TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

I'm running out of time. You seem to be pro-vaccine but have started a group, Children's Health Defense, which sells baby clothing with anti-vaccine messages, like "unvaxxed, unafraid" for $26. Can you assure us that your organization will stop selling these products? I have no control over that organization; I resigned from the board. You founded it just a few months ago. Are you supportive of these onesies? I support vaccines and want good science. Will you tell your organization to stop selling those items?

And y'all living. She won't let us get by, ma'am. What is wrong with you? I would hate to be your stepmom. Told you. No wonder she's back. I've asked you, please. You know what? You won't do all the kids. Need to be with no counsel. Because I

Adam Gillette from Accuracy Media confronts Tamara Nowitzky about DEI work at the university, alleging that the department was still engaging in DEI in defiance of state law and that only wording had been changed. Gillette asks if this is true. Nowitzky repeatedly responds, I can't comment, to questions about compliance with the law and whether the department has subverted it by altering language. Gillette presses further, presenting a video in which Nowitzky allegedly said she had to change the words because people are dumb. He asks if she said that, and whether the department is complying with the law or subverting it by changing words. Nowitzky again declines to comment, saying, I can't comment, and does not provide direct answers to whether there were thoughts or criticisms about taxpayers who oppose funding DEI, potential loss of state or federal funds, or a message to legislators who passed a law banning DEI at universities. Gillette notes that Nowitzky had commented extensively in the video, and asks for clarification about whether she misspoke or if the statements are accurate. Nowitzky responds with fragmented phrases: “I can't come,” followed by partial words from Gillette’s prompt, and then, “Most of your progressive. Of your faculty faculty,” seemingly offering insufficient, disconnected remarks. Gillette continues to seek any thoughts on whether a predominantly progressive faculty fosters a welcoming environment for students who don’t share those values, but Nowitzky again says, I can't comment. Gillette indicates that investigators spoke with several staffers and found that the psychology department and other departments had changed wording but were continuing the same DEI work. He asks Nowitzky for comments on these findings. Nowitzky states that the university is “fully compliant with House Bill four and all federal laws and policies and procedures with respect to that issue.” He acknowledges this while also noting concerns raised by Tamara Nowitzky in the psychology department about the claim that they “just changed the words because people are dumb.” In closing, Gillette mentions the recorded comments and complaints alleging that the university continued DEI work in defiance of state law, despite the purported word changes. The exchange ends with Nowitzky reiterating the university’s position of compliance and presenting the conflicting claim from a department member about altering wording, rather than altering the underlying DEI work.

Parents seek guidance from health leaders regarding vaccine decisions. I want to address a serious matter about character. You were accused of sexual harassment and assault by Eliza Cooney, who was initially hired as a babysitter. When confronted, you mentioned you weren't a "church boy" and acknowledged having "skeletons in your closet." You later texted Ms. Cooney an apology but claimed no memory of her account. Can you respond to these accusations in front of this committee? Did you make unwanted sexual advances toward Ms. Cooney? No, I did not, and that story has been debunked. Why did you apologize then? I apologized for something else. That’s not my understanding. You can read the text she published; it was not for that.

Have you ruled out a pardon for yourself or family members? Yes, I have. What would I pardon myself for? I have no intention of pardoning myself because I didn't do anything wrong. Could you comment on Meta's decision to...

Did you coach a parent on how their biological son could spend the night in hotel rooms with girls during field trips? No, that did not happen.

My district is really suffering under the pressure of the border crisis. Why won't you address it? Get out of my way. Get your hands off me. What is wrong with you? Are you talking to the Biden administration about fixing the border? Get off of me. You asked her to touch me on the stairs. I did not touch you, I have it on video.

Nick Shirley initiates the exchange by stating his name and pressing for permission to record, noting that the other person “doesn’t have any permission to record me, period.” He proposes, “Can we talk outside? Permission to record.” The other person counters that there is no permission from either party, saying, “She doesn’t either have she doesn’t have permission or … for me. You cannot stop people on the street and question them.” Nick states, “We can ask them,” and the other person repeats, “Have any permission.” The dialogue shifts to a concern about the whereabouts of children. Nick asks, “Where are the children?” The other person responds, “I will sue you. You don't have any permission. We have nothing to do with this. Okay, sir? And are there … So leave.” Nick persists, asking again, “Are there children here?” The other person repeats, “Please leave.” Nick inquires, “Where are the children?” and the other person insists, “Leave. Leave.” Nick questions, “We’re wondering what's happening. Tell us what's happening here then.” The other person commands, “I said leave.” Nick clarifies, “We're wondering what's happening.” The other person states, “We are not a childcare. We have nothing to do with it. We're the common people walking. Yes. We're not … we're not accusing you. We're asking where the children are at.” The other person repeats, “Don't ask me anything.” Nick emphasizes his intent: “We're not accusing you. We're asking the daycare centers.” The other person refuses to answer, “I am not gonna answer. You have.” Nick presses, “Where are the children … who do you work for? My name is Nick Shirley.” The other person asks, “Who do you work for?” Nick responds, “I work for myself. Nick Shirley.” The other person inquires, “Okay what are you recording?” Nick answers, “We're wondering where are the children $2,660,000 for the Minnesota child care center. You're not talking to the right person. Are there children that come here?” The other person demands, “Answer the question. Are there children?” Nick states, “There's no children inside the building.”

