I have another blog. (Actually I have two other blogs, but one is not of interest here.)
The one I’m referring to has been out of commission for quite some time and I had no idea how to fix it. I called the hosting service and they told me they’d fix it for $60/hour. I had no idea how many hours might be involved, so I declined and decided to learn how to fix it myself. My concern was that if I paid a bunch of money and it happened again, I would be back in the ditch again. If I learned how to fix it, then I’m good for the future.
That has taken me a while, putting it mildly.
Anyway, I finally was successful and it’s back up and running.
The amazing thing about this was that the fix involved one very short line of code and took me about 15 minutes. The trick was knowing what the line of code was and where to put it and how to get it there.
I’m especially happy about this because that blog is not devoted to any particular topic. It’s devoted to whatever I want to talk about.
Some folks have expressed an interest in what I write about elsewhere, so I thought I’d mention it here.
Seeing the Light is the newest piece, just published, over at the Burning Bridges blog.
Blogs get a lot of spam. You guys don’t see it, but I do. For example, right now, the spam folder here has 127 messages in it, and I typically empty it every couple of days.
To make things easier, I have some software on this blog that filters out spam and sends it straight to the spam folder where I can deal with it in bulk. It’s simply a time-saver and generally works very well.
The last few days, though, something weird has been happening.
Some of your comments are being sent, not to the spam folder, but to the trash.
The bad news is that they were piling up there. Another bit of bad news is that sometimes the software stuttered and repeated a message several times. And another piece of bad news is that I do not know how to fix it because I do not know what is causing it.
The good news is that now I know this is happening.
I have restored as many as I could, and I will monitor the trash daily from now on.
I am not trying to prevent anyone from posting. Promise. 🙂
Before I get started on this, I want to make one comment.
I don’t especially love these pages. I think most of them go over-the-top. I think they often make unsubstantiated and unnecessary assertions and make matters worse, not better. I am generally not a fan, do not participate on them and rarely read them. People do send me screen shots or give me a heads up when stuff happens on them, though, and this was one of those cases.
Nicole made a very silly comment on her page: “I do not consent to this election,” which is even sillier considering that she spends a great deal of time explaining to everyone that she does not vote and why she does not vote and why we’re all stupid for voting.
And a pause here:
Do you have a voting plan? Have you figured out when you’re going to the polls, and how you’re going to get there? Have you voted early (if you’re in a state that is sensible enough to let you do that)? Do not bitch about the election. VOTE.
End of my public service announcement and back to the programming.
Now, please note that on a Facebook page, when you make a public post, anyone who wishes can share that post. See the little “Share” thingy? Facebook provides that to make it easy. That’s why they call it “social media.” That’s the “social” part.
Nicole reads Facebook from her phone. And she has a handy-dandy little app that allows her to see the post where somebody shared her post, without being bothered to navigate to the page itself, and reply. Isn’t that nifty?
She doesn’t have to go to the evil pages. She just can participate via that app.
Here’s her notification.
She could simply ignore it, of course, but she cannot stand to do that. She has to access the app and read all about and then comment away.
“You could leave me alone,” she says plaintively. (She could also not respond, but that’s another issue.)
But no, you continue to send unwanted and harassing communications.
Well, actually, Nicole’s app and Facebook sent the communications. If it’s unwanted, she could either ignore it or delete the app. It’s quite easy and simple.
But this is the best part.
Just remember, you can only hide your identity for so long.
And she includes a little screen shot, which is apparently of what she sees in her handy little app.
She didn’t look at it carefully.
Noticed the two places I’ve highlighted? Nicole C. Naugler’s account posted “I have not consented to this election.” But who wrote it? Who posted it? Carol Pellitier did.
Who in the hell is Carol Pellitier, and why is she pretending to be Nicole?
