Blessed Little Plans, August 14



Nicole is getting more and more vague in her “plans,” which as everyone knows, is not a good thing for organizational purposes. The more specificity, the better, and the more likely that the plan will actually see the light of day.

I’m seeing lots and lots of “indefinites” appearing under the Due Date, and that’s not desirable.

“Later this year” is slightly better, as it does give us a cut-off date of December 31, however, the actual plans themselves are defined as “a few things.”  Tsk, tsk.

I’m very disappointed that we haven’t been treated to the update to the Tiny Cabin Q&A. I was really looking forward to that. We’re remodeling our kitchen and I thought maybe I could get some great ideas.

One very definite thing is an appointment with the judge on Tuesday. And we all know what that means, don’t we?

after court lunch date

Date time at Hardee’s.  It’s so romantic.

71 thoughts on “Blessed Little Plans, August 14”

  1. I wish I had someone to keep track of my schedule for me. I always forget to put things on my calendar.

    Any idea why the near silence from Camp Naugler? Are the trying to get that TV show?

  2. Have you seen her latest blog. It’s about why Joe isn’t in pictures, and blogging about the kids. Obviously she saw your blog about blogging about the kids.

  3. They probably call ahead to book a table. I can picture them now… Angus burger in hand discussing their shit(literally) and thinking of ways to smite the trolls. Joe thinking about his neighbor’s daughter..If she only knew how Hardees nuts would hit her face…. Nicole thinking to herself the thick burger’s meat is thicker than Joe’s dick….Oh the things she’d do to a frozen patty and I’m willing to bed my mortgage free home she could fit two thick burger’s inside… I’m never eating Hardees again.

  4. LOL, thank you Sally for the good laugh.
    I especially loved Joe’s feverish post that they are “documenting and recording EVERYTHING!!!”. Note the three exclamation points, he’s Jonesing for Hardee’s.

    The FBI and DOJ are busy folks, Nauglers. They tend to focus on kinda important problems, like narcotics rings, terrorism, kidnapping, murders, big time money laundering and fraud scandals. You might want to give them *alot* of heads up that you wish to meet with them with all that evidence of yours to hang all those corrupt, unconstitutional good old boys by your Sovereign citizen noose!

  5. Remember when Nicole had “plans” to build guest cabins so that visitors could come and experience her way of life? That would have been so awesome.

  6. Lol! I’m sure Nicole read about her August 14th plans. She just posted on her journal how they “aren’t on anyone’s schedule.” t didn’t take her long to come up with a few responses to Sally’s blog including Sally’s blog entry ‘Writing about Children.’

  7. She never reads your blog….but promptly responds with a smart aleck comment that a bunch of stuff still isnt done 5 years later. SMH.

    I did note that the kids were involved in Scouts, and a homeschool program, and riding horses and had A FREAKING CEILING over their heads. They also were apparently allowed to have Christmas 5 years ago. So you can add social isolation of children to the list as a completed task, I suppose.

  8. Not to mention that Tubby Hubby having a job was an exciting prospect 5 years ago.

    Who in their right mind crows from the rooftops about the “progress” these two have managed to make in 5 years. SO frustrating!

  9. I feel like *acquiring a source of potable water at home* (like I dunno, fashioning some sort of crude rainwater collection system or somefreakinthing) should be on the calendar since apparently they’ve been ‘planning’ to do this since day one.

  10. Amie, yeah I read through some of her old blog posts the other day and it’s pretty sad how far they’ve fallen. More kids, fewer resources. They used to actually have routines and cook on regular stoves and have warm baths and do scouts and visit friends. 🙁 I think some of that decline coincides with Nicole working more outside the home and Joe just giving up on paid employment entirely and doing…whatever the hell he does.

  11. Well, God dam’it…
    Joe is on to me and my back wood’s good O’l boy unconstitutional lunch dates.
    And he is documenting and recording everything too !!!
    O’What shall I ever do?

    Welcome to Kentucky Mother-Fucker….welcome !!!

    Call the F.B.I… 🙂
    We’ll set up a lunch date with them next week too !!!

    Joe has lost his MIND !!!!

  12. What you are doing is known as stalking and is illegal. You are monitored on this platform, how many times you repeatedly look, observe, and trace this families movements whether through he world wide web or via land, watching this family. Your intent here is notated. You are not doing this accidentally. And intent is where this behavior becomes illegal.


  13. Nice to see she is in no hurry to build the homestead. There have been two mild winters, the predictions are not for another one. No hurry, they can always huddle in the van for warmth again, right?

