Saturday, March 9, 2019

How Did Trump and Clinton Pal Jeffrey Epstein Escape #MeToo?

Photo Illustration by Kelly Caminero/The Daily Beast

How Did Trump and Clinton Pal Jeffrey Epstein Escape #MeToo?   ~ hehe & fer ALL u's   PATTY;s   fans ...looky ,  looky  WHO   ole Bobby "got a tug & pop pop fiz fiz & gulp gulpKraffy's ... lawyer is ???   dots,dots,Dots ,DOTS  folks ???   ...Image result for kraft pats or
Image result for kraft pats

Call him Weinstein 1.0: The billionaire with famous friends (Kevin Spacey, Woody Allen) was a secret pervert who used his power and influence to groom teens for abuse.
As the Harvey Weinsteins of the world get their comeuppance in the press and in court, another serial predator walks free.
Last month, after a flood of allegations by Hollywood actresses, Weinstein was indicted on rape and criminal sex act charges in New York. The disgraced Hollywood executive stands accused of assaulting one woman in 2004 at Miramax headquarters in TriBeCa and raping another woman at a Midtown hotel nine years later. He has pleaded not guilty to these crimes.
Since Weinstein’s reign of terror was exposed and ignited a #MeToo reckoning, other powerful men have found themselves publicly censured or even toppled over their dark pasts and allegations of sexual misconduct.
But the Weinstein Effect seems to have spared one Jeffrey Epstein—a 65-year-old billionaire and convicted sex offender who’s palled around with former President Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, Kevin Spacey, Woody Allen, and other high-flying friends whose names were revealed in his “little black book” and flight logs for his private jet. Many of them enjoyed jaunts to Epstein’s private Caribbean island and mansions in Manhattan and Palm Beach, Florida.
Even President Trump was among the deviant philanthropist’s admirers. “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,” Trump told New York in 2002. “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it—Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”
Jeffery’s “social life,” according to police and a score of lawsuits, involved a pedophile ring of dozens of underage girls, whom he groomed and then loaned out to powerful friends. But aside from a minor conviction in Florida—for which he served a mere 13 months—Epstein has emerged remarkably unscathed. New York authorities have never charged him with any crime, and he still drops into his Upper East Side mansion, where women have been photographed coming and going, according to tabloid reports. His sex offender registration lists his primary address as St. Thomas.
The mysterious financier’s sick world was unmasked in March 2005, when the stepmother of one 14-year-old victim phoned police and said a wealthy man had molested her child. She’d received a call from a schoolmate’s mom, who overheard her own daughter discussing “how [the victim] had met with a 45-year-old man and had sex with him and was paid for it,” a police report said. Around that time, a teacher found $300 in the girl’s purse.
Palm Beach detectives would soon unearth five girls who claimed that Epstein had lured them into a ring of sexual abuse. By the time Epstein inked his plea agreement, the feds had identified 40 victims. Police said Epstein was enlisting his employees and other young women to recruit underage girls—many of them underprivileged or from broken homes—for massages at his home. One recruiter told police that Epstein advised her, “The younger, the better."
“‘I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,’ Trump told New York in 2002. ‘He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.’”
The teens, some as young as 13, were ordered to remove their clothes. During the massages, Epstein would masturbate himself and molest his victims, according to both lawsuits and police reports. Sometimes, according to court records, he forced them into intercourse with him or into performing sex acts with an assistant, whom he allegedly bragged of purchasing as a sex slave from her parents in Yugoslavia. Afterward, the victims said, Epstein usually paid them $200 or $300 and as much as $1,000.
“He’s never denied girls came to the house,” Jack Goldberger, Epstein’s defense attorney, told the Palm Beach Post in July 2006. But Epstein didn’t know the girls’ ages, Goldberger said, and took a polygraph test to prove it. “He passed on knowledge of age,” the lawyer said.
In court filings responding to victims’ lawsuits, Epstein said each teenager “consented to and was a willing participant in the acts alleged” and that he “reasonably believed” they were 18 years old during the “alleged acts.”
Epstein eventually walked free with a slap on the wrist, even after Florida cops took their case from state prosecutors to the FBI and U.S. attorney’s office.
In June 2008, Epstein pleaded guilty to two state charges: solicitation of prostitution and procurement of minors for prostitution. In an unusually sweet deal with federal prosecutors, he served 13 months of his 18-month sentence in the private wing of a Palm Beach county jail and was permitted to leave six days a week, for 16 hours each day, for “work release,” according to local press reports. Epstein agreed to register as a sex offender for life, as well as fund attorneys for more than 40 victims who filed lawsuits against him for damages.
“Epstein’s high-powered legal team, which included Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, supplied prosecutors with dossiers on the alleged victims in an effort to discredit them.”
Epstein has continued to make headlines in the decade since his conviction, as his alleged victims pursue him in court. One accuser, Virginia Roberts, came forward to the Daily Mail in 2011 to claim that Epstein flew her across the world to “meet” Prince Andrew when she was 17 years old. The litigation from Roberts and other Jane Does has untangled more sinister layers of Epstein’s operation—including alleged sex crimes that occurred in New York but apparently went unprosecuted. (In depositions for the civil cases, Epstein has pleaded the Fifth when asked about his sexual activity with underage girls.)
His name resurfaced during the 2016 election season, when a woman using the pseudonym Katie Johnson filed a lawsuit against Trump, claiming he raped her at one of Epstein’s parties when she was just 13 years old. She dropped the suit months later.
Trump called Johnson’s claims “not only categorically false but disgusting at the highest level and clearly framed to solicit media attention or, perhaps, are simply politically motivated.”
“There is absolutely no merit to these allegations. Period,” Trump concluded, while lawyers for Epstein didn’t appear to comment on the lawsuit.
Epstein came up again during Trump labor secretary nominee Alexander Acosta’s Senate confirmation hearing. Acosta was the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida who oversaw the pervy money manager’s plea deal.
