CT Democrats let concerned parents know what they really think of them in infuriating tweet

Share:

The following article contains editorial content which is the opinion of the author. 

CONNECTICUT- Let’s face facts…Democrats hate kids and they hate parents. Oh, they use children as convenient props when they’re looking to raid the wallets of the American people for their socialist programs, but at the same time, they not only support but advocate for the murder of millions of children yearly.

Not only happy with trying to destroy children, they have now also turned their attention to parents.

Time was Democrats celebrated dissent. One need only look back just over one year ago when they were over the moon with violent rioters who destroyed American cities from New York to Los Angeles and every Democrat-run city in between.

However when those who protest peacefully—and we mean really peacefully—speak out against the Democrat socialist agenda, they are pigeon-holed as violent extremists more dangerous than ISIS or al Qaeda.

As an example, look at a cartoon shared this week by Connecticut Democrats where they compared parents who love their children and are concerned about the indoctrination being foisted upon them in our public schools, to horror movie monsters and villains, according to The Blaze.

In recent months, parents have become even more aware of what their children were being taught in school, primarily after schools started remote learning in the midst of the coronavirus outbreak. And parents did not like what they were seeing.

Parents have started openly confronting school boards over matters such as critical race theory, radical transgender propaganda, and mandates for masks in classrooms despite overwhelming evidence showing they are harmful to children both physically and psychologically.

More recently, radical Attorney General Merrick Garland entered the fray when, at the behest of the National School Board Association, issued a memo in which he threatened to unleash the full force of the FBI on parents who commit the “sin” of speaking out for their children’s welfare, a right guaranteed under the First Amendment to the Constitution.

As a result of that memo, conservatives and parents across the country have accused Garland of weaponizing the federal government to suppress dissent and intimidate parents.

Garland was slammed in a congressional hearing this week where he refused to answer questions posed by Republicans, instead resorting to talking points.

There is also the issue of Garland’s family benefiting financially from the pushing of critical race theory which has been widely reported this past week.

In Connecticut, the Democratic Party showed parents exactly what they think of them, posting a vile cartoon showing deadly characters such as Michael Myers from Halloween, Jason Voorhees from Friday the 13th, Freddy Kreuger from Nightmare on Elm St., among others.

A woman asks them if they are going trick or treating, to which the Jason character replies, “Going to a school board meeting.” This folks is what the Connecticut Democratic Party thinks of parents concerned about their children’s education. This was posted on the official twitter account of the Connecticut Democratic Party.

The Connecticut Republican Party fired back on Twitter:

“Concerned CT Parents: This is what @CTDems think of you!—THEY ARE CALLING YOU MONSTERS. VOTE THEM OUT!!!!”

The cartoon was drawn by far-left liberal lunatic Nick Anderson, who also drew a recent cartoon which showed Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) being sold at an auction.

Others also slammed Connecticut Democrats. Fox News contributor Joe Concha called it “political suicide” for Democrats to “make parents the enemy,” with fellow contributor Guy Benson writing, the “contempt is real and it is deep.”

In fact, one school superintendent also spoke out against the tweet, writing that school board members themselves were “also once angry parents who spoke out for what they believed in.”

 

Connecticut Democrats are probably feeling a little put out after they were shown the door in Guilford, Connecticut, where a group of conservatives opposed to critical race theory swept to victor in a series of school board primaries.

Of course Connecticut isn’t the only place where Democrats feel parents shouldn’t have a say in what their children are taught. In Virginia, hapless Democratic gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe drew ire when he said parents should have no role in what schools teach their children, Fox News said.

Meanwhile in Washington, the feckless Garland was grilled by Republicans over a number of issues including his memorandum unleashing the FBI after parents who speak out at school board meetings. Despite the fact his memo insinuated that parents were the equivalent of “domestic terrorists,” Garland tried to deny that’s what the memo was about.

Garland told the House Judiciary Committee that he couldn’t “imagine any circumstance in which the PATRIOT Act would be used in the circumstance where they would be labeled as domestic terrorism.”

This was in response to the NSBA letter to Joe Biden in which they asked for the federal government to use the PATRIOT Act to target parents, Newsbusters said.

Garland was also grilled over the probable conflict of interest involving a company owned by his son-in-law, Panorama Education, which pushes critical race theory in thousands of schools across the country.

Critical race theory, a Marxist-based ideology has become ground zero for parents concerned about indoctrination of their children.

