You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

NOMOCHOMO ago

https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3432234/20631827

@vindicator @shewhomustbeobeyed @darkknight111

https://www.wehoville.com/2019/01/09/ed-buck-recounting-history/

I found the motherlode that clearly ties Ed Buck to Pizzagate back in 2017

https://www.wehoville.com/2019/01/09/ed-buck-recounting-history/

EDITOR’S NOTE: This story originally was published by WEHOville in April 2017. Ed Buck now is back in the news because of the discovery of a dead African-American man in his Laurel Avenue apartment on Monday. This story recounts the history of this prominent white and gay West Hollywood man.

Who is Ed Buck? Those who follow politics in West Hollywood know him as the guy whose successful campaign for a ban on fur sales helped propel City Councilmember John D’Amico into office in 2011. He’s also known for his tenacious digging into City Hall records to make a claim that credit cards were being misused. And he is known for his financial support for local, county, state and national Democratic Party candidates.

Another side to Buck has come to light lately with the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department announcing it is opening an investigation into the death in Buck’s Laurel Avenue apartment on July 27 of a young African-American man named Gemmel Moore, who was a self-confessed prostitute. The L.A. County Coroner’s Office had ruled the death an accident caused by an overdose of methamphetamine, a highly addictive and dangerous drug that is popular among some gay men. The Sheriff’s Department says that drugs and drug paraphernalia were found at Buck’s apartment.

That side of Buck has drawn little comment from local political figures, although the Stonewall Democratic Club, an LGBT political group, last week asked Buck to step down from his position on its steering committee. But it has attracted a lot of attention from the right-wing media here and abroad, including publications such as the Drudge Report; TruNews, a Christian news site; Political VelCraft, a right-wing conspiracy site, and Voat.com, a website that promotes conspiracy theories such as PizzaGate. Stories on those sites call out Buck’s financial support for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, his homosexuality, his alleged attraction to young African-American men and his alleged drug use.

Recently LGBT African-American activists also have begun to speak out, calling for an investigation into Moore’s death. Ashlee Marie Preston, the transgender African-American editor of “Wear Your Voice,” an online feminist publication, has written about an odd experience she had with Buck. “Moore’s death is centered around power dynamics, a wealthy white politico and his deadly fetishization of disenfranchised black men,” Preston wrote. And Jasmyne Cannick,a black communications and public affairs strategist, has called out Moore’s death on her website with the headline “Journal Documents How Wealthy Democratic Donor Hooked Young Black Gay Man on Meth Before His Death.”

Edward Bernard Peter Buckmelter (he changed his last name to Buck in 1983) was born into a middle-class family in Steubenville, Ohio, on Aug. 24, 1954. When he was six he moved with his parents, a brother and two sisters to Phoenix, Ariz. “My childhood was uneventful as hell,” he said in an interview with the Arizona Republic in June 1987.

Ed Buck in 1987 (Arizona Republic)

Buck attended a Catholic elementary school and graduated from North High School and Phoenix College. Buck has described his father as a “longtime alcoholic.” As a child, Buck himself was a handful according to his mother, who was interviewed in October 1987 by E.J. Montini of the Arizona Republic. “The dean of boys had a hot line to my phone at work,” she said, speaking of Buck’s high school years. “I’d answer the phone and say, ‘All right, what is it this time?’”

Buck came out to his parents as gay at the age of 16 and, while attending college, won a three-month internship that took him to Yugoslavia. In his profile, the Arizona Republic’s Montini says that a year after that Buck returned to Europe and was offered a spot as an extra in a TV commercial. Buck stayed in Europe for five years, living in Paris and Amsterdam, where he worked as a fashion model and appeared in movies and magazines. He also modeled in Japan for Wrangler jeans. Buck returned to Arizona in 1980 and began working for a friend as a bicycle courier.

In his interview with Montini, Buck said he worked for the Arizona franchise of Rapid Information Services, a business owned by a friend that provided driver’s license information to insurance companies. Despite his lack of business experience, and the business’s poor financial situation (his friend ran it out of a one-bedroom apartment), Buck saw great potential in it. A year and a half after joining and helping build the business, Buck bought it out of bankruptcy for $250,000 and renamed it Gopher Courier. Five years later he sold it for what he said in another interview was “more than a million dollars profit.”

