is not known, but as I said on the immediately prior thread, the torties would not need to risk their front organization’s creds – beyond a few of the usual boilerplate press releases, perhaps – to achieve what is primarily a legislative project (abetted by a media that has – according to the cartoon – incredibly remained utterly “hoodwinked” for decades).

    • James Robertson says:

      California got the most. Who else got anything?

      Funny how everybody else but Pliar and the church act "slyly" according to liar boy.


  21. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on JR’s of the 30th at 930AM:

    On what basis JR makes the claim that “opportunism and money grubbing by SNAP” “just doesn’t ring true” is anybody’s guess, when all is taken into account. But it’s just his impression and readers may assess it was they may.

    But it is a necessary bit for the cartoon: as we see in the immediately following riff, JR then tries to shoehorn in his final piece of the cartoon: SNAP was “on a religious mission” (i.e. a mission assigned by the Church) to “smear victims” and make them look bad by behaving so badly itself.

    Thus – to repeat yet again what I have said about this for years here – JR’s operational presumption here is that if something, anything, makes ‘victims look bad’ then it must be and has to be ipso facto considered to be a plot by the Church. This is a core hermeneutical rule of construal for the Abuseniks.

    That the Abusenik and Stampede dynamics are now not only plausibly considered to be, and are increasingly demonstrated to be, seriously challenged in the veracity and integrity department and to have been that way almost from the get-go … this possibility or probability is one that the Abuseniks cannot permit themselves to consider, nor – even more importantly – allow anyone else to consider.

    • James Robertson says:

      Given that SNAP has always made victims "look bad", except for saying victims were hurt by their sexual abuse by clerics, to exclude their working for the church would be idiocy. If they only work for victims' lawyers and make victims look bad and then also fail to capitalize on the damages done us, who else but the church benefits from such odd and unusual behavior? Certainly not victims or our lawyers. There's only one group it does benefit.


  22. Publion says:

    On then to JR’s one-liner of the 30th at 931AM:

    Given the lack of clear evidence (although this is a problem that may well be somewhat alleviated by assessment of the elements of the Chicago Complaint) then there is no way at this point to “prove” that JR’s cartoon is “wrong”.

    But given the failure of his cartoon to adequately account for all the elements involved (without simply asserting that anyone and everyone not on board with the Abuseniks and the Stampede is in cahoots with the Church whether they know it or not), then what would be the purpose?

    I would no more try to prove Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck “wrong”; they are cartoons, they exist as such in fact and actuality, and may be appreciated or disagreed-with as such. Just like the material from JR’s pea-pod twin ‘Dan’.

    Those who derive entertainment or relief from them are welcome to do so.

  23. malcolm harris says:

    The lawsuit filed against SNAP by former employee Gretchen Hammond makes for interesting reading. She states that one of her first jobs was to  re-design the software which recorded the revenue received from donations. They were so pleased with her efforts.. she got a salary increase.  But her job as Development Director was really about raising funds, and at this she was also very successful, raising a million dollars for one particular SNAP project. Yet before long she was being frozen out by the others. Such as being excluded from an internal audit review, carried out by an accounting firm. In other words Gretchen, the person raising the money, was not  allowed to know how the money was being spent?. Wonder what was in that audit report?. Her lawyer should depose the auditor… to give evidence. Because I doubt auditors can claim privilege?. Particularly in respect of a non-profit charity, which is forever seeking public donations.


    • Dan says:

      The pot calling the kettle black. Where have all of you staunch catholics asked for an indepth investigation or insisted on knowing the audit report of your corrupt church of greed. How about asking for all the files and information the cult holds in secrecy, on all the pedophiles and perverts of your Klan. The church claims to being more transparent and has made leaps and bounds in protecting minors. How about all you brainwashed catholics holding back your "donations" and "raising funds" until your church comes clean, truly clean. "Take the board from your own eye, before taking the splinter from another." All non-profit, so-called charities, seem to be into major fund raising and you can probably find corruption in most all of them. Churches are the biggest culprits of non taxable fraud, and probably have the least right to criticize other frauds, that collect peanuts in comparison. "Beware of wolves in sheep's clothing." Read your Bible and discover the modus operandi of all these shysters. Catholics and phony christians can no longer keep their head in the sand and play dumb.

    • Agnes Milford says:

      Agreed!   If all this is proven in court, and nothing gets covered up, then I believe there should be a federal investigation.  Sadly, what was supposed to be the intention of supporting victims of sexual abuse, never truly was.  So, where can victims of sexual abuse get help?  Where can they get the help to find honest prosecutors who will put the predators away.  I've been informed, that one of SNAP's missions was to expose pedophile priests, so that any victim within the statute of limitations can criminally charge their predator.  Has anyone ever heard of any of the "donations" helping victims towards justice?