“Protesters on both sides of the political aisle are now using Epstein’s reputation as ammo.”
In a 2011 letter, Acosta said the negotiations came after a “year-long assault on the prosecution and the prosecutors” and added that “the defense in this case was more aggressive than any which I, or the prosecutors in my office, had previously encountered.”
Epstein’s high-powered legal team, which included Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz (who is now working for Weinstein and is a legal ally of President Trump), supplied prosecutors with dossiers on the alleged victims in an effort to discredit them. The counter-investigation included copies of some of the girls’ MySpace.com profiles which showed drug and alcohol use, according to cops. Epstein’s strategy included hiring private eyes to follow witnesses, including one victim’s father, police said.
Last month, the FBI released heavily redacted memos on the Epstein probe, and one offered a hint as to the reason for his lenient treatment: “Epstein has also provided information to the FBI as agreed upon.” It’s unclear what dirt he might have given the feds. Epstein was once a limited partner at Bear Stearns and abruptly quit in 1981. Around the time of his plea deal, the investment bank’s role in the subprime mortgage crisis could have been of great interest to the feds. Epstein reportedly lost $57 million in the subprime meltdown.
Protesters on both sides of the political aisle are now using Epstein’s reputation as ammo. On June 6, a Philadelphia Trump supporter interrupted Bill Clinton at his book event to shout, “Why did you fly on Jeffrey Epstein’s Lolita Express 26 times? Twenty-six times, Bill. Why, what were you doing on Jeffrey Epstein’s plane?”
The activist, Howard Caplan, was referring to the press’ nickname for Epstein’s private jet. “Look it up. Jeffrey Epstein!” Caplan yelled before security took him away.
Meanwhile, at a rally in Duluth, Minnesota, on Wednesday, President Trump booted a protester who hoisted an old photo of him with the accused sex fiend. The text on the demonstrator’s poster simply asked: Who is Jeffrey Epstein?
Now two cases could propel Epstein back into the spotlight—including one where Roberts, who claimed Epstein kept her as his “sex slave,” is expected to testify against him in a Florida trial.
If Epstein appears, it would be the first time he has to face his alleged victims in court.
According to the fine print of his once-confidential plea deal, Epstein could have been charged with federal offenses involving sex acts with minors. If convicted of such crimes, he could have spent decades or even life behind bars.
Instead, he’s continued to enjoy the fruits of his wealth, flitting between the Virgin Islands and New York City, where tabloid shutterbugs have captured him strolling the Upper East Side with different women. One New York Post report said Epstein houses Russian models at his 51,000-square-foot palace on East 71st Street.
At a sex offender registration hearing in 2011, a Manhattan assistant prosecutor asked a judge to go easy on Epstein by making him a Level 1 fiend, or the lowest on the scale. The assistant DA claimed Epstein shouldn’t be forced to register at Level 3, which indicates a high risk of repeat offense, because “there was only an indictment for one victim” in Florida, the New York Post reported. The judge disagreed and labeled him Level 3, a decision that was upheld on appeal. “I’m not a sexual predator, I’m an ‘offender.’ It’s the difference between a murderer and a person who steals a bagel,” Epstein told the Post a month later.
Meanwhile, last year, a woman named Sarah Ransome sued Epstein in Manhattan federal court, claiming he trafficked her for sex from October 2006 through April 2007—all while his attorneys were waging war against the federal charges in Florida. Ransome, originally identified under the pseudonym Jane Doe 43, differs from other Epstein victims who’ve filed lawsuits in that she was in her early twenties when he allegedly sexually abused her.
“‘I’m not a sexual predator, I’m an ‘offender.’ It’s the difference between a murderer and a person who steals a bagel,’ Epstein told the Post.”
When asked about Ransome’s allegations, and whether Epstein would be investigated for sex-trafficking, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York said they do not comment on people who haven’t been charged. The office also does not comment on whether someone is under investigation.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office declined to comment.
Ransome’s complaint was filed in the same district where Harvey Weinstein and his companies face a pair of class-action lawsuits accusing the ex-mogul and his associates of running a mafia-like operation that perpetuated and covered up his sexual harassment, assault and rape of women seeking work opportunities.
Young, vulnerable girls and women likewise say they sought opportunities with Epstein. A South Africa native living in New York, Ransome dreamed of attending the Fashion Institute of Technology (F.I.T.). Then she met Natalya Malyshev, whom she alleges was Epstein’s recruiter. Malyshev said she’d introduce Ransome to “a wealthy philanthropist who regularly used his wealth, influence and connections to help financially poor females like [Ransome] achieve their personal and professional goals and aspirations,” court papers allege.
Her case is pending U.S. District Judge John G. Koeltl’s ruling on motions to dismiss filed by Epstein and his fellow defendants. The complaint is against Malyshev, British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, who was accused by Roberts of helping Epstein procure girls and of molesting the girls herself, and Epstein’s assistants Sarah Kellen and Lesley Groff. (Kellen and Groff were listed as co-conspirators in Epstein’s federal plea deal. At the time of the alleged crimes, Kellen was in her late twenties; Groff is also believed to have been an adult during Ransome’s alleged abuse.)
“According to Ransome, Epstein didn’t quit his sex-abuse operation. Instead, he allegedly transported young women from other U.S. cities and abroad to his residences in New York and the Virgin Islands.”
During Epstein’s plea negotiations, he departed Palm Beach for New York and the Virgin Islands “in order to convey an image to prosecutors that he and his co-conspirators had stopped committing sex crimes,” her lawsuit states.
Still, according to Ransome, Epstein didn’t quit his sex-abuse operation. Instead, he allegedly transported young women from other U.S. cities and abroad to his residences in New York and the Virgin Islands, the complaint says.
When Ransome met Epstein, he allegedly promised to get her into F.I.T. or another school. She claims the other defendants “confirmed and reiterated this promise” and assured her many times that Epstein would advance her education. For her part, Maxwell told Ransome she would need to give Epstein massages “in order to reap the benefits of his and Maxwell's connections,” court papers allege.
