Posted on

When She Came Out as a ‘Boy,’ Therapists Silenced Her Mother

This is the experience of just one
American parent whose family has had to navigate the trans journey in recent
years.

To protect the identity of the child I will be deliberately vague about locations and some specifics. But the family was living in one of the big cities of America and have only fairly recently moved to a more rural location. This is where they are when I speak with the child’s mother, who I will call Sarah.

Sarah is,
in every way, an average middle-class mom. She cares for her children and like
her husband works to support them. She describes her politics as “slightly left
of center.” Four years ago, at the age of 13, her daughter announced that she
was trans and that she was actually a boy.

The
daughter had already been diagnosed with a mild form of autism, and had had
trouble being accepted by some of her peers. She had trouble picking up on
conversational signals. Invitations to play weren’t reciprocated, and her
fashion choices weren’t deemed quite right by all of her peers.

In time
Sarah’s daughter found that boys in her school were slightly more amenable to
her than girls. But even then she couldn’t quite get the degree of social
acceptance which she wanted.

“Why doesn’t anyone like me?” she used to intermittently ask her mother. Trying to make sense of why she was “not fitting in with girls” in particular, she was also trying to work out why she wasn’t fitting in with her peers in general.

>>> Check out Douglas Murray’s new book, “The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity”

Then one
day she announced to her mother that she was in fact a boy and that this was
the cause of her problems.

Sarah
asked her what had given her the idea that she was trans. After all, for her
family it had all seemed to come on very suddenly. Her daughter said that she
had got the idea after a presentation at her school.

At this
point it emerged that around 5% of the children at her daughter’s school now
identified as transgender. They included a remarkably similar range of
children, including children who had been diagnosed as having forms of autism and
a history of being unpopular or poor at connecting with their peers.

Her mother would not be able to understand this, because she was “cis.”

Of course
her mother wanted to know more. If there had not been any other children at her
school who identified as trans, would she have decided that she was a boy?
Sarah’s daughter said that no, she wouldn’t have done so because she “wouldn’t
have known that it was an option.”

It was not
that she thought she was a boy, but that she was a boy. And what is more, her
mother would not be able to understand this, because she was “cis.”

Sarah had
never heard the word “cis” before, let alone been described as it. Sarah’s
daughter repeatedly told her mother that “trans children know who they are.”

But Sarah was supportive. She agreed to call her daughter by her new, preferred, male name and began to address her using male pronouns. She even introduced her daughter to her friends as her son.

>>> I Spent a Year as a Trans Man. Doctors Failed Me at Every Turn.

Trying to be as supportive as possible, mother and daughter even went on a “trans pride” march together and danced along to Lady Gaga’s “Born This Way.”

Sarah was
so supportive that she bought the first binder her daughter needed to conceal
her developing breasts. It is hard to see what more a mother could have done.

At the
same time, quite understandably, Sarah started to read up online about the
whole trans business. It was new to her family’s life and she wanted to get a
range of views in order to arrive at some understanding of her own.

The clinician told her that “parental acceptance was the first step to prevent suicide.”

By Sarah’s
own admission, her first impressions of the online debate were not good. A lot
of the critical reading online was, she thought, marked by a strain of
“anti-LGBT” sentiment. The people who wrote about it often seemed to be what she
describes as “bigoted or religious.”

She had
never explored any of this deeply before. She was “just concerned about my
daughter.” And so Sarah went to speak to some professionals—starting with some
gender clinicians.

The first
of these told her something which echoes what many other people in her position
have heard. The clinician told her that “parental acceptance was the first step
to prevent suicide.”

As with any parent, this was a threat of the worst nightmare imaginable. The doctor clinician also told Sarah that since her daughter had been “insistent, persistent, and consistent” in her claims this meant that her daughter was indeed a boy.

>>> My Daughter Identified as Transgender. I Was Powerless to Stop Doctors From Harming Her.

Sarah was
not only worried by the words of the professionals but also by some of what her
daughter was saying. Whenever Sarah’s daughter described her feelings of gender
dysphoria her mother noticed that the words seemed “rather scripted.”

And to say
that the script was manipulative is an understatement. At one stage her
daughter issued a list of demands which included blackmail and threats unless
these demands were met.

Sarah’s
daughter was 13 and a half when she announced that she was trans. At 14 and a
half she went to the therapist. And at 15 she was told that she should start
taking the puberty blocker Lupron.

At each stage it was stressed that it was “insulting” for the mother to question the feelings of her daughter and that as with trans people so with autistic people.

At each stage it was stressed that it was “insulting” for the mother to question the feelings of her daughter.

“Autistic
people know who they are,” she was reassured. Even to question this was to be “able-ist.”
A number of different therapists were approached and eventually mother and
child returned to the first one.

When Sarah
expressed some concerns over the choices being offered to her daughter by the profession,
and specifically the idea of her daughter going on puberty blockers, she was
told, “You have a choice between puberty blockers and the hospital.”

And so at
17 and a half Sarah’s daughter announced that she wanted to transition.

Of course Sarah asked her daughter about whether she really wanted to do this. She stressed the irreversibility of the path down which her daughter was going.

Even more
irreversible than the hormones was the irreversibility of transitioning. What
if—Sarah asked her daughter—after choosing to transition she then felt the need
to de-transition? What if having made this change she decided she didn’t want
it?

Her
daughter’s response was, “So. I’ll kill myself.”

While no
parent should ever take such a threat lightly there does seem to be a pattern
to it, as Germaine Greer had claimed much earlier. And not only from the young
people, but from some of the medical professionals who are pushing their case.

For
instance, in 2015 Michelle Forcier, MD, professor at Brown University Medical
School and director of Gender and Sexual Health Services at the Lifespan
Physician Group in Providence, Rhode Island, was interviewed on NBC.

Asked
about whether children as young as three or four could possibly know what they
want, Forcier replied, “To say three- and four-year-olds don’t understand
gender doesn’t give our kids a lot of credit.”

When asked
what harm could be done by waiting before transitioning she said, “The biggest
harm is not to do anything.”

But what
was the risk of waiting, she was asked.

Her reply: “The risk of waiting is suicide. The risk of waiting is running away. The risk of waiting is substance abuse. The risk of waiting is bullying and violence. The risk of waiting is depression and anxiety.”