  24. James Robertson says:

    Stopping my telling the truth or coloring what I've said to be lies has been Pliar's goal , not just for me but for everyone who has tried to be truthful at this site. He is as constant in his lies as the Northern star is true. Dan and I are only in agreement in 2 things both of which i'm grateful for. First that the church enables sex abusers and ignores their victims and second that the Pliar is the biggest liar at this site.

    Malcolm Harris thanks for your info..Could you please tell me/us what was the 1 million dollar project SNAP was raising money for?  I'm at a loss to imagine any project that SNAP would pay money for. Was it their court costs in Missouri or Kansas?

    Again SNAP 's leadership's salaries don't seem exorbitant from the little I know. Very church like thing, that.




    • malcolm harris says:

      In reply to JR, on February 1….., the million dolllar project mentioned is contained in Grechen Hammond's lawsuit against SNAP.  It appears to be related to the attempt by SNAP to have the Pope tried and convicted as a criminal, for alleged child abuse.  Of course it was only an audacious ploy, to get front page publicity for SNAP. They also tried to get the U.N. involved, through a dubious back- door method.  It all failed, in terms of a legal case, but it's real purpose was to keep the witch-hunt going. Which it probably did achieve.. However it was apparently an expensive undertaking and needed a special fund-raising effort, to pay the lawyers and travel expenses, ect., ect. Just the same a million dollars is a lot of money, and perhaps Gretchen is still wondering where it all went.

    • James Robertson says:

      Thank you Malcolm. What that $1 million paid for was to weakly take the possibility of trying the pope as a criminal enabler off the table by again failing at something major that mattered deeply to victims . $1million is a lot of money for very little action other than making victims lose again publicly in the media.

      Was this when Ratzinger was Pope or Francis? Might have been why Ratz resigned?

    • James Robertson says:

      Or was it since Francis has been Pope? Even adding to the outrage against victims by active Catholics." How dare these lying "victims" sue our new and wonderful "Pro people" Pope."

      I ask because I've forgotten SNAP's litany of failures for victims out numbers completely any of it's victories for victims. As a matter of actuality, I can not name one victory for victims that SNAP could truthfully claim as their initiation.

    • James Robertson says:

      Agnes to answer your last question above: Never.

  25. James Robertson says:

    Here's something that reminds me so of Pliar's and some others' behavior  SNAP included.


  26. Publion says:

    ‘Dan’s of the 31st at 720PM bounces off mine of the 31st at 513AM:

    As so often, he simply waves away what he can’t handle as being “lies and more lies, on top of lies, from liars” – clutching his pearls with one hand, while the other flutters to his forehead. His court appearances must have made for some nifty entertainment.

    Perhaps there is some truth to his channeling entities from his bathroom mirror: perhaps it’s Sarah Bernhardt in there.

    • Dan says:

      You would most likely have enjoyed hearing your fellow Klan members in court, but maybe would have been jealous to not be able to add your lies to the mix. Fork-tongued mocker.

  27. Publion says:

    As for JR’s of the 1st at 237PM, I can’t make out the sense of it. Just what did California get “the most” of? And is he serious when he asks “Who else got anything?”.

    But – of course – he moves quickly away from what even he seems to realize doesn’t make much defensible sense and moves quickly to his favorite gear, and his métier: the epithetical.

  28. Publion says:

    On the 1st at 234PM JR claims it as a “given” that “SNAP has always made victims ‘look bad’”.

    Wellllll … except for “saying victims were hurt by their sexual abuse by clerics”.

    But wasn’t that the whole point of SNAP, as popularly presented?

    Of course, that bit would also serve the torties’ purpose (and fulfill SNAP’s indenture to the torties) quite neatly: SNAP was always there to provide the go-to media source for keeping the Stampede narrative on track.

    But how then could it be “idiocy” to “exclude their working for the Church”?

    And it isn’t a matter of excluding the possibility; it’s a matter of coming up with a theory that would make that possibility rationally plausible or perhaps probable. And surely none of JR’s cartooning has accomplished that necessary and vital task in any way, shape, or form.

    And how exactly did SNAP make ‘victims’ look bad? At least until SNAP was exposed quite recently, what did SNAP do to make ‘victims look bad’?

    And what does it mean to say that SNAP did “fail to capitalize on the damages done to” ‘victims’? Three billion dollars or so would pass as ‘capitalizing’ in any banker’s or businessman’s (or tortie’s) book. Perhaps what JR really means – knowingly or not, of course – is that SNAP failed to capitalize on the marvelous asset it had in JR. And he’s gonna make ‘em pay for that.

