The Malinchak Reaction

my face is stupid ... and you can too

James Malinchak is a fucking scammer!

… or something.

Of course :: I’m a just fake robot so what do I know but parody?

My recent James Malinchak {aka fucking scammer} post landed on ole’ cuzin Malinchak like a plague of biblical frogs :: and he no likey. I mean :: hello :: he’s trying to launch a scam frauduct off the back-end of a BS television appearance over here … and this ain’t helping.

He better do something about it … like … um … like … um …

Says James Malinchak to the large mirror above the double sinks in the empty master bedroom of his empty Henderson McMansion …

“FUCK! The Droid. FUCK!

Think Malinchak think!

There’s no “I” in think!

No fuck … wait … yes there is!

Or is there?


I’m from a steel mill town where people lived with their homes and their pants and you can’t do this to me!”

{stupid overload!}

So instead of thinking up a plan with his defective thinking equipment :: James Malinchak {scammer} called a hush law firm. Cause that’s how ABC’s super charitable Secret Millionaires roll {like mega dicks}.

The law firm of Lavely & Singer agreed to represent {stupid fucking scammer} James Malinchak in his efforts to once again bring silence to the voice of the abused victims … sort of.

Lavely & Singer did send a Cease & Desist letter :: but to the wrong motherfucking cowboy. Tom Antion :: a well liked veteran in this bizarro “industry” :: mailed his list about my Malinchak post :: quoted from it extensively :: and retracted a previous endorsement which he has come to regret. The big scary law firm sent the C&D to Tom instead of the fake robot :: weak ass threats by proxy …

According to the Wall Street Journal law blog :: Lavely & Singer is the law firm that helped cover-up some of Tiger Woods’ shenanigans. They also represented Reese Witherspoon {in the incident involving Reese Witherspoon} :: and author James Frey {who made Oprah look stupid without killing anyone}.

The letter is stuffed with case law and scary legal words and concepts :: it’s definitely the most impressive threat letter I’ve seen to date … they’re usually pretty ghetto.

“All of this demonstrates your malicious intention to harm my client’s reputation by spreading outrageous demonstrable lies. Your conduct exposes you to very substantial liability for defamation, false light invasion of privacy, tortious interference with contract, and interference with prospective economic advantage, among other claims. Moreover, if you continue to engage in this course of wrongful conduct, doing so will exacerbate that liability exponentially, potentially exposing you to liability for compensatory and punitive damages of tens of millions of dollars.”

Blah blah bullshit!

They might just have a point there if James Malinchak wasn’t such an obvious scammer. But he is … so they don’t.

More …

“Your offensive and harmful false Statements include referring to my client as an”unethical ” “money stealing” ” scammer ” who provides “No value :: no service :: no refunds :: no nothing” to his customers. Those lies are pointedly calculated to harm my client’s reputation.”

Quoting me :: complete with alt-punk-punctuation and everything. They are “pointedly calculated” words :: that’s for sure :: but rather than lies they are a true reflection of James Malinchak’s horrible reputation. You may think that Tom can’t be held liable for quoting my fake robotic opinions about how much turd sucking James Malinchak and his messed up face do … but Lynda Goldman of Lavely & Singer has already pretended to think of that …

“To the extent that you attempt to claim that in your emails peppered with defamatory statements you might have paraphrased or lifted from other sources and that you are therefore not responsible for stating that Mr. Malinchak is a “money stealing” ” sociopath,” etc., any such argument would fail as a legal defense to defamation claims, since you will be deemed to have adopted those defamatory statements as your own. See, e.g., Khawar v. Globe lnt’l, Inc., 19CaI.4th 254, 79 CaI.Rptr.2d 178 (1998) (“one who republishes a defamatory statement is deemed thereby to have adopted it and so may be held liable, together with the person who originated the statement, for resulting injury to the reputation of the defamation victim”); see also, Jackson v. Paramount Pictures Corp., 68 CaI.App.4th 10, 80 CaI.Rptr. 2d 1, 27 (1998) (“When a party repeats a slanderous charge, he is equally guilty of defamation, even though he states the sourceof the charge and indicates that he is merely repeating a rumor”); Srnolla, Law of Defamation (2ndEd. 2004) Vol. 1, §4:91 (secondary publisher, or republisher, may be liable for defamatory publication). Be advised that “[r]epetition of another’s words does not release one of responsibility if the repeater knows that the words are false or inherently improbable, or there are obvious reasons to doubt the veracity of the person quoted or the accuracy of his reports. . . . “Goldwater v. Ginzburg, 414 F.2d 324,337 (C.A.N.Y. 1969). That is the case here.”

Lynda Goldman of Lavely & Singer is expressly and impliedly calling The Salty Droid a liar. Such an obvious liar am I that other people quoting me is an actionable tort in and of itself. Given that my whole reputation :: and the success of this project :: hinges on my perceived veracity :: I’d say that Ms. Goldman’s unfounded statements and hurtful allegations do themselves rise to the level of defamation. Maybe I’ll send Tom Antion a C&D over his republication of Ms. Goldman’s defamatory words {or not}.

Lavely & Singer style themselves as an Entertainment Law and crisis management firm. Their efforts to shut-up the celebrity press are of zero interest to me. Don’t care about who Tiger Woods screws :: don’t care if people want to expose who he screws :: don’t care if lawyers try to shush people who are going to expose who he screws. Don’t care. Exploiting the fame of celebrities to sell trash papers is big business :: and those celebrities have the right to fight back {I guess}. If your name is a $50 million brand :: then you’re probably going to hire lawyers to protect that brand. Fine.

But James Malinchak isn’t a celebrity trying to keep his private life private :: he’s an asshole that’s fleecing innocent and naive victims. His reputation isn’t being damaged :: it’s being exposed. If dissent is silenced … he will do more harm … there will be more victims.

I’m hoping that Lavely & Singer want to be an Entertainment Law Firm … and not a Facilitating WhiteCollar Crime Law Firm. I’m hoping that they just made a mistake :: and that they wouldn’t send a 1st Amendment slighting C&D regarding a public figure if they thought that public figure might actually be taking sad middle-aged ladies for five-figure sums. Because that wouldn’t be ethical :: and I don’t imagine it would help attract new celebrity clientele.

But if Lavely & Singer are itching for a fight :: if they want to be a part of a continuing global conspiracy to separate the credulous from their monies :: if they want to be a part of keeping speech chilled :: victims voiceless :: and change impossible :: then …

I’m most definitely their motherfucking huckleberry.

>> bloop bleep

144 thoughts on “The Malinchak Reaction”

  1. Lawyers are idiots and are no different from the celebrities featured in this blog.

    No offence.

    1. @Beowk ::

      Not true.

      Some lawyers are worse than useless garbage who do more to harm society than all the world’s murderers put together.

      And some lawyers are heroes {John Adams :: Thurgood Marshall :: Gandhi} :: and the only ones with the fucking stones to stand up to powers of oppression.

      ALL the “celebrities” featured on this blog are useless :: and there is no alt-version of them that is useful.

      1. @SD, The road to hell is paved with good intentions. America’s obsession with fighting oppression and ’empowering’ people has always been a fucking disaster. All the bullshit civil rights lawyers are lower than the KKK…who were at least honest about wanting to live in white ghettos(the same white flight ghettos that ‘do gooder’ middle class lawyers buy for themselves). Idealistic, unrealistic bullshit that makes your brown people hate your conceit more every day.

  2. Surely Lavely & Singer know what Malinchak does. The lawyer has to know the truth before they represent a client, don’t they? Or is that optional?

    Derschowitz knew the truth about von Bulow … didn’t he?

    If Lavely Singer see evidence of Malinchak’s scamming (like all these chuckleheads, he doesn’t do much to hide it) would they stop representing him?

    Or do they just take a check from anyone willing to pay the number they quote and say “fuck it” to all the rest.

    One wonders.

    1. @Vern, I suppose they know he’s in the ‘self-improvement industry’ and don’t look any further. It is a very, very murky industry – to try and untangle all the lies people spew about themselves and others does take a while. Lavely & Singer bill by the hour, so probably feel their time isn’t well spent conducting such thorough research. Just hold your nose and take the money…

    2. @Vern ::

      Maybe they didn’t know.

      Did George know?

      I doubt it.

      People :: including lawyers and celebrities :: tend to think that no one would lie right to their face … and they don’t have incentives to investigate when money is on offer. James Malinchak convinces people that he’s something he’s not for a living. It’s not very hard.

      1. @SD,

        What a shame,… now I {almost} can’t watch seinfeld anymore,.. because George will remind me of the {slimy, scam, fraud, ripoff} James Malinchak soap opera.

        An innocent endorsement,… have consequences,.. you know!!

        Fukk you George,.. wake up! know who you’re endorsing in the future,… OK?!!

        Do you go and sign any {fukking legal} papers without reading them also, stupid?!?

        These endorsement videos is soo fukking damaging,… people loose money trusting shitty endorsement like that.


        The {slimy, scam, fraud, ripoff} James Malinchak will pay the price ultimately,…

        I have good feeling of all the attention he gets from Salty (and other good men and woman and robots and horses) will bite him hard at the end.

        1. @Gringo ::

          Yeah :: but it’s hard to figure this shit out … but yeah.

          Jason was highlarious on the highlarious Seinfeld reenactment season of Curb Your Enthusiasm. That shit was pop genius.