>>> ‘We Are Manufacturing Transgender Kids,’ Says Man Who Once Identified as Woman

Joel Baum,
who is senior director at the campaign group Gender Spectrum, has put this even
more starkly. To parents worried about consenting to their children going on
hormones he has said, “You can either have grandchildren or not have a kid any more,
either because they’ve ended the relationship with you or in some cases because
they have chosen a more dangerous path for themselves.”

The
problem with the choice being presented this way—in the most catastrophizing
light possible—is that it leaves no room for discussion or dissent.

Instead,
the moment that a child says they think they may be of the opposite sex, they
must be greeted only with acceptance and from then on only with a set of
life-changing steps which an increasing trans body of professionals appear to
want to encourage with as little pushback as possible.

Yet
stories like James’s and also that of Sarah’s daughter are filled with suggestive
turns. Just as James says he might never have considered trying to become a
woman if he hadn’t been in a milieu in which drag and trans were common, so
Sarah’s daughter admits that she might never have considered the possibility
that she was actually a boy if there had not been other pupils at the same
school who were making the same claims.

All of which brings us to the crux of the issue.

in the U.S. there is not merely a movement but a business incentive for pushing this.

Even if there are some people who actually suffer from gender dysphoria, and even if for some of them life-changing surgery is the best possible option, how might they be differentiated from people who have such ideas suggested to them but who later turn out to have made the wrong decision for themselves?

Among the
most hard-nosed but likely arguments for an eventual slowing of the current
trans stampede is the growing possibility of an avalanche of lawsuits. Although
the United Kingdom, including the National Health Service, has opened itself up
to this eventuality, the potential in Britain for successful future legal
actions is nothing compared to the U.S.

Whereas
Britain’s health service is struggling to satisfy the increased demand for
gender reassignment surgery, in the U.S. there is not merely a movement but a business
incentive for pushing this.

Just one of the signs that trans is an area where social demands are starting to attract business opportunities lies in the extraordinary levity with which trans activists—including some surgeons—are now talking about life-changing surgery. Some of this requires a strong stomach.

This excerpt was published with permission from the book, “The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity.”

The post When She Came Out as a ‘Boy,’ Therapists Silenced Her Mother appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailysignal.com/

Posted on

Did Trump Critic Rep. Rashida Tlaib Violate Campaign Finance Laws and Ethics Rules?

“It’s pretty simple,” Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., tweeted last March, in calling for President Donald Trump’s impeachment. “No one is above the law, including the President of the United States.”

But perhaps Tlaib—among Trump’s harshest critics in Congress—needs to follow up with another tweet, in the interests of transparency. This tweet could read: “No one is above the law. Except me.”

According to a report issued last week by the House Ethics Committee, there is “substantial reason to believe” that Tlaib used campaign funds for personal expenditures, thereby violating both campaign finance laws and House ethics rules.

The alleged violations stem from $17,500 that her campaign paid her, apparently to cover personal expenses, after she was elected to Congress.

Text messages and emails between Tlaib and her campaign staff show that throughout her campaign she repeatedly asked her campaign for money to cover personal expenses like “car maintenance, child care, and other necessities.”

At one point, Tlaib asked her campaign to give her $2,000 every two weeks. Between May 7 and Nov. 16, 2018, it did so. Then, on Dec. 1, 2018, it paid her $15,500.

In total, Tlaib’s campaign gave her $45,000 over seven months.

Federal campaign finance law (52 U.S.C. §30114(b)) prohibits the use of campaign funds for personal use. The law, including the regulations promulgated by the Federal Election Commission, defines “personal use” very broadly.

Personal use includes any “commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s campaign duties.” That plainly includes car maintenance, child care, and “other necessities.”

Additionally, House ethics rules prohibit representatives from using campaign funds for personal expenditures. They and their staffs are tasked with ensuring that their campaigns operate in compliance with the law.

While candidates may take a salary from their campaigns, there are very strict limits on that. Among the litany of restrictions is this one: The salary can only be paid for work performed before the election. The salary has to end the day the candidate is either elected or withdraws from the race and is no longer a candidate.

Tlaib’s eligibility for a salary paid from her campaign funds ended on Nov. 6, 2018, when she was elected to the House of Representatives. Yet her campaign continued to pay her through the end of December. She collected $17,500 after the election.

Tlaib’s lawyers concede that the payments were made after Nov. 6 last year, but argue that the money was for services performed before the election. But according to the report, documents taken from her campaign “suggest otherwise.”

A spreadsheet of campaign salary payments shows that Tlaib’s campaign paid her $2,000 on Nov. 16 last year for work performed between Nov. 1 and 15. And according to that same spreadsheet, the $15,500 paid on Dec. 1 was for work performed between Nov. 16 and Dec. 31 last year.

Additionally, the checks confirm those dates, as do emails from Tlaib’s campaign treasurer. As to the $15,500 payment, her campaign treasurer’s records show that at least $8,000 of it was paid for work performed after the election, and the remaining $7,500 was an unspecified “adjustment.”

It certainly appears to be a clear violation of federal law. Perhaps it’s no surprise, then, that the best arguments her lawyers can come up with are that there was no “conscious disregard” of the law, and that it’s “most irregular” for the Office of Congressional Ethics to look into pre-election activities.

In other words, Tlaib should be excused because she didn’t bother to learn the law or because Congress should permit candidates to violate ethics laws with impunity until they get elected. It doesn’t take a lawyer to see how feeble these arguments are.

Given how bad this looks for Tlaib, it’s no surprise that she and her campaign staff refused all interview requests from the Office of Congressional Ethics.

And Tlaib’s problems extend beyond the Ethics Committee.

Both the Federal Election Commission and the U.S. Justice Department have jurisdiction over violations of federal campaign finance law. The FEC can force those who err to repay the money and impose a civil penalty – even where there was no “conscious disregard” of the law.

If Tlaib “knowingly and willfully” violated the law, that is a criminal violation that comes under the jurisdiction of the Justice Department. Criminal violations of the law can result not only in civil penalties, but prison time.

We agree with Tlaib that “no one is above the law.” Does she agree with her own tweet?