The Facebook page called Nicole C. Naugler is not a personal page. It’s a like page. Therefore, it can have multiple administrators. Nicole C. Naugler is one (see highlighted at the bottom). Carol Pellitier is (or was) another. Facebook tells the admins who has written what using what identity so they don’t get confused.
But Carol Pellitier is not some friend of Nicole’s who is helping her out managing the page. Carol Pellitier wrote as if she were Nicole.
That’s because Carol Pellitier is Nicole.
She’s a sockpuppet.
Here she is. Obvious sock. She takes up space. She’s insurance, in case Nicole gets put in Facebook jail. She’s also used to snoop if you try to block Nicole. [And before I could even get this published, the profile has disappeared. I would link to it, but I can’t because it’s gone.]
Here’s what Nicole posted in her brandy-new little blog about socks.
From that intro, she went on to list all kinds of names and pages of people that she decided were sockpuppets, including at least one that is not, but is a real person’s profile.
What is simply astonishing to me is that paragraph. I knew when I first read it that Nicole didn’t write it.
It’s no wonder her oldest son plagiarizes the hell out of stuff. He learned from his mom. Hey, if you can’t write it, just steal it.
See the part she didn’t plagiarize?
. . . those created to praise, defend or support a person. . .
. . . to circumvent a suspension or ban from a website. . .
Carol Pellitier. One of Nicole’s sockpuppets. Rest assured, there are others.
Just remember, you can only hide your identity for so long.
Nicole is having thoughts late at night, apparently. Maybe it’s from all that cleaning. She’s tired and reflective.
The first part of this is a big whine about how overwhelmed she was when their story went viral. It totally wasn’t her own doing or anything. It just happened. They were hanging out, just being normal, and wham! Viral.
The problem with that is that some of the most god-awful photos of the shitshack and surroundings were taken by a professional news photographer. You know, from the media. The media that Joe and Nicole invited to come to the shitshack and witness the awfulness of what the state was doing them, so their story would go. . . you guessed it. . . viral.
So pardon me if I just don’t start playing a mournful sympathy tune when she whines about how unprepared she was for notoriety.
But this part gets to me.
I can choose homebirth and you can choose a hospital birth and we can still get along.
Isn’t that nice? It’s all tolerant and friendship-like. No reason for any quarreling or disagreement. Just use the opportunity to ask questions. Maybe you’ll learn something (implied: you stupid, ignorant dumbass). Nicole, of course, doesn’t need to ask any questions unless they are geared to box her opponent into a corner so she can deliver a resounding blow to the jaw.
Spend ten minutes reading a thread following some controversial shit she posts and you’ll see what I mean. There is no reasonable discussion. Disagree with her and you’ll be banned forthwith. Tell her you plan to circumcise your infant son and watch how tolerant she is.
But regardless of the fact that she doesn’t even know how to begin implementing the sentiment she wrote above, the basic idea is okay. All of us (I hope) have friends or family with whom we disagree from time to time. My closest friends in the world (apart from Dave) are Republicans. It gives me pain, and I am happy that they are unhappy Republicans who aren’t going to vote for Trump, but they are Republicans nonetheless. It’s not a deal-breaker when it comes to love.
But some things just aren’t open for negotiation, and where we draw the line is a very personal thing.
For me, racism is a biggie. Make a racist joke in my presence and you’ll probably never say anything in my presence ever again. Religion will also drive me over the edge. It’s all fine as long as nobody tries to proselytize me. But start with crap about how you’re concerned about my “everlasting soul” and we are going to part company rapidly.
Those two things might not bother you.
But back to Nicole. The three things she mentions are unschooling, off-grid life, and stay-at-home dads.
She isn’t actually participating in any of those three things at all.
Her children aren’t “unschooled.” They simply are not educated at all. Period. Nothing educational is done for or with them, and making a box doesn’t count.
I was a homeschooler. I understand the concept of unschooling. I even empathize a bit. I also understand with a whole lot of hindsight what the weaknesses and pitfalls are. Homeschooling, be it conventional or the unschooling variety, is not nothing. It takes work and attention on the part of the parents to make it optimal.