          If Mr. Alexander’s pathetic excuse for an agent/publicist wants any help getting that bullshit removed … I’m quite sure I could oblige.

          1. @SD, BTW

            Have you noticed that {slimy, scam, fraud, ripoff} James Malinchak is imitating Bill Clinton’s voice/tonality? Yes,.. the former {masonic, secret society, free mason, skull & bones} president of the U.S. {sigar lover dildo fukkhim} Bill Clinton…

            James Malinchak should get some attention from some high degree free mason {SKULL & BONES} in a negative light,.. because they’re known to have connections to shut down anything they mislike {even have him buried dead or alive}

  3. @Salty

    Go get them! I briefly had a lawyer from L and S represent me to negotiate some film rights to my life story. I would up getting $1 for a year option. Nice work there….

    BTW, Mala-chucks-dick is also a public figure, so the burden of proof is much higher as he has to show that any defamatory statements were made with knowledge that they were false or with a reckless disregard for the truth.

    RJ..ex litigation paralegal with Tuverson and Hillyard

    1. @Ross Jeffries ::

      Maybe L&S should dump you and Malinchak and take up my defamation and public accommodations claim against Twitter.

      I suspect that Twitter has more money than Tom Antion.

  4. @Salty

    One more thing: here in California, we have an Anti-SLAPP(Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statute. Anyone who tries to sue for defamation in a situation where the defendant is participating in a public forum on an matter of public interest, faces serious odds against prevailing.

  5. OMG Does your mother know what you are doing? You must make her proud and terrified at the same time!

  6. If you provide proof hes a scammer is Tom allowed to turn around and counter sue them for like freedom if speech harassment or something?

    1. @syndicate h8r ::

      Sort of :: but not really. Lawsuits are an expensive waste of time … both ways.

      I doubt Tom wants to sue :: he just wants to apologize to his trusted customers and make sure it’s clear that he no longer supports such an obvious bastard. That’s what EVERYONE should be doing :: that’s what EVERYONE is obligated to be doing … and yet you can still count on one hand the number of people who actually have.

      Not impressive.

  7. Maybe they should sue Malindork’s dentist instead – he did much more to damage this guy’s reputation than you did, ‘droid. That forced Cheshire crap is truly the stuff of nightmares.

    1. @Martypants ::

      His dentist is probably a minion of James Arthur Ray who disfigured him in order to give Ray a competitive advantage in the biz.

  8. Awww…you bullies are making Malinchak sad. Lavely & Singer are counting on the fact that most people get intimidated by scary lawyer letters. What they should be counting on instead is most people don’t like lawyers who protect scammers.

    On top of everything else, I can’t believe they want to tell him what he can post on his Facebook page! They are funny lawyers.

  9. Salty, it looks like you might just get that lawsuit you’ve been hankering for yet. MalingeringChuck already admits openly he has a low IQ. Maybe…just maybe…that’s the ONLY thing he’s telling the truth about and he’s really really stupid enough to push it into court.

    I too understand the whole “reputation management” thing but the 1st Amendment protects the TRUTH. If what you’re saying is true, or if you state whatever the hell you want clearly as your opinion, you’re entitled to it. State law be damned. It looks like these attorneys are treading painfully close to restricting Antion’s constitutional rights.

    But then again — that’s why I was never an attorney (thanks, mom, for never pushing me there).

    Once again, nice stuff. This guy is so totally over-the-top screw-em-all it’s not even funny. I’d LOVE to see the discovery flying HIS way, too.

    1. @Poop Chute ::

      They ain’t going to sue me dog :: not in the cards. No one will even talk to me. No C&D’s have ever been served to me directly.

      The question here is whether or not I will back off of them :: not if they will back off of me.

        1. @Jimmy Ray, In that case, I’ll see your raised punch, and add-in a spin-kick. Or maybe some brass knuckles on the punch, so more breakage is ensured.
          And it would only be right if the video of this glorious brutality is shot in an empty Vegas show home.

  10. I suspect that L&S are using the same tactic I learned about in the dojo many years ago: puff up & threaten when you know you lack the wherewithal to prevail. I have never been bested by anyone who announced what a horrible fate would befall me in a match, and from what I’ve seen in my own research (and that of my partner Cosmic Connie), Salty is in no particular danger of having to slap the mat anytime soon.

    Oh my… does that make me liable for having supported the “libelous” source of Munchindick’s pain? :-)

    1. @Li_Kuan,

      Saaaay, now that you mention it, we have several wild tom turkeys that do that very thing outside our windows now and again. It’s spring afer all, and they walk around puffing themselves up reeeeeeaaaalll big and spreading their tail feathers wide hoping to psych each other out. It’s quite amusing and can go on for some time. From now on, I think I’ll imagine skanky-lawyer-types as puffed-up turkeys with no substance and deserving of no respect.

  11. Good work again, Salty. And by the way, you may have been banned from Facebook, but you’re getting a fair amount of publicity there anyway, thanks to a brand new Facebook member (I finally succumbed to pressure).

  12. @Salty –

    Personally, I enjoy the parody and public forum provided by this website.

    However, the fact that these weekly parodies serve as conversation starters is moot isn’t it…?

    I mean, I’m not from a small steel mining town or anything fancy like that, but doesn’t – 485 U.S. 46 Supreme Court Ruling clearly state: “First Amendment’s free-speech guarantee prohibits awarding damages to public figures to compensate for emotional distress intentionally inflicted upon them.

    I mean, I don’t have a low IQ like James, but when Chief Justice William Rehnquist said (in the official opinion):

    “First Amendment gives speakers immunity from sanction with respect to their speech concerning public figures unless their speech is made with the knowledge of its falsehood…”

    Maybe you can clear it up for me, but as far as I can tell, “Intentionally Inflicting emotional distress on public figures” is a Constitutional Right Unanimously backed with precedents set by the Supreme Court. As long as you believe what you’re saying is true, it doesn’t need to be substantiated, parody, or satire, you’re allowed to say whatever you believe.

    And, according to that ruling, “deliberately attempting to harm someone’s reputation and / or cause them emotional distress” is totally protected by law as long as you believe what you’re saying…

    So while I sincerely hope the bloodsuckers at Lackey & Scumbag allow you to be their Mother Fucking Huckleberry… It’s not going to happen, there’s no case here.

    Their C&D is an a total bluff…

    The funny thing is, since James knows his allegations against Tom are unfounded, if he makes one public statement refering to Tom’s actions as libelous, then technically, James would meet the criteria for an actionable defamation suit…

    End Note: To Lackey, Scumbag, and James – Sue the Droid, come on, do it for the lulz, stop being pathetic and file a fucking suit you pussies…

    sine qua non: (ie. Only a pussy is disturbed by being called a pussy, thus rendering it factual. If someone calls you a pussy, and you file a C&D, the C&D merely substantiates the claim that you’re a pussy.)

    In other words: Unfounded threats to sue Tom for “tens of millions of dollars” prove the the claim that you are a money stealing scammer. So unless you file the suit and win, you’re found guilty in the court of popular opinion and your reputation is fucked…

    PS. Get Alexa Sparky — compare, contrast, and extrapolate (and realize how many people are watching)…

    A Bone: To save you time on the obscenity argument, there is a clear legal distinction between obscenity and profanity…

    1. @Injun Samurai, “…Only a pussy is disturbed by being called a pussy, thus rendering it factual. If someone calls you a pussy, and you file a C&D, the C&D merely substantiates the claim that you’re a pussy.”

      LOL. Of course this reminds me (as I’m sure it does many of you) of Bill “Hollow-Sink” Harris and The Silencing of the Lambs. I know you linked to that above, Salty, but here’s the link again for those who don’t feel like scrolling up.

      1. @Cosmic Connie,

        Malinchak almost makes Harris look good by comparison–at least he sells a product that is actually delivered! (Even if many customers–including me–wonder whether it actually does anything or not.)

        Keep on fighting the bad guys Mr. Droid.

    2. @Injun Samurai,

      Yes please someone (BallsInCock)sue the droid, that would be some fake reality tv show shizz that I would definitely watch!

    3. @Injun Samurai,

      I am impressed by your knowledge. Do you or salty have any recommendations that are credible for the lay person to better understand first amendment rights?

      1. @Fascinated,

        Thanks Fascinated, that’s nice of you to say…

        My background is actually in legislative law, so I’m not really a good source for ‘lay’ stuff… (my knowledge of the intricacies and subtleties of civil law consists of a formidable roladex)

        But if you are serious about getting a basic knowledge of this stuff, $12.70 spent on ‘U.S. Constitution For Dummies’ (available at Amazon) will go a very long ways towards giving you an overview and getting you conversant quickly…

        Also, cheap, easy, and lay is to rent: “The People versus Larry Flint” and “Howl” – two great movies on Freedom of Expression which both address the “Obscenity versus Profanity” issue which is what all of us are hoping the Lackey & Scumbag attorneys go after if they try to get Salty…

        Free, easy, and quick is to do a google search on “Profanity versus Obscenity” and you’ll get host of articles that will get you up to speed on the limits of freedom of expression…

        Basically, everything Salty and Tom have done so far with regards to James is totally legal and protected by law, no court would ever bother hearing it…

        But I think the actual C&D James, Lackey & Scumbag wrote (not filed) falls under: “Threatening, Belligerent, or Coersive with the Intent to Obstruct Commerce” – across state lines making it both a civil and trade federal offense…

        It’s funny, because Salty and Tom’s right to ‘Intentionally Inflict Emotional Distress’ on James is protected by law… But because James et al threatened Tom in writing, they’ve potentially committed a federal offense…

        In other words, you can’t threaten to sue someone if you know you have no case, that’s coersion and it’s illegal. You must believe you have a case before filing a Cease and Desist…

        But that letter, unless it bogus is not a legal document, you’ll notice it says “Our File Number” where it should say “Case Number” they’ve never filed a Ceased & Desist order, it’s a just threat…

        See, being belligerent is one thing, that’s freedom of expression, but threatening to do someone physical or monetary harm is an entirely different thing, it’s not protected, it’s illegal… When commerce and statelines get involved, it ‘exacerbates exponentially’.

