Horrific, but I don't see how E.A.'s maternal grandfather has anything to do with Tom Hanks. It was her mother's confession of what she claimed her father (E.A.'s grandfather) had done.

Tom Hanks is not related to his ex-wife's father in any way but through a former marriage.

I'd rather hear about a smoking gun on Tom Hanks himself. The only one I've ever heard was a woman who claimed her father rented her out to Tom Hanks when she was 13. Accusations 20 years later are not proof, just suspicion.

Do you think Trump is guilty of all the 20-year-old claims of rape he has been accused of? No?

Then where is our smoking gun for Tom Hanks? I'm serious, I want someone here to bring the receipts to the table. I don't doubt he's a pedo, but I'd like to see the proof before I slip the noose around the man's neck.

I searched the board and only found a couple of hits on Hanks' daughter's memoir, in which she describes:

A decade after the death of her mom Susan Dillingham, E.A. Hanks began to sort through the belongings that had been put into storage. Among the items she kept were a threadbare quilt from her childhood bed, a potato masher, a binder of poetry and a trove of "miscellaneous papers.”

Within those papers, E.A. (short for Elizabeth Anne) later found a red journal belonging to her mother, who was her father Tom Hanks' first wife.

“It wasn’t a journal with dates,” says the 42-year-old writer, “but more stream of consciousness, spurts of what would occur to her. And then I read her description of her father committing this horrible crime.”

The words were shocking beyond belief. Says E.A., “The crime she describes is witnessing her father rape, murder and cannibalize a little girl.”

In another article, Tom Hanks says: “We all come from checkered, cracked lives, all of us.” Source: https://nypost.com/2025/06/04/entertainment/tom-hanks-finally-breaks-silence-on-daughters-bombshell-memoir/

Yeah, Tom, I remember all those times I sat around the fire out back over Gramp's house listening to him tell me stories about how he'd raped, killed, and cannibalized a little girl.

What in the actual fuck?

Does Tom Hanks and Isaac Kappy, come to mine?

The thing about actors is, they know how to act. They know how to become another person. They know how to create split personalities. Unlike certain types of schizophrenia, for the actor, there is control of the other personality(s).

I don't know how common that ability to act well is. I mean, I can act. I've done plays in school for example. Unfortunately, I suck at it (or fortunately?). I can't create convincing alternate personas. I tried. I even took classes at it. I just sucked at it. I was too much me and myself, I never get the knack of being Irene. But I have friends who can.

So what if you have that ability to create personalities to the extreme, either by born in talent, or perhaps by training, or even through by force (broken personality e.g.)? What if there is a combination of them?

For example of one combination; what if you are born with the talent, and you have people around you that teach you to act, such as by children who have parents who are also actors? What if those children are taught to create aberrant personalities by their parents, helping them to craft personalities that are sexual, and murderous, and even cannibalistic?

Or as another example; what if you are born with some capacity for it, some talent, but you are also accidentally or purposefully broken, mentally divergent. Think Dexter as an "accident" example, or accidentally catching your mother and father eating a child as another example. In an "on purpose" example would be MKUltra.

My investigation has shown numerous examples of combinations of those "controlled split personalities" (Hillary Clinton, Anderson Cooper, or, I believe, Tucker Carlson are examples) or even some not "controlled" (Beyonce, or Jim Morrison e.g.).

All of those people have connections to other people (mostly close relatives) who have indications of the same split personalities. There are indications that they likely have done some pretty awful things, or are at least acting against intentions other than they appear. I.e. they are in the world stage, they are actors on that stage "by day," and they are someone else very different "by night."

This is how the Aristocracy continues in power, and how it remains evil. They aren't just evil because they are aristocrats. There is both an extra component (talent, training, and/or breaking) and the component of birth.

How does this Evil Aristocratic Sub-Culture continue? First, there are plenty of people to choose from within the "1%." Second, people are more likely to be broken by parents or close relatives, because relatives are already broken (and/or trained) themselves. Third, there is a desire (a religion really) for the Aristocracy to remain the "Aristocracy" (think primogeniture).

In the case of Hanks, there is evidence of talent, membership of the Aristocracy, and association or close relatives. To be fair, in this case its his wife's relative, but their is a sub-culture of evil within the Aristocracy. This close association suggests a high probability that someone else (Hanks e.g.) will also be in that culture. Especially for someone who checks all the boxes like Hanks.

Part of the Awakening is learning about the existence of the sub-culture of Evil Aristocracy. Learning how deep it goes is essential. If we learn about Hanks, and we learn about Hanks' wife's father and Epstein and Diddy and Biden's diary and Hunter's laptop and others, and that they are all pedophiles and pedovores, and then that they all engaged in ritual child sacrifice, then that component will prove itself to be a religion and that the adherents of that religion are controlling the world through the Matrix.

This story isn't about the father-in-law of Hanks. It's about how the sub-culture works, and it's connection to the Matrix, and thus, the Awakening. A mystery isn't told by reading the last page.