Monday, October 26, 2015



Low income families evicted to make way 
for asylum seekers
for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Migrants are being housed at a 4 star hotel in Germany while Germans themselves are being told to leave their homes to make way for asylum seekers.
The sheer number of asylum seekers making their way to the Saxony-Anhalt region has resulted in an accommodation crisis, with the Maritim Hotel in Halle now being used to house at least 80 migrants who began arriving last week.
The 4 star hotel boasts an indoor swimming pool, sauna and fitness room and is located just a 10 minute walk from Halle’s historic old town.
According to one report, the relief agency behind the relocation of the migrants is concerned that some of the refugees are simply leaving the hotel and not returning, while others are complaining about the lack of activities, with games evenings and film screenings not being sufficient to keep them entertained.
Staff members are also said to be annoyed at the fact that the migrants are constantly breaking hotel rules. The refugees are not subjected to passport checks until they arrive at the hotel. Taxpayers are footing the bill for a permanent presence of ten police cars and 30 officers.
With more migrants expected to arrive, the Maritim’s page confirms that the hotel isn’t taking any reservations at the moment. While authorities assert that the situation is only temporary, others speculate that the hotel could become a permanent migrant center, with numerous staff members who have worked there for 25 years losing their jobs.
While the migrants are enjoying all the comforts of a 4 star hotel, low income Germans are being ordered to leave their homes. As the Telegraph reported, Germans are beginning to receive notices of eviction to make way for asylum seekers.
As we reported last week, a regional governor told residents of a municipality in Germany that if they didn’t embrace the arrival of hundreds of new migrants, they should leave.

Germany: Migrants not fleeing danger "must leave our country" - Merkel
Published on Sep 4, 2015
German Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke about the refugee crisis effecting Germany during a visit to Essen, Friday, to support the mayoral candidate for the Christian Democrat Union Party (CDU/CSU) Thomas Kufan.

Speaking at the city's Burgplatz square, Merkel stated that "those who are really fleeing from war, necessesity, oppression and violence can remain permamently with us," adding that "those that can not prove that they are here for these reasons, we must say that you must leave our country."


Swedish Church Removes Crosses To Make Muslim Migrants Feel Welcome


Collapse: Sweden Raped And Robbed By Immigrants
Published on Oct 21, 2015
Once dubbed the “Great Humanitarian Power” by its ex-prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt
Sweden is on the edge of a brutal collapse due to a wave of entitled immigrants raping Sweden’s women at a rate of53.2% and bleeding the economy of the country dry.

Sweden’s third largest city, Malmö, experienced ethnic violence between groups of immigrants. The gangs, described as “youths” by the Swedish media, used guns, bombs and hand grenades to mark their turf.

In August the Swedish Migration Board, Migrationsverket, recorded almost as many reports of threats and violence in asylum accommodation as throughout the whole of 2014, according to the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter.
“In Sweden, which does not usually report the nationality of rapists, a just released study by Swedish Police revealed that Muslim men, who constitute only 2 percent of the population are responsible for 77.6 percent of rapes, giving once peaceful Sweden the highest rape rate in Europe and the second highest in the world, next to South Africa.”

Following the arson attacks, the government decide to keep the location of refugee centers secret. Immigrants are being housed in former royal mansions and Sweden is building housing for the chaotic violent army taking over and raping their own country into collapse.

Muslim Migrants Turn Sweden Into
Rape Capitol of Europe
Published on Oct 26, 2015
David Knight breaks down how the hordes of "immigrants" are really nothing short of an invading army under the control of the New World Order and are being used to collapse and destroy the world's economy and how they have turned the once peaceful country of Sweden into the rape capitol of Europe and almost the world.



SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Washington (CNN) The Justice Department notified members of Congress on Friday that it is closing its two-year investigation into whether the IRS improperly targeted the tea party and other conservative groups.
There will be no charges against former IRS official Lois Lerner or anyone else at the agency, the Justice Department said in a letter.
The probe found “substantial evidence of mismanagement, poor judgment and institutional inertia leading to the belief by many tax-exempt applicants that the IRS targeted them based on their political viewpoints. But poor management is not a crime,” Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik said in the letter.
The IRS scandal exploded in May 2013 when Lerner answered a planted question at an American Bar Association event and apologized for inappropriately scrutinizing some groups applying for a tax exemption. Her response fueled a full-on scandal within hours that shook the Obama administration. Congressional hearings were held within weeks and the interim leader of the IRS was forced from office.
The IRS mishandled the processing of tax-exempt applications in a manner that disproportionately impacted applicants affiliated with the tea party and similar groups, leaving the appearance that the IRS’s conduct was motivated by political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate motives.
IRS probed for ‘potential criminal activity’ 01:06
The IRS, which has a broad mandate ranging from tax collection to the implementation of key Obamacare provisions, has struggled to recover from the scandal. Obama nominated John Koskinen, a well-known turnaround manager, to run the agency.
Kadzik found “no evidence” to support a criminal prosecution.
“We found no evidence that any IRS official acted based on political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate motives that would support a criminal prosecution,” Kadzik said. “We also found no evidence that any official involved in the handling of tax-exempt applications or IRS leadership attempted to obstruct justice. Based on the evidence developed in this investigation and the recommendation of experienced career prosecutors and supervising attorneys at the department, we are closing our investigation and will not seek any criminal charges.”
Democrats welcomed the announcement.
“Today, the Justice Department confirmed the same conclusions we had years ago,” Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said in a statement. “Over the past five years, Republicans in the House of Representatives have squandered literally tens of millions of dollars going down all kinds of investigative rabbit holes — IRS, Planned Parenthood, Benghazi — with absolutely no evidence of illegal activity.”
But former House Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa, R-California, said the DOJ’s decision gives the impression that “government officials are above the law.”
“The Justice Department’s decision to close the IRS targeting investigation without a single charge or prosecution is a low point of accountability in an administration that is better known for punishing whistleblowers than the abuse and misconduct they expose,” Issa said in a statement. “After stating that their investigation confirms that tea party and conservative groups were improperly targeted, they dismiss it merely as a byproduct of gross mismanagement and incompetence — ignoring volumes of evidence in the public record and efforts to obstruct legitimate inquires.”
And Rep. Paul Ryan, the chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means committee and the likely successor to outgoing House Speaker John Boehner, called the DOJ’s announcement “predictable” and said his committee will continue its investigation into the IRS’s actions.
“Through these investigations we have uncovered serious and unprecedented actions taken by the most senior IRS official in charge of the non-profit unit, Lois Lerner, to deprive conservative organizations of their constitutional rights,” Ryan said in a statement. “Despite the DOJ closing its investigation, the Ways and Means Committee will continue to find answers and hold the IRS accountable for its actions.”