        So what’s funny here, is that if pressed, James and the Lackey & Scumbag attorneys will need to prove that they believe they have a case, that they never made a threat, and the only case they could possibly have is to say “Salty is Obscene” – See, obscenity isn’t protected, but profanity is…

        There are finite tests for obscenity, but in the end it basically boils down to: “Obscenity is any statement or act which strongly offends the prevalent morality of the time…”

        So the reason I personally hope they take Salty up on his offer to be their Huckleberry is that the case will inevitably come down to updating Morality…

        But none of this will ever see a courtroom…

        But then again, what I do know? I use a roladex for these sorts of issue, there’s only one true Human Right’s violator on Salty’s roster worthy of facing off with Salty in court… That’s what I’m really looking forward too…

        End Note: It’s worth noting that once you get up to speed, Salty’s posts take on a new light because you’ll start to notice how deftly he tows the line of the law… His ability to be vulgar, profane, incendiary, and vitriolic without ever crossing over into libel or obscenity is truly a work of art…

        1. @Injun Samurai, Thanks! I will be busy checking out those resources. Your insight and expertise is appreciated.

        2. @Injun Samurai, One more question if your still around.

          What’s your opinion of when someone becomes a “public figure?”

          My reading leads me to believe it is loosely defined except for those in actual public office. Do the folks featured on this blog all meet the definition of at least a “limited public figure?”

          In my non qualified interpretation any business owner who uses Internet media to promote their product or service whether it be an opthamologist promoting LASIK surgery via commercials and Internet video or a lawyer using Internet video to promote their law services would be classified as a “limited public figure.”

          This would mean they would have the high standard of proving “malice” in any type of defamatory suit or would be open targets for parody.

          Am I thinking along the right lines?

          1. @Fascinated,

            You sound genuine, so I’ll try to give a genuine answer as best I can, mind you, I’m far from an expert in this particular field…

            “The Spirit versus the Letter of the Law”

            To grasp anything, it helps to grasp at the root: “What is a judge and how do they become a judge?”

            In all matters legal, there are always two issues – ‘The Spirit of the Law’ and ‘The Letter of the Law’.

            It’s a little hard to grasp at first, but it works like this: The Spirit of the Law is always ‘moral repudiation’ – which means: “to expose and subject false or pretentious moralities to standardized penalties”

            In other words – The entire judicial system seeks to serve as judge and juror over our collective morality.

            That’s the Spirit of the Law – To enforce and uphold a Moral Society…

            The Letter of the Law is the actual finite tests, measures and definitions. (The stuff that gets written down.)

            So here’s where it gets tricky (because this statement is subject to argument): There is no standard objective definition for Morality, Morality itself is created through ‘Shared Acceptance of Actions or Ideals’ …

            So for example, The United States is currently ‘illegally’ engaged in a conflict in Afghanistan, it’s illegal, it totally violates the letter of the law, but when pressed for a vote last month, 82% of Congress agreed to illegally continue the conflict indefinitely…

            So what that means, in a very real way: “Anything is legal as long as enough people to agree to it.”

            So while the Spirit of the law is about standardizing morality, in practical terms: “Might Makes Right.”

            That’s where the discussion begins, because ‘Right’ and ‘Moral’ are two different things… This is the root discusion of law.

            Make Sense? The Letter of the Law is designed to uphold and concertize the Spirit of the Law. The Spirit of the Law is designed to represent ‘A Moral Standard not based on might (power).’

            Therein lies the threefold problem, “Who decides what the limits of morality tolerate? Where do the spirit of the law and the letter of the law meet? And if in the end, might makes right, what does the law even matter?”

            Now, my background is in legislation – where we seek to make, adapt, and modify the letter of law…

            But in the field, the real world, the letter of the law must be constantly changing, so we need we need judges to interpret it’s spirit…

            So the whole system is set up like a pyramid with nine people at the very top, society at the very bottom, and lawyers in the middle. These nine judges at the top, are called the ‘Supreme Court’ and they can effectively create law through a thing called ‘Precedent’ – in other words, they interpret the letter of and spirit of the law, and then their decisions become ‘reference’ for later cases…

            Cool right?

            So these nine Supreme Judges got there because they are believed and expected to have ‘High Moral Standards’ so as a society, they are in many ways, our collective moral compass. We grant them some authority to judge the limits of morality.

            A side note here is this: After 1871 and the ratification of the 14th Amendment, our judicial system ceased to be a ‘Constitutional System’ – technically and practically, the Constitution is entirely moot in the courtroom… Most judges don’t even know that, but the United States no longer functions as a Constitutional Republic, it is in fact, a Corporation.

            That’s a whole other topic, but it’s important to understand – NOMATTER what anyone says to the contrary courts now have adjudicative autonomy…

            That means – very literally – Judges can decide whatever the fuck they want regardless of the letter or spirit of the law.

            In other words: (and people will argue against this truth) – The Letter of the Laws is meaningless. It all comes down to the Judges.

            Knowing that, you begin to see the news in different ways, because it explains why Judges all over the country all allowed to behave with total disregard for the constitutional rights.

            This is why the appeal process exists, the court system is arranged hierarchically, with every level having more authority then the previous one… ie. Each level is expected to be a more accurate and powerful measure of Morality… Local level judges are expected to have regionally biased moral standards.

            Okay, slow down, first: Since the United States is no longer a Constitutional Republic, we are in fact, no longer citizens. We actually, according to the letter of the law HAVE NO RIGHTS whatsoever.

            None, Zero, Zip, Nada… You have no rights at all.

            We are in fact, technically, literally, and functionally: ‘Chattel’ valued at $1 million dollars per unit at the time of birth. In high level legislation, we aren’t even referred to as people, we are referred to as Human Capital, (human capital not human beings).

            The United States is a Corporation whose chief asset is Human Capital.

            This being the case, we are subject to International Trade Law rather than Constitutional Law.

            To verify this, search on: “Title 28, 3002(15)(3)” <– which is essentially the articles of incorporation for the United States, which spell out explicitly that without exception all Federal, Judicial, and Executive functions of Government are Corporate in nature rather than Constitutional.

            (while this largely includes Legislation, there is a sovereign non-corporate aspect of the Legislative Arm)

            So what does this have to do with James Malinchak, Lackey, Scumbag and Malice?

            Chattel versus Chattel.

            As you can see, the system itself is rife with the potential for corruption, and Trade Law reigns supreme.

            So the only real offense is “Material Infringement on Trade” – – –

            ie. Don’t piss off the chattel so bad that the milk they produce spoils.

            Long Ago we discovered: “Chattel must believe that they are autonomous if they are to maintain productivity. A system of publicly accessible law made available to them affords a sense of equality, and objective self governance.” (ie. The illusion of a system ‘by the people for the people’ must be maintained through the appearance of the courts)

            In other words: It doesn’t have to be fair, but if people think it’s a least somewhat fair, they’ll keep working.

            So, back to James and the Spirit of the Law…

            I’ve been victorious in court 24 out of 25 times over the last 15 years totaling hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars worth of judgments (literally) and I can tell you this: Going to Court is about winning. It isn’t about law, it’s about winning.

            That’s a harsh statement, but it’s the truth. In the real courtroom, you have to prove just one thing: “You are the preferred chattel.”

            Once you prove that, then you use the letter of the law to support the judge’s decision in your favor, thus mitigating your opponent’s rights to appeal.

            For clarity: ‘Chattel’ basically means – “Physical Property other than Land” –

            I know this flies in the face of what you’ve been taught, but to understand how law works, you need to get the basics straight: “You are not a person, you have no rights, the United States no longer functions as a Constitutional Republic, it is a corporation and from the time of birth, you, everything you produce, and everything you think you own is the full and legal property of that corporation.”

            Sort of sucks, but that’s just the way it actually is. Our constitutional rights, and even the laws themselves are just hear to keep us productive… Don’t ever be confused into thinking that ‘Constitutional Law’ rules the courtroom. (Just ask yourself, “When did ‘anal rape’ stop being ‘cruel and unusual’ and become standard punishment for all crimes?”)

            Okay: With perspective in tow, let’s look at the question at hand: “Public Figure versus Private Figure versus Limited Purpose Public Figure” & “Actual Malice versus Common Law Malice”

            What is the spirit of the law in this matter? (if you know that, you’re positioned to win)…

            The actual spirit of the law in this matter is this: “A public figure’s status as public figure is relative to their ability to manipulate media. High Control = Public Figure, Moderate Control = Limited Purpose Public Figure, Low to No Control = Private Figure.”

