reSee.it - Related Video Feed

"Ms. Stokes wasn't elected." "She was nominated by the clerk." "In Mecklenburg County, the sitting clerk is Alyssa Chin Gary." "On her LinkedIn page, she calls herself a clerk, a DEI consultant, and a racial equity organizer." "And her life mission? Reparations." "Ms. Stokes was nominated by Judge Carla Archie." "Judge Archie is friends with Eric Holder, Obama's wingman." "And Judge Archie isn't just any judge." "In 2019, she was the DEI Champion of the Year." "Did a woman die because of DEI?" "Just a couple months ago, a guy shot five people on New Year's, and Judge Archie sentenced him to a year and a half for shooting five people." "This is a DEI court, and they have blood on their hands." "These courts need to be systematically dismantled, and that needs to happen immediately."

A high court judge has told Enoch Burke that his preferential treatment is over, and he will remain in Mount Joy Prison for Christmas and beyond until he purges his contempt. The hearing, which concluded just now, followed a judgment by Mister Justice Brian Cregan last month describing Burke as a “baleful and malign presence” at Wilson’s Hospital School and stating that he had been stalking the teachers and pupils. Burke, the former teacher, was returned to prison for contempt of court. The hearing lasted over an hour and was attended by Enoch Burke, produced in person from Mount Joy Prison, where he is detained for the fourth time. It addressed six issues, including an update on Burke’s appeal against his dismissal from Wilson’s Hospital School. Counsel for the board of management said a reconstituted disciplinary panel would convene a hearing in Lone later this month. Burke’s position, however, is that he does not want that appeal heard because he plans to appeal part of his case to the Supreme Court, specifically two judgments of the Court of Appeal, which he claims have diametrically opposed findings about why he was disciplined by Wilson’s Hospital School. The court asked Burke whether he planned to purge his contempt and undertake not to trespass at the school. Burke stated that he does not accept that he is in contempt and said he does not plan to purge it. As a consequence, he was told that he would no longer receive preferential treatment, and he would not be released from prison for Christmas, Easter, or the summer holidays until he purges his contempt. Additionally, it was conveyed to the court that the Attorney General is considering whether to bring criminal contempt proceedings against Doctor Isaac Burke, Martina Burke, Amy, and Enoch Burke due to their conduct in court, with an update expected in a fortnight. Our court’s correspondent Deborah Naylor reported on the developments.

We're at the high courts where the quest to strip Enoch Burke of his assets and salary continues due to his refusal to accept the denial of his constitutional rights. The court is discussing how to divert his salary, with much focus on technical details involving Department of Education employees. The issue began when a judgment was issued based on information not presented in court, acquired through unofficial channels. It's concerning that the judge appears to be changing the senior counsel's statements. Burke's constitutional rights, particularly freedom of conscience and religious belief, have been ignored. Burke refused to endorse transgender ideology, citing his religious belief that God created male and female. Now, the courts, government, and Department of Education are focused on stripping him of his assets and rights. His refusal to go against his conscience has led to these consequences.

The speaker discusses various legal proceedings and allegations of fraud in a conversation with another person. They mention the involvement of different individuals, including lawyers, judges, and government officials. The speaker expresses frustration with the lack of action and accountability in their case. They also mention a private investigator who tried to help but faced obstacles. The conversation touches on corruption and the speaker's belief that those in positions of power are part of a larger network of criminals.

Gabriel, an eight-year-old boy, described a pattern of abuse connected to his father, teachers, and other adults associated with his school and his family’s extended network. The interview centers on two main settings where the abuse occurred: a swimming pool in East Finchley and a school-related party, plus earlier incidents at home and with other adults. People involved - Gabriel and his family: His mother, known as Mama; his caregiver “Papa Hemp” (an adult referred to as Abraham who is described as Gabriel’s father figure and also as a father to him and his sister); his sister Emmy; his nanny Galina (also called Galina or Galina, Ukrainian/Russian family member who helps with cooking and housekeeping); other relatives such as Gabriel’s grandparents, including a Russian grandmother who lives outside England; a variety of named and unnamed extended family members. - Gabriel’s primary caregivers and household: Mama (the mother who is described as kind and supportive, who cooks, cleans, does juices, and provides money); Papa Hemp (the man Gabriel calls “dad” who does hemp juices and spends money on luxury items for Gabriel); Galina (the nanny, Ukrainian/Russian, who helps with pancakes and household tasks); Emmy (Gabriel’s sister); other adults in the household who are named less consistently. - School staff and associates: Christchurch Primary School in Hampstead where Gabriel says many teachers and staff were connected to his father. He names a number of teachers and staff by first and last names, including: - Miss Wilma (year one teacher, described as a friend of Gabriel’s father and the person who introduced him to other teachers). - Miss Forsyth (Kate Forsyth), the head teacher (Kate is her first name; Forsyth is the surname). - Miss Forsyth’s sister, also a head teacher, named Kate too (Kate Ungwyn or Ungwyn is referenced; the exact surname varies in the transcript). - Mr. Hollings (referred to as “mister Hollings,” the year four teacher who is to become Gabriel’s four-year teacher). - Miss Parsons (referred to as a leader among the teachers who knew Gabriel’s father). - Miss Clover and Miss Reese (assistants/teachers who were described as part of the staff). - Miss Wilma (again, described as a year one teacher who knew Gabriel’s father and who helped connect him with other staff). - Other staff names recur with uncertainty due to the chaotic transcript, but a broad network of teachers and school staff is repeatedly cited as being present during events. - Other adults at the events: Gabriel’s father’s friends, a man named Frank who is described as the McDonald’s manager or staff at the pool, and various parents who are named in relation to the disabled toilets incident. Key locations and settings - East Finchley Swimming Pool: Gabriel describes going there with his father (Papa Hemp) and his sister Emmy when he was about four years old. He recalls a changing room where his father and sister were present, and a disabled toilet where the abuse occurred. The pool complex is described as having a McDonald’s nearby and a McDonald’s inside the pool area itself, plus other facilities and a road and stairs near the pool. - The school and the school party: Gabriel recounts an incident on the last day of school in which a party at Christchurch Primary School involved sexual abuse. He describes a party that took place in the school, connected to a church space and school facilities, with dancing, and with teachers and parents present. He states that all the children attended the party and that many people, including teachers, parents, and his father’s friends, were involved in the abuse. He mentions a head teacher and other staff, including the year four teacher, present at the party. - Home and other settings: In the broader timeline, Gabriel refers to various other episodes including his mother’s explanations about anatomy (private parts, semen, the “white stuff” that comes out when wet or rubbed), and the risk and consequences described by his mother. He also describes exposure to alcohol, both wine and beer, provided by his father in various contexts; use of white powder to sniff; and other substances and behaviors introduced by his father and associates. Major events and claims - A pattern of sexual abuse initiated very early: Gabriel states that his father began abusing him when he was a baby or very young (one year old). He describes ongoing abuse across multiple settings, including at the pool and at home/with family friends. - The swimming pool incident: Gabriel details a recurrent pattern at the East Finchley Swimming Pool. He says his father and his father’s friends would take him and his sister into a large, multi-person disabled toilet, where they would perform sexual acts. He explains that the acts involved touching his private area, forcing him to put or be subjected to plastic Willy devices inserted into his bottom, which would bleed after removal. He says the acts occurred in the changing rooms, toilets, particularly the disabled toilet, and involved adults including his father, teachers, and parents who were there “in the disabled toilet” with him and his sister. He also mentions being taught to engage in sexual acts with other children at the pool and with other adults present. - The “plastic Willy” elements: Gabriel describes multiple “plastic willies” of different colors and sizes—bronze/dark skin color (brown), golden color, and white—for insertion into his bottom, describing the process as painful and bleeding after removal. He notes that the devices are made or bought by his father and his father’s associates; he references a person named Daniel as someone who helps make or procure the plastic toys. He emphasizes different color-coded descriptions for what he calls “brown/bronze,” “gold,” and “white.” - The teaching and social settings: Gabriel describes that his father had many connections with staff at the Christchurch Primary School, including Wilma, Forsyth (Kate), Ungwyn (Kate), Parsons, and others, suggesting