Friday, December 16, 2022

Iraq snapshot

Friday, December 16, 2022. THE DAILY CALLER smears US House Rep Katie Porter.




We're back to the hearing.  I knew we would be but I thought we'd be covering another part of it.  When I realized we had to cover US House Rep Katie Porter's part, I thought I could just pull up some coverage and grab a link to their story and a paragraph or two to excerpt.

But  no one's covered the story.  

Katie is being lied about by a media outlet, outright lied about, and where's our media watchdogs?  Caught sleeping on the job again.
 



When Republican Yvette Herrell demonstrated that she didn't know how to listen at the House Oversight and Reform Committee's Wednesday hearing about the attacks on LGBTQ+ persons, I was appalled and felt she was deliberately mishearing (and had been passed bad summaries by her staff).  Bryanna Lyman is at THE DAILY CALLER.  Is that why she feels free to lie about US House Rep Katie Porter?

"Grooming."  As we've had to point out (such as here) and "pedophile" are being applied to members of the LGBTQ! community. It's a lie and it's always been a lie.  Anita Bryant used the lie to scare the nation in the seventies -- may she rot in hell (and take Glenn Greenwald with her).

The two terms are wrongly applied to LGBTQ+ people intentionally to harm them and, as Alastair Patton-Garcia noted recently, it's to 'other' the community.

These are intentional lies that are told  by homophobic people with the intent to stoke hatred towards the LGBTQ+ community.

For those who don't know, pedophiles are people who pursue children (those under the age of consent) for sex.  That would be people like Scott Ritter, the former United Nations employee who is now and forever a registered sex offender who served time in prison for attempting to have sex with girls.  Pedophiles do exist.  It is inaccurate to portray them as gay people or as transgendered people  Most are, like Scott Ritter, straight people who are married.  That's the reality when you look at the figures.  

"Grooming."  This is supposed to refer to those adults who are interested in having sex with underage people (children) and so they 'groom' them -- they ease into it slowly, they make them think they're friends, they then attempt to abuse that trust by leading the person into a sexual affair.  You could look at US House Rep Lauren Boebert's convicted husband as a groomer -- you could say that's why he was exposing himself in that bar to those women.

In the past, nut jobs like Anita Bryant would lie and insist that gay people groomed and that they had to because ''they can't reproduce.''

So today, the liars go on FOX NEWS or they chat with professional losers like Aunty Gigi . They repeat these lies in an attempt to scare people and whip up a mob sentiment against LGBTQ+ people.

That's what the goal is, that's why Republican members of Congress make the statements they do.  It's not for nothing that this Committee hearing featured one Republican after another who could not say "gay" or "LGBTQ+."  That was the topic, after all.  Instead we got nut jobs like Yvette Herrell who wanted to tell the witnesses (who, unlike her, actually knew what they were talking about) that there are other "hate crimes" -- do they know how many cops are shot each year?

You just want to slap someone like that because they're so damn stupid.

A police officer is trained, is armed.  It's called "in the line of duty."

There's no reason that a guy holding hands with his boyfriend should be attacked.

And, Yvette, not to be robbed.  The attack wasn't motivated by a crook needing money.  It was motivated by hate when four homophobic, hateful men saw two men in love.  Alex Bolliner (LGBTQ NEWS) reports: 


Four men in Florida were sentenced to probation and community service for the vicious 2018 beating of a gay couple at a Pride event because the couple was holding hands.

The attack on Rene Chalarca and Dimitri Logonov made national headlines at the time, taking place as the two were leaving a restroom in Lumus Park after Miami Beach’s Pride parade. The brutal attack was caught on security video.

“They start to hit us, like beating us, hard,” said Chalarca.

“It was, like, instant. I got hit, and they knocked me out,” said Logunov, who said that the attackers called him a “fa***t” in Spanish. “We probably provoked them because we were walking together, holding hands. It was gay pride, South Beach was full of gay people.”

Chalarca and Logonov were hospitalized.

Police searched for the attackers, releasing images from surrounding security cameras. Juan Carlos Lopez, Luis Alonso, Adonis Diaz, and Pablo Figueroa later surrendered to police and were charged with aggravated battery with hate crimes enhancements and could have faced up to 30 years in jail.

But under a plea deal last month, the charges were reduced to two counts of battery with prejudice. All four of the assailants got five years probation and 200 hours of community service, and they have to go to an anger management class.