The Nauglers are not “off-grid.”
They are squatters living without utilities in a garden shed. They depend totally on water from a source off their land, on food from sources off their land, on power from sources off their land except for the tiny bit of juice they generate with two small solar panels. Take away their off-the-land resources and they would all be dead in two weeks for sure and probably sooner than that.
And Joe Naugler is not a “stay-at-home dad.”
He’s an unemployed lazy-ass moocher, and for years he’s been mooching off his wife and anything the public gets conned into giving him. I have been a stay-at-home mom, and I assure you, it’s not like what he does.
Just saying you’re unschooling, or living off-grid, or living in a cabin, doesn’t mean you actually are doing any of those things. Words have meanings, and we assign those meanings so we can communicate.
The slam at Caitlyn Jenner is uncalled-for and pretty close to a racist joke in terms of how offensive I find it. There is an enormous difference between being trans (something Jenner cannot help and cannot change, like having red hair or bad teeth), and pretending you’re a “homesteader” when you’re really a squatter in a garden shed. The two things are not even remotely similar.
We are all sovereign beings.
Are we? Really?
Am I a queen, a supreme ruler? I don’t think so. Do I possess supreme or ultimate power? Nope. (And obviously, I am not a coin.)
Neither does Nicole or Joe Naugler.
None of us do.
Nicole gets this nonsense from the so-called “sovereign citizen” movement.
That’s from the FBI’s website. I assumed that would be an okay source to use, since one of the Blessed Little Plans is to have a sit-down conversation with the FBI.
None of us are “sovereign,” with the exception of a very few actual monarchs and most of them no longer have absolute power in their countries.
And Joe and Nicole are not exceptions to that, as they had very clearly laid out for them in court just the other day. How many times do the authorities have to drag their asses in there before they start to get the message that they cannot just do whatever they like?
Coupled with all this is the idea that you can become anything you want if you want it badly enough.
Well, no, a bear cannot become a frog. I cannot just say I am an FBI investigator and suddenly be one. Being “confident in who we are” does not mean being delusional about our capabilities or possibilities. It doesn’t mean that you say you are a homesteader when you don’t meet a single one of the criteria that define that term.
And then she veers off topic to that of criticism, which is of course, always unfair when directed at her, and totally understandable when emanating from her.
If your ideas have merit, they will be adopted voluntarily. If they have to be forced, well, there’s a good reason why. They probably aren’t good ideas to begin with.
This is called argumentum ad populum. It’s a logical fallacy but one that is widely believed. If lots of people think something (Monsanto is evil, vaccines are dangerous, Jesus is real, prayer works, Trump would make a good president), then that has to be true.
No, it doesn’t.
If we’d waited for the argumentum ad populum, the descendants of slaves would be enslaved still, women would still not have the vote, and gays would not have the right to marry.
But let’s assume it’s true for a second. If living in a garden shed, crammed in with 13 people and no utilities is a good thing, if doing nothing whatever about education but letting kids just run around doing whatever the hell they want all day long, if begging for money on the internet, if having children you simply cannot afford to educate, feed, clothe and house—if these are all good ideas that have “merit,” well, then why isn’t everyone else doing that?
What just astonishes me, and makes me more than a little bit sad, is that as of right now, four people read that little essay of Nicole’s and thought it was great.
If they have any real concern, they would go through proper channels and not call themselves “trolls” in the first place.
We didn’t called ourselves “trolls.”
That is Nicole’s name for us. We are mocking her when we use the term. Here’s just one example.
Is there a particular reason why your family would not want to move out of the region?
As a commenter put it so well, “everywhere you go, there you are.” They don’t move for several reasons. First, they have nowhere to go. Nicole’s business is in the area. Second, they can’t make ends meet now. They have no money to move. Third, CPS would follow them wherever they go.