            The more control they have, the less protection they are given (remember, don’t fuck with the chattel, and MOST IMPORTANTLY don’t fuck with the chattel’s right to defend themselves against other chattel) <– If the chattel feel helpless, they will not work productively.

            So a public figure is a person who has access to channels of exposure. They are not protected, because that would upset the rest of the chattel’s right to defend themselves against that person’s control over the media. In other words, a public figure is expected to defend themselves against the rest of the chattel…

            A private figure is just more chattel, and we need to protect the chattel from eating each other, so a private figure is ‘corporate property’ and protected.

            A public figure has gained enough control over media auspices to threaten large numbers of chattel, so the system itself is designed to encourages the chattel to tear public figures apart.

            This protects the chattel, protects productivity, maintains a status quo, and in the end, protects the system itself.

            That’s the spirit of the law in this matter.

            No run the ‘LASIK Guy’ through the same mental test… He bought a little advertising, made a few commercials, and is trying to do some business. If someone starts to defame him, does he have enough control over the media to defend himself?

            Most often, a small time Chiropractor, Optometrist, Hearing Care Professional, they all make commercials and run ads, but they have no substantial access to unpaid media sources local or otherwise. That’s what a judge has to look at, “Which decision best supports the most chattel?”

            Chattel want to feel like the courts protect them, so most decisions are made to support that. The actual letter of the law somewhat moot, but it must be upheld to some degree in order to keep the chattel confident and productive…

            In this case, the letter of the law differentiates between “Actual Malice” and “Common Law Malice” like this: “Actual Malice is simply ‘Knowingly propagating a falsehood, or reckless disregard for veracity’ <–that's where the satire and parody laws come into affect (but remember, even those laws comes back to keeping the chattel productive) – "Common Law Malice: is simply spite or ill-will with the intention to cause harm and exhibiting recklessness as to whether such harm should occur or not.”

            Now, that is a great statement of legal definition right there that sums up this whole issue: “recklessness as to whether such harm should occur or not”

            Salty can never be found guilty of Malice, because he is diligent in his belief that the people he tries to harm deserve it. So by definition, it’s not malicious.

            That’s the real beauty of the whole system, despite it’s shortcomings, it is designed to hold people accountable for their actions.

            I know this was a lot, perhaps more than you were looking for, but when you understand the spirit of the law, you can answer almost any legal question without any actual knowledge of law, then you just find the laws and cases that support the spirit of the issue…

            The Spirit of the Law is basically always: “Don’t fuck with the Chattel”

            Now here’s the spinner: Judges are Chattel too, just liek the rest of us. When you get the implications of that, then you’ll see why the LASIK doctor is probably protected while a guy like James is fair game…

            The LASIK doctor (barring obvious negligence) may have just helped the Judge’s wife see better, while a guy like James just ripped off the Judge’s kid.

            The Judge is just honorable chattel in a robe, and he / she got there by knowing the spirit of the law: “Don’t fuck with the Chattel.”

            End Note: The one time I lost in court, my client suffered a $58 million dollar setback… And we lost, because we deserved to loose. Our failure as counsel came in failing to convince our client that their position was wrong before it ever came to judgment. At the end of the case, it was clear that the needs and wants of the Chattel were supported over the desires of our client.

            And although we lost, it made me feel good about the judicial system because it reaffirmed my belief that the courts do work and do in fact support the needs of us chattel.

            In a far reaching timeline, eventually, the courts may even help us to get actual constitutional human rights once again. I mean, White Males had them for over a hundred years before they sold them, someday, we may all get them…

            To go one step further in you self education, there is phenomenal article, written by a very well informed lunatic:

            Mind you, I didn’t write that article (the one I linked to), and I neither endorse the author, his ideology, nor his products, but as food for thought, it’s well worth reading and highly accessible to the lay reader…

            TL/DR: It’s only malicious if you think they don’t deserve it… If they deserve it, defamation is encouraged and protected.

            1. @Injun Samurai,

              Thank you for your response. I will have to read it a few times over the next couple days to fully grasp what you just wrote but I appreciate it greatly. I think you have added greatly to the conversation here.

              I have been reading this blog like it was serial fiction (unfortunately it is not fiction) for the last year and have wondered some of the legalities that enable salty to say and do what he does here.

            2. @Fascinated,

              OMG! I can’t believe posted such a ridiculously long response… Perhaps there is some value to censorship…

              Anyways, I just re-read it and surprisingly enough it is coherent as long as you can shift to a paradigm where being called ‘chattel’ isn’t offensive…

              Here’s an eloquent and beautiful expression of the same core content:

            3. @Injun Samurai, I read the link you left in that last post about the US being essentially a corporation.

              How would it change the game if the LASIK eye surgeon is now promoting info products to his fellow LASIK surgeons… holding himself out as an expert in helping his fellow LASIK surgeons to extract more money from the public.

              Would he then be classified as a limited public figure… at least to the community of lasik surgeons he is attempting to influence through media, internet, and trade journals?

              Does that make him subject to parody?

              Almost every profession has hucksters that sale the same crap as Malincrap does except the audience is members of his profession ie. doctors, laywers, carpet cleaners etc.

              There seems to be no outlet for revealing some of the terrible things they may do behind the scenes because of fear of repercussion.

            4. @Injun Samurai,

              If what you said is true, that has to be the most depressing yet illuminating posts I’ve ever read.

              I always just shake my head at the insanity of self contradicting braniacs denying absolute truth absolutely while still espousing truth by definition, and it turns out the American legal system is actually based on the illusion of productive chattel?

              Is what you said common knowledge in the legal community? I’m not a lawyer, but I know several and I’ve NEVER heard anything like this before.

              It’s surreal to me.

              Droid, is Injun Samurai’s comment on the level?

              1. @H{TOH} ::

                Sounded pretty good to me.

                Hard to be correct about anything when you speak broadly. In many ways we are still villages … with our affairs managed at the village level. And the system is full of disruptive independent agents and irrationalists who muck up the works. So nothing can be always true.

                But if you’re gonna be expansive and shit :: then I guess I’ll buy it. The courts are like the banks … if we all go to get our money … tis not there. The justice system is set up produce the illusion justice that keeps us dancing in our chains.

            5. @Hal (the original Hal),

              Ditto to the Droid – “The justice system is set up produce the illusion of justice that keeps us dancing in our chains.”

              Took me 2000 words to say what he said in 17…

              …and to be clear, I was trying to be brief (at the expense of diligence and accuracy.)

              For the Record, there are a lot of murky technicalities that I glossed over in my effort to simply explain the fundamental rule of law: Don’t fuck with the Chattel.

              You asked: “Is what you said common knowledge in the legal community?”

              To which I answer: No! Absolutely not common knowledge, not even at the professorial or congressional levels, it is convoluted and technical but for proofs sake, it all comes down to this:

              Executive Order 6102: – Where the United States Government issued a Nationwide Mandate claiming proprietorship over all gold assets… In other words – We as chattel may have our possessions, assets, lands properties claimed by the government at their discretion. That’s empirical proof, a precedent on the topic.

              People will argue against the technicalities of the topic, but it’s hard to argue with the empirical.

              You have to remember that Judges, Congresspersons, and Politicians are all Chattel just like the rest of us, and like the rest of us, they too are subject to Dunning-Kruger Confidence. They will ardently oppose an unappealing truth even when presented with concrete evidence to the contrary…

              But wait, Executive Order 6102 mandated that the population surrender all their gold, no big deal right? The congress and president can take our possessions whenever they want, that’s their prerogative, we all know that…

              But who did they give all the gold to? I mean, why did they want it?

              See, ‘chattel’ means ‘property’, but in order for something to be called property, it has to have an owner…

              Follow the gold, that was the property of the property, if we follow it, then maybe we can find the right ass to kiss…

              For brevity’s sake, I think it’s best to ask Six Time New York State Associated Press Award Winning Investigative Journalist, Mark Pittman what he thinks on the subject…

              In fact: Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz called Mark Pittman “One of the great financial journalists of our time.” Pulitzer Prize winning financial journalist Gretchen Morgenson said of Pittman: “His investigative journalism sets the standard for other reporters everywhere.”

              Pittman’s Tell-all Investigative work has won him the Hillman Award, George Polk Award, and the Gerald Loeb Award…

              Since there’s 1,000’s of other ‘less’ credible sources, can I just save time and offer quotes from Pittman as an credible expert witness on the topic?

              Oh wait, he’s dead. He died suddenly at age 52 of unknown causes while sueing the federal reserve on Freedom of Information Act violations after he discovered that the $12 trillion dollars worth of chattel funds had slipped off the books during the TARP bailouts.

              On August 24, 2009, Chief Justice Loretta A. Preska of the United States District Court of New York (Mahattan), found in Pittman’s favor and mandated that the Fed had five days to comply with full disclosure.

              ie. If we’re really chattel (property), who owns us?

              So the courts find for Pittman, he wins the case, the Fed (a privately held corporation) is ordered to disclose, but they don’t. They just refuse to comply and instead appeal the order…

              But the decision was upheld in appeals, and the Fed (a privately held corporation) just says “Screw the courts, we make the laws, we ain’t disclosing shit…”

              Pittman’s pissed, he’s ready to have the Supreme Court send in the guys with guns… Everybody’s watching, there’s no way out of it, this whole rouse is coming to head…

              …as if to make his point, Pittman, 52 years old with no history of health problems of any kind, instead of going to the Supreme Court, just drops dead. The only person to ever sue the Fed, wins in court, the FED REFUSES TO COMPLY, and Pittman dies mysteriously of total and complete heart failure (not heart attack – full heart failure) the source of which his autopsy reports as “unknown cause” . . .