Very wealthy at the age of 32, Buck took risks, opening a restaurant and getting into the pay telephone business, on both of which he lost money. He owned a $280,000 house on top of a hill near Squaw Peak (now known as Piestewa Peak), a mountain outside of Phoenix. He also, according to a story in the Gayly Oklahoman newspaper, had entered into a relationship with a Chippendale dancer.

Buck found new meaning in his life with the election in 1987 of Evan Mecham, a Republican, as Arizona’s 17th governor. Mecham was a controversial figure, not least because of his decision to end Martin Luther King Day as a paid holiday for state employees, his claim that high divorce rates were caused by women holding jobs and his description of African-American children as “pickaninnies.” Then there were the accusations that he misused state funds and failed to disclose a $350,000 campaign loan.

Ed Buck named Grand Marshal at the International Gay Rodeo’s 1989 Arizona event.

Buck launched a successful effort to impeach Mecham, leading the Arizona Republic to describe Buck as a “millionaire, self-acknowledged homosexual and registered Republican” who was “destined to go down in history as one of Arizona’s most unlikely political figures.”

The impeachment campaign was a rough one, with Buck attacked because he was gay. It also resulted in publicity about Buck’s arrest for “public sexual indecency” in an adult bookstore in 1983. Buck pleaded guilty and paid a fine, and the charge was dismissed. He claimed a cop had seen him grab the crotch of a friend. Buck also was called out for trying to get a drugstore to fill a fake prescription for Percocet, a highly addictive drug that contains oxycodone. In an interview in 1988 with the Washington Blade, Buck said he had made a copy of an existing prescription and needed to fill it because of pain from a root canal. Buck was indicted by a Maricopa (Ariz.) County grand jury on a charge of “attempting to obtain a narcotic through fraud or deceit.” A judge agreed to dismiss charges against Buck if he would be tested weekly for drug use for one year.

Given that Buck was openly gay, and that Mecham was known as homophobic (he once said during a radio interview that he would ask for a list of gay state employees, implying he would fire them), Buck became somewhat of an LGBT community hero. In 1989, for example, he was named Grand Marshal of the International Gay Rodeo in Arizona. Yet Buck didn’t identify with some parts of the gay community. In his interview with the Washington Blade, Buck criticized some for their flamboyance. “We dress up, we see guys in their best leather, others in their best dresses, marching down the street,” he said. “These people do not represent the majority of gay people, who would never wear costumes. And it drives the semi-closeted and moderate gay people underground.”

Switching Parties

In 1988 at a Republican Party conference in Oklahoma City, Buck called for changes in the party’s “intolerant” stand on LGBT rights in Oklahoma, which included opposition to state-mandated sex education programs in schools. Unable to make major changes in his political party, Buck soon switched allegiances. In an online post in 2010, he explained his decision. “I didn’t leave the Republican Party, it left me. I can remember Barry Goldwater saying ‘out of the boardroom and out of the bedroom’ when referring to the role of government. That’s the GOP I was a proud member of … My principals have not changed, but to keep true to them, my political party had to change.”

Vindicator ago

I found the motherlode that clearly ties Ed Buck to Pizzagate back in 2017 and Buck to Sexualizing Children in 1988.

Excellent. This is exactly why we flair posts. You are an excellent digger, Nomo. I wish you had just given DK a hand and posted this instead of creating drama.

NOMOCHOMO ago

The only reason I found it is because I was banned....Not because of either of your flairs.

I asked @Crensch a question. He repeatedly evaded with counter questions.

Ego, bruised from the questioning, He then made my membership dependent on proving another users' post.

Crensch's Unprecedented Whim became a user-specific guideline. A Dangerous Despotic Precedent

Repeating a question to a Mod is "baiting" them?

Different Mods hold different users to different standards?

The reason given for my ban is Rule 1: Relevance.

Even though you edited Rule 1 last night (cut/pasting "NSFW" from Rule 5), you didn't change "relevance" to apply to comments. It is a submission standard.

To ban a user for a comment that doesn't fulfill a submission guideline is comment censorship.

Because Relevance does not apply to comments. You changed Rule 5 from "NSFW" to "Comment Abuse" without notifying the pizzagate community.

I am shining a light on Moderation. Any scrutiny is framed as "drama".

Unban me. I broke no rules.