I suspect most of you are laughing at this by now. I admit laughing when I read it.
I carefully chose this particular comment to illustrate something, though. Had Beth been just a wee bit less judgmental, I would have passed her by. But she insists on passing judgment on me, so she’s fair game.
Beth is an example of a person who reads something, thinks very little and certainly not very deeply, and then begins typing.
How many times do you see on social media somebody posting a long tale about how wronged they have been, and how their landlord/mother-in-law/cousin/co-worker did something horrible to them and it’s all so bad and please pity me? And then what ensues is a whole raft of comments that all take for granted that the tale is absolute fact, and that the evil person who perpetrated this terrible outrage is actually a terrible person.
I see it a lot. Maybe I see it because I’m sort of looking for it. Blogging like this has made me a bit of a skeptic.
My parents were divorced when I was 13. My mother was better than lots of divorced parents and was fairly careful to not criticize my father in front of us kids, but we knew, of course, that there was a big problem. You don’t get divorced over nothing. We knew the basic details. And we all (there were three of us) just accepted our mother’s version, which we absorbed through tiny comments made here and there.
Mom was pure and innocent. Dad was bad. That concept colored the rest of my childhood, estranging me from my father and making me really angry and resentful of him.
I went into adulthood believing the same thing. Mom was good. Dad was bad.
But when I was in my forties, I began to see the world a bit differently. Not nearly so black-and-white. Raising a child, living in the adult world, well, that sort of thing will do that to you if you’re lucky. And I began to understand my father much better.
I also began to understand that marital strife often (usually) involves two people. There is more than one way to see my parents’ divorce. My mother was not totally innocent. My dad was not totally evil. These were two flawed people (translation: normal) who just couldn’t live together. That’s not their fault. It’s not my fault. It’s nobody’s fault.
But that’s the case with most disputes.
They do it for the joy of causing trouble.
Notice that? See how Beth pronounces judgment? She is completely and entirely wrong in nearly every accusation she makes, and then she slams down the gavel and there we have it. Evil. Wrong. Bad.
She makes little to no effort to read much of anything. I know this because she has no idea that the Nauglers have been reported to CPS over and over and over again. She has no idea that Goatgate went to court and the Nauglers totally lost. She has no idea that Shitgate is an ongoing case in the court system right now. These are all facts documented right here, complete with copies of the applicable court records. She could have asked her questions on any of the “troll” pages and gotten immediate answers.
But she didn’t. Like folks on Facebook do all day every day, she just accepts Nicole’s version of events as factual and pronounces judgment.
I did the same thing with my parents’ situation, but I had an excuse. I was a kid and I was trusting my mother. Beth is an adult and she is trusting a perfect stranger on social media.
But what is really interesting is how Nicole reacts to this kind of thing. Just like the discussion about Shitgate, where multiple people kept expressing outrage and amazement over “outhouses,” Nicole does not correct anything. It is rare for her to correct a leghumper who is passing judgment on any critic. She only goes into correction mode if it’s in her interests to do so.
Of course, why would she? Beth might just hit the donate button if she is affronted enough by what she sees as persecution of the innocent Naugler family.
These folks sponsor a ranch for boys and girls in Kentucky. I have been looking around for a while now for a charity to sponsor here on this blog. Not just any charity would do. It had to meet several serious criteria.
First, it had to be local to Kentucky.
Second, it had to involve either the military or law enforcement.
Third, it needed to address the needs of children.
And last, it had to be a charity I felt didn’t eat up all the donations in administrative fees and that actually does something positive and constructive.
I got a flyer about two months ago from our local county sheriff telling me about the Kentucky Sheriff’s Boys and Girls Ranch. It’s a camp for needy children. It’s intended to help these kids now, while they are young, so that these sheriffs do not meet them in court later on when they are older.
Consider helping. Donate button is to your right if you’re on a regular computer, and just keep scrolling down if you’re on a phone. Kentucky’s children thank you.