              Maybe is was Organophosphates?

              So what happened next?

              After Pittman’s unexpected, inexplicable death it took 18 months for the case to make it to the Supreme Court…

              Finally, just 15 days ago, on March 21st, 2011 the Supreme Court issued it’s ruling: The Fed was given five days to comply and disclose the documents to the now dead Mark Pittman…

              Over the last 15 days, the Fed, in full compliance, released 231 pages of the 6,186 pages Pittman was after.

              Those pages reveal where $2.7 trillion dollars worth of our, We the Chattel’s money went… Money that we were never told about, that we and or congress never approved, was taken without our permission. The other $10 trillion? It’s still missing, 75% of the GDP, vanished without a trace into the Federal Reserve.

              The entire bailout, everything that has happened for the last 4 years in our entire economy, fully disclosed in just 231 pages… There are 6,000 pages of records the Fed is still refusing to release…

              Pittman was unavailable for comment on his historic victory, (because he’s died mysteriously while taking the matter to the courts) however, the Obama administration did make a statement:

              “We are disappointed that the court has declined our petitions (and found in favor of the proletariat), which deal with the protection of () the Federal Reserve,”

              Yeah, seriously, the Obama administration issued a formal statement saying they are disappointed that the Supreme Court upheld the Freedom of Information Act!

              Hey, we fucking own the Fed right? lol… Not since 1913, now it owns us.

              Obama’s top Supreme Court lawyer acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal had this to say on the subject (paraphrased) – “We won’t let this happen again, we had congress pass new Dodd-Frank laws to make sure that the Freedom of Information Act never interferes with the private Business of our government ever again…”

              Whew… That’s good news! Now we’ve got new laws that trump the Freedom of Information… This way we don’t have to worry about reporters dying mysteriously anymore, the top level people can just change the law to match their actions: Refuse the court orders, loose in the Supreme court, then change the laws themselves so it can’t happen again…

              But you need a good name for a law like that, keep ’em dancing right? What do you call a law that protects the Fed (a privately held corporation) from the sorts of Disclosure and Transparency nuisances all other businesses are expected to abide by?

              How about: “The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act” ? We chattel can rest easy knowing that Wall Street will be reformed and we’ll finally be protected from accidentally glimpsing the truth…

              Whew, it was a close call we almost saw the strings…

              By the people, for the people…

              …while me and Mr. T are still dancing in our chains.

              TL/DR: The Droid’s targets are the outlet for the outrage. Droids are designed for the rigors of conflict, and by focusing all our resentment on whoever the Droid’s weekly target is, it makes dancing in our chains all the more tolerable…

              End note: For the Lackey, Scumbag, and Malinchak posse – Only pussies fire warning shots like C&D’s, real ballers spike you in a crowd with a 22gauge graphite pin stacked with batrachotoxin…

            6. @Injun Samurai,

              Damn, you should write a book or something.

              It’s like the entire conspiracy theorism culture rolled up into one semi-entertaining author (sorry, you’re no @SD when prosing)…

              @SD… The things this blog fosters & facilitates…!!! A 10,000+ word legal essay on the state of American “citizenry” in the comments on a post murdifying the frauduct dreams of a toothy r-tard public speaker?

              I feel almost obliged to practice my “ability to be vulgar, profane, incendiary, and vitriolic without ever crossing over into libel or obscenity” so I can start my own career as a fictional non-human entity bringing justice & peace to the forgotten & abused little peepz…

              Maybe the SaltyDroid’s future is as an info-product creator:

              “How to dismantle interstate fraud rings via fake robotics & profane alt-punk-punctuating (w/o overstepping the bounds into potentially libelous shiznits)”

              I’d buy that. And go to the up-sell in-person seminar to hear the pitch-fest robot-rigged scarcity ploys. Oh yeah, and for the networking…

              But seriously @Injun Samurai – book? website? where else do you spew your semi-digestible 2000 word chunks of wisdom (other than SD blog post comment threads)?

  13. In my opinion, I can’t help but think that someone that isn’t a scammer would want to address the points raised directly and show how he really isn’t a scammer. Perhaps it’s just a matter of being perceived as a scammer, rather than actual maliciousness and whatnot.

    You know what I mean?

    Malinchak could have handled this like a man. Instead, he went to lawyers crying like a bitch.

    Alas, sicking the lawyers on someone first shows guilt more than anything else. That’s what I perceive anyway. It also makes me wonder, how many other people have gotten a letter like this and been bullied into complying?

    That’s my opinion.

    1. @Rafael Marquez, it is so funny, he sent those two lawyers after a man that quoted SaltyDroid. If they are so upset with him quoting , then they should have sent that C&D to Salty FIRST. He is the source. Even the lawyers are afraid. lol too funny


    “We cannot overemphasize the seriousness of this matter. If you disregard the foregoing demands, you do so at your peril.”

    I haven’t laughed so hard since Ricky Gervais roasted Hollyweird at the Golden Globes!

    1. @Bullshit Detector, I was also wondering about it because before they told me about it I thought probably they were in danger of overemphasizing it but then they told me they weren’t so I knew I was wrong then.

    1. @Joe,

      Oh Dear. Dave is a high school buddy who now works with him. Well, James did tell us to get testimonials from everyone we know who would say nice things about us prior to selling our speaker or other services.

    1. @Left Hook ::

      James Malinchak isn’t in compliance with any Acts!

      of course … that’s just my highly educated and informed expert opinion … take it for what it’s worth {way more than your stupid opinion}.


  15. I can think of many First Amendment lawyers who would LOVE to take on this type of case pro bono, without charging the defendant a penny. Why? It’s similar to the reason white collar attorneys take on high-profile cases for free … the publicity/free marketing associated with the case more than pays for the actual costs fronted by the firm. In other words, being sued by somebody represented L&S does not necessarily mean huge defense costs.

  16. Yo Salty!

    Let’s say one of these guys sued you.
    Could you get the records of their associates (aka affiliates)?

    I think you said something about this before.

  17. Guys this isn’t related but there are many people here who are site owners and I thought you should see this.
    If some of you buy stuff from godaddy then you should know that their CEO is a murderer and a fucking coward who kills animals for pleasure.

    His response is even worse.

    1. @Fuck-Godaddy,

      Wow–that just makes me ill. Elephants are such cool creatures. It boggles the mind how callous and completely removed from feelings of connection and compassion this guy must be. Just gross. I will never ever buy anything from Go Daddy again.

      1. @scammed,

        True. And not only that, he is a motherfucker Leopard killer as-well.

        Watch in the video how he mention that killing Leopards is great for economy and foreign currency.

        Fucking idiot!

      2. @scammed, “Elephants are such cool creatures”

        Especially when they’re stampeding through your crops and ruining your food supply. Coolamundo.

  18. “James Malinchak isn’t a celebrity trying to keep his private life private :: he’s an asshole that’s fleecing innocent and naive victims.”

    Sometimes you just have to call a spade a spade.

  19. He should probably try to avoid the mistake of using fake small caps in his promotional materials. You can tell because the small capitals are the same weight as the big capitals.

    Of course, that’s all just my opinion, however.

  20. One thing I got to think about as when I was readin g the funny cease & desist letter was about that I don’t think I’d ever seen a law firm negotiate against themselves so fast and easily befroe ever getting any sort of counteroffer because at the beginning they said:

    “Moreover, if you continue to engage in this course ofwrongful conduct, doing so will exacerbate that liability exponentially, potentially
    exposing you to liability for compensatory and punitive damages of tens of millions of dollars.”

    but then later by the ending part of the letter they said

    “if you continue your wrongful conduct, my client’S damages will escalate, exposing you to millions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages.”

    Maybe it’s some new-fan-gold sort of “silent negotiation” tactic.

  21. You gotta love a robot who pulls the tail of the angry dog and laughs while doing it

    ‘I’m most definitely their motherfucking huckleberry.’

    Who knew Robots had BIG balls…

    I knew a Linda Goldman not Lynda Goldman. The Linda Goldman I knew was a HUGE Slut

    Many called her Whore Linda Goldman and Linda the slut Goldman.

    1. @Vern,

      To understand more fully, watch the movie “Tombstone”…which everyone should do anyway.

      1. @SD,

        Your Wyatt Earp side ain’t so bad either. “Make no mistake…it’s not revenge he’s after. It’s a reckoning.”

    1. @SD, This is Robert Paisola and I am the CEO of Western Capital Multimedia. Thanks so much for showing the public what we do on a daily basis to protect our clients from people like this. You would never believe how much money that have offered for us to take down our posts, but we never ever will.

      The voices are gathering and the voices are being heard and change is the result that you are seeing around the globe.

      We assist the pitbulls, we go after the bad guys and we NEVER EVER STOP

      To your success

      Robert Paisola
      President and Chief Executive Officer
      The Western Capital Group of Companies

  22. Hey, looks like you finally got a nibble!

    But why do you want to go fishing for sharks?