Maxwell and Epstein allegedly warned Ransome that she wouldn’t obtain her education or modeling contracts without performing sex acts with Epstein and others. The sex was required to avoid the group’s “threatened retaliation against her if [she] did not perform as demanded,” the lawsuit adds.
Ransome said she tried to swim off Epstein’s private island after one alleged episode, where Epstein, Maxwell and Kellen ganged up on her with “verbal abuse and threats.” But a search party led by Epstein and Maxwell physically carried her back to his estate, she claims.
The trio is accused of keeping Ransome’s passport so she couldn’t escape. They had been providing Ransome with housing, a phone and transportation so long as she continued to “service Epstein sexually,” the complaint says.
In January 2007, Epstein sent Ransome home to South Africa to recruit an aspiring model as his latest personal assistant. Ransome says she refused, realizing the new hire would “be forced into sexual servitude.” But while she was abroad, Epstein and Maxwell warned Ransome she couldn’t return to New York unless she lost weight, dropping from about 125 to 114 pounds, the lawsuit states.
Groff would allegedly monitor her weight loss and dangle the prospect of an F.I.T. degree. Ransome “attempted to comply with the order but, given her physical height and body structure and her already existing body weight, the diet imposed upon her placed her in serious physical jeopardy, including kidney malfunction and extreme emotional and psychological distress,” the complaint says.
“At a sex offender registration hearing in 2011, a Manhattan assistant prosecutor asked a judge to go easy on Epstein by making him a Level 1 fiend.”
According to Ransome, Epstein and Maxwell even phoned Ransome’s parents in South Africa to assure they’d take care of their daughter when she returned to the U.S.—and that they’d use their connections to get her into school.
Ransome completed and delivered her F.I.T. application and supporting essay to Epstein, believing they were a “done deal,” court papers allege. When she returned to New York in February 2007, Maxwell allegedly ordered her to have sex with Epstein immediately. She claims the alleged traffickers kept pressing her to drop excessive amounts of weight and “offered her no opportunity to decline or resist their instructions.”
Three months later, Ransome says, she left the United States to flee Epstein.
All defendants (excluding Malyshev, who hasn’t responded to the suit) say Ransome’s claim for damages falls outside the statute of limitations for sex-trafficking victims—and that the relationship with Epstein was “consensual” in the first place.
In a motion to dismiss filed in November, lawyers for Epstein and Groff accuse Ransome of suing for sex-trafficking violations in “a moment of stunning opportunism… allegedly because Epstein did not help [Ransome] to gain admission to the Fashion Institute of Technology and advance her career.”
Maxwell’s camp, too, delivered a blistering rebuttal: “Rather than a Dickensian tale of a vulnerable, naïve, young women, forced into a life of slavery and sexual servitude, this case actually presents the end game of a sophisticated, ambitious woman, accustomed to an expensive lifestyle provided by numerous male benefactors.”
In response, Ransome’s lawyers argued Maxwell “cannot run away from the fact that [the complaint] properly alleges that Maxwell was the mastermind behind convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking scheme.” They say the socialite incorrectly argues the Trafficking Victims Protection Act doesn’t apply to Ransome’s case because she wasn’t physically chained against her will; rather, traffickers are known to use psychological coercion to maintain control over their victims.
“This is not and never will be a sex trafficking case,” Maxwell’s team retorted in court papers last month. “It is the story of a brief, consensual relationship between two adults occurring more than ten years ago.”
Allegations of Jeffrey Epstein exploiting young women in New York were surfacing well before Sarah Ransome’s case.
Maximilia Cordero claimed she was 16 when Epstein sexually abused her in 2000 and vowed to boost her modeling career in exchange for sexual favors. Seven years later, when Cordero filed a lawsuit against him, her attorney (and boyfriend) said she was unable to consent because she was underage—and because she had a mental illness. Cordero’s suit was dismissed after a judge ruled Cordero was not insane during her encounters with Epstein and thus she could not circumvent the statute of limitations. According to the court’s decision, the only medical testimony came from a psychiatrist hired by the defense who said Cordero’s condition was caused by substance abuse. Epstein, through both an attorney and a spokesman, denied the allegations.
Then there was Virginia Roberts.
The 15-year-old girl was working a summer job at Mar-a-Lago when Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly recruited her for Epstein in 1998. The alleged madam invited Roberts, who now goes by her married name Giuffre, to make good money by learning massage therapy, according to a now-settled lawsuit Giuffre filed as Jane Doe No. 102.
Maxwell has denied the allegations, calling them “entirely false” in a statement released in 2011 after Giuffre spoke to British media.
Giuffre’s father, a maintenance manager at the Trump resort, was glad an older woman was offering his daughter this opportunity and dropped her off at Epstein’s mansion, her lawsuit said. Like the other victims, Giuffre claims she was sexually abused during the massage session. She claims Maxwell told Giuffre she had “lots of potential” and asked her to return the next day.
“Giuffre has claimed she spent four years as Epstein’s sex slave and was pimped out to the wealth manager’s rich and powerful friends.”
Giuffre has claimed she spent four years as Epstein’s sex slave and was pimped out to the wealth manager’s rich and powerful friends.
Now, 20 years after she met Epstein, Giuffre may testify against him. The financier is facing a malicious prosecution lawsuit in Florida from Bradley Edwards, an attorney who says Epstein sued him in 2009 as punishment for representing the victims.
Edwards declined to comment on the case. But when asked why cops never busted Epstein in New York, he said, “New York authorities are familiar with the allegations that have been made by Virginia against Jeffrey Epstein and have shown no interest in investigating or prosecuting him or anyone else in New York.”