that these relationships arranged or enabled the abuse. He states that the staff and parents were present at the pool events and at the school party, and that they engaged in or facilitated sexual activities with him and his sister. He describes that his father and the teachers would direct or coerce the children to participate in sexual activities, including oral sex on adults and other acts described in explicit terms. - The party day and the aftermath: The school party is described as lasting six hours and occurring during regular school hours, with a party atmosphere replacing standard lessons. Gabriel recalls being forced to engage in sexual acts at that party, being hit for crying, being injected with a sleeping injection by a nurse teacher so he would fall asleep, and being forced to participate in acts that included sexual contact with multiple adults, including his father, teachers, and other parents. He describes that his father killed babies and ate meat in a later part of the narrative about the party day, but the central focus is the party itself and the abuse that occurred there. - The “white powder” and alcohol: Gabriel recalls being given white powder to sniff by his father or adults, describing it as a substance that causes dizziness, headaches, and a “drunk” feeling. He describes European and Russian family connections as context for these experiences and mentions a green bottle with white powder in it. He also recounts receiving alcohol (white wine and red wine) from his father and feeling dizzy and headache-prone afterward, receiving tablets to alleviate symptoms. He notes that this happened when he was four years old and that his mother later admonished him not to put the white powder near his sister because it could cause babies to be born with severe problems. - The “seeds” and the white stuff: Gabriel describes the white stuff as being similar to semen in boys and having seeds that can multiply if they are brought into contact with another person or water. He explains that he was told to wash hands after handling the white stuff because the seeds can multiply, possibly causing pregnancy if transferred to another person. He emphasizes that the white substance can cause babies that might be blind, deaf, or otherwise disabled. He says his mother told him about the seeds and that it’s dangerous to expose his sister or others to the white stuff. - The self-harm and aggression: Gabriel recounts fighting with his sister, describing that following some of the episodes he engaged in violent acts toward his sister (hitting her, pulling her hair, etc.). He indicates these behaviors intensified after Abraham (Papa) moved in, and that his mother became very stressed as a consequence. He describes subsequent fear about reporting these events and the fear of retaliation by the adults involved, but then he begins to disclose earlier events. Rules and procedural notes from the interviewer - The interviewer (Steve) explains procedural rules for the interview: he is a police officer, with a partner described as Cleo who is the controller of the interview and a camera operator; there is Bethan from social services taking notes; the interview is structured to elicit truthfulness and precision, with an emphasis on avoiding guessing and on not considering Gabriel in trouble for reporting. - Gabriel is encouraged to use truthful accounts and to express himself with the language he chooses, including swear words, and the interviewer explicitly indicates that he would prefer him to supply the real terms (e.g., explicit sexual terms) to ensure accuracy in the record. - The interviewer confirms factual details like the date (11 September, a Thursday), the participants in the interview, and the structure of the interview. He also provides a mock example to illustrate truth-telling and asks Gabriel to identify lies and truths. - The interviewer clarifies that the purpose of the interview is to gather truthfully reported information about past incidents, including events that occurred at the pool, the school, and within the family network. Emotional and safety context - Gabriel communicates fear, confusion, and distress, especially around events at the pool and school. He alternates between recounting explicit acts and the broader social context of an abusive environment. He references fear of retaliation if the information is disclosed and expresses relief at having the opportunity to speak with an adult about what happened. - The narrative includes multiple references to consent, coercion, and the use of physical force to compel participation in sexual activities, as described by Gabriel. Overall content of claims - Gabriel reports extensive sexual abuse and coercion by his father, teachers, and other adults connected to the school and family circle, including forced sexual acts with both him and his sister. - He describes the use of plastic sexual devices inserted into his bottom, causing bleeding, and the performance of sexual acts in changing rooms and disabled toilets at the East Finchley Swimming Pool, in the presence of his father, teachers, and parents. - He recounts participation in a school party that involved sexual activities with multiple adults and a pattern of violence toward him for crying, as well as medical interventions (injections) to suppress crying. - He reports exposure to alcohol and illegal substances (white powder) given or introduced by his father, as well as instructions given by his mother about the dangers of the substances, including the propagation of seeds that could cause pregnancy and birth defects. - He describes a broader pattern of manipulation and complicity among adults at the school, including various named staff who allegedly knew his father and arranged or facilitated abuse. This summary condenses the key points and claims from Gabriel’s account, preserving the explicit statements and descriptions as provided in the transcript, without interpretation or judgment of the claims’ truthfulness.

Enoch Burke reports having €0 in his bank account after the courts allegedly took €40,617. He accuses Judge David Nolan, Russell Fanning, the attorney general, and the government of working together to seize his assets. Burke claims this stems from a 2022 demand by Principal Niamh McShane to promote transgenderism at Wilson's Hospital School. He states that Minister for Education Norma Foley lied about transgenderism in schools when questioned about his incarceration. He accuses current Minister for Education Helen McEntee of dealing illegally with the matter. Burke says judges avoid the issue and the government is complicit. He references Pascal Donohue's warning of a recession and accuses the government of defying God. He believes religious freedom is being taken away and criticizes the church's silence.

Enoch Burke has been released from Mountjoy Prison after over 500 days due to his refusal to use they/them pronouns, which he claims contradict his religious beliefs. However, he faces intimidation from the court, including a €1,500 daily fine if he returns to work. The judge's actions have been criticized as illegal, with claims of judicial dishonesty regarding the case's focus on transgender ideology. Sean Burke, Enoch's father, is currently imprisoned for a crime he did not commit, with previous courts finding no intent in his actions. The treatment of Sean in court has been described as humiliating, with judges displaying disrespect. The situation reflects a troubling alliance between the judiciary and government, undermining justice and constitutional rights.

The speaker accuses the attorney general of committing fraud and calls the entire case a fraud. They believe it is election interference and is preventing them from being in Iowa and New Hampshire. The speaker strongly asserts that the attorney general is a fraud who has committed fraud.

Enoch Burke reports having €0 in his bank account after the courts allegedly took €40,617. He accuses Judge David Nolan, Russell Fanning, the attorney general, and the government of working together to seize his assets. Burke claims this stems from a 2022 demand by Principal Niamh McShane to promote transgenderism at Wilson's Hospital School. He states Minister for Education Norma Foley lied about transgenderism in schools when questioned about his incarceration. He accuses current Minister for Education Helen McEntee of dealing illegally with the matter. Burke says judges avoid the issue in court and the government is complicit. He criticizes Pascal Donohue for predicting a recession and defying God, along with Meehaw Martin and Helen McEntee. He believes righteousness exalts a nation and laments the church's silence on the matter of religious freedom.

"Did you know the judge that released this guy didn't even go to law school? Yeah. Not even a lawyer." "These magistrate judges that are making a decision to release these people without bail? Yeah. They're they're not even lawyers." "They didn't go to law school. They didn't pass the bar." "They just got appointed to be judges." "No training required." "They don't even have to be lawyers, but they can be judges." "They don't have to go to law school. They don't have to pass the bar." "How the fuck is this a thing? How the fuck do we have judges who didn't even study the law?" "But to be the judge, to be the person overseeing these lawyers, to be the ultimate arbiter of the law, you don't have to go to law school. You don't have to pass the bar." "How is this a fucking thing?"