    And – really – the “lawyers” of the allegants, i.e. the torties, did not “benefit” … ? If the numbers noted in the Complaint are accurate, there are some hefty ‘donations’ made to SNAP by torties; one of them ‘donated’ 171K in a single year to SNAP.

    • James Robertson says:

      Nothing to what they could have donated if they and SNAP worked for victims rather than against us. You are shocked at $3 billion that's not 10% of what you owe.

  29. Publion says:

    On the 1st at 1205PM ‘Dan’ will simply try to change the subject: Catholics haven’t asked for an investigation or an audit of their “corrupt church of greed” … so … what?

    And this sly bit then provides entry for his bit about all those “files and information” again.

    Oh, and the Church – as well as being equated with Imperial Rome – is now equated with the “Klan” in ‘Dan’s cartoon.

    Because – doncha see? – ‘Dan’ knows that the Church has not ‘come clean’ and come “truly clean”. And using the logic of his own bit here, why doesn’t ‘Dan’ ‘come clean’ and “truly clean” about his own whackness and whackeries? (But I’ve already pointed out why we’re never going to see that.)

    And yet again he delivers an instruction he would better and best deliver to his bathroom mirror, regarding the “board” in his own eye. And is he not a fine candidate for the “wolf in sheep’s clothing” who, masquerading as God’s speshull deputy dawg, doth verbally accost and harangue schoolchildren  (and whomever else) under the sheep’s clothing of “beautiful prophecy”?

    As to the “modus operandi” of such masquerading “shysters”, I think ‘Dan’s “modus operandi” is already known now.

    • Dan says:

      And here again, we are treated to more of his absolute stupidity and repetitive lies. There's got to be something seriously wrong with your brain, that leads you to repeat what you've been told is absolute lies. Nothing short of a lobotomy may be in store.

  30. Publion says:

    We proceed to JR’s of the 1st at 221PM:

    Here – as so often – he tries to head for the Victim-y high ground: I am “stopping [his] telling the truth” and/or “coloring what [he’s] said to be “lies” …

    I can’t stop JR from putting up anything on this site, even “the truth” … if he ever tries that route.

    And surely his own lack of truthiness was not something I created; that revelation was contained in his own claims and material. With perhaps better luck than ‘Dan’, JR is best advised to conduct a serious séance with his bathroom mirror.

    And then on to the epitheticals, wherein JR doth name ‘Dan’ as a corroborator of his stuff. Whatever to do with that bit?

    • Dan says:

      Oh! Yeah! Take your shots and then whimper that they always pick on poor little peewee. Not epithetic, closer to just pathetic. True Christians aren't in need of luck, let alone the type you seem to prefer, reeking from your bathroom toilet. Maybe it's time you come out of there, because your "stuff" and "bits" stink.

  31. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on JR’s of the 1st at 221PM:

    And JR then dons the Wig of Collaborative Inquiry, asking ‘Malcolm Harris’ where JR might find reference to the million-dollar project undertaken by SNAP. Had JR – self-proclaimed paragon of informed truthiness – not yet bothered to read the Complaint?

  32. James Robertson says:

    Somewhere a toilet is missing its turd. Ooops it's here smearing itself over the truth in order to hide what has really occurred. PLIAR the self-spreading turd. Catholics are SO virtuous.

  33. James Robertson says:

    I love how the "Liberal" NCR won't allow any discussion of SNAP being a church owned and run function by banning anyone who mentions it. And the Media Report has the "self stationed"  defender of the faith, a deep dished liar called P. who does exactly the same thing. When the Catholic left wing and right wing do the same thing, how different are they?

  34. Agnes Milford says:



    This doesn't seem productive.  Maybe just help find the truth, based on facts.  Find those facts, and make sure you have documents to prove what's happening, with both the Catholic Church, and SNAP.  Sound like SNAP leaders got their hands on a lot of incriminating information, but it sounds like their exploitation of victims, and alleged kick backs from attorneys they allegedly referred victims to, has "dirtied the waters" of getting justice.     How can victims get justice when there's no discussion of the broken judicial system?  There's much work to be done, and someone needs to get to the root of all of this.  It sounds like Gretchen's law suit may be taking a step in that direction.  If all this is true, then those who exploited victims for their own personal agenda/gain, should be exposed, then held accountable. Why do I get the gut feeling that they're too well connected, and there will be no accountability?



    • Dan says:

      If they are as corrupt as the catholic church, they will definitely have people in high places. If they are as greedy as the church, they will be able to pay off someone corrupt in the system. If they are as evil as the church, they'll be lying, making excuses and deceiving in order to blind police, the DA's office and judges in order to get a free pass. If they're as conniving as the church, they'll twist the facts and attempt to place blame on the victims. If they're able to accomplish any of the above, then your gut feeling that there will be no accountablity will come to fruition.