Two weeks after meeting Epstein, Giuffre says she was flown to New York for “training” at his mansion. “It was basically every day and was like going to school. I also had to have sex with Epstein many times,” Giuffre said in a 2015 affidavit. (The statement was submitted as part of a lawsuit two women filed against the U.S. Department of Justice, saying prosecutors violated their rights as crime victims by failing to warn them of Epstein’s plea deal.)
Giuffre allegedly lived as Epstein’s teenage slave from 1999 through 2002, including at his home in New York. “In fact, my only purpose for Epstein, Maxwell and their friends was to be used for sex,” she said.
“New York authorities are familiar with the allegations that have been made... against Jeffrey Epstein and have shown no interest in investigating or prosecuting him or anyone else in New York.”
— Brad Edwards
Those friends allegedly included Alan Dershowitz and Prince Andrew, who was pictured in a photograph—taken at Maxwell’s London townhouse—with his arm around Giuffre’s partially bare waist. Both the Trump-supporting academic and the royal have denied having sex with Giuffre, and in April 2015, a federal judge struck the allegations from the court record. “At this juncture in the proceedings, these lurid details are unnecessary,” Judge Kenneth Marra ruled. “These unnecessary details shall be stricken.”
Giuffre claimed she was subjected to daily sexual abuse, including by Maxwell, whom she later sued for defamation in Manhattan federal court in 2015. Giuffre argued the socialite called her a liar after she detailed her allegations in court papers. The case settled last year, preventing Epstein from taking the stand in what was expected to be an explosive trial.
In her affidavit, Giuffre says she “observed Maxwell have sex with dozens of underage girls” and take explicit photos of them. “Maxwell had large amounts of child pornography that she personally made. Many times she made me sleep with other girls, some of whom were very young, for purposes of taking sexual pictures,” Giuffre added.
Now a married mother of three, Giuffre said she was forced to sleep with Dershowitz for the first time in Epstein’s New York mansion, when she was 16 years old. She claimed she also had sex with Prince Andrew in New York when she was 17.
She claimed Jean Luc Brunel, a modeling mogul now suing Epstein for tarnishing his reputation and damaging his business, had sex with her multiple times when she was 16 to 19 years old. Giuffre said some of those encounters occurred in New York, and that Brunel supplied Epstein with European minors who aspired to walk the runway.
“Jeffrey Epstein has told me that he has slept with over 1,000 of Brunel’s girls, and everything that I have seen confirms this claim,” Giuffre said in her affidavit, adding that she witnessed orgies with children in different cities and that Maxwell and Epstein’s New York-based assistant Sarah Kellen participated in them.
Giuffre was allegedly trafficked to politicians, powerful business executives and other acquaintances of Epstein. “Epstein required me to describe the sexual events that I had with these men presumably so that he could potentially blackmail them,” Giuffre said in her affidavit, adding, “I am still very fearful of these men today.”
“In her affidavit, Giuffre says she ‘observed Maxwell have sex with dozens of underage girls’ and take explicit photos of them.”
Giuffre fled Epstein’s clutches when he agreed to fly her to Thailand for massage training, she claims. She met her future husband and never looked back.
“Because of how often Epstein and others were having sex with young girls, and how much it was a centerpiece of their lives, I doubt they have just stopped,” Giuffre said in the affidavit. “It also seems to me that, when I knew them, they believed that they were above the law—too powerful to be prosecuted.”
Jack Scarola, an attorney for Edwards, expects the trial in Palm Beach to start no later than August and that the court will likely set a date early next month.
The upcoming trial will be the first time that Jeffrey Epstein—if he chooses to appear in court—will be forced to “sit there and be confronted with the truth about what he has done,” Scarola told The Daily Beast.
“He has thus far been able to avoid that experience and been able to avoid a detailed airing in a public courtroom about what has gone on, as opposed to filings that are buried in the records of the clerk’s office,” Scarola said.
“Virginia is ready, willing, able and enthusiastic about the opportunity that she will have to confront Jeffrey Epstein face to face,” Scarola added. “There are other victims who are absolutely ready and willing to testify.”
Included on the witness list are Prince Andrew, President Clinton, President Trump, David Copperfield and Leslie Wexner, the billionaire founder of the company that owns Victoria’s Secret and Epstein’s only known financial client. (Scarola said the boldfaced names are listed because they may have knowledge of the case, but that he doesn’t expect most of them will be witnesses.)
“He has thus far, for reasons that remain unexplained, been able to evade criminal responsibility for his wrongdoing.”
— Jack Scarola
The proceeding may be in Florida, but Epstein’s lifestyle and activities in all of his locations, including New York, are likely to come up.
“He has thus far, for reasons that remain unexplained, been able to evade criminal responsibility for his wrongdoing,” Scarola said. “It may very well be that the focus of public attention through this civil lawsuit on what he has done will create the kind of pressure necessary to see that he is appropriately criminally prosecuted.”
If the recently released FBI memos on Epstein are any indication, the feds have known about Giuffre’s claims for years. Among the press clippings included in the file were a Daily Mail story from March 2011, when Giuffre revealed her identity.
Soon after Giuffre went public, according to her 2015 affidavit, two FBI agents met her in Australia, where she was living at the time. “They seemed to be very professional and hard working. I thought to myself, ‘Wow, these people will do the right thing against the bad guys and protect me,’” Giuffre said.
In a second affidavit filed months later, Giuffre said the agents “seemed like they were being blocked from doing what they wanted to do—which I thought was to arrest Epstein and his powerful friends for all their illegal sex crimes.”
Giuffre hoped Epstein would be prosecuted. “But when nothing came of it, I got very upset,” Giuffre said. “I wanted to do something to stop Epstein and the other people he associates with from sexually abusing girls.” She added, “Law enforcement had taken my detailed statements, but nothing seemed to be happening.”
Giuffre said she contacted the FBI in April 2014, months after she moved back to the United States. “But, it seemed like the hands of [assistant U.S. Attorney Marie] Villafaña and the FBI were always tied by someone else with more authority,” she said.
“I have never been able to figure out who was (and still is) stopping a prosecution,” Giuffre wrote in the affidavit.