Originally published by Fox News

The post Did Trump Critic Rep. Rashida Tlaib Violate Campaign Finance Laws and Ethics Rules? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailysignal.com/

Posted on

DHS Deputy Says ‘About 60,000’ Migrants Have Been Sent Back Under ‘Remain in Mexico’ Program

Ken Cuccinelli, the acting deputy secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, lauded the Trump administration’s “Remain in Mexico” program, which has sent tens of thousands of asylum-seekers back across the southern border to wait.

Cuccinelli appeared Sunday on “Fox & Friends” to discuss the White House’s efforts to manage the illegal immigration crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border, including its recent order to relocate National Park rangers to the area to help Border Patrol rangers and its success with the Remain in Mexico program.

dailycallerlogo

“Well, first of all, the Department of Interior owns an enormous portion of the border. I want to say as high as 40% of the border is in Department of Interior land, so there’s a logic to bringing Department of Interior law enforcement down to the border,” Cuccinelli said Sunday. “President Trump has been aggressive with every legal lever he can pull. Doesn’t mean we pull them all at the same time, but this is one more way to interdict these flows of illegal aliens.”

Cuccinelli also noted that these National Park rangers will have arrest powers, allowing them to fully assist Border Patrol agents as the U.S. government cracks down on the flow of illegal migration and fight against cartel activity.

When DHS chief Chad Wolf visited the border earlier this week, according to Cuccinelli, officials within Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and United States Citizenship and Immigration Services all called Remain in Mexico an “overwhelmingly useful, helpful, successful” program.

Remain in Mexico, which is also known as Migrant Protection Protocols, requires asylum-seekers who crossed through Mexico to reach the southern border to go back and wait in Mexico while their claims are processed through the U.S. immigration court system—a process that could take months. The program is ultimately designed to mitigate fraud as it prohibits asylum-seekers from escaping into the interior of the U.S. before their claims are adjudicated.

Cuccinelli said the program, which was launched in January, has sent roughly 60,000 migrants back to Mexico.

“This is not just for people seeking asylum. It is also for people who’ve crossed the border illegally and they’re essentially on what we call a ‘detained docket.’ It means they are not going to be released until their case is heard, and so they’re waiting in Mexico as well,” he said.

“It’s been phenomenally successful, phenomenally helpful, and really we need Mexico to maintain it and expand it,” Cuccinelli continued.

Remain in Mexico has not been the only tool the Trump administration has used to push asylum-seekers back over the southern border. Earlier in November, the White House began implementing its asylum cooperation agreement with Guatemala, which requires migrants who cross Guatemala to first seek protected status there before doing so with U.S. officials. Migrants who do not follow this rule are subject to be returned to Guatemala.

The Trump administration has also reached similar asylum cooperation agreements with El Salvador and Honduras.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post DHS Deputy Says ‘About 60,000’ Migrants Have Been Sent Back Under ‘Remain in Mexico’ Program appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailysignal.com/

Posted on

Ilhan Omar Accused of Being a Paid Agent of Qatar and Accessing Sensitive Info for Iran: Court Testimony

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) has been accused of being a paid agent of the government of Qatar and using her position in Congress to access sensitive information for the benefit of Iran, according to testimony in a civil suit in Florida.

Rep. Ilhan Omar, screen image.

Alan Bender, a Kuwaiti-born Canadian businessman, made the accusations in video-conference testimony on October 23 from Toronto for a civil case filed in Florida against the brother of the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Khalid bin Hamad al-Thani, over allegations the Sheikh ordered his American bodyguard to murder two people and that he held his American paramedic hostage.

Bender’s deposition was reported Monday by Al Arabiya

…In explosive testimony made by video link from Toronto, Canada to a Florida District Court on October 23, Kuwaiti-born Alan Bender claims to have deep ties with governments and royal officials across the Middle East including Qatar. In his statement, he says he met Qatar’s Secretary to the Emir for Security Affairs Mohammad bin Ahmed bin Abdullah al-Masnad and two other senior Qatari officials.

The three allegedly claimed credit for the meteoric rise of Omar, saying: “If it wasn’t for our cash, Ilhan Omar would be just another black Somali refugee in America collecting welfare and serving tables on weekends,” according to Bender’s sworn deposition. The deposition was obtained by Al Arabiya English and authenticated by the attorney for the plaintiffs.

…In the testimony, Bender claims to have been asked to recruit American politicians and journalists to be Qatari assets. He says he objected and the Qatari officials responded by saying that several American politicians and journalists were already on the payroll—most prominently Omar, who was allegedly described as the “jewel of the crown”, according to the deposition.

…Bender’s accusations go much further. According to his testimony, Al-Masnad said that Qatar “recruited Ilhan Omar from even way before she thought about becoming a government official.… They groomed her and arranged the foundation, the grounds, for her to get into politics way before she even showed interest. They convinced her.” For her part, Omar cooperated with the Qataris and received cash payments, he alleges in the deposition.

…Bender claims that once Omar took office, she used her position in the House of Representatives to access sensitive information which she relayed to Qatar, and through them to Iran.

End excerpt. Please read the complete Al Arabiya article at this link.

Imam Tawhidi, known as the Imamofpeace on Twitter has been working for months to expose Omar as a foreign agent. He posted a blind item thread in July starting with this tweet:

In September, Tawhidi named Omar as an agent of Qatar in a new Twitter thread:

In this tweet thread, Tawhidi wrote about the lawsuit and that Bender had been subpoenaed to testify. Tawhidi indicated he planned to leverage the case to expose Omar’s ties to Qatar by suggesting questions to the plaintiff’s attorney, which he apparently has succeeded in doing. (Tawhidi also accused Linda Sarsour of being involved with Qatar.)

A search shows that apparently no comment has been made by Omar in response to the allegations as of publication of this article.

The post Ilhan Omar Accused of Being a Paid Agent of Qatar and Accessing Sensitive Info for Iran: Court Testimony appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Posted on

BREAKING: FBI Lawyer Who Altered FISA Docs and His Lover Worked for Current ICIG Who Edited IC WhistleBlower Form to Legitimize Schiff Sham

Barack Obama corrupted everything he could touch over his eight years as President.  His military was prosecuting its own soldiers for murdering enemy combatants.  Obama’s State Department was a pay-for-play racketeering enterprise and Obama’s FBI and DOJ morphed into sick and criminal gangs.