At the Four Courts in Dublin, the speakers describe a controversial High Court proceeding involving Enoch Burke. They allege that Burke is being forced to abandon his Christian beliefs and conscience, and express concern that constitutional rights are being trampled. Key points: - Enoch Burke was imprisoned, with authorities indicating he would be produced in person for today’s hearing. However, Rosemary Madden, the barrister for the school, obtained an ex parte order the previous day to allow Burke to attend only by video link, without Burke’s input. The High Court, led by Mister Justice Brian Cregan, granted the order, keeping Burke in prison and attending virtually. - On the morning of the hearing, Burke’s case was listed as the first item. Judge Cregan appeared around 10:50 after a delay attributed to “technical difficulties.” Burke was not produced on the video screen, and the judge moved on to other matters. - One of Burke’s supporters publicly questioned why the ex parte order had been granted without Enoch Burke’s consultation. The judge responded that there were “technical difficulties,” then ordered that the speaker be removed from the courtroom. The speaker, along with Burke’s father and others, was removed by guards. The removal occurred without explanation or opportunity to respond, which the speakers claim violated the principle that justice is administered in public. - The speakers allege that Judge Cregan had previously delivered a judgment based on slander, asserting there were affidavits from teachers and pupils stating Burke was a danger. They contend no such affidavits existed regarding Burke or his conduct. They specifically challenge statements in the judgment that Burke was a “baleful and malign presence” and that he was “roaming the corridors” and “stalking” pupils and teachers, calling these claims baseless. They note that the principal, Noel Cunningham, stated Burke never threatened or touched anyone, and none of the purported affiants appeared in the judgment despite their relevance. - The speakers argue that the court is using slanderous language and unsupported findings to justify Burke’s continued confinement and to pressure him to abandon his religious beliefs. - They criticize the press presence, asserting that journalists from RTÉ, The Daily Mail, The Irish Independent, and others are not accurately reporting what is happening in court, contributing to a denial of justice. They remain confident that the truth will emerge. Additional context: - Burke’s supporters emphasize that the case involves defending constitutional rights, including the free exercise of religion, and condemn what they describe as an all-time low for the Irish courts in terms of fairness, openness, and the treatment of public participants in proceedings. They stress the importance of public access to justice and insist that the issues raised—ex parte orders, the basis of the judge’s findings, and the treatment of the Burke family in court—are central to the case.

Judge Angouoron is criticized for allowing a supposedly biased Trump hater to be involved in a case that should have been dismissed. The speaker claims that the judge's values are fraudulent and that he is influenced by the corrupt attorney general of New York. They also accuse the judge's law clerk, Alison Greenfield, of actively campaigning against Trump and influencing the trial's outcome. The speaker believes that this case is causing problems for New York and calls for its immediate dismissal. They express support for Trump and criticize Greenfield's actions. The transcript ends abruptly.

Speaker 1, Julie Kelly, asserts that the new leadership at the DOJ and FBI may not be aware of who Jocelyn Ballantyne is, describing her as lead prosecutor who "led the team of government lawyers, DOJ lawyers, who went after the Proud Boys" and labeling her as "among the worst of the worst." Kelly references her experience covering the Proud Boys trial in 2023 and states that Ballantyne was near the top of Kelly’s list of j-six prosecutors who should be fired. Kelly recounts a scandal from the Proud Boys trial involving a spreadsheet of FBI correspondence in which agents discussed destroying evidence, surveilling, and eavesdropping on communications between Proud Boys who were in pretrial detention federal prison and their attorneys. She notes that the defense, during the trial, discovered this spreadsheet accidentally and intended to use the information as evidence. According to Kelly, the defense attempted to question an FBI agent who was a government witness and planned to present what they found in the spreadsheet. She describes that, as the defense began to present this evidence, Judge Tim Kelly—who, she says, is good friends with Jocelyn Ballantyne and had worked with her in the DC U.S. attorney’s office on cases—abruptly cut off the questioning. A day or two later, Ballantyne went into court and claimed that the communication represented classified secrets and should be withheld from the jury, a move Kelly characterizes as being aligned with Ballantyne’s actions. Kelly asserts that Judge Kelly went along with this claim to withhold the information. Kelly emphasizes that Ballantyne led the team of prosecutors against the Proud Boys, who were convicted of seditious conspiracy. She notes that Ballantyne then pursued severe sentences, including some defendants receiving life terms, such as Lindsay Attario, who Kelly says ended up with a twenty-two year prison sentence before those sentences were commuted by the president. Speaker 0 interjects multiple times with questions and expressions of disbelief, urging Julie Kelly to explain how such actions could be true and challenging the notion that Ballantyne’s conduct was inappropriate, while Kelly maintains that the described conduct and the actions taken by Ballantyne and the DOJ were part of the Proud Boys prosecutions and related cases.