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) went after Garland, asking him if he was aware of the importance of impartiality of executive branch employees, to which Garland said he was “very familiar with it.”

Johnson continued to tell Garland that the ire of many parents has come about because of the curriculum his (Garland’s) “son-in-law is selling.”

Johnson reminded Garland that according to federal regulations, employees of the executive branch are “discouraged” from engaging in conduct “that’s likely to” impact  financial interests of someone related to or otherwise close to them.

“Your son-in-law—your daughter—clearly meets that definition,” Johnson said.

He then directed Garland to give a yes or no answer as to whether he got an ethics review over the apparently conflict of interest, which Garland refused to answer.

Garland said the memorandum unleashing the FBI “did not relate to the financial interests of anyone” and was “aimed at violence and threats of violence,” while claiming there was “no conflict of interest” related to investigating “violence,” KOMO reported.

Earlier in the hearing, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Judiciary Committee Chair Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) sparred over an attempt by Republicans to play a video from school board meetings showing parents confronting school board members with no violence shown.

A whiny Democrats (name unknown) objected to the video under an obscure rule that there is a “48-hour” notification window for submission to the committee for refusal; despite Jordan confirming that rule was in fact followed, Nadler the Muppet ruled the video could not be shown, BizPacReview reported.

Unfortunately with Democrats running the show, the likelihood of any type of hearings to investigate Garland’s clear misuse of the Department of Justice will go nowhere. 

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

In case you missed it, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) recently demanded Garland provide evidence to back up the claims in his memo. For more on that, we invite you to:

DIG DEEPER

WASHINGTON, DC- Republican firebrand Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) went off this week after the Biden Justice Department said they would be targeting parents who have been increasingly active in local school board meetings in the wake of increasing indoctrination of school children.

Boebert is demanding the DOJ show the data it is relying on to bolster its claim of “an increase” in “threats of violence” against local school officials. The threat to use the FBI to get involved in what should be local law enforcement issues is an unprecedented use of federal law enforcement assets.

Boebert, who has been one of the more vocal opponents of the Biden administration’s sharp turn to the far left and a member of the House Freedom Caucus wrote to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland demanding a copy of current data and “all the data from previous years that can corroborate” Garland’s claims that serve as a basis for setting the FBI after school parents, Breitbart News said.

 

Boebert 10.7.21 by Ashley Oliver

In starting the letter, Boebert said:

“I am alarmed by your decision to weaponize the Department of Justice (DOJ) against concerned parents, exercising their First Amendment rights, who dare to oppose the teaching of critical race theory, a repulsive and racist ideology, in their children’s schools,” she wrote, then asked for additional data.

Continuing, Boebert directed Garland, an unhinged radical, to “compile and provide a list of any political appointees who had a part in crafting and implementing this policy decision as well as any career staffers who made substantive policy edits to the October 4, 2021, memo.”

That latest request if fulfilled (we assume Garland will stonewall) will be interesting, based on information gathered by America First Legal, which indicated some of those “career staffers” may have included Susan Rice, domestic policy adviser for the Biden administration, as well as Kristen Clarke, assistant attorney general for civil rights at the DOJ. For more on that, we will include our Law Enforcement Today report on that below.

Boebert’s letter continued:

“The October 4th DOJ press release also states that ‘the Justice Department will also create specialized training and guidance for local school boards and school administration…on how to capture and preserve evidence of threatening conduct to aid in the investigation and prosecution of these crimes.’  

The implied ‘crime’ being expressing their frustrations about mask mandates and critical race theory which conveniently run counter to this regime’s agenda. This bureaucratic policy change was never agreed to by Congress and is no small thing. It is organizing the tremendous power of the federal government against law-abiding parents.”

Then, Boebert addressed the “elephant in the room,” namely Garland’s family connection to Panorama Education, which is heavily involved in the pushing of critical race theory in America’s classrooms. Garland’s son-in-law, Xan Tanner is the owner of Panorama, therefore Garland’s family financially benefits from the pushing of critical race theory and other “equity” programs in America’s schools.

“Also of concern, numerous media organizations have reported that your son-in-law, Xan Tanner, the owner of Panorama Education, is potentially benefiting from this new propaganda operation. PanoramaEd, a Boston-based company backed by Mark Zuckerberg received $1.8 million in “emergency” COVID funds through a contract with Fairfax County Public Schools to conduct “social and emotional learning” screening and allows them to conduct “psychometrics” on the school system’s 180,000 students.”

Boebert’s letter goes on to note that according to PanoramaEd’s website, it teaches “social and emotional learning (SEL)” and “culturally responsive training,” which she notes are “deeply rooted in teaching equity programs and critical race theory.”

“These are the exact policies and programs that are causing parents to protest at school board meetings. While your family is personally benefiting from the exact kind of propaganda these parents are protesting, you are using your immense power as Attorney General to stifle their First Amendment rights,” she wrote.

“Your actions are unconstitutional, and you should have recused yourself from this matter given the clear conflict of interest,” Boebert wrote.

She requested Garland provide her office with “a copy of your recusal list, a copy of your signed ethics pledge, and any documents submitted to the DOJ Departmental Ethics Office during your onboarding or tenure to include any conflicts of interest and communications in which you disclosed your personal and familial relationships with the DOJ by November 1, 2021.”

Boebert’s letter stems from Garland’s memo issued last week in which he directed the FBI to meet with local and state officials because “in recent months there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools.” Yet, Garland did not provide specific examples of those “threats of violence.”

Garland’s memo apparently came in response to a letter sent to the Biden administration from the National School Board’s Association in which they asked the administration to use tools such as the Patriot Act as a cudgel against parents protesting the indoctrination of their kids by the nation’s public schools.

While Garland claimed such behavior is illegal, Boebert disputed that, claiming that instead of criminal activity it was in fact parents “expressing their frustrations about mask mandates and critical race theory which conveniently run counter to this regime’s agenda.”

In a statement provided to Breitbart News, Boebert said:

“The United States Attorney General is weaponizing the DOJ to attack American parents who disagree with Critical Race Theory. Surprise, surprise, his son-in-law is in the business of spreading CRT. This is wrong. This is corrupt. I’m demanding answers.”

The most “transparent and ethical administration in American history?” You decide.

For our prior report on the circumstances surrounding Garland’s memo, we invite you to:

DIG DEEPER

We recently reported about the Biden administration letting the FBI loose on parents who show up at school board meetings to express concern about what is being taught to their children in schools, a clear violation of these parents’ First Amendment rights.

The timing of Attorney General Merrick Garland’s decision to use the full force of the federal government to attack those rights was extremely suspicious, given its close proximity to a request by a partisan organization for the government to do exactly that.

On Thursday, America First Legal drafted a letter to Michael Horowitz, DOJ Inspector General seeking an IG investigation into the circumstances surrounding Garland’s dictate.

As the letter notes, the Supreme Court has time after time recognized that parents have a fundamental liberty interest, as well as a constitutional right do “control and direct the education of their own children.”

Further the letter states that solely based on those fundamental rights, parents have the right to speak to their elected leaders about public school policies and practices, including but not limited to indoctrination via critical race theory, anti-family and anti-religious gender ideology and mask mandates and therefore “are entitled to the most robust federal protection.”

In addressing Garland’s draconian and unprecedented letter of October 4, 2021, accuses the Department of Justice of “committing federal law enforcement resources to inappropriately prevent parents from exercising constitutionally-protected rights and privileges.”

The letter then goes on to address a number of facts germane to their complaint:

  • Parents have protested policies implemented by public schools including “teaching or indoctrination of K-12 students in certain principles of Critical Race Theory and gender-related ideology.
  • They note that a number of Biden-supporting “stakeholders,” including the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, conspired to “oppress, threaten and intimidate parents to chill and prevent them from exercising the rights of privileges secured by the Constitution,” noting that for the most part these efforts had been ineffective.
  • “In early September, Biden Administration stakeholders held discussions regarding avenues for potential federal action against parents, with a key Biden Domestic Policy Council official (Jane Doe #1) and White House staff (John Doe #1). Stakeholders also held discussions with senior department officials, including at least one political appointee in the department’s Civil Rights Division (Jane Doe #2). Jane Doe #1, John Doe #1, and others in the White House separately expressed concern regarding the potential partisan political impact of parent mobilization and organization around school issues in the upcoming midterm elections.” [emphasis added]
  • AFL next alleged that “at the express direction of or with the express consent of Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, and other Biden Administration officials” set about developing a scheme to use a letter “from an outside group (‘not the usual suspects’) as pretext for federal action to chill, deter, and discourage parents from exercising their constitutional rights and privileges.”
  • The legal organization next alleges “upon information and belief” that in approximately the middle of September, the neo-Marxists in the White House began working on what would eventually morph into Garland’s memorandum. While staff members (assumed to be Department of Justice) expressed concerns about both the absence of federal law enforcement “nexus and authority,” as well as “the constitutionally protected nature of parent protests” those concerns were brushed aside by Jane Doe #2, who noted “this was a White House priority, and a deliverable would be created.”
  • On September 29, 2021, the National School Boards Association, citing the Patriot Act published a letter in which they demanded “federal action against parents citing authorities” which included the Patriot Act, which was intended to investigate terror threats from foreign adversaries.The letter notes that among other alleged “violations” committed by parents which the NSBA claims mandates federal intervention included, “inter alia,’posting watchlists against school boards and spreading misinformation (sic) that boards are adopting critical race theory curriculum and working to maintain online learning by haphazardly attributing it to COVID-19.’”