What’s your name? What are you doing here? I’m texting a friend. Who are you texting? A 15-year-old. No, I’m not. Yes, you are. If you don’t stand here and talk, I’ll call the police. Let me see your phone. You’re here to meet a 15-year-old. Where are you going? You can’t just leave.

What's happening at this hotel? Reports indicate that individuals have been filming children at a nearby primary school. Don't touch me; I'm just trying to understand the situation. You're pushing me away, but I need answers. This is unacceptable. Illegals have been filming children here. Why are you preventing me from getting information? It's ironic that you're calling the police on me when there are serious allegations about people filming children just up the road. You have no evidence? There is evidence. Where is it? The community deserves answers about what's going on with the children.

You're a poll worker, right? Why did you say Trump is a racist while people were walking in? I'm not a poll worker. But you and others were saying it. How can you tell me that? Whatever. I'll be reporting this to your supervisor.

You're a poll worker, right? What’s the issue? You mentioned Trump is a racist while people were entering. No, I'm not a poll worker. But you all were saying it. No, you were. How can you say that? Whatever. I'll report this to your supervisor.

Byron Thedford? That's me. Oh, we received a report that you were pushing DEI in defiance of the state law and seeking loopholes to get around the law. Is that true? It's not. No, sir. You've never talked about pushing loopholes to get around the law? I haven't. No. What about this video?

I've been hearing about the prosecution and vilification of parents, and as a father myself, I wanted to understand what was happening. After investigating, I reviewed Attorney General Merrick Garland's memo, which addresses a disturbing increase in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, teachers, board members, and staff. It's important to note that the words "mother," "father," or even "parent" do not appear in this memo. The idea that there's some widespread prosecution of parents is completely unfounded and fabricated. I'll submit the memo for the record.

Hey, I'm Adam Gillette with Accuracy and Media. I heard you were coaching a parent on how to break laws regarding biological boys and girls in sports. Is that true? No response. Is there someone else we should talk to? You can check with security downstairs. We're fine waiting here to possibly speak with her further. No? Okay, great.

Just because you won doesn’t mean we forget your actions. If you want to confront me, reach out. It's difficult to step away from teaching, as it’s my lifelong passion. I’ve dedicated myself to my students and their families, and I’ve always aimed to support them. I regret that they had to witness a different side of me. I’m truly sorry for how this situation has unfolded. I always wanted to be a positive influence for your kids. This began when a video I posted on Snapchat went viral, prompting an investigation by the school and police. However, the police have informed me that they do not plan to charge me.

Our agenda being unchecked may corrupt your kids. Funny, but you're right.

I've been hearing about the prosecution and vilification of parents, and as a father who sent his kids to public school, I wanted to understand what was happening. After looking into it, the memo from Attorney General Merrick Garland addresses a disturbing increase in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, teachers, board members, and staff. However, the words "mother," "father," or even "parent" are not even mentioned. The propaganda suggesting prosecution of parents appears to be completely unfounded. I will submit this memo for the record.

I'm not going to comment. I don't know any of you or what this is about.

Where's the leader? Who's in charge here? You’re treating us like criminals. This is unacceptable. That’s my father inside, and my wife is in there too. Can you please back up? I’m already backed up; I haven’t moved.

I will not comment on allegations regarding my family's business dealings. The claims are false. I did not interact with their business associates. There are many questions.

I've been hearing about the supposed prosecution and vilification of parents, especially mothers and fathers, for five years now and as a father myself, I wanted to investigate the claims. So, I looked at Attorney General Merrick Garland's memo, which claims there's been a disturbing increase in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, teachers, board members, and staff. Notably, the words "mother," "father," or even "parent" are not present. The propaganda about the prosecution of parents appears to be unfounded, seemingly made up out of thin air. I will submit this memo for the record.

Hey Nick, can you come here? Let's talk privately, away from everyone. What do you do here during the day? Just hang out with friends? What are your hobbies? You play video games, huh? What kind of games? Wrestling? Who's your favorite wrestler? We're here because of your online posts. Facebook and TikTok blocked you, right? Unfortunately, you're coming with us. I know you don't want to go, but we have to take you to see a doctor. You can't keep doing what you were doing. I'm sorry, but it's necessary. Please, promise me you won't do it again. I want to believe you.

Please forgive me. I'm not good at this. I can't do what you're asking. No, please. I didn't mean to be here. I can't face these charges. I'm not involved in this. Please, I'm not your child today. I’m not going through this. I’m here, but I don’t want to deal with the drama. I’m finished with this situation. I can’t handle it anymore. Please, I’m not doing this. I’m done. No, please. I can’t go through this again. I’m not involved. Please, just stop.

Speaker 0 says: "Back off. You don't have to respond to them. Just don't say anything. What the fuck is this?"