Please note: The email address used for this is the one for the Romancing Victims website. I know that already. It was available and not being used for anything else and I needed an email address that would keep this Paypal account completely separate from my others (Nathan’s music site has two of them). If you use a credit card, I think that’s what it will say when you get the bill.
Money is like manure; it’s not worth a thing unless it’s spread around encouraging young things to grow.
– Thorton Wilder
We all know someone that is always in need. Something is always wrong — always an excuse. Everyone is out to get them. Nothing is their fault.
For many, “begging” means the scruffy man at the corner liquor store, tin cup in hand, a cardboard sign. For others it’s a homeless mother with a baby. That kind of begging is easy to look at and decide whether you’re going to help or not. You see it. You have a good gut feeling if the person will use, or abuse your donation. You can tell if the person is truly in need or just begging because they don’t want to earn an honest living. For some folks, it’s a way of life.
They may hear the clink of a coin in the cup, and you may keep walking. You see it with your eyes. Your guts tell you if they really need help or will go grab a bottle of Thunderbird and wake up with wet pants.
The internet is a whole new street corner. Now you have thousands and thousands of potential handouts “walking by”. If you can convince folks that you’re a wholesome, hardworking, reverent individual that could just use a little bit of help . . . well, you’re off to a grand start. People have soft hearts and most will try to help someone in need. The Nauglers are well versed in subtle online begging, the art of asking for money without being “in your face” with their desperate needs. They have been doing it for years, yet continue to add to their family despite their inability to support the children they already have.
It’s a pattern. The constant hints and subtle suggestions. But hey, you read through the repetition and make up your own mind. Are they doing this? Ask the church groups they’ve been in.
Sound harsh? maybe it is. But responsible adults do not constantly drop hints and ask for others to pay for things. Some of us consider this to be the crux of “responsibility”.
This was quite probably a rather misguided attempt at humor. But at this point, who knows.
OK, but you certainly aren’t shy about supplementing with donations.
Venmo, Paypal, Go Fund me . . . crowd source funding masters.
They ended up with over $45,000 from this effort alone. They had a very detailed list of what the expenses were to be used for. They have repeatedly become very hostile when people ask if they were used as promised.
Interestingly, this post linked directly to a site that made it easy to send the seeds.
Ah yes, the subtle hints.
Winner winner, chicken dinner.
Think about this one for a moment. They are running a business. Why would clients be dropping off food and money?
Oh yeah, get over it.
Fundraiser for a business? Wait . . .
Is it a business or a charity?
Here’s an odd one. Somebody set up a Go Fund Me campaign. It’s quite probably satire. However, in exposing and explaining that they did NOT set it up, they certainly didn’t fail to ensure folks knew where they COULD “donate”.
This is only a smattering of the constant posts and a bit of insight into what is going on.
Remember, they garnered over $45,000 in Go Fund Me donations. What have they done with them?
Brought to you by “Nefarious Please and others”
Update This was sent by a blog reader. It seems pretty benign. It’s a nice story. Charity and kids. It might actually stir up warm feelings. But please notice the comment “Put money in my hand.”
How hard are these folks to figure out?
Well “technically”. . .
Let’s make a collection. Here’s two more.
They’re “still accepting donations.” As though there will come a day, some day, when they are no longer accepting donations.
And the vehicles. Have the Nauglers ever actually bought a car or van all by themselves? Nicole tells us that she really doesn’t like to finance things. She much rather that “angels” just give stuff to her.
The below photograph has been altered to protect the identity of the innocent. I replaced their faces with cartoons. Otherwise the post that Nicole Naugler ran in a local group of almost 17,000 has not been altered in any way shape or form.