As Elaine observed when she covered it, "They should have served hard time.  They made a decision to attack two men, they beat the men so badly that they were hospitalized.  Yet they walk with probation?"

If Yvette can't grasp the difference between police being shot in the line of duty and two unarmed men being attacked because they held hands, she's a damn fool.  Congress already has way too many of those.  

Gay people are being attacked, they're being beaten, in schools they're being tormented and told they don't exist.  Suicide rates are high.  And there's no need for homophobes in the first place, but I'll be damned if I am silent while they try to destroy people.  And Yvette to stop pretending she decries all violence when she made it through an entire hearing where she didn't decry violence against LGBTQ members or, for that matter, even acknowledge them -- no mention of lesbians, no mention of gay males, not mention of bisexuals, no mention of transgender persons, no mention of queer people.  

Republican politicians are very eager to lie about LGBTQ+ persons, they just aren't eager to acknowledge the very real violence the community is experiencing.


Twitter, since it was taken over by self-described “free-speech absolutist” Elon Musk, has seen a dramatic rise in the use of the anti-gay slur “groomer” among a cluster of high-profile anti-LGBTQ accounts, according to a new report.

According to a study by Media Matters and GLAAD released Tuesday, nine prominent anti-LGBTQ accounts had an over 1,200% increase in Twitter users’ retweets of the accounts’ tweets with the “groomer” slur in the one-month period after Musk’s Oct. 27 takeover compared with the month prior.

The accounts also showed an increase of more than 1,100% in mentions of the right-wing media accounts in tweets with the slur. The accounts analyzed in the study are: Tim Pool, Jack Posobiec, Jake Shield, Gays Against Groomers, Blaire White, Allie Beth Stuckey, Andy Ngo, Seth Dillon and Mike Cernovich. In addition, the Libs of TikTok account saw more than a 600% increase in its mentions with “groomer” language, going from nearly 2,000 to nearly 14,000 over the same timeframe.   


Oh, look, Andy Ngo, Aunty Gigi's ward.  

So THE DAILY CALLER article notes that Katie decried the terms "groomer" and "pedophile."  They, however, 'report' it in such a manner that Katie supposedly agrees with the terms being applied to LGBTQ but doesn't want them used.  

No.

Katie knows they're lies and she was noting the damage that the terms are doing.


Here's what Katie Porter actually said in the hearing -- and we're only pulling her praise for Committee Chair Carolyn Maloney.  She was speaking to the second panel made up of Human Rights Campaign's Kelley Robinson, Pulse Nightclub shooting survivor Brandon Wolf, National Center for Transgender Equality's Oliva Hunt, Inside Out Youth Services' Jessie Pocock and The Williams Institute's Ilan Meyer.


US House Rep Katie Porter: I wanted to start with Ms. Robinson, if I could.  Your organization recently released a report analyzing the five hundred most viewed, most influential Tweets that identified LGBTQ people as so called "groomers."  The groomer narrative is an age old lie to position LGBTQ+ people as a threat to kids and what it does is to deny them access to public spaces and it stokes fear and it even stokes violence.  Ms. Robinson, according to its own hateful content policy does Twitter allow posts calling LGBTQ people "groomers"?

Kelley Robinson: No, I mean Twitter along with FACEBOOK and many others have community guidelines.  It's about holding users accountable and acknowledging that when we use phrases and words like "groomers" and "pedophiles" to describe people, individuals in our community that are mothers, that are fathers, that are teachers, that are doctors,  it is dangerous.  And it's got one purpose -- it's to dehumanize us and make us feel like we're not a part of this American society and it has real life consequences.  So we are calling on social media companies to uphold their community standards.  And we're also calling on any American that's seeing this play out to hold ourselves and our community members accountable.  We wouldn't accept this in our families, we wouldn't accept this in our schools.  There's no reason to accept it online. 

US House Rep Katie Porter: So I think you're absolutely right and it's not just this allegation of groomer and pedophile, it's alleging that a person is criminal somehow and engaged in criminal acts merely because of their identity, their sexual orientation, their gender identity.  So this is clearly prohibited under Twitter's content yet you found hundreds of these posts on the platform.  Your team filed complaints about these posts, correct?

Kelley Robinson: Yes.

US House Rep Katie Porter: And how often did Twitter act to take down these posts which violated its own content policy?

Kelley Robinson: Very rarely.  

US House Rep Katie Porter: So from our calculation, it looks like about 99% of your complaints.  They basically acted on one or two of the 100+ complaints you filed. Instead of taking them down, Twitter elevated them.  Allowing them to reach an approximate 72 million users.  This is not just about what happens online.  What happens online translates into real harm in people's lives.  Ms. Popcock, you provide services to a community that experienced the devastating LGBTQ attack.  Can you provide some examples of the link between speech online and the attacks against providers like you.  


Jesse Pocock: We know really, I mean, online threats, in addition to creating an atmosphere of bullying for young people, it also creates an atmosphere of delegitimizing our real professional trained work at INSIDE OUT YOUTH services.  And it is just so critically important that we can continue doing the work that we do.  But I want to tell just one quick story because it's beautiful.  We have an online community center and it is moderated by peer advisors and when asked how many issues of like fighting or contention do you deal with on the disport server our young people tell us "Well, it doesn't happen very often."  So I'm here to tell you that our young people have figured out how to moderate platforms in positive, productive ways?  Twitter, FACEBOOK, everybody else can figure it out too.  

US House Rep Katie Porter: Absolutely.  Ms. Robinson, your report notes that these radicalizing posts, these 'groomer' posts, these other posts that attack LGBTQ communities are related to acts in the real world -- what happens online is often reflective of what happens in the real world.  After Governor DeSantis of Florida passed his so-called "Don't Say Gay" bill, what trends did you observe online with regard to 'grooming' related discourse.  

Kelley Robinson: Unfortunately, we saw a 400% increase on Twitter of this sort of hateful language.  Particularly calling our community members groomers and pedophiles.  And we know that rather or not the bills move into effect, the lasting impact of that online bullying of defining our communities in that way, it sticks -- especially with our kids. 

US House Rep Katie Porter: My time has expired but I just want to say I'm proud today, I'm proud to stand with the gay community and I'm proud that you're all here as part of our country and giving us testimony.  I yield back, Madam Chair. 




Get it?



Bryanna Lyman pretends she didn't -- I guess the clue's there in the last name that she's a liar.  She owes Katie an apology.  She also owes Kelly Robinson an apology because she lies about her as well.

Robinson were offering expert testimony which is why Bryanna Lie Face doesn't quote her.  She's selective -- as she is with Katie.

"Groomers."  We've dealt with that garbage before.  It's inaccurate and it's a smear.  That was the point both women were making.

Bryanna Lyman did not misunderstand the women, she deliberately lied about them.  It's outrageous.  

I don't usually rail against THE DAILY CALLER.  I don't read it.  When they've sent something to the public e-mail account, if it was worth noting, we did.  Otherwise, I had no opinion of it.  I am now appalled by it.  They are deliberately lying.  They have printed a deliberate inaccuracy in order to smear LGBTQs people and they have deliberately lied about what was said in a Congressional hearing.  I don't think it gets worse than that?

We've reported on hearings repeatedly at this site over the years.  I've only been appalled by the coverage one other time.  (Generally, I'm appalled by the non-coverage.)  That was when pretty much every outlet covered a hearing and they all offered nonsense except for THE NEW YORK TIMES.  It was an important hearing, on the future of the US in Iraq.  It mattered, what was discussed mattered.  Senator Kay Hagan, for example, made important points (to the witnesses Leon Panetta and ), about how the 'withdrawal' was a drawdown and how some of the US troops 'leaving' Iraq were going to Kuwait and would continue to cross the border back and forth.  There was so much worth noting in that hearing.  In fact, we covered it -- community wide -- in the following:  the November 15, 2011 "Iraq snapshot," the November 16t. 2011 "Iraq snapshot," November 17, 2011 "Iraq snapshot," Ava's "Scott Brown questions Panetta and Dempsey (Ava)," Wally's "The costs (Wally)," Kat's "Who wanted what?" and THIRD's "Gen Dempsey talks '10 enduring' US bases in Iraq."    That's all covering one hearing because it was that important.


Again, only THE NEW YORK TIMES covered the importance, the substance of the hearing.

NBC?  ABC?  Various newspapers?  They wanted to have fun and josh and joke.

At the beginning of the hearing --

Let me stop there.  Having sat in on multiple hearings, let me explain for anyone unaware how this goes.  Big media outlets send someone in.  They have copies of the prepared remarks.  They sit for the first 30 or so minutes of a hearing -- that might last two or even four hours -- and rush off -- leaving the hearing -- to 'cover' it.  

They miss the hearings over and over, the bulk of the hearing is completely missed by Big Media and it happens over and over.

John McCain was in the Senate.  In his initial round of questioning, he tore into Leon Panetta over something.  It was no big deal.  The press treated it like it was.  They reported it as though it was a big deal.  That's all they took away (and delivered to news consumers) about a hearing on the US' future role in Iraq.  All they offered was: Catfight between McCain and Panetta.  As I've noted numerous times here, I know Leon and have known him for years.  I don't think I used that to explain how insipid the press was for running with that nonsense. (I may have, but I don't think I did.)  It was performative nonsense and Leon didn't take it seriously.  Nor did McCain who, in the second round, was kidding and joking with Leon.  

That outraged me because the media was ignore real and serious issues -- how many troops were leaving, what troops were being stationed in nearby countries, that talks were ongoing regarding another SOFA, what aspects were being handed over by the Defense Dept to the State Dept -- to instead focus on 'Catfight in Congress!'

There they just weren't doing their job.  And I've seen coverage where people got something wrong -- like they had a quote that they attributed to the wrong person.  

I have not seen someone do what Bryanna Lie Face has done -- deliberately lie.  

If that's THE DAILY CALLER's standard, they need to shut down.  Again, this is not, "Oh, they're right-wing so I hate them!!!"  We have linked to them before when they've e-mailed something that was germane to what we were discussing.  We have linked to other right-wing sites as well -- especially with regards to Iraq because, for years now, they're more likely to cover it than msm or left sites.  But what THE DAILY CALLER has done is deliberately lie about what a member of Congress and what a witness said.  She has lied and she's lied to incite.  That's outrageous and an abuse of The First Amendment.  This is libel.  And it's not an accident and it's not a minor detail in the report.  Bryanna Lie Face has built her entire report around a lie.

I have no idea how THE DAILY CALLER thinks it's okay to print that.  Should Kelley Robinson decide to sue, I bet they'd rethink their policy.  (They're lying about Katie but she's a public official and has a higher threshold and may honestly not feel it's worth it to sue.)

They should be ashamed of themselves.  

And THE DAILY CALLER needs to know that they are now seen as liars.  Not a news source, but as liars.  

They didn't take issue with what Katie and Kelley said.  They didn't say, I disagree.  They took what the two women said and deliberately lied about what they said.  That's why they offer a few words here and a few words there as quotes.

And it's offensive that they're lying about what two women said, it's offensive that they're claiming to be a journalism outlet and they don't follow basic journalism, and it's offensive that they are doing this to spread lies about the LGBTQ+ community.  

By the way, after she published her garbage Brianna Lie Face gushed on Twitter about her how dad took her to see The Who: "I was lucky enough to see The Who in May with my dad and sister and folks let me tell you, BEST CONCERT EVER." 


Is she really that dumb?  


She wants to lie about Katie Porter and Kelley Robinson and claim that they are a danger to children and then wants to gush about what a great band The Who is? From CRAPAPEDIA:


Townshend accepted a caution from the Metropolitan Police (the Met) as part of Operation Ore, a major investigation on child pornography conducted in 2002–2003. The Met stated that "it was established that Mr Townshend was not in possession of any downloaded child abuse images". Townshend was on a sex offenders register for five years, beginning in 2003, after admitting he had used his credit card to access a child pornography website.[144][145] Townshend claimed he accessed the images as research in a campaign against child sexual abuse[146] – specifically, to prove that British banks were complicit in channelling the profits from paedophile rings.[147] Authorities could not prove that the website accessed by Townshend involved children, and no incriminating evidence was found on his personal computer.[148]


Glad you had the time of our life watching Pete perform.  Now cross your legs, Brianna, your hypocrisy's showing.


So many idiots.  So little time.  Yes, the person behind the attack on Florida's Pulse Clubm was a right-wing extremist.  It's too bad that Pat Fallon is a damn idiot.


I don't know how you get so stupid and still make it to Congress.  And, trust me, I'm aware hate merchant idiots like Marjorie Taylor Green and Lauren Boebert are in Congress.


But the idiot that is Pat Fallon is on a whole other level.  ISIS emerged in Nouri al-Maliki's second term.

