Nancy Salzman took the first plea deal and got the best deal. Lauren came a few weeks later. Her deal was not as good.

Guest View: Nancy and Lauren Salzman have NOT made deals with Feds

By One Night in Bangkok Makes a Hard Man Humble

Hey Claviger,

I’m beginning to think you’re WRONG with regard to your assessment that Nancy — and possibly Lauren — have negotiated a set of mamma/daughter plea deals.


…Because after MONTHS of engaging in plea negotiations with Nancy Salzman, Moira Penza has come up with exactly SQUAT so far. That’s not normal. If an agreement was officially reached she’d have disclosed it already.

Also, it’s been MONTHS since Moira Penza first told the court that she expected Nancy to enter into a plea deal, yet she’s come up with exactly SQUAT so far.

Let’s not forget that Moira Penza also agreed to (i.e. failed to oppose) Allison Mack’s bail arrangements to let her out of jail when she got arrested, all because she expected a plea deal to be agreed to. Yet we all saw how that went. Penza FAILED miserably and Allison played her like a fool.

Let’s not forget that Moira Penza agreed to (i.e. failed to oppose) Allison Mack’s bail ‘adjustments’ to give her more leeway and freedom to go to school, yet that didn’t mean SQUAT with regard to Mack’s plea deal status.

Thus, it means NOTHING that Penza isn’t opposing Nancy’s motions for more freedom.

Also, unless a plea deal was already DONE and Lauren’s performance on the witness stand was locked-in as part of her deal terms, it means NOTHING that she made a motion to separate her trial. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

Also, WHY hasn’t Nancy tried to separate her trial from Keith’s IF her own testimony is gonna be used to lessen her own punishment, just like Lauren’s?

Do you honestly think that Nancy was given FULL IMMUNITY but Lauren’s only being given a reduced sentence?

Not a chance. Nancy’s hands are 10 times dirtier than Lauren’s, Mr. Claviger.

I’m beginning to think that Mr. Claviger is like a Tarot Card Reader. He’s merely ‘seeing’ the potential outcome that he WANTS TO BELIEVE no matter what motions are filed or opposed.

I have no doubt that whatever motion gets filed next, Mr. Claviger will interpret that to mean Nancy is cooperating.

If a motion is filed to let Nancy go disco dancing on Tuesday evenings or acquire a pet monkey, Claviger will interpret that to mean a plea deal is done.

Penza is kinda ‘choking’ in the plea deal negotiations, so far.

How long does it take to secure just ONE fucking plea deal in a case with so many defendants?


About the author

Frank Parlato


Click here to post a comment

Leave a Reply

  • To my many detractors… I get my kicks above the waistline, sunshine.

    To everybody else:

    The prosecutors need to be replaced IMO since they’re just not up to the task of securing plea deal witnesses in a timely manner. They’re kinda fucking up this case and Keith could go free if they don’t stop clowning around.

    Agnifilo’s “Garden of Eden” (GOE) defense is gonna be the next Twinkie defense. It will be immortalized in legal history.

    All future potential rape victims will be likened to Eve in the lush Garden of Eden, by gutless defense attorneys.

    Can Penza stop him? Right now, she’s not giving me much confidence. She better stop this shitty performance.

  • The prosecution doesn’t have to share its case until two weeks prior to the scheduled trial – if I’m remembering correctly – so the Salzmans may have turned and it’s still a work in progress. Perhaps that’s why Nancy isn’t required to attend proceedings even though she seems to be recovering.

  • Looks like today our favorite corrupt ex-prosecutor, Dennis Burke, has invented a new name for sending messages to FrankReport.

    “Penza is kinda ‘choking’ in the plea deal negotiations, so far. How long does it take to secure just ONE fucking plea deal in a case with so many defendants?” writes the disgraced former U.S. Attorney, arrogantly reflecting on his clan’s history so far, as they’ve managed to use Clare Bronfman’s resources to hold together many of the defendants in concert while preventing them from entering in to plea deals.

    Apparently the disgraced former U.S. Attorney has moved on from his old pseudonym of “DeezNuts” to a more creative name, “One Night in Bangkok Makes a Hard Man Humble”. Nice one, Dennis!

    How’s the coordinated coercion and subtle or not-so-subtle intimidation of witnesses working out for you, Denny boy? Feeling a little pressure from Judge Garaufis these days, aren’t we?

  • You mean NX tricked the Court into lighter bail conditions on a false promise for a plea deal?

    That’s great news, Bangcock!

    Here’s the SQUAT Nancy Pants will soon be discoing too sans pants:


    • Guess what, Schlock(s)? This is a free-to-guess zone.

      In fact, it wasn’t too long ago your wild guess that Ben Zemeckus partied with Allison, KAR, Stormy Daniels and a whole swamp load of politicians made almost-Hollywood headlines, now was it?

      And guess what, you’re allowed to guess wrong, too. …Please inform any of your personalities who MAY go by the name “One Night in Bangkok.”

      • Just the other day Heidi thought that ‘Bangkok’ aka ‘Clicky,’ was someone who had been involved in NXIVM and who knew about her and her sister’s stay in Bangkok. Now Heidi believes that Bangkok is really Scott.
        So does that mean you think Scott was involved in NXIVM, too?

        • Your obsession with Heidi is creepy Flowers. You behave like a very disturbed person on this site – why so much hatred? Still think your own personal trials and tribulations are more important than the issue at hand? Did you lose a family member to this evil cult? Or are you just sick enough to want to troll someone who has?

      • … Heidi. I never guessed that Ben’s story was real or made up, I merely contacted Frank that it was an interesting story that should be told, because others may be able to corroborate it or prove it was not true. In the end, Frank decided Ben’s story was worth posting.

        You’re … accusing me of posting under other IDs, as I’ve explained multiple times before, I don’t do that….

          • The rules aka laws of liable, slander, defamation and/or intentional infliction of emotional distress are:

            You may state the truth, however ugly. You may not state an uncertainty as fact but you may state it as your opinion.

            As far as intent goes, it’s clear your sole intent is to inflict emotional distress on even complete strangers who visit this site, Schlock, with your constant name-calling and lack of any real knowledge of the subject matter. Whereas my intent with “Schlock” is to mitigate the impact of your insults on others in hopes they are less offended by you given your schlockyness.

            Perhaps the editors of FR know that I am not, in fact, a “whore” and are therefore uncomfortable allowing that comment. Whereas, I am very confident that “Schlock” is a suitable description re: the vast majority of what you have to say, especially your juvenile insults.

          • What other word, besides “whore”, did you want to use, Scott?

            Heidi, if you’re allowed to guess, than we are all allowed to guess, right? However, a guess without any evidence to back it up is probably just a tactic that is being used to discredit someone.

          • Flowers, since the word wasn’t approved to be published, I can’t tell you what it was, but here’s some synonyms, all of which are my opinion, it goes without saying, except that I just did: odious, wicked, evil, atrocious, monstrous, disgraceful, abominable, detestable, contemptible, reprehensible, despicable, horrible, horrific, horrifying, terrible, awful, abhorrent, loathsome, outrageous, shocking, shameful, hateful, hideous, unspeakable, unpardonable, unforgivable, inexcusable, execrable, ghastly, iniquitous, villainous, nefarious, beneath contempt, beyond the pale; rareegregious, flagitious.

%d bloggers like this: