Thursday, June 18, 2015

It's Interesting How All Women Who Are No Longer Interested In Leonard Cohen, Whether Or Not They Were "Lovers," Transform Into "Scorned Women." Well, When Misogynists Are Involved.

From: Kelley Lynch <>
Date: Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:41 AM
Subject: Re: "Limited powers of attorney" that you claim to be in possession of
To: C <>, "*IRS.Commisioner" <*>, Washington Field <>, ASKDOJ <>, "Division, Criminal" <>, "Doug.Davis" <>, Dennis <>, MollyHale <>, nsapao <>, fsb <>, rbyucaipa <>, khuvane <>, blourd <>, Robert MacMillan <>, a <>, wennermedia <>, Mick Brown <>, "glenn.greenwald" <>, lrohter <>, Harriet Ryan <>, "hailey.branson" <>, "stan.garnett" <>,, "mayor.garcetti" <>,, "Kelly.Sopko" <>,,
Cc: Dan Bergman <>, Michelle Rice <>

IRS, FBI, and DOJ,

Gianelli/Mongochili is on overtime pay evidently.  Gianelli has changed accounts again.  It has been using Guerilla Mail, GMX, and now  Very angry, desperate alter ego.  There are a number of alter ego/ego maniacs involved in this situation.  Have you noticed?  An interesting "fiction."  

Kelley Lynch

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Kelley Lynch <> wrote:

Daniel Bergman and Michelle Rice,

Why not simply add Gianelli/Mongochili to the list of formal entries of legal appearances in Case No. BC338322.

Gianelli, who is accurately being referred to as a "troll," is trashing Ann Diamond on Truth Sentinel.  Are all women Leonard Cohen's "scorned" lovers even when they weren't his "lovers" and have seen him in years?  How very misogynistic.  It's a wonder more feminists haven't analyzed him.  Ann Diamond provided the Court with a declaration and, as has been true with just about all witnesses, she is being targeted, slandered, and Gianelli's in on it.  

Gianelli is also lying to Ann Diamond in his email about the price of my house, some insanity with pharmacy bills, etc.  I do not now this man.  It's fascinating that he and Rice spoke in May 2009 and he's still on the job.  Thoroughly predictable.  I've brought his blog to the attention of Judge Hess now.

Kelley Lynch

+Stephen Gianelli I smell troll .
Dedosdigital - why rely exclusively on your sense of smell? Try reading the linked documents and use the analytical abilities in your brain. There is an internet "trioll" at work alright and her name is Kelley Lynch.
+Stephen Gianelli You relentlessly attack , with malice ,  in support of the official media story . By contrast , I have never observed malice in Ann Diamond's writing .
Then you are not family with Diamond's writing about Leonard Cohen. Additionally, you quite obviously have not listed to the two podcasts.  In any event, I have read the court documents and transcripts and made up my own mind with analysis, not first or second impressions.
+Stephen Gianelli I am not Family . Familiar , with Ann's book , yes, having read it . You make the assumption I am not f a m i l i a r with the subject in question . Go ahead , but sophistry of that low order lacks interest or credibility .
 · 1 
+dedosdigital Thanks for your reading. No, I have no malicious intent toward the larger-than-life public figure called Leonard Cohen. I did not write my memoir to attack him -- merely to set the record straight and even 'reach out' to some of those involved. Leonard Cohen has more secrets running in the background than most of us could accumulate over several lifetimes. Occasionally, a woman enters his life and stumbles over some of these secrets. Relationships only function to the extent that they're based on truth. Unfortunately for Mr. Cohen, he must sometimes choose between the relationship and the carefully-maintained public image. Guess which he chooses. Nothing will convince devotees of the public Leonard Cohen that their man could ever lie or engage in other unethical conduct. Insiders know different. Let's not go berserk tearing down idols, but also let's not be naive.
+Ann Diamond Kochira koso..... On the contrary , thank you . Your books are eminently readable , enjoyable .
+Ann Diamond Very insightful comments, Ann. Thank you for your declaration. I think it is really quite brilliant. It is astounding that anyone would believe that someone who dated another individual years and years ago would be a scorned woman. I wasn't even Cohen's "lover" but he has now assigned me that title. The melodrama works beautifully in certain circles.
+dedosdigital You're very kind. Unfortunately I'm not Jane Austen which one would need to be to do justice. Although Stephen Gianelli apparently believes he knows the 'objective' truth through 'analysis' of records and documents, he relies on and spreads misinformation about people to discredit them without even attempting to grasp the basics. He loves clichés like "the scorned woman," "the embezzling personal assistant" etc. Except for the endless vitriol and litigation, Kelley Lynch's ongoing saga is very familiar to me. I believe much of it is based in denied emotions that get quite twisted and I think Jane Austen would agree. Although I did not wish to become part of his harem, I knew Leonard Cohen well at one time. He lives a complicated life where misunderstanding and confusion run rampant. He seems to enjoy that kind of life, while constantly complaining about it. He has a circle of sycophants and tells them whatever it takes to keep them loyal. This leads to chaos in his relationships for which he never takes responsibility since there is always another woman ready to throw herself at him. He basks in the adoration of people he sees as inferior. When he feels personally slighted, he withdraws into silence. There is no negotiating with him as he disdains "listening to women" -- in fact women terrify him -- under pressure he becomes rigid and inaccessible, or even 'switches alters' and seeks revenge. The original cause can be something quite trivial, although in Lynch's case there was a major falling out over money and 'community property." Once triggered, Cohen can go to extremes from which there is no backing down and has the ability to escalate and mount a destructive campaign the likes of which few could match, since most of us "don't have the discipline.' He draws as much inspiration from military strategy, as he does from troubadour poetry.