Brandon Wolf survived the attack on Club Pulse and, for some reason, that made Pat Fallon want to attack Brandon.  

He tried to put the words of Democratic members of the Committee into Brandon's mouth -- Brandon correctly told him those weren't his words.  But Pat Fallon is both an idiot and a bully so that's how he gets off.  Watching him try to intimidate Brandon, you got the feeling that if the press hadn't been present, Pat would have loved to have committed his own hate crime against Brandon.


And for the record, US House Rep Cori Bush spoke after Pat Fallon.  That's why she addressed the White supremacy issue to begin with -- the one we noted yesterday had Ranking Member James Comer sputtering.  Cori's remarks did not take place in a vacuum.  They were a response to Pat Fallon trying to pour is hate towards Democratic members of the Committee onto Brandon Wolf. 



  • Daniel Davis Aston, 28
  • Kelly Loving, 40
  • Ashley Paugh, 35
  • Derrick Rump, 38
  • Raymond Green Vance, 22

The shooting also left twenty-five people injured.


But the Republican side wanted to ignore the issue of the hearing which was violence aimed at the LGBTQ community.


So you got Pat Fallon (who also practiced Flordia's "Don't Say Gay" throughout the hearing) declaring that "crime is out of control against everyone" and, as noted earlier, Yvette's lament -- and apparent surprise -- that cops are shot at.  Yes, Yvette, this is a new development, you go study up on it.


So as Pat attacked Brandon Wolf, he wanted Brandon to know that the attack on Club Pulse -- an attack that Brandon survived -- was carried out by an American who had pledged allegiance to ISIS and this was not, Pat Fallon kept insisting, a right-winger.


Uh, yes, it is you stupid fool.

 

ISIS emerges in Iraq during Nouri al-Maliki's second term.  It is an extremist, right-wing, fundamentalist organization of terrorists.  


Somehow, despite approximately a decade of terrorism carried out in Iraq,  Pat Fallon never understood what the group stood for:


IS is a theocracy, proto-state,[170] and a Salafi jihadist group.[42][41][43][44][45][171] ISIL's ideology has been described as a hybrid of Qutbism,[37][38][39] Takfirism,[37][40][41] Salafism,[42][45] Salafi jihadism,[42][41][43][44][45] Wahhabism,[42][41][43][44] and Sunni Islamist fundamentalism.[43][44][172] Although ISIL claims to adhere to the Salafi theology of Ibn Taymiyyah, it rebels against traditional Salafi interpretations as well as the four Sunni schools of law and anathematizes the majority of Salafis as heretics. ISIL ideologues rarely uphold adherence to Islamic scholarship and law manuals for reference, mostly preferring to derive rulings based on self-interpretation of the Qur'an and Muslim traditions.[173]

According to Robert Manne, there is a "general consensus" that the ideology of the Islamic State is "primarily based upon the writings of the radical Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood theoretician Sayyid Qutb".[174][175] The Muslim Brotherhood began the trend of political Islamism in the 20th century, seeking gradual establishment of a new Caliphate, a comprehensive Islamic society ruled by sharia law. Qutb's doctrines of Jahiliyya (pre-Islamic ignorance), Hakimiyya (Divine Sovereignty), and Takfir of entire societies formed a radicalised vision of the Muslim Brotherhood's political Islam project.


They are fundamentalists filled with hate -- you'd think Pat Fallon would recognize himself, it should be like looking in a mirror for him.


I filled in for Kat last night and noted I'd try to respond to the e-mails regarding  Tara Reade.  Quickly, here it is.




Tara Reade was on Tucker Carlson's show at some point this week.  Don't care.  Tucker's a hateful homophobe.  

Tara is saying Joe Biden penetrated her with his fingers.  I thought that was what she always said but maybe not -- maybe she didn't explain it -- or, more likely, didn't explain it in depth enough for some people to grasp what happened. 

I don't like Tara and I think she's an idiot.  I also believe every word she has said with regards to Joe.  I believe she was assaulted.

I've gone into why I don't like her, we don't need to note that again.  The idiot part may be more spread out.  So briefly . . .

