The Debunking of ANGIE WONG’s cease and desist letter Line by Line


No political persecution just facts exposed damming to Angie Wong’s cover stories:

Angie Wong was voted off the board of Legacy PAC and L-Strategies consulting firm on May 30th  2023, she was also removed from Veterans for Trump and Veterans for America First on same date.  Wong has a history of not willingly leaving boards found in public records and ongoing litigation in New York.  On June 8th 2023 Wong was delivered a cease-and-desist letter which she claimed not to receive (debunked). Wong locked out Jared Craig and Stan Fitzgerald from the PAC’s social media and fundraising platforms such as Win Red , Anedot etc.  The PAC accountant was able to reclaim the Win Red tools from Wong through the system.  After the authorized board members shut down the original website Wong created a new fake website URL using unauthorized images of John Fredericks and Kari Lake and has attached those images to a donate button that does NOT go to the Legacy PAC bank account. Wong continues to use the title of Legacy PAC and use the social media without authorization like a squatter waiting for the courts to remove her. Wong then moved forward with her own cease and desist letter consisting of unverified and debunked claims.  Wong posted this cease-and-desist letter with a title “The political persecution of Angie Wong” on a blogger site known as medium and as of this date has it pinned to her twitter feed.

After inferring Jared Craig and the Fitzgerald’s were White Supremacists Wong also posted she gave this information in her blog under penalty of perjury to her attorney and law enforcement. 

Let’s start with that claim of perjury, if she did so then that will be a criminal charge as we will clearly disprove her claims.  That noted understand Wong’s former partners are both an attorney and former prosecutor with a retired police detective who have both taken hundreds of statements in the capacity of lawyer or police detective. The procedures Wong claimed to participate in would not be standard procedure to do under oath and therefore likely to be yet another fabrication by the self-proclaimed journalist.

Wong, A self-proclaimed journalist, has not presented any work history prior to the pandemic where a film crew did a human-interest story about her children’s school situation. Other than 2 weeks in Hong Kong with a media company she was terminated from ,and then litigated against, there is nothing online about her work history in the media but there is a background of work history in other non-media fields.  During her time with Legacy PAC and VFAF Wong issued no press releases.  Stan Fitzgerald authored and issued every release crediting Wong to help build her SEO and Brand being she was a business partner. 

This blog post she titled “The political persecution of Angie Wong consists totally of her own false claims to attorney Alex Kauffman will now be debunked line by line with exhibits.

1- Wong claims contractual obligations owed.

Wong has no contract with either Legacy PAC nor L-Strategies firm and failed to establish by-laws for the PAC in her role as president.

See below exhibit A-1 : that is the only contract Angie Wong presented that she claims any ongoing financial obligations from.  The contract itself is signed only by a third party, and not even by Wong herself who authored it.  The contract was part of an alleged criminal theft by deception scheme carried out by Wong and is outlined in the news section of this website with the title “The Booker Tapes”.

2- Wong Claims not to have been notified of the board meeting where she was removed

See below Exhibits B-1, B-2 and B-3 , that is false.

3-Wong claims her removal from the board was in retaliation for asking to see the consulting firm books . See Below Exhibits C-1 and C-2 that is false.  Wong was removed because she illegally diverted funds from L-Strategies and for non-performance of duties in Legacy PAC.  Wong was given login information when the company was formed, she was given log in information on a second time more recently and supplied a screen shot of the one-page statement when she refused to log in. Wong only made these requests when she was being questioned as to her own actions without supervision in an apparent attempt to create out of context written communications to use in her false narrative.  

4- Wong claims her removal was covered in materially false press releases.

See below exhibits D-1 and D-2 – this claim is out of context.  The partners, in what they thought was an agreed procedure (by lack of written challenge from Wong in previous written communications), proceeded to state Wong moved on to seek a career in Journalism as opposed to publishing why she was removed. The partners were trying to help protect Wong’s reputation as opposed to publishing the truth. Wong was offered an NDA to allow her to part ways without accountability to her actions as to why she was removed.  When Wong self-proclaimed her-self to still be president of Legacy PAC after being removed another press release was issued stating she was removed which is factual. The error of covering for her actions has now been corrected and published to be up to date as transparent and factually accurate.

5-Published investigative report issued by Patrick Collis was a falsified justification for removing Wong and also in a defaming manner inferred that Wong was associated with the CCP.

See Below Exhibit E-1 and E-2 – that is false.  A photo Angie Wong shared of herself in front of a communist dictator was shared, again to be clear as one can see in exhibit E-1 Wong shared this pose herself. This investigator made no inference or statement at all about any CCP connection. In fact, Angie Wong asks the question on her own feeds “Are my partners….” (Because there was no CCP verbiage) The entire wording in my webpage (not a complete report) was about Wong’s two attempts to hurt the optics of the Trump presidential campaign.  Wong orchestrated with her own words and posts that this investigator was tying her to the CCP by sharing her own photo. The undersigned mentioned that it was only a portion of the investigation being the attempt to hurt the Trump campaign, these actions were why she was removed from Veterans for Trump, our investigative firm has clearly outlined now on the news section of the website why she was removed from the boards.

6- Wong claimed the information shared caused financial harm.

See Below Exhibit F-1 through F-5– That is false.  First note Wong is not paid to give commentary, Wong pays a media booker to act as a commentator on news outlets (previously established in exhibit A-1) To claim financial loss one must establish a previous employment which Wong never has had, she is a customer not a salaried personality.  Second as per the exhibits she appeared almost every day on news shows since being removed from the boards debunking her own claims.

Exhibits 1-6 remove the need to respond to the last page of the Alex Kaufman letter.

This investigator notes that Wong’s claims in her ceased and desist of defamation mention The Fitzgerald’s and Jared Craig when only this investigator shared that photo of Wong identified as exhibit E-1. Also Wong names the Fitzgerald’s in contractual criminal allegations when Donna Fitzgerald is not even a partner and Stan Fitzgerald had a hands-off policy on bank accounts and contracts which Wong knew but named them anyway (see exhibit G-1).  To Be clear the Fitzgerald’s have never yet been compensated for their work in politics. The Fitzgerald’s created a wall in-between fundraising efforts as well as never having logged into any business venture bank accounts or reviewed any contracts. The Fitzgerald’s should never have been mentioned in that original Alex Kauffman cease and desist.

The June 8th 2023 cease and desist letter delivered to Wong, predating Wong’s claims, can be viewed on this webpage news tab.  The claim that Wong did not receive it is debunked by the fact the attorney representing Jared Craig and the Fitzgerald’s was named In Wong’s cease and desist. The only way she knew that would have been reading it in the June 8th letter she claims she never received.



EXHIBITS B-1 , B-2 and B-3

Exhibit C-1 and C-2

Exhibit D-1 and D-2

Exhibit E-1 and E-2

Exhibit F-1 through F-5

Exhibit G-1


Virginia Veterans for America First