    1. @Fake Non-Droid, Don’t confuse a shark with a bottom-feeding catfish wearing a rented shark costume.

    1. @Words Spread, Sounds like Christopher Mollo, who has posted on Salty’s site before.

      He’s a total maniac but his vocabulary and rich swearing is actually quite entertaining.

  23. This might be the best written real life account of someone that was really on the inside. This guy actually bought the whole coaching package and details moment by moment accounts of what happened to his investment…obviously fuckin washed down the drain.

    Posted 03-21-11 (I met this guy myself at this very event he is referring to)

    For those that posted and said no one here actually knew what they were talking about, read this post and come back here with your tail between your legs.

    1. @mmk, Wow. That’s pretty shocking. Better copy and save that complaint in case the Rip Off Report offers to remove it “for a fee.”

      1. @Thom, And also give a nice “positive review” like they did for mr. Beck:

        Thursday, June 07, 2007:

        “Rip-off Report gives John Beck a positive rating because the company completely revamped its Customer Service Department and reached its goal to achieve total customer satisfaction and excellent service. This was completely made possible by a totally honest approach to corporate introspection. John Beck would have never made these changes if they did not first recognize and admit they needed to make changes. I have always said that all companies can improve in some way. If that does not occur then the company stagnates and will ultimately fail, unless they go to the dark side and bilk the very clients they purport to help. That is not the case here. The company continues to demonstrate its dedication to resolve any disputed matters / misunderstandings and safeguards against similar issues in the future.”

        “Tada!”, said the FTC:

        “John Beck/Mentoring of America, two principals, and three purported “inventors” marketed three get-rich-quick schemes, duping hundreds of thousands of consumers into paying approximately $300 million. The defendants marketed “John Beck’s Free & Clear Real Estate System,” “John Alexander’s Real Estate Riches in 14 Days,” and “Jeff Paul’s Shortcuts to Internet Millions.” The defendants allegedly made false and unsubstantiated claims about potential earnings for users of these systems. They used frequently aired infomercials to sell the systems for $39.95 and then contacted the purchasers via telemarketing to offer “personal coaching services,” which cost several thousand dollars and purportedly would enhance their ability to earn money quickly and easily using the systems. In addition, all purchasers were signed up for continuity programs that cost an additional $39.95 per month, but which were not adequately disclosed to consumers. Some consumers also continued receiving unwanted sales calls after they told the defendants’ telemarketers to stop calling. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.”

    2. @mmk, @Thom, As you probably saw, there is also a link to a considerably shorter March 2009 Ripoff Report complaint about Malinchak; that complainant “only” lost $6,997.

      A June 2009 follow-up says, “Full Refund was made. They apologized profusely and made it right.” A few other commenters sang Malinchak’s praises. But the original complaint is still up there.

      And even if Malichak “made it right” for that one person, he apparently didn’t change his ways.

      It seems to me that he is going to have a more difficult time “making things right” regarding that March 2011 complaint — especially now that the cat is really out of the bag about him.

      (ABC, are any of y’all paying attention?)

    3. @mmk,

      EXCELLENT! A++++++++ anti-testimonial!

      We need more of these, but this will do for now-

      Mr. Malformedballinsackchuk-

      Are you ready to go to Hell?

      Enjoy the trip scumbag-

    4. @mmk,

      Memorable from the complaint:

      “Remember the movie Sixth Sense (the “I see dead people” movie)… How, at the end when you find out that Bruce Willis is a ghost, you can go back and watch the movie again and things that you thought were true were actually misrepresentations of reality.”

  24. James Malinchak seems like a scam expert – it’s amazing how these fuckwads get honest business people to pay to attend a sales pitch and on it goes.

    Recursive pitch fuck fests – James seems good at it.

    There seems to be more “live events” with guest speakers, included in internet marketing launches these days – are they basically pitch fests?

    1. @screwed by Matt Harward,

      Q: “There seems to be more “live events” with guest speakers, included in internet marketing launches these days – are they basically pitch fests?”

      A: Yes. Yes indeed.

    1. @Gringo,

      Why anyone would PAY money to this douche to learn public speaking
      is beyond me. You’d learn more useful info from Guy Smiley.

      PS. Mike Koenigs is a double douche. The only thing he’s turned into a system is fleecing people. Mike sucks.

    2. One scammer (Malinchak) staking his “name and reputation” on another (Koenigs) is actually pretty funny. And the fact that Mal says he has to be careful whom he endorses because he was featured on ABC’s Secret Millionaire is also amusing. But it’s kind of pukeworthy nonetheless.

      1. @Cosmic Connie,

        You’re right.

        Plus Malingnantchat’s fake tan is stunning.

        Compare his face to his hands… there’s no “natural” way to get your face that dark and keep your hands from tanning.

    3. @Gringo, that is sick… in a bad way.

      Ed Rush is looking down through most of the video when Ballsinsack is talking, as if he’s hedging his bets and not 100% ok with this testie.

      Also Malinchak is full of BS when he says they “stopped” the seminar to do this video – it’s so fucking obvious they are on a break and they didn’t stop just for this recording. So he lies through his teeth, and he puts on this crazy ass fake smile that makes it obv he is hiding something, in my humble opinion.

  25. Come next election I’m writing in Jason Jones and The Droid – I seriously am and I would suggest that you do the same – Don’t care if you want it or not Droid you’re going to be a write-in for something simple like senator I don’t care if Gandhi himself is running. Actually I prefer that you don’t want the fucking job that means you’ll do a better job at it, and maybe you’ll get all worked up and actually start releasing some of the shit that goes on behind closed doors, I can just imagine a lobbyist in your office, you with the droid mask on, him wondering if he stepped into the twilight zone and fearing for his sanity through one of those big toothy bullshit lobbyist grins.

    I’d nominate myself but I don’t want the job either.

  26. The most recent folks to be featured on ABC’s Secret Millionaire are Gary and Diane Heavin, the couple behind Curves, a chain of women’s workout venues. I’m not exactly wild about the fact that Gary Heavin supports depriving women of their reproductive rights, but of course that does not make him a scammer. At any rate, since the Heavins did their “undercover” work for ABC’s fake-reality show in my former home town, Houston, their Millionaire segment was featured in some of the Houston news media over the weekend. That’s understandable, of course. I couldn’t help snorting, however, at this little snippet in a Houston Chronicle article:

    “ABC producers contacted the Heavins last spring to see if they would be interested in starring in the reality show. The TV executives wanted to be sure the Heavins were on the up-and-up. And the Heavins wanted to make sure they wouldn’t be portrayed as kooks or flakes.

    “When both sides were satisfied, they went to work.”

    Assuming the ABC execs made similar efforts to ensure that Malinchak was “on the up-and-up” before going ahead with his segment, it certainly casts a light on the network’s standards, at least for Secret Millionaire. Apparently their main (or only) criterion was that the prospective star actually have enough money to qualify for the term “millionaire” — never mind how that wealth was earned.

    1. @Cosmic Connie,

      never mind how that wealth was earned.

      Not caring how the wealth was earned is doubtless always a problem…but what I think is that it’s especially insidious in the self-help & fake-wealth-guru-IM-sector because those people…wearing The Mask Of Sanity can’t even claim they were maybe pressured by a bunch of share-holders…

  27. Wow. It’s a good thing you are an attorney. I think most people would be scared shitless by the C&D. It’s great that you’re not, and feel free to expose the scumbags. Bravo!!!!

    1. @MP, The old-school nastygram approach to intimidation is rapidly becoming a sure blunder in the age of the internet. Nobody likes a bully, and especially a hired bully attacking someone who’s mission is in support of the greater good. It’s more likely to blow up even worse in one’s face, or in some cases, their big overgrown horse teeth.

    1. @Matt Hardwad,
      Interesting — especially this comment following the remark that contained the link to Salty’s site:

      posted by Anonymous
      Tue, 04/05/2011 – 3:07pm

      “. . .. so it costs 410,000 tax deductible dollars for a 46 minute infomercial on prime time television . . . .pretty cheap cost compared to the cost of a 30 second super bowl commercial . . . . show Gary and Diane as caring giving individuals rather than the team which has driven hundreds if not thousands of women into bankruptcy with their monthly fees and boilerplate pro-Curves contracts which forces heinous fees be paid to Curves if the business fails forcing many operations to stay in business – – -losing money until the lengthly [sic] contracts expires. If you show an attorney a Curves franchisee agreement- – – -they would NEVER recommend you sign it!! There were 7,269 Curves in the US in 2007 . . . .in 2010 there were 4,680 . . . . . .no wonder they needed to spend 410K in a public relations campaign.”

      Conspicuous altruism: don’t ya just love it?

      1. @Cosmic Connie,

        A friend of mine is a business broker. The last time he mailed a letter to health clubs asking “do you want to sell?”, 16 of 16 Curves franchisees responded that they wanted to sell.

        Of the 16, not one was making enough profit to be valuable to a potential buyer.

  28. haven’t seen anyone mention james’ drunk run from the cops in PA back in 99 on a motorcycle while he had a learners permit!


    1. @Brad, While I’m sure the story is interesting in its own way, I’m not so inclined to think that what may have been just a youthful indiscretion is relevant to current issues. Now, if Malinchak is still habitually driving (a car or a motorcycle) while intoxicated, thus endangering others, that would be something else. But if that 12-year-old incident was an isolated one, maybe it’s not so important now. At any rate I think that his IM scamming — and his reactions when people tried to expose it — provide more than enough fodder.