I wont break your Modified Rule 5, but please announce it.

Vindicator ago

Different Mods hold different users to different standards?

Wrong. I already explained this. I screwed up and failed to flair for Rule 1, because I forgot Buck's victims were all adults. Because we removed almost all of the Buck posts previously, @think- who knew I was away from the computer all day, pinged Crensch to change the flair. You keep spinning events to fit the narrative of unfair flairing, and you continue to ignore the fact that Crensch was right, you were wrong to argue with him about darkknight's post breaking Rule 1, and you abused the Comment section for your own egotistical ends.

I didn't edit Rule 1 -- I appended the NSFW rule to it without changing either one in any way so as to keep the number of rules the same. We have never used Rule 5 anyway. It was wasted space.

To ban a user for a comment that doesn't fulfill a submission guideline is comment censorship. Because Relevance does not apply to comments.

So you think you should have free rein to shit up other people's submissions with your rants about how bad you think moderation is, when we have an entire subverse for that because the whole community agreed they didn't want that stuff on the main board, because you know you'll get banned if you submit a shitpost to assuage your ego?

Illogical.

I am shining a light on Moderation. Any scrutiny is framed as "drama".

You are tearing down the community when you could have built it up -- as you just demonstrated in this submission. You were fully capable of helping DK fix his post, but instead of doing so, you got into a fight. Why did it take a ban to get you to do the right thing? You do realize, this argues in support of banning shitty behavior, right?

You changed Rule 5 from "NSFW" to "Comment Abuse" without notifying the pizzagate community.

I haven't had time to write up an discussion post yet, due to the same real life responsibilities that have kept me away from the board of late. But this has actually been in place for several months under the Sitewide Rules. If you check the banlog, you will see that Putt added the Voat User Agreement to the rule violations list moderators can cite some time ago, and Donkey was banned for comment abuse under that -- at the request of multiple users -- after he impersonated another user to discredit her research. @Crensch could have done the same in your case, though he chose to ban you for undermining the prime submission rule. There is not an option to click more than one rule in the ban interface.

We discussed the matter and agreed there should be a subverse rule that reflected the User Agreement requirement to Respect Other Users, since this has come up now several times recently, and the UA also tells mods "When you receive notice that there is content that violates this user agreement on subverses you moderate, you agree to remove it."

Unban me. I broke no rules.

You broke at least two. Crensch was pretty clear about what you need to do to have your posting privileges restored. It's up to you.

We have a subverse full of people who either are survivors or who are family or friends of people subjected to elite child rape. They have been here for years, contributing. It's a dick move to turn their hard work into your off-topic soapbox.

NOMOCHOMO ago

Wrong. I already explained this.

you previously said:

"while I was AFK, users DMed him that we had deleted most previous posts about Buck

this time, it's

@think- who knew I was away from the computer all day, pinged Crensch to change the flair

"User" to "users". Your story is changing. Why would @think private message Crensch to moderate, rather than comment and tag him publically. You are proving that ya'll do hold different users to different standards. Apparently some have back channel influence.

So you think you should have free rein to shit up other people's submissions with your rants about how bad you think moderation is?

QUIT MISCHARACTERIZING MY COMMENTS

"baiting" has become a "rant".

I merely QUESTIONED him

A. https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3432234/20631962.

B. https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3432234/20632100

C. https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3432234/20632406

D.

https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3432234/20632582

E. https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3432234/20632802

F. https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3432234/20632873

Putt added the Voat User Agreement to the rule violations list moderators can cite some time ago,

"When you receive notice that there is content that violates this user agreement on subverses you moderate, you agree to remove it."

Cite the user agreement rule I broke.

@Crensch could have done the same in your case

What users have asked for me to be banned? Who have I impersonated?

think- ago

Why would @think private message Crensch to moderate, rather than comment and tag him publically.

I will make this brief, Nomochomo:

I indeed PMed, since sometimes users who are pinged don't get the ping, and writing a PM is to make sure they actually get a message.

Everyone is free to PM the mods at any given time, either by mod mail, or by PMing them.

That's not a special privilege I have.

And unlike you, I'm not keen on starting a 'muh the mods were wrong!!' shitshow on public threads.

I knew that @Vindicator was busy in rl, so I also PMed the other two PG mods.