    After all it’s about the journey as portrayed online, not about actually doing anything. It’s not as if there were 11 children “and holding” needing an onsite fresh water source, bathing facilities, safe sewage solutions, fresh food, or whatever. It’s not as if children grow, in the blink of an eye, into teens and adults who might like a modicum of privacy, say a door on the privy or room to call their own away from the prying eyes of their family.

    Does that mean she will stop begging online? You know the “we would have built it, but no supplies no money routine”? I don’t think it will last. Exploiting the children online to sell overpriced Amazon products for pennies in kickbacks isn’t going to fill that “donation hole” or finance her dreams.

  14. I have a likely dumb question. I listened to the recording of Nicole’s arrest and a few points jumped out at me. Were there any other people present at the time she started yelling that her kids were being kidnapped (her words, not reality) and for someone to call the state police? In all of this pitiful, yet at times hilarious saga, I cannot determine if there were others present until Joe arrived on scene. In all truth her voice lacks the genuine edge of fright, such as a certain high frequency sound that happens when the diaphragm tenses and the throat involuntarily constricts when real fear hits, throughout all of that recording (screaming, rapid stupid speech, ridiculous hyperbole “shoot me” and “watch my belly” is at a relatively low register suggesting that she was merely acting). She does, however, get truly freaked out and frightened (which is characterized by certain high pitched frequencies as described) when she cannot account for her cell phone which is quickly located. If there was no one else present then Nicole’s yelling for someone to call the state police was purely contrived audio drama. The possible loss of her phone, rather than her children, generates genuine fear and concern in her which belies her true priorities and motivation throughout that whole incident. That her oldest sons were immediately taken and her others the next day was fortuitous for the Naugler parents. It was, in my opinion, a calculated ploy to get money.

  15. There is one “plans” the Mr and Mrs keep up on. It’s the after court, lunch date at Hardee’s. How romantic of Joe. And lately, it’s almost a once a month.

    And by the looks of a photo, court is some “socialization” time for the baby.

    Aww. Court days are a twofer.

    Courtin’ on court days. What a way to keep some zest in a romance.

  16. ‘planning’ to do this since day one.

    I started The List without going retroactive just to illustrate how often she says “We plan to do X.” If we went back to the start, The List would be very long indeed.

  17. What you are doing is known as stalking and is illegal.

    You do realize that changing your screen name doesn’t change what I can see, don’t you, “Joy”? No, this isn’t illegal.

    By all means, “notate.”

  18. If there was no one else present then Nicole’s yelling for someone to call the state police was purely contrived audio drama.

    Apart from the police, Nicole and the two oldest boys, to my knowledge there was no one else there.

  19. In case your ignorance is getting in the way.

    We will close in on you soon. Apparently you don’t learn and feel you are above the law.

    What Is It?

    Stalking is a pattern of behavior that makes you feel afraid, nervous, harassed, or in danger. It is when someone repeatedly contacts you, follows you, sends you things, talks to you when you don’t want them to, or threatens you. Stalking behaviors can include:

    Knowing your schedule.
    Showing up at places you go.
    Sending mail, e-mail, and pictures.
    Calling or texting repeatedly.
    Contacting you or posting about you on social networking sites (Facebook, Twitter, etc).
    Writing letters.
    Damaging your property.
    Creating a Web site about you.
    Sending gifts.
    Stealing things that belong to you.
    Any other actions to contact, harass, track, or frighten

  20. I’m sorry, in case you are oblivious to the laws within your own state:

    Code Section
    508.130 to .150

    Defined As
    Intentional course of conduct directed at specific person(s) which seriously annoys, intimidates, or harasses and which serves no legitimate purpose

    Stalking in 1st degree: intentional stalking with explicit or implicit threat of sexual contact, injury, or death and protective order for same victim; or criminal complaint; or convicted of felony or Class A misdemeanor; or within previous 5 years; or stalking with deadly weapon. Stalking in 1st degree is a Class D felony. Stalking in 2nd degree: stalking with explicit or implicit threat of sexual contact, injury, or death: Class A misdemeanor. 508.140

  21. stalking? You do realize that nicole’s rambling blog posts appear on my facebook timeline…..

    If I walk down my street buck naked the neighbors arent stalking me if they look out of their windows. It is the exact same thing. Nikki puts her life out in the public to solicit donations. It isnt stalking if you are commenting on a public forum about it.

  22. I do believe I had a “Noticing and commenting on things that I post in a public forum = stalking” square on my Bingo board. If I didn’t, I should’ve. It’s so frickin’ common. I once saw a comment string in which somebody reposted AN ADVERTISEMENT in order to point out some errors of fact, and what do you know, the seller came boiling in hollering about stalking and threatening people with Internet lawyers. Because anything other than shutting up and giving money = stalking, I guess.