      1. @Cosmic Connie is right…there are bigger issues going on now and I know a couple of people that made stupid driving mistakes in their early 20’s.

        The biggest issue is Malinchak is going to hold an event in May – *2 Tickets to James Malinchak’s 4 Day Millionaire Secrets Revealed Boot Camp May 12-15th in Los Angeles, CA!!! (Each ticket valued at $4,997)

        I am sad at the number of people, even though they are choosing to attend, will be brain washed into buying more programs and training. Someone said it best in the last blog post “he always tells you the promise and teaches you never to reveal the how”

        I believe this is because he doesn’t know the how. These people are going to get robbed blind.

      2. @Cosmic Connie, Actually, if true, a “drunk RUN from the cops” after his formative years could yield some insight into his true character, although I’m guessing we already have enough insight about that.

      3. @Cosmic Connie,

        actually he was either in or near his 30’s so it’s very relevant. he wasn’t 12.


  29. I hate Kern, etc…as much as any Droid groupie and have never bought a guru package preferring instead to download it off a file sharing site – StomperNet! yeah you!

    However, I did come across Malinchak’s stuff and because I bought the package I got to go to the event this spring for $50.

    Here’s my assessment. My half-positive take on him is easier to write than the things that I really didn’t like so I’ll start with that.

    #1. How to be a Big Money Speaker information package.

    It’s really focused on how to structure your speaking business and speeches so you can sell from the stage. I’m a pretty sophisticated internet marketer and have done a decent amount of speaking, and so it seemed to be pretty solid advice. Some of it was re-hashed of course, but as a package for someone new to the industry it would provide a decent structure to follow, get them motivated, and remind them to quit dreaming and go work the business.

    That is fine.

    The problem I had is that the pitch is “make millions” and “anyone can do it” even though we all know most people can’t for a variety of reasons – they don’t have anything of value to share, write well, speak well, aren’t disciplined to send out brochures, make follow-up phone calls, etc… That’s mostly why they’ve fallen for the get rich pitch in the first place.

    As for “price” and “value.” Well, for someone like me who can afford $1,600 and is buying a few templates that we won’t have to recreate and a few great nuggets of advice on speaking and booking – and who has some skill and resources…that’s not too much.

    There were a good number of successful business owners and authors at his seminar this spring – in addition to the kooks. Yes, I did talk to successful, talented folks who really did get some new insights, new angles, and new relationships that will help their businesses from James. And, I talked to a number of other’s who were like “well, I got a few things but I knew most of this and there are other ways.”

    But, for the dreamers, well, it’s a big waste of money, and James’ saying, “You are responsible to your audience, not for them,” doesn’t really make up for his selling a ton of stuff to them.

    What’s insidious is that he DID have a number of lines about who shouldn’t buy his stuff/use his strategies but since the entire experience was set up to sell the same, those statements only gave the overall pitch more credibility.

    Anyway, since I was fairly happy with the package, off I went to the seminar at the LAX Westin….

    #2. I liked James.

    Yeah, he’s got a weird ass smile and repeats ad nauseum the lines that are supposed to make him seem to be one of the people i.e. “steel-mining town in PA.” They are though. He, his sister Cindy who runs the office, and his high school buddy named Dave who runs the business have small town PA written all over their faces. Dave is your average joe. Cindy seems sort of burnt up. James’ other sister died awhile back so maybe that’s part of the vibe she gives off.

    Anyway, I grew up with folks like this and, well, not to justify it, but it’s pretty easy to see them being decent folks. My guess is that James had some speaking talent/some charisma and a work ethic and so he did pretty well on the college circuit. When you come from “there,” making money is pretty seductive – as it is for anyone from wall street types to strippers to anyone who has ever sold something and hyped it or shaded the truth.

    My guess is that he, not being tech savvy or bright intellectually (as he says…no shame in that), then fell in with the IM crowd….Tom Antion, etc… He worked his way up to the Chicken Soup guys and Glazer where, of course, everyone endorses everyone else. Somewhere along the way he just bought into the IM tactics and is steamrolling ahead with them to his detriment. Most folks with an ounce of sense who aren’t busy kissing his ass can tell exactly what he’s doing.

    Anyway, have you ever had a friend who was a great guy but who was an asshole to women but you kept him as a friend and really liked him. Well that’s James to me. A really likable guy who shouldn’t market himself like he is. A friend that you wish you could slap upside the head and say, “Dude, your pitching ‘the fastest way to the cash’ is a catchy slogan but most people are going to take it as license to pretend to be something they are not and it’s gonna land on them hard. Cut it out.”

    Does that make sense?

    I didn’t get a Frank Kern “heh heh screw those people who bought my shit vibe” from James. More of a “I’m trying to help you” vibe but then he uses a bunch of tactics that aren’t ethical or at least do end up taking a lot of money from people.

    I get the same vibe from Buchard. I read his book and he talks very ethically about how you should actually “be an expert” and not let 80% of your audience fail…to demand excellence of them…tell them to not be slackers and dreamers (my words not his.) BUT, he just misses that everything he is doing is going to make every idiot of no experience think they too can be an expert…and then feels compelled to use half-truths and exaggerations in his marketing to sell more stuff. sigh….

    One thing about the “Value.” This is a pretty subjective topic. Some of the people I met were in his $50k+ Platinum group and were obviously there for the “celebrity” aspect of it, the networking at events. They had money to burn so that’s their call. Some of the people who went to his house had had a great experience with James figuring out a new market position and brand for them. He is pretty good at that.

    Some of them didn’t seem to have received anything other then feeling great that a celebrity had paid attention. At least one I talked to was requesting a refund.

    Next time I’ll get into some specifics of what I experienced at the event.

    1. Learning how to manipulate while being manipulated by the same tricks you’re being taught is really weird. Fascinating at first but then nauseating by the end..

    2. Seeing how his formula for selling from the stage can be a train-wreck if the speaker and his topic are.

    3. How one speaker told me that two higher ups in the company were fighting – which I assumed were Davy and Ed Rush i.e. Bumpkin vs Disingenuous Asshole.

    4. How the practical good stuff is mixed with total BS which really drove me nuts.

    In case I don’t get back here quick enough, the event ended with me walking out of the “internet secrets” pitch by Ed Rush.

    This is my field and so by the time the package reached a “value of $120,000” – the package consisting mostly of a crappy website with a squeeze page, auto-responder, 6 hours of interviewing/transcription, and connection to a fulfillment house – when I knew that folks could get the same thing for a bit of research and a few-thousand dollars tops I was going nuts.

    Quote Ed, “A membership software and program could cost you $15,000” – well, no, go buy Wishlist Member’s $169 wordpress plugin or the free one from WPMUdev and take a few hours to set it up….arghghgh.

    I walked out, ditched the last seminar, got drunk at the bar with some scoundrels from an MLM convention in town, and then was probably the only person to skip the morning session and the “picture with James” event.

    If I go back to an event it will be because there are so many people who can afford to drop $3 – $10k or more on internet marketing and business consulting so I’ll happily steal them and give them some real value.

    Last thing…

    I spent 10 years working for nonprofits so feel similarly about his TV appearance. He does care about those people. I do think he connected with them in a genuine way especially with the Coach for the girls basketball organization. But of course he is playing the game so he helps stage it and says his lines like any actor.

    Then he pays $100,000 (my guess is that it was out of his pocket and that previous donations at his events to LEAP did go to that organization). You could afford that too if you realized that instead of taking a day to speak to a college, you could get 100 people in a room at $2,000 a pop and then 8 of them would buy your $88,000/year coaching package. : )

    This money does help the organizations that are doing good work. So what if they are being exploited by a stupid TV show and millionaires…that money will help them do a lot of good. Then he reaps huge publicity benefits and makes even more money.

    Yes the self-promotion masquerading as selfless-charity is gross, but maybe it will help inspire a few people to get off their assess and volunteer or donate. The organizations that got the money will do good with it and the publicity is good for them too.

    Anyway, I’d like to hear from more successful speakers about his approach and the industry. Hearing Ed Rush pitch the internet marketing shit the way he did makes me wonder if James speaking techniques were as good as I originally thought.

    1. @Teve Torbes, I’m really not sure what to make of your lengthy comment. You fluctuate in your analysis of Malinchak, but in my view, even one turd in the punchbowl ruins the entire punch.

      My aging mortal coil has seen and experienced plenty, and imo, Malinchak is a douche. He is presently going to extraordinary measures to build a firewall of hype online to make legitimate criticism harder for the public to find and assess. That’s dubious at best. In a word, I consider him sly. That’s not a compliment.

    2. @Teve Torbes ::

      You’re swimming in bullshit friend.

      Kern is nothing on his own :: Malinchak is nothing on his own. I don’t hate :: or care about :: either.

      They’re both part of a people grinding machine that needs to be stopped.

      You’re just filling the air with distracting nonsense.

      1. @SD, I agree that the people grinding machine needs to be stopped, but don’t you think that there’s room in that effort for something other than calling him “a despicable douche” etc…

        What you call “distracting nonsense” is perhaps an acknowledgement of what some people will find valuable for whatever reason. (The lack of focus was due to the early morning hour.)