The Ease with which Government Kidnaps Children – A Review of Current Legislation and the Multi-Billion Dollar Child “Protection” Industry

http://healthimpactnews.com/2018/the-ease-with-which-government-kidnaps-children-a-review-of-current-legislation-and-the-multi-billion-dollar-child-protection-industry/
Connie with Separating American Families sign
Connie Reguli spoke out for families at a rally in front of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., on September 10, 2018. Photo by Freedom Public Press.
Commentary by Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News

Connie Reguli is one of the most prominent legal voices in the family rights movement. The Tennessee attorney is recognized for her tenacity in fighting for families whose children have been unjustly taken from them by Child Protective Services. She has represented several Tennessee Medical Kidnap families, including the Turner family, Whitney Manning‘s family, and Matthew Marble.
Besides litigating cases involving family members seized by Child and Adult Protective Services, Connie travels around the country educating parents and activists on how to fight back when overzealous agencies seize their children. Her grassroots Family Forward Project Facebook group has over 11,000 members.
Connie Reguli was recently part of a team of activists and professionals who gathered in Washington DC on September 11, 2018, to participate in an Educational Panel put together by 4 the Children USA. The event was live-streamed to hundreds of thousands of viewers, including District Attorneys’ offices from several states according to event founder Robert Slaven.
Connie Jennifer Kathleen and Terri in car in DC
Kathleen Arthur, Connie Reguli, Terri LaPoint, and Jennifer Winn on the way to the Educational Panels in Washington D.C. September 11, 2018.
Connie Reguli was inspired to speak from the heart in the event, after passing out copies of her original speech to the audience. Connie has graciously given permission for Health Impact News to publish the written speech in its entirety.
She addresses the financial incentives for states to take children from their families, made possible by federal legislation. The Family First Act was passed as a part of President Trump’s Omnibus Budget Act in February 2018 and is set to go into effect on October 1. Connie explains important issues that still must be addressed legislatively.
In her oral speech, she explains some of the difficulties that parents face when they go to family court, which is very different from criminal court. After equipping parents with vital information, she turns to advocates, discussing how to advocate effectively, pointing out areas that need to brought to the attention of legislators.
Here is the speech she gave at the event, followed by her written speech:

September 2018 – Operational Review Family First Preservation and Services Act in February 2018 (FFPSA) Adoption and Safe Families Act 1997 (ASFA)

by Connie Reguli
Our country is collapsing in on itself, in part because of the loss of family integrity and our inability to provide for child safety. The forty-year social experiment initiated by the Mondale Act [the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA)] in 1974 has failed.
The layers of legislation cast on the American public in the name of the best interest of the child and promoted with the belief that every family needs a government (i.e. It Takes a Village) has backfired.
Family integrity is imploding at the hands of an overzealous government that chose to financially incentivize removing children from their less than perfect homes and placing them into the homes of strangers paid by federal and state tax dollars.
The aggressive legislation surrounding Title IV E and the Adoption and Safe Families Act has evolved into a government sanctioned social engineering project that has broken family ties.
The biological ties that are protected under the Fourteenth Amendment are forever broken with the swipe of a pen by a judge in a courtroom in a merciless act called “termination” of parental rights. It is nothing less than generational genocide.

The Ease with which Government Takes Children From Families

It is hard to imagine in a sophisticated first-world country like the United States that the government officials could walk into your child’s public school, have them removed from their classroom, interviewed by government officials in private (without your knowledge), remove your child from the school, and place them in the home of a stranger all without your knowledge. The reason you ask, maybe you don’t feed your child enough, maybe they missed a few days from school, maybe someone just lied and said you were a drug dealer, and your child could not answer the right questions to exonerate you.
It is hard to imagine in a sophisticated first-world country that a new born baby could be stripped from his mother’s arms in a hospital because the Mother had one positive test for opiates during pregnancy, even though there was no showing of drugs in the Mother or the child at birth and there is no other evidence of child abuse or neglect.
It is hard to imagine in a sophisticated first-world country that a child could be locked in a hospital with a rare and untreated disease and separated from her entire family simply because her parents wanted to take her for a second medical opinion.
Beabout family
Little Grace Beabout was taken for her family when her parents simply wanted a second opinion before the hospital removed their baby’s kidney. Photo provided by Beabout family. See their story here.
This is the state of our nation and the child welfare system in the United States.
It was shameful in the 1980s when state agencies could not keep track of children placed in state-operated foster homes and children lingered for years with no family and no finality. Several states were faced with class action lawsuits that placed the states under long term consent decrees.

Multi-Billion Dollar, For-Profit Industry

The privatization of government functions, i.e. the military and the prison system, soon expanded to foster care and child welfare.
Children removed from their parents are the commodity in this for-profit, $18 billion foster care industry.
In a blink of an eye, the states were swept with foster care private contractors, and the state all but relinquished direct state foster care programs. Now the Title IV E funds, intended to protect children, necessitate that the state maintain a quota of children under government control to satisfy their contractual relationships.
It was the perfect storm for a new provision in law to erupt.
Brilliant legislators in the Clinton era designed and passed the Adoption and Safe Families Act in 1997. The goal was to provide permanency for children.
To do so, the federal government decided that a financial incentive program to the states and the foster-to-adopt parents would move children out of the foster care system into permanent placement.
The states were provided a $6,000 bonus check for each child adopted to strangers. The foster parents who adopted were provided bonuses for clothing, tax incentives, and a monthly stipend on the children for the remainder of their minority. This was 1997.
Today, twenty years later, this financial program drives child welfare agencies to aggressively remove children from homes, place them into the homes of strangers, and adopt them out, changing their lives forever.
Robbing children of their heritage. Refusing to reunify the children with parents. Refusing to place the children with relatives.
The entitlement program under ASFA now exceeds the foster care maintenance programs. When you rob a child of their heritage, you have changed them forever.