  23. Waiting for the “Repeating exactly what I say = slander” twofer to appear. (One, HDU repeat exactly what I said as if I can’t magically make my words mean anything I want, and two, I can’t tell libel and slander apart.)

  24. Um, since when do private investigators issue any notices? They are not law enforcement officers nor are they officers of the court. For a PI to expose their operations and intent to their target is beyond inept or just stupid. Wannabe authority figure? Pro bono wannabe? BTW Sally’s blog is completely within the purview of the first amendment. The intent of her blog has never been a secret. If Sally’s showing the considerable hypocrisy of Nicole’s professed homesteading life and her real life by merely accounting for Nicole’s public commentary is damaging the grifting income, too bad for Nicole. Nicole’s legitimate business is not to be commented on (we get our hands slapped if we do). Nicole’s kids are commented on only carefully and with extreme consideration to the kids being minors. Nicole has never shown anyone else that kind of deference or respect.

  25. “What you are doing is known as stalking and is illegal. You are monitored on this platform, how many times you repeatedly look, observe, and trace this families movements whether through he world wide web or via land, watching this family. Your intent here is notated. You are not doing this accidentally. And intent is where this behavior becomes illegal.”

    Last time that I checked – a public blog expressing opinion is not stalking or illegal. I am sure that Sally has zero plans to stop this expression and probably welcomes your monitoring.

    free·dom of speech
    the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint.

    Furthermore – expanding on comments or actions publicly discussed by the Naugler family is not stalking – it is discussing.

    In addition, maybe you should focus on how to help these children or any other child instead of taking on the role of keyboard warrior.

    Wishing good, merely, is a lukewarm charity; but doing good is divine. ~James Lendall Basford (1845–1915), Sparks from the Philosopher’s Stone, 1882

    If you have no will to change it, you have no right to criticize it. ~Author Unknown

  26. Oh PI Joy, we know Nicole reads the blog, documents everything and she believes the FBI is watching. Yawn. But thanks for reminding us.
    Does PI stand for private investigator? You sound scary. Try to spell our names right, o.k.?

  27. I always assumed that Nicole was screeching to a passing motorist to call the State police .
    If you listen to the audio with headphones you can also hear one of the boys tell Nicole “calm down, you’re just making things worse” or something to that effect.

  28. How do you listen to the recording of her arrest. I read some of it from someone who had posted something about her arrest but I cannot find the video. Could someone post a link?

  29. I also realized NN didn’t have her usual meltdown, tantrum, explosion this weekend. I guess she’s trying to break the cycle.
    Yeah she doesn’t read over here….

  30. I love that they are using the excuse for court to have a romantic get away to the local fast food restaurant. How special of them. I wonder, while they are out gallivanting around, who feeds the kids.

  31. It’s funny because everything you post actually is notated. But I don’t think that’s what Joy meant. lol

  32. This has probably been covered here. I found the “disclaimer” very interesting on the last line of this SS from the now closed, Capistan funding opportunity for B.L.G. Co.
    “Capistan is looking to raise at least $20,000 to loan to Nicole so she can afford to pay off her part of the renovation costs, some other setup expenses, and a few months rent at her brand new strip mall location, right in the heart of Radcliff. We’re setting a stretch goal of $60,000 which will do something amazing: pay off her property loan on the Blessed Little Homestead of 27 acres of virgin Kentucky woodlands, thus saving her hundreds in interest each year. In response, Nicole has agreed to make immediate monthly payments on her loan with 1% monthly compound interest on the remaining balance. This means that every backer is being promised a return of over 10% APR. (*DISCLAIMER: This is an unsecured investment. There is no guarantee of repayment.*)”

    I am wondering if any of the investors will see any returns?

  33. We will close in on you soon. Apparently you don’t learn and feel you are above the law.


  34. I’m sorry, in case you are oblivious to the laws within your own state:

    I know what the law is, but thanks anyway. You just trot off and notate, why don’t you?

  35. It’s highly unlikely there was any passing motorist. That’s a dirt road. Not a lot of traffic.

  36. Wow! Is, reading a public blog, and a public Facebook page, repeatedly, considered stalking, and suddenly illegal? What will the millions of ex-girlfriends, perusing their ex’s Facebook page, do??

    Thanks, PI – I think Ill go have ANOTHER look at the blog, and maybe five more of the Blessed Little Homestead Facebook page…

    What a joke. This not only makes you look like a louse, it makes you look like a helpless, bed-wetting man-child, PI.

    The court of public opinion hurts.

  37. “Goddamnit Loyd”,
    Your comment is absolutely disgusting, and in very poor taste. Horrific, even.