What a mess!

Over the weekend we learned from another leak to the Washington Post, that an individual in Obama’s FBI altered documents that provided support for a FISA Warrant obtained to spy on candidate and President Trump.

The individual (or individuals) was soon identified as Kevin Clinesmith who worked with his reported lover Sally Moyer for the current Intelligence Community (IC) Inspector General (IG), Michael Atkinson.

Conservative Treehouse reported –

If you have followed the case closely, the intentional removal of Peter Strzok in combination with the explanation of the lawyer’s FISA responsibilities; and in combination with prior reporting of FBI lawyer 2; it seems pretty obvious the line-level lawyer was Kevin Clinesmith.

If the WaPo article had added all the detail and left in how the line-level attorney worked for Peter Strzok everyone would have known who it was. Hence they put in more details about his activity but removed the Strzok reference.

Kevin Clinesmith was one of the key FBI small group members on the original Clinton investigation known as the “mid-year exam”, or in text messages the “MYE”.

Within the MYE Clinesmith was one of the key legal staff working with Peter Strzok. Clinesmith was lawyer #2 for Strzok who eventually transferred to the subsequent Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

Clinesmith was also previously reported to be having an intimate relationship with another member of the FBI team, Sally Moyer, though that is uncertain. [Tashina “Tash” Guahar was also a key legal figure on the Main Justice side of the MYE team.]

Sally Moyer was FBI unit chief in the Office of General Counsel (counterintelligence legal unit within the FBI Office of General Counsel).

Ms. Moyer was responsible for the legal compliance within the FBI counterintelligence operations that generated FISA applications.

When the MYE investigation finished, the Carter Page FISA construction is where Kevin Clinesmith and Sally Moyer come together in their next assignment, the FBI investigation of Trump.

The interesting connection is that Clinesmith and Moyer both also reportedly worked for Michael Atkinson while he was an attorney with the Department of Justice (DOJ).  

Atkinson next took a position as the ICIG.  Recently, it was reported that Atkinson changed the IC whistleblower form in September shortly after a CIA Agent, who was spying in the Trump White House, drafted a complaint on President Trump.

Atkinson saw to it that the whistleblower form was updated to allow for second hand information, which the ‘whistleblower’ (believed to be Eric Ciaramella) provided in his complaint.  Although, the form should not have been accepted based on second-hand information and because it was about the President of the United States (who is not in the IC), Atkinson accepted the complaint.

The whistleblower later attempted to edit the form he originally provided.  The original form stated that the whistleblower did not talk to Congress before filing the form but after it was discovered that he had met with Adam Schiff’s team in Congress, the whistleblower attempted to edit his form.

The fact that the whistleblower worked as a CIA operative also causes concerns since the CIA is only supposed to work overseas while working on external threats.  He is not supposed to be spying in the White House on the President.

This Obama group of criminals should all be in jail, not running around attempting another coup on the President of the United States.  #LockThemAllUp

Hat tip D. Manny

The post BREAKING: FBI Lawyer Who Altered FISA Docs and His Lover Worked for Current ICIG Who Edited IC WhistleBlower Form to Legitimize Schiff Sham appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Posted on

WALSH: Sex-Ed Program Teaches Six-Year-Olds How To ‘Self-Stimulate.’ This Is Why Sex-Ed Should Be Abolished.

A new sex-ed curriculum recently instituted in some classrooms in the United Kingdom is one of the most blatant examples of institutionalized child sex abuse that we’ve seen in the West. As the Daily Mail reports, the All About Me program being unveiled in over 240 schools across the country would give very young children “rules” for “touching yourself.” The Mail offers details about these rules:

Under a section called Touching Myself, teachers are advised to tell children that ‘lots of people like to tickle or stroke themselves as it might feel nice.’ They are also instructed to inform youngsters that this may include touching their ‘private parts’ and, that while some people may say this behaviour is ‘dirty,’ it is in fact ‘very normal.’

It gets worse:

In the same lesson, children are given scenarios which they must judge to be ‘OK’ or ‘not OK.’

In one, pupils are told that when a girl called Autumn ‘has a bath and is alone she likes to touch herself between her legs. It feels nice.’

This is for six- and seven-year-olds, remember. Not that it would be any more appropriate for older children.

An overview of the All About Me program seems to indicate that this lesson plan will be very hands-on, in a literal sense:

Children will be given the opportunity to explore a variety of different touch and feel sensations and allowed to decide which they like and dislike.

By the end of the lesson, children will understand that just because they like how something feels does not mean that everyone feels the same.

By year four of the program, things get more specific:

Children will consider the rules of when it is appropriate to be naked or semi-naked and when it is appropriate to touch themselves, including self-stimulation.

And in year five, the kids will have graduated to discussions about erections and wet dreams:

Children will be informed of their own personal anatomy and the development of their genitals, including wet dreams, erections, self-stimulation, and menstruation.

A similar program was recently rolled out in South African schools, instructing kids on the wonders of masturbation, anal sex, and oral sex.

And lest you think we are safe from this madness here in the States, our own compulsory sex-ed curricula are not far removed from what’s described above. A recent “framework” for sex education in California features, among other things, graphic descriptions of sodomy and bondage.

What we’re witnessing here is not a “slippery slope” to the normalization of pedophilia. This is pedophilia. There’s no more slope. We’ve reached the bottom, which isn’t to say that we can’t pull out a shovel and continue our descent. My point is simply that these “programs” are a form of widespread, institutionalized child sexual abuse. The administrators who approve this material are predators, and the teachers who teach it are complicit. The “I’m just following orders” excuse rarely gets you off the moral hook, and it certainly doesn’t in this case.

But we should not be surprised by this. It is the inevitable consequence of allowing public schools to teach “sex-ed” in the first place. There is, it turns out, no non-creepy way for schools to handle the topic. There is no approach that isn’t at least inappropriate, and at worst abuse. That’s because schools have no business delivering lectures on sexuality, no matter what is being said about it. By broaching the subject, they are already treading on ground where they don’t belong. It’s no wonder that they marched all the way to this point.