Lois Lerner will not face charges in DOJ investigation

Justice Department Declares Lois Lerner Innocent in IRS Targeting Scandal

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research 

On Friday, in a letter to the chairman and the ranking member of the House Committee on the Judiciary, Peter Kadzik, the assistant attorney general of the Justice Department, let Lois Lerner (shown) off the hook:
We took special care to evaluate whether Ms. Lerner had criminal culpability.
The need for scrutiny of Ms. Lerner in particular was heightened by the discovery and publication of emails from her official IRS account that expressed her personal political views and, in one case, hostility towards conservative radio personalities.
We therefore specifically considered whether Ms. Lerner’s personal political views influenced her decisions, leadership, action, or failure to take action with respect to tax-exempt applications, or any other matter.
We found no such evidence.
Lerner, and others, were guilty of all manner of malfeasance, delays, obfuscation, stalling, dithering, and borderline obstruction, according to Kadzik, but nothing his department can prosecute her for. There were “mistakes” and “ill-advised selection criteria” used in targeting specific conservative groups seeking tax exemption, along with “delays” and “oversight and leadership lapses by senior managers and senior executive officials in Washington, D.C.” There was “substantial evidence of mismanagement, poor judgment and institutional inertia,” but nothing, according to Kadzik, warranting criminal prosecution. After all, wrote Kadzik, “poor management is not a crime.”
Invoking claims of plausible deniability, Kadzik blamed the targeting on “IRS employees’ failure to give adequate attention to the applications at issue … caused by competing demands on their time and an unwillingness to be held accountable for difficult decisions over sensitive matters,” adding: “We did not uncover any evidence that any of these employees were motivated by intentional viewpoint discrimination.”
This is called the “Washington two-step” — a whitewash of the first order — which adroitly sidestepped issues such as Lerner’s claim of innocence before the investigating committee and then pleading the Fifth Amendment for all those alleged charges she claimed she was innocent of. Little was mentioned of the convenient crash of her computer server, and less of the backup tapes that were destroyed before they could come to light under a subpoena from the committee.
The Justice Department spent two and a half years in its investigation, it said, interviewing more than 100 IRS employees and reading more than one million pages of documents. And yet it could not provide a scintilla of evidence showing a deliberate vendetta by the IRS against conservative groups springing up following attacks on precious freedoms by the Obama administration. Representative Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), poised to become speaker of the house, called the conclusion by the DOJ “deeply disappointing,” saying that “the American people deserve better than this” and adding that “the Ways and Means Committee will continue to find answers and hold the IRS accountable for its actions.”
Mark Meckler, a Tea Party leader and president of Citizens for Self-Governance, which sued the IRS over the delays, called the conclusion “a whitewash and miscarriage of justice at the highest levels of law enforcement.”
Nothing was said in Kadzik’s letter about Lerner’s participation in the Washington two-step: her deliberately planting a question at a meeting of the American Bar Association in May 2013, giving her a chance to apologize for the mounting rage over targeting, and blaming the festering incident on “front line people” in the IRS’s Cincinnati office. Evidence surfaced later, however, that Lerner knew about the targeting as far back as June 2011.
Nothing was said about her being placed on administrative leave in June 2013, nor her hasty retirement from the IRS in September. Nor was anything said about her Contempt of Congress citation in May 2014, following her Fifth Amendment pleading.
Nothing was said about the “BOLO” list — the “Be On the Look Out” list — of conservative groups to be targeted for special scrutiny, referencing such words as “Tea Party, “Patriots,” and “9/12 Project” to draw attention to, and delay of, applications from these groups for tax exempt status.
Nothing was said about the highly intrusive questions the IRS demanded of conservative groups, some of which were impossible to answer, and others of which were highly offensive. Documentation demands included “any contracts or training material” the groups might have exchanged with the Koch foundations, what books its members were reading, what they had posted on social networking websites, names of donors and how much contributed, and whether or not they were considering running for public office.
The Coalition for Life of Iowa, for example, was asked to “explain how all of your activities, including the prayer meetings outside of Planned Parenthood offices, are considered educational.… Please explain in detail the activities at these prayer meetings.… Please provide the percentage of time your group spends on prayer groups as compared with other activities of [your] organization.”
Nothing was said by Kadzik about the report from the inspector general released in May 2013, which concluded:
The IRS used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names or policy positions instead of indications of potential political campaign intervention.
Ineffective management: 1) allowed inappropriate criteria to be developed and stay in place for more than 18 months, 2) resulted in substantial delays in processing certain applications, and 3) allowed unnecessary information requests to be issued.
Nor was anything said about the arrogance of IRS employees, their defiance of their supervisors, and their insensitivity to the impropriety of their behaviors uncovered by the inspector general.
Questions abound. When Speaker of the House John Boehner learned of the IG’s report, he said: “My question isn’t about who’s going to resign. My question is who’s going to jail over this scandal?” Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) said: “We should not only fire the head of the IRS … but we’ve got to go down the line and find every single person who had anything to do with this and make sure that they are removed from the IRS and the word goes out that this is unacceptable.”
Only a few answers have trickled in. Aside from Lerner’s retirement, Steven Miller, acting commissioner of the IRS, resigned in May 2013, while Joseph Grant, commissioner of the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division, retired in June 2013. No one has been fired, and now, thanks to the extensive whitewash by the Justice Department, no one will be charged with criminal misconduct.
Other questions remain, such as how well does the system designed by the Founders to pit one interest group against another — the system of checks and balances — work when each competing branch of government has been taken over by groups and interests that are inimical to freedom?
It’s safe to say that, based upon Kadzik’s letter, future targeting of dissident groups can now be engaged in without concern about or worry over sanctions, discipline, or jail time. The Department of Justice has now, with its letter, given carte blanche to any government agency, including the IRS, to “go after” any group perceived to threaten the establishment, without fear of reprisal. They’ve been given a green light.