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

AFL noted that it wasn’t definitively known “whether and to what extent drafts of this letter were shared with Biden Administration officials, including Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2, and whether changes were suggested or made by them” prior to the release date of Garland’s statement.

  • Garland’s Memorandum was publicized on October 4. With only five days between the September 29 letter of the NSBA and Garland’s letter, it is suggested that the whole thing was “pre-coordinated and the September 29 but pretext, or that the normal clearance process and standard order both within the department (including legal sufficiency review by the Office of Legal Counsel, the Civil Rights Division, the Criminal Division, the Office of Legal Policy, and other components), and between the department and the White House Counsel’s Office and the Office of Management and Budget, were bypassed or corrupted.
  • “On October 5, there was a follow up call involving, inter alia, the White House Counsel’s Office, Jane Doe #2, and many other Biden Administration political and career officials. The briefing included how to talk about ‘equity’ initiatives, to avoid liability for violating discrimination laws, and, critically, to hide ‘equity’ measures, initiatives, and action from Freedom of Information Act disclosure.” In other words, AFL alleges, it appears all of this was done in order to “evade public scrutiny of these Biden Administration activities.”

AFL closed and asked Horowitz to investigate whether or not Garland’s threatening memo “was formulated and issued based on improper considerations.”

“At this point, the dangers inherent in the undue politicization of the department’s criminal and civil law enforcement authorities, and in the corruption of the department’s standard order and process, should be evident.”

Stay tuned to this one, folks. While we cannot be 100% certain who Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 are, it is “reasonable” to assume that Jane Doe #1, a “key Biden Domestic Policy Council official” is Susan Rice, and Jane Doe #2, a “political appointee in the department’s [DOJ] Civil Rights Division,” is Kristen Clarke, who heads the Civil Rights Division in the DOJ. Finally, John Doe #1, merely identified as only “White House staff,” could be Biden’s White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain.

As noted, we do not know the specific identities of these officials but if you do the math, it makes sense exactly who these people are.

If indeed this whole scheme was hatched inside the White House and the plan was to “use a letter from an outside group (‘not the usual suspects’) as a pretext for federal action,” the way this whole thing shook out, this is a bombshell of epic proportions. 

That is backed up by a letter from the previously unknown National School Board Association instead of the National Education Association or the American Federation of Teachers. That being used as a pretext, shows that the White House conspired to use the Department of Justice to attack parents and shut them up.

If this happened under a Republican, the attorney general would have already been dismissed and the impeachment papers for the president drawn up. We are living in very scary times.

In case you missed our report on the original letter from the National School Board Association, we invite you to:

DIG DEEPER

WASHINGTON, DC –  The National School Boards Association is asking for assistance from federal law enforcement to protect teachers and community members from the “immediate threat” of parents, stating that schools across the nation are facing threats of violence over mask mandates and Critical Race Theory.

In a letter sent Thursday to President Biden,  the National School Boards Association (NSBA) said school board members, officials and students across the nation are facing an increased amount of malice, violence and threats that amount to “a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”

The six-page letter sent by NSBA and signed by Viola Garcia and Chip Slaven, the group’s president and interim executive director, said:

“America’s public schools and its education leaders are under an immediate threat. The National School Boards Association (NSBA) respectfully asks for federal law enforcement and other assistance to deal with the growing number of threats of violence and acts of intimidation occurring across the nation.

“The National School Boards Association respectfully asks for federal law enforcement and other assistance to deal with the growing number of threats of violence and acts of intimidation occurring across the nation.”

The Association said schools across the nation struggling to cope with the pandemic recovery have been targeted by threats and attacks because of mandates requiring children to wear masks and arguments over Critical Race Theory (CRT).

CRT is an academic framework centered on the idea that racism is systemic, and not just demonstrated by individual people with prejudices.