As far as schools are concerned, sex should be a purely scientific subject. Teach the kids about anatomy. Teach them where babies come from. Teach them the facts of human reproduction. That’s it. The children don’t need to hear, and should not hear, the teacher’s personal views on what kind of touching is appropriate, and what sort of sex positions are enjoyable, and “when it is appropriate to be naked or semi-naked,” whether our cultural attitudes towards sexuality are repressive, and so on. None of that constitutes objective scientific information. It is, at best, the subjective view point of the person who came up with the lesson plan. And subjective view points about sexuality have no place — at all — in a school.

This is not a pitch for “abstinence education.” Abstinence programs are certainly less creepy and less morally fraught than some of this other stuff, but I don’t want my child’s teacher to give him tips on how to avoid having sex any more than I want her giving tips on how to have it. It’s simply none of her business, either way. She is an unwelcome intruder. Just because I send my kids to school to learn the ABCs and 123s doesn’t mean I also want them to be indoctrinated into Mrs. Wilson’s personal philosophy on human sexuality. Actually I don’t send my kids to school at all — we homeschool — but the point stands.

If it would be considered a gross infringement for a teacher to stand up and proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the middle of algebra class, why is it any less of a gross infringement for a teacher to proclaim the Gospel of Sexual Enlightenment — the Gospel of Freud, basically — in the middle of health class? You might argue that schools “have to teach it” because parents refuse to do it themselves. But where does that end? There are many ethical, moral, and spiritual lessons that parents often fail to impart to their children. Should schools then become churches, daycare centers, therapists, spiritual gurus, and sex coaches all rolled into one, just to compensate for lackadaisical parenting? Schools don’t automatically inherit the right to teach whatever a parent doesn’t teach.

Besides, parents might “refuse” to teach their children how to masturbate because they, as parents, feel (rightly) that such a lesson would be extremely bizarre and inappropriate, and probably warranting a visit from CPS. It might be a teacher’s opinion that parents should teach those things, but her opinion is irrelevant. It’s also, in this case, insane. That’s why schools should stick to the academic basics. Reading, writing, arithmetic, etc. It is not their job, or their right, to go beyond that.

via The Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com

Posted on

Bloomberg News Tells Reporters Not to Investigate 2020 Democrats

Bloomberg News‘s leadership promulgated a new editorial policy forbidding staff journalists from investigating 2020 Democratic presidential candidates.

According to multiple reports, Bloomberg News editor in chief John Micklethwait informed staff in a memo that the outlet would continue "our tradition" of not investigating owner Michael Bloomberg, his family, or his personal foundation. But Micklethwait also announced it would "extend the same policy to [Bloomberg’s] rivals in the Democratic primaries." Reporters will still be allowed to investigate President Donald Trump so long as he is not a "direct rival" to Bloomberg’s presidential aspirations.

The policy change follows Bloomberg’s formal announcement on Sunday that he was entering the 2020 Democratic presidential race. The billionaire and former New York City mayor’s presidential run presents difficult questions for Bloomberg News, which has a longstanding policy of not reporting on its founder and CEO.

In the memo, Micklethwait announced that Bloomberg‘s opinion editorial board will cease operation. Several members of the opinion team will take leaves of absence and join the Bloomberg campaign as staffers.

2020 is not the first time the news outlet has had to grapple with its founder’s political ambitions. Bloomberg Politics Washington news director Kathy Kiely resigned in protest in 2016, when Bloomberg was considering running for president, citing concerns that the outlet would be unable to cover his campaign fairly. Kiely’s resignation came on the heels of reports that Bloomberg News staffers were being instructed not to write stories speculating about their boss’s potential run without approval from higher-ups.

Asked for her opinion about the Sunday memo, Kiely told the Associated Press Monday that the policy will "relegate [Micklethwait’s] political writers to stenography journalism…. It’s not satisfying for journalists and it’s not satisfying for readers. I think people will go elsewhere for in-depth political coverage."

The post Bloomberg News Tells Reporters Not to Investigate 2020 Democrats appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://freebeacon.com

Posted on

DOJ Inspector General Says FBI Employee ‘Manipulated Key Docs’ In Trump Probe

The Justice Department Inspector General found evidence “that an FBI lawyer manipulated a key investigative document related to the FBI’s secretive surveillance” of former Trump aide, Carter Page, according to Fox News.

The outlet reports that the edit was “enough to change the substantive meaning of the document.”

The revelation represents the first in what is expected to be a parade of details from the report, which is due out in full next week, according to sources within the Justice Department. Attorney General William Barr alluded to the report early last week, telling media that Inspector General Michael Horowitz had completed his investigation, authored his report, and spoken with officials named in the report in order to clear the way for publication.

The full report, which will hit shelves on December 9th, is also expected to demonstrate a number of irregularities with the FBI’s investigation into whether members of the Trump campaign, and, subsequently, the Trump transition team, coordinated with Russian officials to first alter the outcome of the 2016 presidential election and then install an information and communication pipeline between the Kremlin and President Trump in the West Wing.

In House Intelligence Committee hearings last year – commanded by Republicans who were then in charge – witnesses revealed that the FBI and DOJ relied on a now-discredited dossier on Donald Trump, authored by foreign agent Christopher Steele, to obtain permission to wiretap key Trump transition officials through the FISA courts.

Then Attorney General Jeff Sessions commanded the Inspector General undertake an investigation into the incident, and, it seems, Horowitz found at least some evidence of FBI malfeasance.

“Horowitz reportedly found that the FBI employee was involved enough in the FISA process to falsely state that he had ‘documentation to back up a claim he had made in discussions with the Justice Department about the factual basis’ for the FISA warrant application,” according to Fox News, quoting the Washington Post. “Then, the FBI employee allegedly ‘altered an email’ to substantiate his inaccurate version of events. The employee has since been forced out of the bureau.”

Neither the Post nor Fox News identified the official, and both suggested the report doesn’t identify him either, but Fox News says, the Post initially reported that the “person under scrutiny…worked beneath former deputy assistant director Peter Strzok,” the FBI agent whose clear bias against Trump tainted the investigation.

The Post, Fox News reports, later removed that tidbit for unknown reasons.