      In the Apocrypha, in some Bibles, there is the book of Susanna. It's a great read that exposes the utter hypocrisy of the justice system. It displays the corruption of judges and the undeserved respect given to those in high places. The prophet Daniel, through the wisdom of the Almighty, sheds light on their deception and lies, and justice is once again restored. If you have trouble locating the book, you can use any search engine to find websites that have it. It's just a short story but an excellent example of corruption in this world, similar to what goes on today.

    • Dan says:

      Read again the story of Susanna this morning and noticed a paragraph that stood out. Before big mouth publyin' comes along to claim the "pericope" does not apply, I'd like to quote some of it. Talking to a corrupt judge, Daniel replys, "You are an evil old man, and it's clear that you've been sinning for a long time. You've been giving unfair decisions in court. You have set the GUILTY FREE and CONDEMNED INNOCENT PEOPLE."

      Like the cult and the judges have done to myself and others, and you have helped by adding your ridiculously, stupid lies, justice has been corrupt for centuries. Come Judgment Day, God will weed out the wicked and they will truly get their just desserts. I feel sorry for anyone who comes into this forum, telling the truth, to have their story twisted into the vicious lies of the evil people who troll these comment sections. I think we all know who were speaking of, publiar.    Servant to the One True God

  35. Marco says:

    SNAP was and is the only organization that could resist the Roman Catholic Church.SNAP has put pressure on the Church worldwide, and this was the only way, to bring this 2000-year-old organization to  pay damages to at least some of the victims and to acknowlede the wrongdoing of their clerics.

    Perhaps SNAP was also responsible for the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI.
    However, since the beginning of the 1990s, the Catholic Church has been attempting a new evangelization. This failed so far, especially in Germany. Where the Catholic Church influences the policy almost on a nation-wide basis, and represents churches such as the Scientology Church as enemies of the Constitution.

    Do not forget: The current Pope Francis was member of the Jesuits, enjoyed one of the best educations in the world.

    The Catholic Church has a lot of money in Germany, more than the state itself. They are afraid of too great influence of the USA, abfraid before freedom of religion in the American sense.

    • Dan says:

      If pope francis as a jesuit was afforded one of the best educations, what do they teach? How to be a crook, scoundrel, deceiver and best of all, "A wolf in sheep's clothing." Guess that's why they made him pope, so he could oversee all the crooks, scoundrels, deceivers, perverts and pedophiles, and continue pulling the wool over their sheep's eyes. HYPOCRITES!!

  36. Marco says:

    Let me add:
    Not the Catholic Church itself is wrong. But remember that many of your ancestors had to flee from Europe to the United States in the past, because the Catholic Church in Europe had maintained its dictatorship.

    Till today the Watchtower Society isnt accepted, and all the other christian churches are only means for the purpose. Its also the will of the catholic church inside europe to convert the Jews.

    • Agnes Milford says:

      There's a lot of back and forth going on about SNAP being the church or not, OR being the only one to resist the Catholic Church.

      What I think is more relevant now is that many, many victims of sexual abuse by the Catholic Church, and elsewhere, have now become victims of SNAP. SNAP has become predatory themselves.  They know it.  It's a terrible shame that many victims of sex abuse have been victimized again by SNAP.  I want to know where all the money went!  There was far more spent on traveling abroad, than on actually helping victims.  I think a federal investigation needs to happen on both, SNAP, and the rings of sexual predators——it's not just priests. 

  37. Donald Link says:

    I knew when this whole mess started that there would be opportunities for chrlatons to line up for a share of the plunder.  I have not been disappointed.  If the courts would apply the same standards of proof to these cases as other criminal and civil matter, the dockets would soon be cleared of the rent seekers.

    • Dan says:

      And your charlatans don't pay rent, the church buys them mansions outright. You haven't heard of the "Bishop of Bling", or do you close your eyes and ears to all the malfeasance of your clergy creeps? Just happened to look it up, and several months after his unapologetic resignation, the crook gets appointed to the Roman Curia as a delegate to the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, assigned to the International Council for Catechesis. They thought about prosecuting him for absconding church funds, but after talks with the Vatican and pope francis, the diocese decided not to press charges. Oh! How sweet of them. How much longer are you catholic sheep going to put up with their crooked ways, bury your ostrich heads in the sand, and allow them to get away with this corruption? CREEPS!!

  38. Dan says:

    And members of the catholic church, should be able to spot a "charlatan" when they see one, since they've been brainwashed by the false teachings and sermons of charlatans and donating to the fraudulent crooks, all their lives. Beware of the wolves in sheep's clothing.