The theory holds that racial inequality is woven into legal systems and negatively affects people of color in their schools, doctors’ offices, the criminal justice system and countless other parts of life, as defined by The Washington Post.

In the letter, the NSBA wrote:

“NSBA believes immediate assistance is required to protect our students, school board members, and educators who are susceptible to acts of violence affecting interstate commerce because of threats to their districts, families, and personal safety.

As our school boards continue coronavirus recovery operations within their respective districts, they are also persevering against other challenges that could impede this progress in a number of communities.

“Coupled with attacks against school board members and educators for approving policies for masks to protect the health and safety of students and school employees, many public school officials are also facing physical threats because of propaganda  purporting the false inclusion of critical race theory within classroom instruction and curricula.

This propaganda continues despite the fact that critical race theory is not taught in public schools and remains a complex law school and graduate school subject well beyond the scope of a K-12 class.”

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity
The claim that CRT is only taught in advanced college settings is misleading. The United States Conference of Mayors adopted a resolution during its annual convention last month that pledged to support CRT teaching in K-12 schools. The resolution stated:

“NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the nation’s mayors support the implementation of CRT in the public education curriculum to help engage our youth in programming that reflects an accurate, complete account of BIPOC history.”

The NSBA also thanks President Biden for his “leadership to end the proliferation of COVID-19 in our communities and our school districts,” while requesting federal law enforcement to protect school officials who enact the policies of the administration from parents involving opposition to the mandates and policies:

“Now, we ask that the federal government investigate, intercept, and prevent the current threats and acts of violence against our public school officials through existing statutes, executive authority, interagency and intergovernmental task forces, and other extraordinary measures to ensure the safety of our children and educators, to protect interstate commerce, and to preserve public school infrastructure and campuses.”

The Association is asking for federal protection as they try to enforce mask mandates, which have been a flashpoint at school board meetings.

In addition, parents and community members have flooded school board meetings across the country expressing anger and resentment over CRT being included in K-12 school curriculum. In the letter, the NSBA cited several incidents across the nation regarding mailed threats and threats on social media.

On behalf of 90,000 school board members in the United States who govern 14,000 public school districts across the nation, the NSBA said it is requesting the U.S. Justice and Homeland Security departments, along with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and U.S. Secret Service, to track and investigate risks to students, educators, board members and campuses:

“NSBA specifically solicits the expertise and resources of the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Secret Service, and its National Threat Assessment Center regarding the level of risk to public schoolchildren, educators, board members, and facilities/campuses.”

The NSBA also asked President Biden to issue an executive order  to protect school officials and school board members from parents:

“NSBA requests that such review examine appropriate enforceable actions against these crimes and acts of violence under the Gun-Free School Zones Act, the PATRIOT Act in regards to domestic terrorism, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, the Violent Interference with Federally Protected Rights statute, the Conspiracy Against Rights statute, an Executive Order to enforce all applicable federal laws for the protection of students and public school district personnel, and any related measure.

“As the threats grow and news of extremist hate organizations showing up at school board meetings is being reported, this is a critical time for a proactive approach to deal with this difficult issue.”

When asked about the letter during a White House press conference on Thursday, Press Secretary Jen Psaki said the administration takes school security seriously, but local law enforcement is already protecting schools:

“Obviously, there are going to be different law enforcement authorities that will be related to each community and — where this is happening, so we’d certainly refer you to them about any specific threats. And we’d encourage individuals to report any threats they face to local and state law enforcement agencies. And we’re continuing to explore what more can be done from across the administration.

“But again, a lot of this will be local law enforcement and how they can help ensure these school board members feel protected.”

However, the U.S. Attorney General issued a memorandum on Monday targeting dissent aimed at school boards by parents and other community members. In the startling memorandum, Attorney General Merrick Garland ordered:

“In recent months, there has been a disturbing spoke in harassment. intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools… Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation’s core values…

“The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate.”


Editor note: In 2020, we saw a nationwide push to “defund the police”.  While we all stood here shaking our heads wondering if these people were serious… they cut billions of dollars in funding for police officers.  And as a result, crime has skyrocketed – all while the same politicians who said “you don’t need guns, the government will protect you” continued their attacks on both our police officers and our Second Amendment rights.

And that’s exactly why we’re launching this national crowdfunding campaign as part of our efforts to help “re-fund the police”.

For those looking for a quick link to get in the fight and support the cause, click here.


Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
 
Facebook Follow First
Share:
Related Posts