Horowitz’s report has very specific boundaries, and will cover only the FISA application and the events leading up to the FBI’s pursuit of warrantless wiretaps against a handful of specific Trump transition aides, but it is expected to come in handy for investigators, led by U.S. Attorney John Durham, looking into “Justice Department misconduct in the run-up to the 2016 election through the spring of 2017” – a much wider probe.

Durham is specifically looking into whether multiple investigations into the Trump transition team and the fledgling Trump Administration – specifically investigations into whether President Donald Trump and his team were in the pocket of the Russians — were politically motivated.

That investigation is said to be producing shocking results, potentially enough for a criminal probe.

via The Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com

Posted on

‘Cultural Genocide’: Leaked Documents Reveal How China Uses AI, Mass Surveillance to Run Concentration Camps

(AP) — The watch towers, double-locked doors and video surveillance in the Chinese camps are there “to prevent escapes.” Uighurs and other minorities held inside are scored on how well they speak the dominant Mandarin language and follow strict rules on everything down to bathing and using the toilet, scores that determine if they can leave.

“Manner education” is mandatory, but “vocational skills improvement” is offered only after a year in the camps.

Voluntary job training is the reason the Chinese government has given for detaining more than a million ethnic minorities, most of them Muslims. But a classified blueprint leaked to a consortium of news organizations shows the camps are instead precisely what former detainees have described: Forced ideological and behavioral re-education centers run in secret.

The classified documents lay out the Chinese government’s deliberate strategy to lock up ethnic minorities even before they commit a crime, to rewire their thoughts and the language they speak.

The papers also show how Beijing is pioneering a new form of social control using data and artificial intelligence. Drawing on data collected by mass surveillance technology, computers issued the names of tens of thousands of people for interrogation or detention in just one week.

Taken as a whole, the documents give the most significant description yet of high-tech mass detention in the 21st century in the words of the Chinese government itself. Experts say they spell out a vast system that targets, surveils and grades entire ethnicities to forcibly assimilate and subdue them — especially Uighurs, a predominantly Muslim Turkic minority of more than 10 million people with their own language and culture.

“They confirm that this is a form of cultural genocide,” said Adrian Zenz, a leading security expert on the far western region of Xinjiang, the Uighur homeland. “It really shows that from the onset, the Chinese government had a plan.”

Zenz said the documents echo the aim of the camps as outlined in a 2017 report from a local branch of the Xinjiang Ministry of Justice: To “wash brains, cleanse hearts, support the right, remove the wrong.”

China has struggled for decades to control Xinjiang, where the Uighurs have long resented Beijing’s heavy-handed rule. After the 9/11 attacks in the United States, Chinese officials began justifying harsh security measures and religious restrictions as necessary to fend off terrorism, arguing that young Uighurs were susceptible to the influence of Islamic extremism. Hundreds have died since in terror attacks, reprisals and race riots, both Uighurs and Han Chinese.

In 2014, Chinese President Xi Jinping launched what he called a “People’s War on Terror” when bombs set off by Uighur militants tore through a train station in Urumqi, the capital of Xinjiang, just hours after he concluded his first state visit there.

“Build steel walls and iron fortresses. Set up nets above and snares below,” state media cited Xi as saying. “Cracking down severely on violent terrorist activities must be the focus of our current struggle.”

In 2016, the crackdown intensified dramatically after Xi named Chen Quanguo, a hardline official transferred from Tibet, as Xinjiang’s new head. Most of the documents were issued in 2017, as Xinjiang’s “War on Terror” morphed into an extraordinary mass detention campaign using military-style technology.

The practices largely continue today. The Chinese government says they work.

“Since the measures have been taken, there’s no single terrorist incident in the past three years,” said a written response from the Chinese Embassy in the United Kingdom. “Xinjiang is much safer….The so-called leaked documents are fabrication and fake news.”

The statement said that religious freedom and the personal freedom of detainees was “fully respected” in Xinjiang.

The documents were given to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists by an anonymous source. The ICIJ verified them by examining state media reports and public notices from the time, consulting experts, cross-checking signatures and confirming the contents with former camp employees and detainees.

They consist of a notice with guidelines for the camps, four bulletins on how to use technology to target people, and a court case sentencing a Uighur Communist Party member to 10 years in prison for telling colleagues not to say dirty words, watch porn or eat without praying.

The documents were issued to rank-and-file officials by the powerful Xinjiang Communist Party Political and Legal Affairs Commission, the region’s top authority overseeing police, courts and state security. They were put out under the head official at the time, Zhu Hailun, who annotated and signed some personally.

The documents confirm from the government itself what is known about the camps from the testimony of dozens of Uighurs and Kazakhs, satellite imagery and tightly monitored visits by journalists to the region.

Erzhan Qurban, an ethnic Kazakh who moved back to Kazakhstan, was grabbed by police on a trip back to China to see his mother and accused of committing crimes abroad. He protested that he was a simple herder who had done nothing wrong. But for the authorities, his time in Kazakhstan was reason enough for detention.

Qurban told the AP he was locked in a cell with 10 others last year and told not to engage in “religious activities” like praying. They were forced to sit on plastic stools in rigid postures for hours at a time. Talk was forbidden, and two guards kept watch 24 hours a day. Inspectors checked that nails were short and faces trimmed of mustaches and beards, traditionally worn by pious Muslims.

Those who disobeyed were forced to squat or spend 24 hours in solitary confinement in a frigid room.

“It wasn’t education, it was just punishment,” said Qurban, who was held for nine months. “I was treated like an animal.”

___

WHO GETS ROUNDED UP AND HOW

On February 18, 2017, Zhu, the Han Chinese official who signed the documents, stood in chilly winter weather atop the front steps of the capital’s city hall, overlooking thousands of police in black brandishing rifles.

“With the powerful fist of the People’s Democratic Dictatorship, all separatist activities and all terrorists shall be smashed to pieces,” Zhu announced into a microphone.

With that began a new chapter in the state’s crackdown. Police called Uighurs and knocked on their doors at night to take them in for questioning. Others were stopped at borders or arrested at airports.

In the years since, as Uighurs and Kazakhs were sent to the camps in droves, the government built hundreds of schools and orphanages to house and re-educate their children. Many of those who fled into exile don’t even know where their children or loved ones are.