Crimes Against Humanity

America has a dismal history of crimes against humanity and causing generational destruction.
Slave children were ripped from their families from the beginning of our nation until the civil war; children were picked up off the streets of New York and placed on trains to the Midwest where they were randomly taken in by strangers from 1850 to 1910; indigenous children were removed from their tribal homes and forced into the east coast boarding schools for fifty years; and children were stripped from unwed mothers at birth until 1950.
Orphan train
As many as a quarter of a million children were rounded up by Charles Loring Brace, founder of the NY Children’s Aid Society. Brace “helped” the poor immigrant children by shipping them cross country on “orphan trains” to be given to strangers. Photo source.
See:

The U.S. Foster Care System: Modern Day Slavery and Child Trafficking

Persons considered “imbeciles” were subject to involuntary sterilization.
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes stated in his 1927 opinion that these persons should not be allowed to sap the resources of society and the sterilization of an imbecile person was no greater a sacrifice for society than compelling a vaccine.
As an attorney working in criminal law and family courts for 24 years, I can tell you that parents have fewer rights than criminals.
Parents and children are denied due process, they are subjected to secret courts, non-disclosed reports, massive attack by government social workers, and loss of the constitutionally-protected right to parent.
Children are stripped of their freedom to associate with their family members and family integrity protected under the 14th Amendment.

Government Funding Puts a Price on Children’s Heads

The state agencies operate with conflicting roles and financially incentivized motives. Every state agency was created under the public policy of providing services to families, providing safety for children, and reunifying families.
In addition, they serve to prosecute parents and sever their parental rights.
The funding is directed at foster care and rehoming children. There can be no argument that there is a price tag on the head of every child entering the child welfare system.
See:

Child Kidnapping and Trafficking: A Lucrative U.S. Business Funded by Taxpayers

The system has become so intent on creating cash flow on children through forced adoption that the agencies focus on “adoptable children,” and those in need of rescue from drug ridden homes or long-term abuse are overlooked as children too damaged for adoption.
You see, this system has been in place long enough now that they know that the “damaged” children cause too great a strain on the system. They require too many services; the parents are ill-equipped to deal with children with a history of trauma; and many end up back in state’s care.

New Law: “Families First”

We now have the Families First Prevention and Services Act of 2018 which passed in the budget omnibus bill. Most legislators probably do not even know what is in it.
I have read it. It was intended to redirect funds from the federal government away from foster care and into programs to prevent removal from a family.
Here is the first problem. Number one, it is optional for the States. Legislators in Washington D.C. cannot be so blind to not understand that the private foster care industry will oppose any paradigm shift on how we handle reports of abuse and neglect.
There are after all, 114 registered lobbyists in D.C. for “foster care.”
The corporations are huge. Look up Providence, Omni, Eckerd, Youth Villages, and the multiple “church-based” foster care companies.
Not only do they contract to provide foster care, they are now contracting to provide the “services” for family reunification. This is a serious and intolerable conflict of interest.
Why would you seek to restore a family and return a child to his home, when it means you lose a stable monthly income while the child is in foster care?
The private agencies then contract with mental health contractors who provide substandard care and always report that the family is “not ready” for reunification for any number of reasons.
Not only is FFPSA optional, it provides little incentive to shift the focus to family stability. If you do not think that family stability is important in tackling a variety of other social issues, like substance abuse, poverty, and substandard education, you are wearing blinders.
Family stability has been the backbone of our Christian nation for years. Since the sixties, divorces, unwed mothers, teenage pregnancies, and opioid addiction have skyrocketed. If one were to truly assess the underlying factors in these crises, surely family disintegration would be at the top.
The current Achilles heel of the FFPSA is the continuation of ASFA, the Adoption and Safe Families Act. So long as the states can realize a bonus check for every child adopted through the forced-adoption agenda of the child welfare agencies, prevention services will be met with opposition. The bonus checks must stop NOW.

“Help” from the Predator no Help at All

The conflicts of interest in the agencies and with the state contractor must be prohibited. This will require restructuring the state agencies so that the prosecution of parents remains separate from the agency seeking to rehabilitate families. This is not unlike other government functions.
I served as a District Attorney in my legal career and we always served an antagonistic function to the public defender. We must separate the agencies such that the families can realize a real sense of support.
Now the parents shudder in dealing with the agency because at every stage of the case, they know that the same agency is gathering evidence against them. The same social worker who comes to their home to inspect for safety reasons is likely to be the person who gets on the stand and testifies that the laundry was not done and the home was cluttered, preventing the return of their children.
Connie Reguli at Educational Panel
Connie Reguli speaks to Educational Panel in Washington D.C. Photo by Family Forward Project.
We must prohibit conflicts with the contractors.
Those providing foster care cannot be providing reunification services. There must be antagonism before there can be balance.
We must provide a forum for public comments and feedback on how the agency is doing.
Currently, the public does not participate in any of the reporting functions on the efficiency, competence, and goal achievement of the state workers.
So long as the state agencies are allowed to be their own oversight, the truth will be never be exposed. Although some states provided for the establishment of oversight committees in their formation, none of the states have maintained a true public liaison.
Anonymous reporting must be eliminated.
Sadly, parents are sometimes attacked by spiteful neighbors, ex-spouses, or other ill-intended persons.
Vexatious reports to CPS face no consequences, as opposed to penalties for filing false police reports.
A parent must have the ability to challenge the source of false reports of child abuse.
Finally, FFPSA must be mandatory.
The states must be required to engage in the 12-month program to prevent removal of children where there is no threat of immediate harm and no evidence of abuse. Children are currently removed from their families on mere allegations from anonymous referrals.
We thank you for having a listening ear and look forward to your continued attention on this social welfare crises.
Please follow up with us:
Family Forward Foundation
Familyforwardfoundation.com
Find us on Facebook: Family Forward Project.
Connie Reguli
Family Forward Foundation
1646 Westgate Circle
Brentwood, TN 37027