  38. Making the oldBlessedLittleHomestead blogspot suddenly public, is quite a project in duplicity… A way of monitoring all of the visiting IP addresses, in an effort to build some sort of desperate court case.

  39. Good gravy, is there anybody out there who still believes that the Nauglers were breaking ground in “virgin Kentucky woodlands?” What with the news footage, Mrs. Naugler’s own photos, and Google Earth, the decidedly second-growth and thoroughly trashed nature of those couple dozen acres, contrasted with the comparatively pin-neat condition of the neighboring plots, is pretty darn clear.

    Here are some actual virgin Kentucky woodlands, or at any rate a woodland so old that any sign of the hand of man has been blotted away:

    There’s a whole list of them on the main site, but I picked Angel Hollow because I think some of the tree species are the same. Polewood this ain’t. There’s a photo in the slideshow of a man standing next to a hemlock(?) that is about as thick as he is tall.

  40. Sorry, not sorry, joyless PI, but you are wrong, IMHO. Beep. Please try again. Actually please don’t. There is nothing more annoying to an attorney, even retired ones, than an idiot misinterpreting the law to fit their own opinion of what they think it should be. I will say it one more time so you can understand. YOU ARE WRONG, duh, IMHO. By the way there are at least three Kentucky statutes that directly address the subject. Then there is that pesky constitutional law to take into consideration. Good luck with your future practice of law here in the commonwealth or even on the cosmic interwebz. 😉

  41. Oh come on the PI’s stuff was cute! PI’s quotes of law are rather irrelevant, though. The only individual with any kind of court-issued restraint is Joe Naugler according to public record, no one here wants to inflict bodily harm to anyone at the blessed little cesspit (in fact most posters register a significant degree of concern for the children), and I can assure all that no one wants any manner of sexual anything with any Naugler. There has been nothing to suggest any kind of stalking but PI was vehement and tried to make people shake a bit. Didn’t work too well. But it was cute. I do understand Nicole’s frustration, though. Reality doesn’t sit too well with her. Very few people are willing to put in hard work to donate money and finance the continuation of sloth, poor judgment, fetid living conditions and the continued neglect of the children in all respects. And those laws! You know the ones she doesn’t have to obey but demands that everyone else does.

  42. I really hope its not one of the kids.

    Very unlikely, for various reasons I won’t go into.

  43. Public. Why is this concept so hard for Nicole and her ilk?

    You can no more control who peruses your public pages than you can walk down a public street and demand that “certain people” not look at you and enforce compliance of that demand. Call the police or sue them for looking at you, not likely.

    If you’re going to walk down the street naked with all your business hanging out people are going to look, they are going to make comments, a lot of those comments are not going to be nice. The only control over the situation that you have is to not walk down the street naked.

    If you don’t want “certain people” perusing your online bullshit then make it private or stop posting online. If you don’t want “certain people” commenting on your tatas swinging low, put a shirt on those puppies or stay home. It is that simple.

  44. High voltage power lines running from one side of that land through it to the other side makes it even more special Virgin Woodland. Coughcough

  45. Question. Something is bothering me. Joe is on probation so he can’t drink and smoke pot. Shouldn’t that include fire arms since he told his son to go get the pistol out of the glove box.

  46. You all seem to have a tough time learning and grasping concepts. Quite possibly, believing that you are a protected group of “innocent” tax paying citizens but it’s clear, the hell bent intent to bully. All it requires is a prosecutor who feels she has enough evidence. The evidence is right here. Intent. Harm, stalking. So keep it up. You all have taken this too far and it will stop soon.

    “Of course, expressing an opinion about a matter of public interest is, in general, protected speech. However, if the activists cross the line into harassment or stalking, you may have grounds to take legal action.

    Criminal Laws

    At present, forty-one states, including Tennessee, make cyberharassment a crime.

  47. You all seem to have a tough time learning and grasping concepts.

    And you are pretty much at the end of these kinds of comments. We get it. You think we’re going to be prosecuted. You’re “notating” it all. Have a nice life, but you’re done unless you have something new to add.

  48. If I even believed public commentary on a public blog about another public blog was cyber-harrassment (it’s not), you would have to find a prosecutor who would be willing to pursue those charges. Good luck with that.

  49. PI, no one is directly contacting Nicole nor following her. She has set up her pages to get attention and followers. You don’t get to seek fame, then whine when it becomes infamy.

  50. PI, when directly quoting someone else’s work simple quotation marks just won’t do. Attribution.

    When reading online overviews of a criminal act or cause of action, I highly suggest that you research further. Not just an article, not just the statutes, but the case law too. After all America uses a common law system.