The documents make clear that many of those detained have not actually done anything. One document explicitly states that the purpose of the pervasive digital surveillance is “to prevent problems before they happen” — in other words, to calculate who might rebel and detain them before they have a chance.

This is done through a system called the Integrated Joint Operations Platform or IJOP, designed to screen entire populations. Built by a state-owned military contractor, the IJOP began as an intelligence-sharing tool developed after Chinese military theorists studied the U.S. army’s use of information technology in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“There’s no other place in the world where a computer can send you to an internment camp,” said Rian Thum, a Xinjiang expert at the University of Nottingham. “This is absolutely unprecedented.”

The IJOP spat out the names of people considered suspicious, such as thousands of “unauthorized” imams not registered with the Chinese government, along with their associates. Suspicious or extremist behavior was so broadly defined that it included going abroad, asking others to pray or using cell phone apps that cannot be monitored by the government.

The IJOP zoomed in on users of “Kuai Ya,” a mobile application similar to the iPhone’s Airdrop, which had become popular in Xinjiang because it allows people to exchange videos and messages privately. One bulletin showed that officials identified more than 40,000 “Kuai Ya” users for investigation and potential detention; of those, 32 were listed as belonging to “terrorist organizations.”

“They’re scared people will spread religion through ‘Kuai Ya,’” said a man detained after police accused him of using the app. He spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity to protect himself and his family. “They can’t regulate it….So they want to arrest everyone who’s used ‘Kuai Ya’ before.”

The system also targeted people who obtained foreign passports or visas, reflecting the government’s fear of Islamic extremist influences from abroad and deep discomfort with any connection between the Uighurs and the outside world. Officials were asked to verify the identities even of people outside the country, showing how China is casting its dragnet for Uighurs far beyond Xinjiang.

In recent years, Beijing has put pressure on countries to which Uighurs have fled, such as Thailand and Afghanistan, to send them back to China. In other countries, state security has also contacted Uighurs and pushed them to spy on each other. For example, a restaurateur now in Turkey, Qurbanjan Nurmemet, said police contacted him with videos of his son strapped to a chair and asked him for information on other Uighurs in Turkey.

Despite the Chinese government’s insistence that the camps are vocational training centers for the poor and uneducated, the documents show that those rounded up included party officials and university students.

After the names were collected, lists of targeted people were passed to prefecture governments, who forwarded them to district heads, then local police stations, neighbor watchmen, and Communist Party cadres living with Uighur families.

Some former detainees recalled being summoned by officers and told their names were listed for detention. From there, people were funneled into different parts of the system, from house arrest to detention centers with three levels of monitoring to, at its most extreme, prison.

Experts say the detentions are a clear violation of China’s own laws and constitution. Maggie Lewis, a professor of Chinese law at Seton Hall University, said the Communist Party is circumventing the Chinese legal system in Xinjiang.

“Once you’re stamped as an enemy, the gloves go off,” she said. “They’re not even trying to justify this legally….This is arbitrary.”

The detention campaign is sweeping. A bulletin notes that in a single week in June 2017, the IJOP identified 24,612 “suspicious persons” in southern Xinjiang, with 15,683 sent to “education and training,” 706 to prison and 2,096 to house arrest. It is unknown how typical this week might be. Local officials claim far less than a million are in “training,” but researchers estimate up to 1.8 million have been detained at one point or another.

The bulletins stress that relationships must be scrutinized closely, with those interrogated pushed to report the names of friends and relatives. Mamattursun Omar, a Uighur chef arrested after working in Egypt, was interrogated in four detention facilities over nine months in 2017. Omar told the AP that police asked him to verify the identities of other Uighurs in Egypt.

Eventually, Omar says, they began torturing him to make him confess that Uighur students had gone to Egypt to take part in jihad. They strapped him to a contraption called a “tiger chair,” shocked him with electric batons, beat him with pipes and whipped him with computer cords.

“I couldn’t take it anymore,” Omar said. “I just told them what they wanted me to say.”

Omar gave the names of six others who worked at a restaurant with him in Egypt. All were sent to prison.

___

WHAT HAPPENS INSIDE THE CAMPS

The documents also detail what happens after someone is sent to an “education and training center.”

Publicly, in a recent white paper, China’s State Council said “the personal freedom of trainees at the education and training centers is protected in accordance with the law.” But internally, the documents describe facilities with police stations at the front gates, high guard towers, one-button alarms and video surveillance with no blind spots.

Detainees are only allowed to leave if absolutely necessary, for example because of illness, and even so must have somebody “specially accompany, monitor and control” them. Bath time and toilet breaks are strictly managed and controlled “to prevent escapes.” And cell phones are strictly forbidden to stop “collusion between inside and outside.”

“Escape was impossible,” said Kazakh kingergarten administrator Sayragul Sauytbay, a Communist Party member who was abducted by police in October 2017 and forced to become a Mandarin camp instructor. “In every corner in every place there were armed police.”

Sauytbay called the detention center a “concentration camp…much more horrifying than prison,” with rape, brainwashing and torture in a “black room” were people screamed. She and another former prisoner, Zaomure Duwati, also told the ICIJ detainees were given medication that made them listless and obedient, and every move was surveilled.

AP journalists who visited Xinjiang in December 2018 saw patrol towers and high walls lined with green barbed wire fencing around camps. One camp in Artux, just north of Kashgar, sat in the middle of a vast, empty, rocky field, and appeared to include a police station at the entrance, workshops, a hospital and dormitories, one with a sign reading “House of Workers” in Chinese.

Recent satellite imagery shows that guard towers and fencing have been removed from some facilities, suggesting the region may have been softening restrictions in response to global criticism. Shohrat Zakir, the governor of Xinjiang, said in March that those detained can now request time and go home on weekends, a claim the AP could not independently verify.

The first item listed as part of the curriculum is ideological education, a bold attempt to change how detainees think and act. It is partly rooted in the ancient Chinese belief in transformation through education — taken before to terrifying extremes during the mass thought reform campaigns of Mao Zedong.

“It’s the dark days of the Cultural Revolution, except now it’s powered by high-tech,” said Zenz, the researcher.