@Crensch was the one who changed the flair, but as you can see from @Vindicator's replies, he would have done the same if he had been in.

On a side note, trying to paint my PM as something shady, or accusing @Vindicator of lying is one of your usual asshole moves, and I'm really tired of them.

Please note that I have blocked you, and don't get pings when you reply, so you don't have to make the effort to write a response. Bye.

NOMOCHOMO ago

I knew that @Vindicator was busy in rl, so I also PMed the other two PG mods.

Why didn't you comment your concerns on the post if you thought it was "rule-breaking" ?

https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3432234/20629167

How Buck thought he could proceed with business as usual is staggering.

This.

Instead of going to the user, you went above them, and didn't share your concerns with us pizzagate researchers.

On a side note, trying to paint my PM as something shady, or accusing @Vindicator of lying is one of your usual asshole moves, and I'm really tired of them.

Vin said "users" PM'd him. That shrank to just you. Unless there are other shady snitches?

Crensch ago

Vin said "users" PM'd him. That shrank to just you. Unless there are other shady snitches?

Now that users of the sub are shady snitches for messaging the mods?

@vindicator

NOMOCHOMO ago

I changed it to secret police...I agree snitch has the wrong connotation

Vindicator ago

You haven't been around long, so I wouldn't expect you to know that throughout the first entire year of this subverse, when we had 40 posts a day, we regularly asked users to please message the moderators whenever they saw a submission that needed to be removed, or one that could use a flair (positive or negative). In the past year since we started giving the 24 Hour Grace period, we've also encouraged people to help each other fix rule-breaking submissions if and when they have time to help research them.

Your insistence in casting shade on this practice does not put you in a good light.

Why exactly to you feel entitled to dictate how this subverse should operate?

NOMOCHOMO ago

You haven't been around long...to help research them.

If that's true, prove it with a link.

Your insistence in casting shade on this practice does not put you in a good light.

I'm a shining a light at secret moderation.

I think its shady to tattle on a user to a mod in private, without addressing the issue in your public comment on their post.

Why exactly to you feel entitled to dictate how this subverse should operate?

2 words. Free Speech.

shewhomustbeobeyed ago

Nomo, there is nothing wrong with users PMing the mods with requests or questions. If Vindicator hadn't helped me in private I never would have been able to post anything that meets sub rules. Hell, if you hadn't helped me with the last one I wouldn't have posted it.

I wouldn't have talked to the submitter of that post either. If he isn't a theoldones alt then he is friends with him, and that makes him potentially volatile and unreasonable to deal with.

You're never going to get anywhere with this. These people will not admit their most egregious mistakes. Ever.

NOMOCHOMO ago

I completely agree with you. I have no issues with PMing anyone....As long as Mods are honest about the PM's they receive. @Vindicator lied about the volume of complaints he recieved.

I wouldn't have talked to the submitter of that post either. If he isn't a theoldones alt then he is friends with him

DarkKnight111? Think- did talk to the submitter by commenting on the post....but made no mention of relevancy

https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3432234/20629167

and that makes him potentially volatile and unreasonable to deal with.

So instead report his post in secret? I appreciate your input, but respectfully disagree.

I usually jump into the mud pit.

shewhomustbeobeyed ago

I tried that, reported tOO to the mods, one thinks I'm crazy for my opinions, and the other one accused me of lying. So I handled it myself, tried on my first internet spurge-out (amateurish attempt, at best). Lost my only 'female internet friend' as a final result. Learned much, like user opinions don't matter, especially when there are imaginary interweb wars to be won. It's okay though, nothing can stop what's happening.

NOMOCHOMO ago

Nothing can stop what's happening

take refuge in God :)

I totally hear you and understand your position/strat.

I prefer to martyr my account, so to speak, to preserve transparency. If I'm banned, I'm not contributing my energy/research to this forum, as it can be better used other places.

If Mods still deem my intentions pure, and allow me to contribute. I will give them the same courtesy.

shewhomustbeobeyed ago

That's the problem, nomo. Some crazy fucker told them that you were ES, all the boogiemen on PG are either ES or donqi. Now the only way for you to prove your intentions are pure is to get down on your hands and knees, grovel and beg for forgiveness, and then hope that cren doesn't move the goalpost yet again. Like I said, I don't blame you, or anyone else for leaving.