    When attempting to win an argument I suggest you stick to the facts and present your argument without personal insult or attack. The minute you stoop to argumentum ad hominem your credibility is shot and you have effectively lost the argument.

    Good luck.

  51. Pi Joy, you have quite a familiar style of writing. I wonder why that is? Even ‘if’ and it’s a big if, that anything you are saying actually applies. You forget that your ‘clients’ have a very large and documented history of harassment, doxxing, stalking, abusive and threatening behavior. When quoting your legislation you seem to forget that if your ‘clients’ had wanted a legitimate shot at any sort of lawsuit, they would have to be somewhat credible which we know, you….they aren’t.
    So nice try, but you and your ‘clients’ are neither fooling or intimidating anyone.

  52. Well, for what it’s worth the only one engaging in Internet threats here is PI.

    This is a typical Naugler tactic to try (unsuccessfully) to threaten and intimidate by sounding official. It is also typical for the Nauglers to then bleat about being the object of the very behavior that they inflict on others.

  53. PI,
    Google cyberharrassment, read the definition, look at the law that is often used to identify cyber stalking, and then come back and let’s all talk. Pay close attention to following: false accusations, defamations, slander,and libel and learn what stalking means and bullying. Really read the definitions and critically apply those definitions to what we do here.

    Do any of us make false accusations against the Ns? No, in fact, we base our information on the information they release in a public domain or we cite other reliable sources such as the local news folks. Do you see how that works?
    Have we defamed the Ns? Again, no, we have not. In order to defame someone, we would have to damage the reputation of that person by telling lies. Again, there are no lies here and, to be frank, when a person puts intimate details about his or her life on the world wide web for the world and beyond to see, the last thing he or she can accuse anyone of is embarrassing him or her. While birth is a natural and beautiful event, I’m not sure it’s ever socially acceptable for one’s young children to film the birth of their sibling…nor is it ever a good idea to admit that you made a choice to birth a baby without a midwife present, running water, or clean linens. So, could we embarrass N any more than she has already embarrassed herself by society’s standards?
    Do we slander the Ns? Nope. Again, we only discuss the truths according to the Ns own words. Even when we analyze their own evidence, we get to the truth.
    Have we committed libel acts? Again, nope. We have not written lies about the Ns.

    Finally, do we stalk or harass them? Nope,we do not. She has a very public blog where she posts her take on the world and where she makes some interesting claims about the community in which she lives; we, on the other hand, look for the truth in her words and when there is no truth, we explain to others about the truth or the lack thereof.
    We do not flame the Ns; we do not stalk the Ns; we do not go inside her cyber or real community aggregating them. What we do is we join a conversation that N began and we do so critically and with an analytic eye. That conversation that we join sometimes involves N’s life as she sees it but often it involves claims she or her followers make about “homesteading” or “unschooling” or “parenting” or “personality” etc. If you were to do your research, PI, you will find that what we write is the whole truth and not a sentence here or there lifted out of context from Wikipedia.
    How about that?

  54. PI,

    All Nicole and Joe need to do is go offline, then all of this will disappear. No one will care about them. She is the one that continues to post the details of her life, she is the one that continues to attack anyone that dares to question the narrative she has thrown out there. She can’t go away because she needs the attention and the money. What she doesn’t realize is life would be a lot easier for her if they just stopped posting online and focused on their “homestead” and their every growing family.

  55. Joe is on probation so he can’t drink and smoke pot. Shouldn’t that include fire arms since he told his son to go get the pistol out of the glove box.

    That was not specified on the paperwork, so no. I think it should include that, but nobody made me the judge.

  56. The transparency and predictability is amusing. I can’t wait for the next instalment of comments from the N camp with more claims of stalking and harassment. Perhaps from an ‘FBI Bob’ or ‘CIA Betty’.

  57. Oh goodie, Joy PI is explaining the law to us. Joy PI, where did you go to law school? Are you a lawyer or a PI? “We will close in on you soon” seems like a menacing statement, are you trying to menace Sally? What do you hope to accomplish here?

  58. “Making the oldBlessedLittleHomestead blogspot suddenly public, is quite a project in duplicity… A way of monitoring all of the visiting IP addresses, in an effort to build some sort of desperate court case.”

    PI Joy doesn’t seem to understand that if you have a PUBLIC blog, or a PUBLIC page, then ANYBODY who wishes to read it may do so and they may, in turn, comment upon what they have read.

    This reminds me about 501c3 Scamues who then turn around and scream about harassment when they are asked to provide their last three 990’s and their 1024 to any member of the public who asked for it. Which they are legally obligated to do, per the IRS, or be subject to big fines and lose their designation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.