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:33 AM, Kelley Lynch <> wrote:

Cease and desist.  I have never read such garbage lies in my entire life.  See if Cohen will add you to his team of lawyers formally.  You seem perfect for the "team."

Kelley Lynch
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mongo chilli <>
Date: Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 11:40 PM
Subject: "Limited powers of attorney" that you claim to be in possession of

We know that this is a lie, because your spontanious reaction on June 1 by email to Bergman, Rice, the FBI and others (then posted on your blog) to the accusation that the declarations contained "fabricated" signatures was to assert that the "declarations were prepared and sent to me" and that "the signatures are genuine".
Those statements are completely inconsistant with your testimony in the reply to the opposition that the witnesses provided you with "limited powers of attorney" and you then signed their names to the declarations. None of which makes sense either.
But the point you don't get is whether you had the witnesses' permission to sign their names or not, a declaration must be subcribed by the witness' own hand to be valid. By signing their names to their declaration, the declarations were worthless as evidenceBut you tried to pass those signatures off as genuine (a claim you made explicit on June 1), and it was only when Lenoard Cohen's attorneys called you on the deception that you admitted that the signatures were not genuine, that in fact you singned the witnesses' names to their declarations.
By preparing those declarations (including subscribing them) you violated Penal Code section 134. By actually filing them you violated Penal Code section 132. One count for each declaration falsely prepared, then fasely submitted, six counts total. (Two of the declarations stated on their face that they were signed by a person other than the declarant and were not misleading.)
Indeed, one signs for another pursuant to a power of attorney by signing THEIR OWN NAME "as attorney-in-fact for [insert name of prinicipal]", e.g., By Kelley Lynch, as attorney-in-fact for Rutger Penick". But you did not do that. You simply signed "Rutger penick" - thereby preparing and then submitting a fabricatred, misleading declaration that pretended to be valid but was in fact useless.
And you have now added PERJURY to your offenses.
If the "limited powers of attorney" - signed before you prepared and filed the declarations - exist, PRODUCE THEM.
Indeed, the fact that you FAILED to submit those (alleged) powers of attorney WITH your reply, and instead submitted INADMISSIBLE and imporper "letters" from the witnesses to the judge really says it all; if the POA's existed, you would have produced them with your reply.
You are digging a deeper hole for yourself with each passing day.
I guess that is what stupid criminals do. You ought to know....