In Part One, we introduced you to Jamie the BioTech CEO.
In Part Two, we’re sharing Jamie the Twitter Bro.
Once again, this is an unintentional two-parter. We’d planned on wrapping up Jamie, posting it, eating some candy, and watching scary movies like normal people.
Instead, something caught our eye as we went through an additional round of fact-checking.
We noticed that somebody had tagged a photo of Jamie with an Instagram handle that doesn’t exist anymore.
Out of curiosity, we googled it and found a Twitter account we believe belongs to Jamie.
We mean, it could be somebody else.
Just someone who also lived in the Pacific Northwest the same time Jamie did.
Who has the same birthday.
Who is the same age.
Who happens to also be a “light skinned” black man
Who also hosted energy conservation presentations.
Who has the same smile.
Who has a picture of someone that looks like Jamie on their account.
Younger, sure, but we’d recognize that cute chihuahua’s face anywhere.
We mean, the chance that the Twitter account belongs to somebody else is about the same as the likelihood that Jamie’s BioTech device prevents COVID.
However, the strongest evidence that this is Jamie’s account is that the profile links to his Facebook, which we failed to notice until right before publication.
(Yeah. We were comparing chihuahua faces when we could have just clicked the link. We’re not used to things being that easy, all right?)
Why are we sharing his tweets?
We debated whether or not we should share these tweets, because it falls outside of our usual realm of reporting about jobs.
However, according to Jamie’s OnlyFans, he’s somebody to follow if you want to learn more about “spiritual alignment and grounding” and how to “optimize mental capacity and acuity.”
His OnlyFans profile picture shows only his lower half, but we found the rest of him.
It’s Goop-meets-personal trainer-meets-biohacking.
Given the business structure of OnlyFans, we can’t imagine why anybody would set up an OnlyFans account other than for the goal of monetization. So we thought people who were considering paying to hear Jamie’s advice might find value in seeing Jamie’s thoughts on Twitter.
We wouldn’t share these if they were teenage thoughts, like the tweets that Andrew S apologized for.
Jamie was 23-24 when these tweets were made.
For additional perspective, Rachel was 24 when she was on Matt’s season.
From the story he shared with Michelle, we’re aware that Jamie lost his mom when he was 24. As we’ve mentioned before on this blog, we’re familiar with loss & trauma. And we have empathy for people processing trauma. However, we think Jamie (allegedly) said it best:
It was a challenge to narrow the tweets down, but we think the following is a good representation of what the public would be interested in.
(We won’t be linking the tweets going forward because we don’t think the account will remain active..)
The presence of these tweets doesn’t appear to be an issue of a forgotten password. The last activity on this account was in the spring of 2021, when Jamie liked a crypto tweet. Don’t be surprised if he transitions to digital currency if Biotech doesn’t work out. (Karl might have some advice for him.)
If Jamie paid for our life advice, we’d say the mentally acute thing to do would have been to delete these tweets before going on TV. And maybe read some Roxane Gay.
If you haven’t already, make sure you check out Part 1.
xo Your Nosy Friends, Optimally Performing Snoops of High Googling Acuity
PS You can follow us on both Twitter & Instagram
PPS Thank you for all of your support. The response from Bachelor Nation to our blog has been overwhelming. Your feedback & encouragement has kept this project alive ❤️
PPPS Bernardo Sim from ScreenRant found additional Tweets from the account. We’re linking Sim’s article because what he found adds an additional layer to the tweets that we shared.
Had we seen these we would have included them in our profile. We’d scrolled to the end of Jamie’s Twitter feed and hadn’t realized there was a way to find even older tweets. We won’t make that mistake again!