Well, I can tell you, beyond a doubt that Nicole Naugler is spinning and lying, and telling falsehoods in this post she added to a local group. These are the innocent victims filmed by Joe Naugler on his court date for the pretrial hearing in his criminal charges the other day; Fondly referred to as goat-gate. These three people were standing outside the Breckinridge County Courthouse. After the trial — Minding their own business — Chatting.
As they stood there, away from the insanity and drama, Joe, walked up to them and, cell phone in hand, poised and positioned, smirking his idiotic smirk, to let them know beyond any doubt that he was watching them. Documenting them. He said “and these are the people that came to visit today” (If they have the guts to release the actual video, it will confirm this) It would appear the “in your face” filming was meant to intimidate the individuals. When it didn’t elicit the response Joe needed, Nicole took it a leap forward.
Nicole and Joe do indeed know at least two of these people. One of the people is the complaining witness/victim of Joe’s previous criminal conviction for menacing.
Let’s stop and think about that for a second. Joe has a protective order stating that he is not to contact, harass, or intimidate this witness to his previous criminal trial. (The one he was found guilty of). Yet he found it prudent to walk up on them and ensure they knew he was filming and documenting them.
One thing that Nicole very conveniently fails to mention is this. As if Joe and Nicole have not harassed her enough in this past year, she had the great misfortune to have business at the courthouse that day, unaware that Joe was in court yet again for neighborly criminal misconduct. She was there for a different reason. When she saw friends in the courtroom, she naturally sat next to them. To sit a spell and catch up with neighbors.
Nicole and Joe also know another of the people in the photograph, and Nicole admits that. What she omits, is that this is the neighbor and father of the young girl that Joe stalked at her family farm last summer. Her dad is the same man that has repeatedly stated he believes Joe is simply a “failed man, husband and father” We’re talking about a guy that has 23 years of military service to our country and has not succumbed to these kind of intimidation tactics. Why was he there? Good question. He was there because of these allegations. And then some more ridiculous accusations. He was there because he wanted to see how in the world Mr. Naugler could ever justify his alleged involvement regarding the goats and how Joe was going to claim that he was responsible for “colluding” with the neighbor.
Joseph Naugler. The “failed man, husband, and father.”
Not Joe, but rather the man pictured is the man that said it. Yes it infuriates Joe, but maybe the guy in the picture has a point?
He was there because he had been defamed on the internet and wanted to know how Joe was going to continue besmirching his name. He was there because he fought for our rights. He was exercising his own, as well as providing moral support to a fellow retired veteran and friend who was the criminal witness for that day’s criminal action (goat-gate) against Joe.
The third person was there as a court watcher. She now gets to watch her back whenever she goes to town, because, well, because Nicole is a liar and a vengeful wench. I think it was driving Nicole and Joe crazy that they couldn’t identify that one person, so they posted her photograph with a pack of lies. Something to get someone to identify the woman. What could Nicole say to do that, surely the truth would not have gotten her anywhere?
Lets not forget Cheryl Dewitt an administrator on the local Meade Sell n Trade. Without her choice to allow Nicole to post this very unorthodox and uncalled for post this problem would not have arisen. She is the enabler in this endeavor. Even when contacted about the nature of Nicole and the nature of the photographic post she chose to allow it to stand. She removed comments identifying Nicole’s vengeful act, then advised people to personally message Nicole with the identifying information. It was a very poor choice and not very community minded. Shame on her. I can only hope Cheryl understands the liability she has opened both herself and this community page to. Not worth it. If I were her I would apologize and make it right publicly on the page and within the community. It might just save her.
These pictured people have not been stalking Nicole or her family, certainly not her eleven children, quite the contrary. These people have not harassed the Naugler family at all. They have not threatened, they have not endangered the Naugler family, business or any such nonsense.
They have voiced their opinion. They get to do that. Guys like the complainant and the man pictured fought for us so that we can have freedom of speech and the ability to exercise our legal rights.
What they are are simply good and active participants of their community. They are victims and critics, they see through Nicole’s bullshit, and if you ask me the only thing Nicole actually feels has been threatened is her bottom line.