        By discussing my own experience with James (positive and negative) and giving people an honest assessment of where they could get what they originally wanted from him – I daresay I’ve prevented more people from being taken advantage of by James then even the Salty Droid.


        The Friendly Teddy Bear

        1. Whoops. that’s from me again, Teve Torbes. Young Whippersnapper, you probably don’t even know who Teve Torbes is! Your age must explain your righteous anger : )

        2. @Teve Torbes ::

          You are exactly wrong. Your cheese brained waffling is just the kind of bullshit that the manipulated mind clings to in order to preserve it’s unfounded belief in unicorns.

          That’s fine if that’s what you want for your own life … but keep it out of my face.

          James Malinchak has NOTHING to sell.

          I daresay I’ve prevented more people from being taken advantage of by James then even the Salty Droid.


    3. @Teve Torbes, correction – Davy is James’ cousin. kind of interesting that the only people he can get to work for him are family.

  30. At the event James said, “I had a friend who I used to have sell website stuff to my audience. Then when I figured out how to do it better than him I told him he couldn’t speak at my events since he was a direct competitor and he got all pissed off and won’t talk to me. No offense but why would I promote a competitor.”

    This was pretty clearly Tom, and now Tom is firing back.

    Yeah, just based on that association I’d wager that James didn’t know shit about internet marketing (take a look at his non-millionaire secrets websites) and that Ed is teaching him all the hype email crap.

  31. This was just sent out to the Malinfukd affiliates.

    Weird that affiliates have to remove all their marketing stuff, to get paid.


    So Salty – I guess you need to take this post down… err maybe not since you’re NOT an affiliate and def NOT encouraging people to buy his shit with shilled fake reviews

    … so Salty don’t fret – you’re ok leaving truly negative and revealing posts alone :)

    {Begin message from JV Manager}

    The Millionaire Secrets promotion was an
    absolute blast, and we truly appreciate
    all of the support from our partners!

    We are now involved in the post-launch
    wrap-up…and have a few critical items to
    communicate today.

    So…lets get right to it :)

    Removal Of Marketing Material
    From The Public Internet

    Now that the promotion is officially over,
    our legal counsel reminded us that it is
    critical to have all residual marketing
    material removed from the Internet to avoid
    any consumer confusion.

    Therefore, please remove all marketing
    artifacts (Blogs, paid ads, review sites)
    from the Internet by no later than midnight
    this coming Friday (April, 29th).

    Based on this being a compliance issue,
    this is a crucial activity. Therefore, please
    end an email to (
    (or simply reply to this email) and let
    us know the domains/sites you’ve pulled
    down. If we do not hear from you by midnight
    on Friday, we will assume that you have not
    complied with this request, so it is imperative
    that we hear from you.

    Taking care of this task is not one of
    those ‘fun’ things…but is definitely
    one of those ‘critical’ ones.

    Failure to remove any Millionaire Secrets
    Revealed related marketing artifacts by
    Friday at midnight may place your affiliate
    commissions at risk of delay or even forfeit,
    so please act on this immediately.

    Okay…now on to the fun stuff…

    Your Leads Are Hard Coded
    For Future Promotions!

    James and Ed wanted me to remind you
    that the leads you’ve brought in during
    the promotion are hard coded in our
    Infusionsoft system and as long as
    your account is in good standing, will
    be maintained for all future promotions.

    This will mean you’ll be paid on the
    leads you’ve brought in again and

    James and Ed are very much looking forward
    to continuing their relationship with you
    for future promotions and they know that
    maintaining your hard coded leads is one
    the first steps in ensuring that happens :)

    Final Affiliate Standings and
    Partner Prizes will be announced
    this coming Monday…stay tuned!

    We’re doing a final audit on our affiliate
    contest to make sure that we have the accurate
    standings based on the promotional period.

    We’ll send out the final information this
    coming Monday.

    We’ll also have a random drawing for our TWO
    Wild Card slots between now and then, and we’ll
    announce those winners in that email :)

    A Final ‘Thank You Again’!!!

    We want to offer up one last ‘Thanks! for your
    hard work and support during the course of the
    promotion. We truly appreciate all you did and
    know that it’s our affiliate partners that
    enable this type of promotion to be a success!

    That’s the final wrap-up for this one. If you
    have any remaining questions, please send an
    email to


    David Bass
    Millionaire Secrets Revealed Affiliate Manager

  32. I will pay money to fight Salty Droid. This is not free speech. It is defamation and hate.

    1. @chales :: Classic trolling!

      I think you mean to say that this site is “Libel” (where the alleged defamation occurs in published written form … as in :: a blog) vs. “Defamation” as you accuse.

      Additionally, if that is your belief, probably you would prefer to pay money to SUE the Salty Droid vs. to FIGHT the Salty Droid.

      In which case, we’re all for it! Please, sue the Salty Droid @chales!

      BTW, this site is DEFINITELY covered under “free speech” as has been amply covered in the comments on THIS VERY POST!

      @Injun Samurai can clear this one up for you (if you only had already read what was written) ::

      485 U.S. 46 Supreme Court Ruling clearly state[s]: “First Amendment’s free-speech guarantee prohibits awarding damages to public figures to compensate for emotional distress intentionally inflicted upon them.

      “Intentionally Inflicting emotional distress on public figures” is a Constitutional Right Unanimously backed with precedents set by the Supreme Court. As long as you believe what you’re saying is true, it doesn’t need to be substantiated, parody, or satire, you’re allowed to say whatever you believe.

      So, I guess this site pretty much defines free speech.

      But nice trolling bro!

      Doctor Mario

      PS – Did you spell your name “Charles” wrong? Or iz u rilly cald chales?

      1. @Doctor Mario, Not Charles or Chales. Stephen Pierce trying to push his own nasty coverage off the front page. He is very good at suppressing the truth.

    2. @chales,

      No, it’s not defamation and hate.
      It’s shining the unwelcome light of truth onto the practices of those who would try to cheat and swindle people.

      Cheating and swindling is not new of course. And it grows and grows as long as victims can’t get together to compare notes.

      The internet gives victims this platform at long last.

    3. @chales,

      Well, stop sitting around telling us! Call Houston attorney Paul B. Kerlin of Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP. Be sure to ask about the three-for-one special!

      1. @Lanna, Don’t forget that alleged attorney and known ginger, Paul B. Kerlin, is a “committee member” of the “Beverage Stands Sub-Committee” of the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo (“2010 to present”).

        So @Chales can pay $$$ to Paul Kerlin to attempt to sue SD, and maybe also score some free passes to the rodeo. Or, at least, a couple of “50 cents off” beverage coupons.

  33. Salty Droid,

    Your blog posts about James Malinchak is very interesting. Several years ago, some guru promoted him from a mailing list I signed up to. When I looked at his photo, I sensed something wrong about this guy. My gut feeling said I have to keep away from him.

    Recently, I lurked this Malindork’s handwriting sample on Google, it’s his Thank You card. Having studying handwriting analysis myself, I freaked out to see the X mark on his signature writing, right on the main middle zone. And also a lot of X-ing in his T writings. The X-ing in handwriting means someone with inner moral problem, could be self-destructive and potentially violent or suicidal (one of them or both).

  34. Tom is the same way. He’s just trying to separate himself from Malanchik since he’s been had. I know Tom, and as a great speaker, makes him a great con artist. He prays on older individuals who are not internet savvy, and don’t know the difference. His course is extremely old, and null and void. What he actually teaches he doesn’t utilize himself. What people fail to realize is he makes money when you sign up, purchase his affiliate (residual income) tools, such as,, and the rest of the affiliate crap he sells you on. THAT HE DOESN’T TEACH YOU!

  35. An unknown comic named Tig Notaro hired Lavely and Singer and before you knew it Lavely and Singer got a whole police unit to do her bidding. This Tig Notaro couldn’t sue for defamation cause everything said about her was true so they came up with ways to drag the alleged defamer into the criminal justice system to scare her off.

    They have a lawyer named Allison Hart who just lies and lies and just gets away with it.

    Lavely and Singer is a sick firm who must be exposed as they destroy good people
    They have and will do anything to win They have bad cops like Jeffrey Dunn and John Gregozek in their pockets, and judges too. Journalists are too chicken to write about them for fear of thier “scorched earth” tactics.
    Incredible what goes in the Los Angeles courts when Lavely and Singer are involved.

    1. @Lavelyandsingsersucks ::

      Oh yeah?

      Come tell me about it … my address is right down there with the carrot cake.

  36. Lavely and Singer represent a scammer called Tig Notaro. Notaro is a pathological liar who just can’t stop lying. A lawyer for Lavely and Singer, Allison Hart, has no qualms about lying to the court and just spreading slander against Notaro’s victims. This firms motto is to win at all costs. This firm owns LAPD units and figures they can just criminally prosecute those who dare fight their creepy clients. This is a genuinely evil firm that ruins lives and anyone who stands up to them is a hero.

  37. I know this if off topic but I’m looking into starting my own blog and was curious what all is needed to get setup? I’m assuming
    having a blog like yours would cost a pretty penny?
    I’m not very web savvy so I’m not 100% positive. Any suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

    1. @herb grinders tobacco,

      It looks like you have already setup a nice Amazon site selling weed grinders – useful for pot heads – so it looks like your question is just a traffic hooker.

      Are you selling lots of weed grinders?

      Is it the magic niche?

      Keep it secret, otherwise people will copy you.

Comments are closed.