Court Ruling Paves Way For Mass Confiscation of Firearms in America


in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

(INTELLIHUB) — In a ruling that directly paves the way for mass confiscation of firearms in America, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in a much-anticipated decision, has upheld the constitutionality of the New York SAFE Act of 2013.
Shockingly, the court ruled that nearly all of the most drastic gun control law in the history of the United States did not violate the Second Amendment and is therefore constitutional.
That’s right, a law passed in the wake of Sandy Hook that included and paved the way for confiscation of millions of legally purchased firearms has been ruled “constitutional” with proponents already calling for a similar law to be enacted at the federal level.
As an article published by the American Thinker noted, “If the SAFE Act is upheld by the Supreme Court, nothing prevents Congress from summarily outlawing tens of millions of firearms overnight. Once those firearms become contraband, the government may confiscate and destroy them without compensating the owner (just as the government confiscates and destroys illegal drugs).
“The Second Circuit’s decision leaves the Second Amendment in its gravest peril ever.  Second Amendment rights are now hanging by a one-vote margin in the same Supreme Court that upheld Obamacare and declared a national right to gay marriage.
Constitutional conservatives and Second Amendment supporters ought to be terrified over the prospect of Justice Scalia having a heart attack during a Hillary Clinton presidency.” (and as we know Clinton is calling for mass confiscation herself)


In the weeks since the most recent mass shooting in the country, literally dozens of mainstream publications have promoted Australia as the country to look towards when considering new gun control laws in America.
“Despite the fact that for years gun control groups and anti-gun liberals have claimed that they only want “common sense” gun control, news outlets such as Salon and Slate are once again openly praising Australia’s controversial 1996 gun control law, a law that included a mandatory gun buy back program under the threat of government force.
After the Oregon school shooting, highly trafficked liberal news outlet Slate republished an article praising Australia’s gun control law that was originally released in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre.
In the weeks since the recent shooting the article has become the top read report on the site as well as linked by dozens of other liberal news outlets. (emphasis mine)
On April 28, 1996, a gunman opened fire on tourists in a seaside resort in Port Arthur, Tasmania. By the time he was finished, he had killed 35 people and wounded 23 more. It was the worst mass murder in Australia’s history.
Twelve days later, Australia’s government did something remarkable. Led by newly elected conservative Prime Minister John Howard, it announced a bipartisan deal with state and local governments to enact sweeping gun-control measures. A decade and a half hence, the results of these policy changes are clear: They worked really, really well.
At the heart of the push was a massive buyback of more than 600,000 semi-automatic shotguns and rifles, or about one-fifth of all firearms in circulation in Australia.
The country’s new gun laws prohibited private sales, required that all weapons be individually registered to their owners, and required that gun buyers present a “genuine reason” for needing each weapon at the time of the purchase. (Self-defense did not count.) In the wake of the tragedy, polls showed public support for these measures at upwards of 90 percent.
Like most other articles praising Australia’s gun laws, the author of the Slate article completely leaves out the fact that the buyback program was mandatory which means that anyone that refused to go along with the program was subject to government raids and or violence.”


Another recent article published in the mainstream press, this time by CNN, dreamed of disarming all Americans whiling calling for banning all guns “once and for all”.
The article, written by liberal poet and Middlebury College professor Jay Parini, was a perfect example of how on one hand gun control advocates and their media allies tell the public that they only want “common sense” reform while on the other they are pushing for a full-scale ban.
Parini gets to the crux of his and the many who share his views on the lefts agenda which is the confiscation of millions of legally owned firearms under the threat of government attack and subsequent outlawing of all handguns and rifles.
Let me dream for a moment: I would much prefer to live in a country where only hunters who pass appropriately strict tests for mental competence and a knowledge of gun safety can still acquire rifles that are appropriate for hunting.
Handguns and assault rifles would be banned, period.
Banned. Period. There you have it folks, CNN letting a hard left authoritarian use their platform to “dream” about disarming America. It gets worse.
So let’s get rid of guns in this country, once and for all, making it a felony to possess a handgun or assault rifle. Over a period of years, illegal guns will gradually disappear. Guns don’t kill people, as they say.
People who acquire guns — legally or illegally — do. And we should make it extremely difficult for them to get their hands on these weapons.