The above post epitomizes everything that Joe and Nicole are. Joe can’t post this stuff, he’d probably end up in jail, and, let’s face it, Joe is scared of jail. He sacrificed his children over his “rights” fast as could be when threatened with jail by the county. So the man of the family had to step up. Thus in trots Nicole to do the dirty work. Just as immediately after Joe’s latest (failed) plea deal in criminal court (goat-gate) Nicole was online posting falsehoods and photographs of that complainant neighbor’s property and family, she couldn’t let another opportunity pass by where she didn’t attack more of her perceived enemies, aka, Joe’s victims.
The above post that Nicole made was to a local group with 16,000 plus followers in our small community. I know — different county, but in Kentucky we have an abundance of counties and this page is from a very closely and interwined county. It is an inflammatory post, one could call it a “call to arms”, based on very frightening and completely false allegations. This goes far beyond simple defamation, slander or libel. Quite frankly this post and any others that may exist are potentially dangerous to the victims, as well as damaging to our community.
Are you starting to understand what Joe and Nicole are yet? What vipers they are in our midst. Even with protective orders in place, probation and time on the shelf they will exact their revenge. Joe can’t and apparently won’t jeopardize himself, but Nicole can do it. No stone goes unturned, no act of revenge is too big or too small, because being a good neighbor is hard.
What is a “sock puppet” account. Basically, it is a fake account that someone hides anonymously behind. For a more in-depth definition Wikipedia provides this:
Why would someone do such a thing? There are many reasons. Some people are trying to protect themselves from online or real world attack , while some people are the attackers using the sock to try to hide their dirty deeds.
This post is about the anonymous, well sort of anonymous, Charles Smyth account on Facebook. Charles is a special snowflake among many special snowflakes that have been part of this sordid tale.
Charles would like you to think he is an internet friend of Joe and Nicole. A very close friend.
So close that Charles favors the same vulgar words that Joe and Nicole favor.
So close that Charles follows just about every post online about the Nauglers and is there in a jiffy to carry their banner into their internet war.
So close that Charles private messages the critics. Charles will be one of the first to attack a supporter who isn’t blindly touting the party line. Charles even has inside knowledge on people who had only opened their profile to the Nauglers, people Charles has never been friends with.
So close that Charles likes to direct veiled threats at the critics. Charles has a particular interest in serial killers or as he likes to call himself “cereal killer”.
So close that Charles has even been known to try to jumpstart new donation drives for the Nauglers.
Nicole finds absolutely nothing wrong with Charles. Charles is just a little “snarky”. Charles is their friend. Included in their little closed groups, praising them on their personal pages, cheerleading on their public ones.
Charles will tell you over and over again that he is not a Naugler. Not Joe, not Nicole. That Charles doesn’t run any pages, well, except this fake profile page.
Now remember Charles Smyth is a sock, a fake account, just some lone wolf who is Joe and Nicole’s knight in shining armor/shivering leghumper/little pet attack dog and sometime fundraiser.
Then just the other day Charles wrote this. This is why you shouldn’t try to juggle chain saws. (or hand grenades)
So the question is whose family? How could anyone possibly be attacking and stalking Charles’s unknowable, nonexistent family? Wait a minute! Whose family? Who exactly is Charles?
I have found throughout this sordid tale that Nicole often reveals her own actions when she is pointing the finger of blame at others. Many a day I have read one of her posts scratching my head about what she could possibly be talking about. Then lo and behold she does that same curious thing she had just accused other’s of doing.
Personally, I think it is more than one person using the same sock account. But who knows. They like to mix it up, a little Facebook foreplay. After all in this case I think I can safely say the couple that preys together, stays together. In the end does it really matter who Charles really is? I don’t think so. It is the acts, the words, and the how’s and why’s that matter. After all — Charles isn’t real. Charles is a sock puppet.