1) She just went on Tucker's program.  Just.  The time to do that was in 2020 before the election.  She didn't want to be 'used.'  Whatever, I'm tired of the stupidity.  I'll give April Oliver a pass but everyone after -- including Mary Mapes -- I just don't have sympathy.  April was involved with a big report from CNN and TIME.  And the chief source got pushback from the Pentagon so he retracted his statements.  Doesn't matter.  They were on videotape.  He decided to back out and CNN did a witch hunt and tried to treat it as something other than journalism.  By every journalism measure, April and Jack Smith nailed down all they needed to in order to report.  The media is not  your friend.  It's never your friend.  Yes, I was surprised this decade when, out of nowhere, THE WASHINGTON POST decided to a hatchet job on offline me, but I was surprised because I wasn't doing anything to get press attention.  Someone had a long standing grudge to work.  But the media is not your friend, they are never your friend.  They are there for a story and they'll use you to get it.

Tara should have understood that.  She should have understood that not going on Tucker or whomever's show in 2020 was not going to make her more believable.  It was just going to deny her a large platform from which she could make her case.  April, Mary and many others have been stupid because an 'investigation' was taking place.  Unless you're part of the team investigating, that 'investigation' is not going to be in your favor.

Tara was being shut out of the media when she wasn't being attacked by the media.  It was stupid on her part not to have grabbed every opportunity available.  And any real survivor would have understood her doing just that.

2) Some people are saying she's now a right-winger.

It doesn't help that she's promoting a registered sex offender (Scott Ritter) or that she's jumping up and down like the pep squad for various conservatives.  Tara's not right-wing.  She may become it, but she's not there yet.  She was a partisan and, like many partisans, she thought she knew all about life and political theory.  She may know all about life, she knew very little about politics.  Go back to those early YOUTUBE interviews and grasp that she never should have been put on camera.  I'm sure she herself would groan if she went back and watched them.  We all get there on our own time.  What some are seeing as right-wingerness in her currently is really just her adjusting her stance.  The same partisanship she believed in (but didn't term it that) is what attacked and turned on her when she spoke out about Joe.

3) If Tara had come to me, told her story and I was writing it up, I needed to tell her what I had learned.

That did not happen with regards to her reporter and Time's Up.  She should not have been blind sided to learn that they were (mis)using her.  The reporter on that story should have told her.  That same reporter also should have been the one to report the call Tara's mother made to LARRY KING LIVE.  Not to say, "She says her mom called in to LARRY KING LIVE."  That reporter should have done their duty and located the call and reported on it.  (No one does their duty.  Sharon Stone's lying through her ass and people are repeating it. 'I didn't work for 8 years because I couldn't get hired due to speaking out on AIDS!'  Can she ever stop lying?  And what idiot reporters are reprinting that without checking her filmography and learning that there is no such gap in her employment.)  Yet Tara continued to defend the reporter.  I don't think she does now -- at least not as vocally -- due to who her new cohorts are.

4) Alyssa Milano shot off her mouth.

I immediately called her out here.  It was newsworthy that Alyssa spoke and what she said.  Alyssa didn't believe Tara.  She explained that she knew things we didn't.  

How?

Did someone slip it into the script for a bad TV movie?

No, as I pointed out, Times Up was leaking on her.  Not only did I point it out, that reality was also told to the reporter covering her story.  It shouldn't have taken the Cuomo scandal for the media to tell the truth about Times Up.

And I said to tell the truth.

The media's smear jobs were fed to them by the Biden campaign.

We stood alone -- Ava and I -- in calling out the PBS 'scoop' of all those people who worked with Joe at the time and never, ever heard about the assault.

First off, you don't show up at the office and say, "Hey, everybody, can you give me just a second.  A few minutes ago, our boss assaulted me.  Okay, thank you.  If anyone's headed for the cafeteria, I could use a Diet Coke."

Second, PBS didn't do an investigation.

An investigation of me is not me handing you a list of names I've written and telling you to talk to them.  Joe's campaign made that list.  Every name on that list had already been vetted by his campaign before the list was handed to PBS.

Time and again, even her reporter failed her.  That included failing to do an update.  Tara lied! She compromised judicial cases!!  Remember those claims.  It's a typical Biden move (look at Beau's efforts to discredit people) and then, when the press looks elsewhere, no charges are brought because nothing was done wrong.  A report should have noted, no later than January 2021, that Tara didn't lie about this or that and that no court verdict was overturned by her actions.

I don't like Tara.  I have said from day one that I believed her and I still believe her.  That's why I noted that she needed to demand the records.   I don't like her but I do believe her.  She needs to pursue her case.


Let's wind down with this:


The following sites updated:





Posted by at