Not only are the mainstream media and gun control advocates pushing for a mass confiscation plan in the United States, they are also making it clear that they have no problem with gun owners being shot which would be a likely and obvious outcome if the government decided to outlaw millions of firearms overnight.
Just days ago, author and Coppin State University writing teacher D. Watkins published an article on the prominent hard left news outlet that called for all gun owners to be shot if they wanted to use their 2nd Amendment right.
“Starting out the article with the writers dreams of charging five thousand dollars per bullet, Watkins then makes his position on gun ownership in America startlingly clear.” (emphasis mine)
Rock was definitely on point, $5000 bullets would be great but I’d take it a step further––I believe that being shot should be requirement for gun ownership in America. It’s very simple. You need to have gun, like taking selfies with pistols, can’t live with out it? Then take a bullet and you will be granted the right to purchase the firearm of your choice.
If we could successfully implement this rule, I guarantee the mass shootings will stop. Watching cable news now in days makes me physically ill.
Week in and week out we are forced to learn about another coward, who can’t stand to deal with the same rejection that most of us face–– so they strap themselves with guns and then cock and spray at innocent people. Heartbroken survivors and family member images go viral, as our elected officials remain clueless.
So there you have it. A court has upheld a New York law that paves the way for mass confiscation in America while at the same time the mainstream media is pushing this plan for confiscation and making it clear that if gun owners have to be shot to achieve this agenda then so be it.
The one question that remains is whether or not the American people will stand by as their 2nd Amendment right is openly destroyed right before their very eyes.
This article originally appeared on


Texas Health investigators raid Planned Parenthood in San Antonio

Texas Planned Parenthood Raided By Authorities
Published on Oct 22, 2015
Three days after the state told the healthcare provider it planned to terminate its Medicaid contracts, Texas investigators arrived without warning at Planned Parenthood facilities on Thursday and demanded documents.

At a news conference in Austin, Ken Lambrecht, the chief executive of Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas, said that the appearance of state officials at offices in San Antonio, Dallas and Houston was “a politically motivated … fishing expedition” for information including unnecessary details such as the home addresses of employees and their salaries.

The organisation said it was given 24 hours to turn over thousands of pages by the Texas Office of Inspector General, a division of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.

Texas Raids Several Planned Parenthood Facilities
Published on Oct 22, 2015
Planned Parenthood reports that Texas officials raided several of their facilities on today. The move comes days after the state's Republicans leaders barred the women's health group from receiving state Medicaid money. Texas, the most populous Republican-controlled U.S. state, said it would launch a probe of Planned Parenthood after the release of videos in July by anti-abortion activist group Center for Medical Progress in which a Planned Parenthood official is seen talking about transactions involving fetal tissue. Texas Governor Greg Abbott said this week "the gruesome harvesting of baby body parts by Planned Parenthood will not be allowed," but so far the state has released no evidence of illegal activity by the group.

Lee Ann McAdoo of Infowars Interviews 
Ex Abortion Administrator Abby Johnson



Homosexual Men ‘Divorce’ to Become Threesome, Now Plan to Use Sisters as Surrogates

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

NOVA SCOTIA — Two homosexual men recently “divorced” under Canadian law so that they could include a third man in their relationship, and now plan to have their sisters serve as surrogates to bear their children.
“We just want to say that love is love. It should be multiplied not divided,” Adam Grant told the Daily Mail. “It shouldn’t matter if you’re in a three-way or a four-way relationship.”
Grant and his partner Shayne Curran met Sebastian Tran at a nightclub in 2012, after “tying the knot” the year prior. A year later, they agreed to be open to seeing others.
“Adam and I wanted to have a little more fun so we decided to experiment with multiple partners,” Curran stated. “We never intended it to be anything serious, we certainly never planning on taking on a full-time third partner by any means. It was just bit of sexual experimentation.”
When they met Tran, they both had feelings for him, so in discussing how they could include the man in their relationship, they decided to divorce in order to become a threesome.
While polygamy is not legal in Canada, the men state that they have attorneys that can work up paperwork declaring that the three are bound to each other “in the eyes of the law.”
“If anything, Sebastian only enhanced our relationship,” Curran said.
Now, in order to have children, the men state that their sisters have agreed to become surrogates. Some have also offered to donate their eggs.
“I have two sisters who have both offered to carry our children for us as surrogates and are willing to donate their eggs as well. My sisters actually argue over which one them will carry our baby first,” Curran stated. “Sebastian’s sister will probably donate her eggs too so we can keep it in the family. We want to mix our genes enough so that our kids are as genetically close to us as possible.”
As previously reported, earlier this year, photos of three Thailand men who symbolically “married” each other went viral, garnering societal support for the concept of same-sex “throuples” worldwide, but also generating remarks from Christians about the confirmation of the slippery slope that has long been predicted.
“Love occurs unconditionally and is not limited to only two people,” one of the men, only identified as Art, wrote on Facebook. “Love brings peace to the world.”
Following the report, Dr. Michael Brown noted that the situation demonstrates how mankind has made up its own rules along the way in an attempt to legitimize and justify what a particular person wants. Since homosexuals have stated that marriage should be defined as the union of two people who have feelings for each other, regardless of gender, where does the rule about two people come from?
“If a gay activist says, ‘But marriage is the loving, long-term commitment of two people,’ the answer is simple: ‘Says who? That’s just your new definition. Where did you get the idea it was two people if not from its historic, natural meaning?’” Brown explained. “And so, if I’m ‘bigoted’ because I don’t recognize same-sex ‘marriage,’ then gay activists (and their allies) are just as ‘bigoted’ if they don’t recognize three men (or women) ‘marrying.’
He stated that these developments are demonstrating the domino effect that results when the world rebels against God and His Master design for mankind.
“Those who have taken down the fence of marriage as God intended it have opened up a Pandora’s Box of possibilities,” Brown said, “none of them good.”