Police Dismantle Massive Child Sex Slavery Ring Run By Israelis, Fmr IDF Soldier—MSM Silent

The girls were forced to be part of a WhatsApp group called “Purim” – an apparent reference to the Jewish holiday – where they were pressured and intimidated as well as summoned to areas frequented by Israeli tourists.
israeli
MEDELLÍN, COLOMBIA — (MPN) A large child sex slavery ring overseen by Israelis was dismantled by Colombian police earlier this week, in a story that has shocked Colombia and much of Latin America but received minimal coverage from mainstream Western media outlets. The network had been active since 2011 and expressly “recruited” young, underage females in situations of economic hardship or domestic abuse to work as “sex slaves” catering to Israeli tourists visiting Colombia.
Colombian authorities first began to investigate the sex slavery network in June 2016 following the murder of Israeli citizen Shay Azran in the Colombian city of Medellín. Soon after, Azran’s murderer was found to be another Israeli, Assi Ben Mush, an ex-IDF soldier who was known for his past involvement in both drug and human trafficking in the early 2000s. However, Mush was never arrested for Azran’s murder.
As authorities delved deeper into Mush’s current activities while investigating the homicide, they determined that he was the owner of a hostel in Cartagena, Colombia and that he was also one of the coordinators of “tourism” packages sold exclusively to Israeli men visiting Colombia.
According to judicial sources cited by El Colombiano, the tourism packages sold by Mush and his cohorts involved taking Israeli men – most of them businessmen or men who recently ended their compulsory military service in the IDF – to parties at a variety of locales such as hostels, hotels, farms and yachts, where the main attraction was the sexual exploitation of underage women and the mass consumption of narcotics and alcohol. The sites where the exploitation occurred offered lodging or services exclusively to Israeli tourists, a practice that is surprisingly common in frequented tourist destinations throughout South America.
Mush was expelled from Colombia in November of last year after a massive sex party was broken up by police and illicit drugs were found at the scene. By that time, authorities had already determined the existence of the network and his accomplices.
Assi Ben Mush
A passport photo of Assi Moosh, former Israeli soldier Photo | Elheraldo
As a result of the multi-year investigation, 14 Israeli citizens were determined to comprise the network along with two Colombians, one of whom was a police officer. Yet, while 16 arrest warrants have been issued, only seven arrests have been made, five of which were Israeli and the remaining two Colombian. The network was found to extend through several Colombian cities – Santa Marta, Medellín and Cartagena – and was initially difficult to detect, as those running the network hid their real activities behind legitimate commercial establishments such as hotels and spas.
Colombian police characterized the network as specifically seeking out vulnerable Colombian female minors in area schools — especially those in difficult economic situations or living in homes where domestic abuse was common — and luring them into sex work. The underage girls were said to have received between 200,000 and 400,000 Colombian pesos (~$63 and $126) for each encounter with the Israeli men traveling abroad. In addition, the girls were forced to be part of a WhatsApp group called “Purim” – an apparent reference to the Jewish holiday – where they were pressured and intimidated as well as summoned to areas frequented by Israeli tourists.

OFFSHORING THE BUSINESS

Colombian police noted that the movements and other activities of the Israelis involved in the network suggested that the group was active not just within Colombia but throughout Latin America, meaning that the presence of Israeli-run sex trafficking rings in other Latin American countries is a distinct possibility.
The network is only the most recent child prostitution ring run by foreigners to have been dismantled by Colombian police. Earlier this year in October, American Michael Edward Fanale was arrested for his role in a sex trafficking operation located in the city of Cartagena. Fanale’s network also involved several other American citizens as well as citizens of German and Argentinian nationality.
However, as even the Israeli government itself notes, Israel has recently been the site of a “severe phenomenon of human trafficking for prostitution,” as thousands of women have been “imported” to Israel from developing countries and forced into prostitution by criminal groups. Israeli police have estimated that, at the height of such operations in 2003, 3,000 women were trafficked in a single year, mostly taken from Eastern Europe and smuggled into Israel through Egypt.
Notably, sex trafficking in Israel is said to have declined precipitously in the years 2010 and 2011, just as the now-dismantled child prostitution ring was being set up in Colombia by Mush.
Given that Colombian authorities have suggested that other such Israel-run networks are active throughout South America, it seems that the crackdown on human trafficking in Israel led Israeli criminals to take their illicit activity abroad and used the guise of tourism to take their clientele with them.

Whitney Webb is a staff writer for MintPress News and a contributor to Ben Swann’s Truth in Media. Her work has appeared on Global Research, the Ron Paul Institute and 21st Century Wire, among others. She has also made radio and TV appearances on RT and Sputnik. She currently lives with her family in southern Chile.