By showing students the error of their former ways, the centers are supposed to promote “repentance and confession,” the directive said. For example, Qurban, the Kazakh herder, was handcuffed, brought to an interview with a Han Chinese leader and forced to acknowledge that he regretted visiting abroad.

The indoctrination goes along with what is called “manner education,” where behavior is dictated down to ensuring “timely haircuts and shaves,” “regular change of clothes” and “bathing once or twice a week.” The tone, experts say, echoes a general perception by the Han Chinese government that Uighurs are prone to violence and need to be civilized — in much the same way white colonialists treated indigenous people in the U.S., Canada and Australia.

“It’s a similar kind of savior mentality — that these poor Uighurs didn’t understand that they were being led astray by extremists,” said Darren Byler, a scholar of Uighur culture at the University of Washington. “The way they think about Uighurs in general is that they are backward, that they’re not educated….these people are unhygienic and need to be taught how to clean themselves.”

Students are to be allowed a phone conversation with relatives at least once a week, and can meet them via video at least once a month, the documents say. Trainers are told to pay attention to “the ideological problems and emotional changes that arise after family communications.”

Mandarin is mandated. Beijing has said “the customs of all ethnic groups and the right to use their spoken and written languages are fully protected at the centers.” But the documents show that in practice, lessons are taught in Mandarin, and it is the language to be used in daily communication.

A former staffer at Xinjiang TV now in Europe was also selected to become a Mandarin teacher during his month-long detention in 2017. Twice a day, detainees were lined up and inspected by police, and a few were questioned in Mandarin at random, he told the AP. Those who couldn’t respond in Mandarin were beaten or deprived of food for days. Otherwise, speaking was forbidden.

One day, the former teacher recalled, an officer asked an old farmer in Mandarin whether he liked the detention center. The man apologized in broken Mandarin and Uighur, saying it was hard for him to understand because of his age. The officer strode over and struck the old man’s head with a baton. He crumpled to the ground, bleeding.

“They didn’t see us as humans,” said the former teacher, who declined to provide his name out of fear of retribution against his family. “They treated us like animals — like pigs, cows, sheep.”

Detainees are tested on Mandarin, ideology and discipline, with “one small test per week, one medium test per month, and one big test per season,” the documents state. These test scores feed into an elaborate point system.

Detainees who do well are to be rewarded with perks like family visits, and may be allowed to “graduate” and leave. Detainees who do poorly are to be sent to a stricter “management area” with longer detention times. Former detainees told the AP that punishments included food deprivation, handcuffing, solitary confinement, beatings and torture.

Detainees’ scores are entered in the IJOP. Students are sent to separate facilities for “intensive skills training” only after at least one year of learning ideology, law and Mandarin.

After they leave, the documents stipulate, every effort should be made to get them jobs. Some detainees describe being forced to sign job contracts, working long hours for low pay and barred from leaving factory grounds during weekdays.

Qurban, the Kazakh herder, said after nine months in the camp, a supervisor came to tell him he was “forgiven” but must never tell what he had seen. After he returned to his village, officials told him he had to work in a factory.

“If you don’t go, we’ll send you back to the center,” an official said.

Qurban went to a garment factory, which he wasn’t allowed to leave. After 53 days stitching clothes, he was released. After another month under house arrest, he finally was allowed to return to Kazakhstan and see his children. He received his salary in cash: 300 Chinese yuan, or just under $42.

Long an ordinary herder who thought little of politics, Qurban used to count many Han Chinese among his friends. Now, he said, he’s begun to hate them.

“I’ve never committed a crime, I’ve never done anything wrong,” he said. “It was beyond comprehension why they put me there.”

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Posted on

Nunes: We Are Going to Take CNN, Daily Beast to Court — ‘These People are Sick’

On this week’s broadcast of Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures,” Rep. Devin Nunes (D-CA) denied the “fake news” reports that he met with former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin to get dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden.

He added he was taking CNN and the Daily Beast to federal court.

Nunes said, “I have been used to this for the last three years. The House Intelligence Committee Republicans, we continue to expose Democrat corruption over and over again. And what always happens is right when we expose them, what do they do? They go out to kill the messenger. So this week another fake news story. The problem with this week’s fake news story, then we actually caught him. And we caught them badly and also involves criminal activity and so what we are going to do, I gave a statement on Friday night, we are going to take both CNN and the Daily Beast likely into federal court right after Thanksgiving. And we hope to cooperate because were also going to be working with the appropriate law enforcement authorities because it is not okay to work with someone who has been indicted on serious federal crime to build a media narrative and dirty up a member of Congress. You’ve seen it, the American people have seen it over the last three years. We out them, and then they, with the media narrative to try to dirty up the people who are doing the work on behalf of the American people. We hope that CNN and the Daily Beast will cooperate with the court, they should comply with the subpoenas once we file this and go through different depositions. It should be fun.”

When asked if he was in Vienna with Shokin, Nunes said, I really want to answer all of these questions, and I promise you I absolutely will come back on the show and answer these questions. But because there is criminal activity here, we’re working with the appropriate law enforcement agencies, we’re going to file all this, everyone is going to know the truth, everybody is going to know all the facts, but I think you can understand that I can’t compete by trying to debate this out with the public media when 90% of the media are totally corrupt. And because this is criminal in nature and because it’s so bad, it’s so slanderous, we’ve got all the facts on our side, and we’re going to file in federal court because I’m not going to sit here and try to compete against the media that I have no chance of winning this. I will win in court in, and they’ll have a chance to cooperate, and they’ll have to show how they work with somebody who has been indicted, which is likely conspiring to obstruct justice here.”

Bartiromo asked, “Just to be clear — you’re saying your suing CNN, you’re suing Daily Beast, I know you sued Twitter in the past, do you think this is going somewhere, you’re telling me that CNN committed criminal activity?”

Nunes said, “It’s very likely. Or they’re an accessory to it, right? So none of this is true.”

He added, “The sad part is, I’m the last guy that wants to go into the courts, but the media has become totally corrupt that now they’re willing to actually engage and help with criminals, indicted criminals. These people are sick, and the only way they’re going to be held accountable is through the court system. And It’s the only chance I have to actually get the facts out for the American people because they can’t lie to a court.”

Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com