The speakers frame the Burke case as systemic corruption: "This is insanity what's happening to Weanoke Burke, an upright, intelligent, kind, lover of his students, young teacher... betrayed Christ" and "they've got their 30 pieces of silver." They say the church did not stand up, and "parents... they're Judases." They describe Enoch Burke's refusal to bow to "transgenderism" and to obey principal Niamh MacShane's instruction to call a young boy "day, an abomination." The Court of Appeal reportedly recognized that "the principal's overarching complaint against Enoch Burke" and asked if "that instruction must be looked at. Was it a legitimate instruction?" They allege judge David Nolan refused to read a submission; note "not a normal court." Fines of "€225,000" and calls for Burke's return to "Mount Joy Prison" after "five hundred days." They condemn archbishop John MacDewell as a "Judas" and oppose "indoctrination center" "promotion of LGBT" in the school.

The speaker claims "they" wanted to make an example of Garrett O'Boyle and send a message, disregarding his six years of army service, including time with the 101st Airborne and selection for a special unit. According to the speaker, "they" suspended O'Boyle the day he arrived at his new job, preventing his family from accessing their belongings, to send a message. This allegedly occurred because O'Boyle reported the first major mistake of the administration as a whistleblower, specifically regarding the school board issue and the Biden administration's actions. The speaker states that the FBI investigated 25 parents reported via a snitch line but prosecuted none. O'Boyle came forward because he believed the federal snitch line was wrong. The speaker also alleges the FBI, via a memorandum from the Richmond field office, spied on Catholics who are pro-life and pro-family, placing people inside the church to spy on fellow citizens.

In January 2022, a colleague alerted Speaker 0 that there had been a doubling or tripling of baby deaths in the last year, which sparked curiosity. Speaker 1 states that “Their own government told us a medical treatment was safe, and it killed babies.” Speaker 2 says she has “lost all faith that Health Canada is looking out genuinely for the best interests of Canadians.” Speaker 3 alleges that doctors “made extra money to push vaccines” and were given a billing code to do it, and that she has “pulled all the billing codes.” Speaker 4 asserts that “They've purchased the vaccine that hasn't been approved,” distributed it to the provinces so that once it’s approved, they can “start jabbing ourselves with it” and “start jabbing pregnant mothers with it.” Speaker 3 questions the necessity of vaccinations: “Why did we have to get these vaccinations? Like, why was this something that we had to do? You go to the hospital, you expect to have a baby, and you expect to go home, and then you don't.” Speaker 0 speculates on criminal negligence, saying, “I would suspect that there was criminal negligence on part of the government and the public health officials.” Speaker 3 notes that it is “highly recommended that pregnant women get their vaccine as soon as possible.” Speaker 0 contends that a narrative was pushed to everybody, including pregnant and breastfeeding women, that the mRNA shots were safe and effective. Speaker 2 claims wiretapping, harassment, charging, and barring expert witnesses: “They had wiretapped her phone. They had harassed her. They had charged her. They didn't allow any expert witnesses to testify.” Speaker 1 accuses police of trying to cover up Canadian babies’ deaths “to the point of stopping detective Helen Greaves from testifying about it.” Speaker 4 observes that “The dominant individuals keep the subordinates in their place by constant aggression.” Speaker 5 discusses vaccination choice versus public risk, remarking, “If you don't wanna get vaccinated, that's your choice. But don't think you can get on a plane or a train besides vaccinated people and put them at risk,” and claims CBC initially “started off with CBC running a story to implicate her and to paint her with a brush that looks uncomplimentary to the public.” Speaker 6 claims Canada must shift its understanding of what the is, describing it as “a state broadcaster pushing the agenda of the Liberal government of Canada.” Speaker 4 calls this “the most significant matter affecting our children today from a health perspective,” noting that authorities are “not investigating.” Speaker 2 concludes that everything emanates outward from this case involving law enforcement, the judicial system, the pharmaceutical industry, and health agencies, “how they work together, how they censored information. It all ties together to this one case, and that's what makes it so dangerous.”