Published on Oct 22, 2015
Alex Jones talks with Robert Kiyosaki, best selling author and radio show host about the massive migrant influx and how America is slowing being pushed toward socialism in an effort to destroy the American spirit.


"We want to change it so that they just can't come pounding on your door and saying, 'If you don't let me in, you know who we are; we're going to take your kid away,'" Chris Zimmer tells the Washington Times. "They need to start telling people what their rights are. If they want to act like cops, they can abide by the law like the police." 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
BELVIDERE, N. J. — A homeschooling family in New Jersey has filed a $60 million dollar lawsuit against the New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency for intruding into their home and asking them personal and detailed questions about their lives and their son’s education.
According to reports, the incident occurred this past January as social worker Michelle Marchese arrived at the home of Chris and Nicole Zimmer and sought entry following an anonymous complaint over “improper homeschooling.” At first, Mr. Zimmer refused entry and called the police, but when they were given an ultimatum and told by police that the social worker had a right to investigate, he left Marchese in out of fear that the government would take his son.
“I wouldn’t let her in the house, but then she told me I had ten minutes or else,” he told
For the next two hours, Marchese questioned their 15-year-old son Chris on everything from whether the Zimmers fought or did drugs or beat him. Marchese asked the parents for their son’s homeschooling test scores and curriculum, as well as his medical records, and inquired about the guns in the household, seeking to inspect them and see how easy it would be to break into the locked cabinet.
“She took it upon herself to try to pry open the door with her fingers, but it was locked … Then she said, ‘You need to show me the guns; open the safe,’” Mr. Zimmer outlined to “I knew what my rights were, but I was trying to cooperate with her.”
“If they had come with a complaint of neglect and abuse, come in and ask us, but to question us about home schooling [is concerning],” Mrs. Zimmer told reporters. “For us it was a good choice, and I will always advocate for home schooling.”
The social worker then left and the Zimmers never saw her again, but received a letter in the mail asserting that the couple was not cooperative and so the case closed.
“We were unable to complete our assessment as it pertains to a referral made to our agency on 1/07/15, as you were unwilling to cooperate with the CWS referral process,” the letter read. “Therefore, DCP&P will not be providing services to your child and your family at this time. … Thank you for your cooperation during our recent contacts.”
The couple, however, said that they didn’t need the state’s “services,” and as they remained distraught about the matter, they filed a lawsuit against the department and Marchese.
“We want to change it so that they just can’t come pounding on your door and saying, ‘If you don’t let me in, you know who we are; we’re going to take your kid away,’” Mr. Zimmer told the Washington Post. “They need to start telling people what their rights are. If they want to act like cops, they can abide by the law like the police.”
The state replied to the suit asserting that the department “was simply fulfilling its duty by following up” on a complaint and that “a parent’s right to familial integrity ‘does not include a right to remain free from child abuse investigations.’”
The Zimmers countered the argument through their attorney, contending that “there is a constitutional fundamental right to be free from child abuse investigations where there is ‘no reasonable and articulable evidence giving rise to a reasonable suspicion that a child has been abused or is in imminent danger of abuse.’”
The couple states that if they win the lawsuit, they will donate the funds in order to help other families who are being wrongfully harassed by the government.