The speaker alleges a serious issue involving "auto pen pardons." They claim it was a "cash for clemency deal," where staffers exploited a "bogus legal system" to process pardon forms. The speaker believes these forms were then auto-penned, resulting in undeserving individuals being released, while someone profited from the scheme.

Detective Helen Groos faces a biased disciplinary tribunal for investigating infant deaths linked to vaccinations. Despite facing charges, evidence showed high abortion rates in vaccinated pregnancies. Media leaks and witness intimidation tainted the case. The tribunal's unfair rules and biased decisions hindered the defense. The case is seen as politically motivated to silence police autonomy. Support for Detective Groos is urged, as she fights for justice and police integrity. Prayers for her strength and resolution are requested.

They aim to harm us for disagreeing with them. Our justice system no longer prioritizes truth, but winning at all costs.

The speaker states that someone is not allowing them to speak and is seemingly unaware of rise rates in the courtroom. This person keeps asking what's going on and reiterates that the department has broad discretion and is moving to the system.

They showed my naked photos in a hearing and twisted my father's love for me into something negative. They have no shame.

The speaker questions Judge Netburn's prioritization of individual rights over political ideology. They discuss a case involving a male repeat rapist in a women's prison. The speaker criticizes Judge Netburn's decision, accusing her of prioritizing political ideology over the safety of female inmates. The speaker challenges Judge Netburn's reasoning and accuses her of being a radical judge. Judge Netburn defends her decision based on the petitioner's behavior in prison and medical needs. The speaker accuses Judge Netburn of contradicting her own report and questions her decision-making. Senator Padilla interrupts, preventing Judge Netburn from responding.

The speaker expresses their opinion that the attorney general is a fraud and accuses them of committing fraud. They believe that the case is a fraud and that it is interfering with their ability to be in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Do parents in this country want their children taught that they can change their gender? A bishop was questioned about his silence on Enoch Burke, a teacher imprisoned for 500 days for refusing to use a student's preferred pronouns. Despite being close to the prison, the bishop expressed discomfort with the manner of questioning and had no response regarding Burke's situation. He focused instead on issues of religious rights for prisoners but ignored Burke's plight. This raises concerns about the church's role in addressing such matters, especially when a representative of Christ seems indifferent to a fellow Christian's suffering. The situation is troubling, particularly for Burke's family, who feel abandoned by church leaders who should be advocating for their rights and beliefs.

A speaker named Audra accuses the board of being domestic terrorist child traffickers who allow fraud to enter the record and work with the county and CPS to unjustly remove children from their families. She asks if they have witnessed the terror of children being taken into county custody and accuses them of isolating families to enable child trafficking for profit. Evelyn states her two daughters, Malaika and Zaya, were taken due to postpartum, not abuse or neglect. She recounts an ER visit for her daughter's UTI and claims she is now being portrayed as the perpetrator. She pleads for her children's return, stating they are loved and were taken under the guise of domestic violence, despite her requests for help. Ricky Robinson, the grandfather, accuses San Diego County of conspiracy, retaliation, and child trafficking, holding the children hostage. He demands their immediate return. He claims the county is trying to adopt the children out, fabricating records and falsely accusing the family of being predators. Speakers accuse the board of torturing children and being complicit in their abuse within county custody. They believe the board seeks confidentiality to hide this abuse and will use additional funds to traffic children.