Mike Rogers and James Comer say DOD failed to protect servicemembers private information
On Friday, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee Mike Rogers and Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform James Comer released a statement saying that they are “disappointed’ with the Department of Defense for failing to protect servicemember records after receiving a response from the DoD on the matter. “The Department of Defense failed to protect the private information of our servicemembers,” Rogers and Comer wrote. “To publicly rectify this unacceptable mistake, we hoped DoD would provide full transparency in their response – unfortunately, full transparency is not what we received.” “We are extremely disappointed in DoD’s inadequate response to our questions,” Rogers and Comer wrote. “We asked Secretary (Lloyd) Austin for information on all servicemembers who had their records improperly released to the Democrat-aligned research firm Due Diligence Group. However, DoD only provided our committees with answers from the Department of the Air Force, despite public reporting that DDG attempted to gather information from other services.” “DoD’s response did not give us confidence that all services have put safeguards in place to ensure that servicemembers’ private information is not mishandled,” Rogers and Comer stated. “DoD also failed to provide our committees with information on what actions were taken with the individuals involved in the mishandling of servicemember records and if criminal referrals have been made. We will be demanding the Secretary provide full transparency and accountability on this matter. It is imperative the Secretary take every action possible to ensure this egregious incident will never happen again. We will continue to fight on behalf of our servicemembers and their privacy.” This follows recent public reports that the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force (OSAF) improperly released information from several servicemembers’ personnel files to political operatives. The released information includes at least two Members of Congress, reportedly released to an opposition research firm Due Diligence Group that received money from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). Congressman Chris Stewart and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan last week sent a letter to U.S. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall demanding information on the breach of servicemembers’ personal information without their knowledge or consent. “The Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government are investigating the mass collection and dissemination of information about American citizens by federal agencies,” Stewart and Kendall wrote. “Following reports last fall, Members of Congress, including Congressman Stewart, corresponded with Air Force Inspector General Lieutenant General Stephen Davis regarding the steps his office is taking to investigate the circumstances of this improper release of personnel materials. Recent public reports have disclosed that the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force (OSAF) improperly released information from several additional servicemembers’ personnel files to political operatives. As alleged in the reporting, this is a serious breach of law and servicemember privacy. To advance our oversight and to inform potential legislative reforms, we write to request information about this serious breach of our servicemembers’ personal information.” Mike Rogers is in his eleventh term representing Alabama’s Third Congressional District. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Bill protecting same-sex, interracial unions clears Congress
The House gave final approval Thursday to legislation protecting same-sex marriages, a monumental step in a decadeslong battle for nationwide recognition that reflects a stark turnaround in societal attitudes. President Joe Biden has said he will promptly sign the measure, which requires all states to recognize same-sex marriages. It is a relief for hundreds of thousands of couples who have married since the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision that legalized those marriages and have worried about what would happen if the ruling were overturned. In a statement after the vote, Biden called the legislation a “critical step to ensure that Americans have the right to marry the person they love.” He said the legislation provides “hope and dignity to millions of young people across this country who can grow up knowing that their government will recognize and respect the families they build.” The bipartisan legislation, which passed 258-169 with 39 Republican votes, would also protect interracial unions by requiring states to recognize legal marriages regardless of “sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin.” After months of negotiations, the Senate passed the bill last week with 12 Republican votes. Democrats moved the bill quickly through the House and Senate after the Supreme Court’s decision in June that overturned the federal right to an abortion — including a concurring opinion from Justice Clarence Thomas that suggested the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision legalizing same-sex marriage could also be reconsidered. While many Republicans predicted that was unlikely to happen, and said the bill was unnecessary, Democrats and GOP supporters of the bill said it shouldn’t be left to chance. “We need it,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who presided over the vote as one of her last acts in leadership before stepping aside in January. “It is magic.” The bill is “a glorious triumph of love and freedom,” Pelosi said, tearing up as she celebrated its passage. In debate before the vote, several gay members of Congress talked about what a federal law would mean for them and their families. Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., said he and his husband should be able to visit each other in the hospital just like any other married couple and receive spousal benefits “regardless of if your spouse’s name is Samuel or Samantha.” Rep. Chris Pappas, D-N.H., said he was set to marry “the love of my life” next year, and it is “unthinkable” that his marriage might not be recognized in some states if Obergefell were to be overturned. “The idea of marriage equality used to be a far-fetched idea,” said Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I. “Now it’s the law of the land and supported by the vast majority of Americans.” The legislation lost some Republican support since July, when 47 Republicans voted for it — a robust and unexpected show of support that kick-started serious negotiations in the Senate. But most of those lawmakers held firm, with a cross-section of the party, from conservatives to moderates, voting for the bill. House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy voted against it. “To me, this is really just standing with the Constitution,” said Republican Rep. Ann Wagner of Missouri, who voted for the bill both times. She pushed back on GOP arguments that it would affect the religious rights of those who don’t believe in same-sex marriage. “No one’s religious liberties are affected in any way, shape, or form,” Wagner said. Republican Rep. Chris Stewart of Utah said he was “proud to once again vote in favor of protecting our LGBTQ and religious friends and neighbors.” He praised Senate changes to the bill, ensuring that it would not affect current rights of religious institutions and groups. “Civil rights are not a finite resource, we do not have to take from one group to give to another,” Stewart said. The legislation would not require states to allow same-sex couples to marry, as Obergefell now does. But it would require states to recognize all marriages that were legal where they were performed and protect current same-sex unions if the Supreme Court decision were overturned. While it’s not everything advocates may have wanted, passage of the legislation represents a watershed moment. Just a decade ago, many Republicans openly campaigned on blocking same-sex marriages; today, more than two-thirds of the public support them. Still, most Republicans opposed the legislation, and some conservative advocacy groups lobbied aggressively against it in recent weeks, arguing that it doesn’t do enough to protect those who want to refuse services for same-sex couples. “God’s perfect design is indeed marriage between one man and one woman for life,” said Rep. Bob Good, R-Va, before the vote. “And it doesn’t matter what you think or what I think; that’s what the Bible says.” Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Mo., choked up as she begged colleagues to vote against the bill, which she said undermines “natural marriage” between a man and a woman. “I’ll tell you my priorities,” Hartzler said. “Protect religious liberty, protect people of faith and protect Americans who believe in the true meaning of marriage.” Democrats in the Senate, led by Wisconsin’s Tammy Baldwin and Arizona’s Kyrsten Sinema, worked with supportive Republican senators to address those GOP concerns by negotiating changes to clarify that the legislation does not impair the rights of private individuals or businesses. The amended bill would also make clear that a marriage is between two people, an effort to ward off some far-right criticism that the legislation could endorse polygamy. In the end, several religious groups, including the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, came out in support of the bill. The Mormon church said it would support rights for same-sex couples as long as they didn’t infringe upon religious groups’ right to believe as they choose. Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who led negotiations with Baldwin and Sinema in the Senate, attended a ceremony after the House vote with Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. “When I think about this bill, I think about how much it matters to people in each of our lives, our family members, our coworkers, our
Jerry Carl co-sponsors legislation to encourage energy production and stop foreign oil dependence
Rep. Jerry Carl has co-sponsored legislation to help American energy production. The Unleashing American Energy Act would require a minimum of two oil and gas lease sales a year in the Gulf of Mexico and in the Alaska Region of the Outer Continental Shelf, and it prohibits future moratoriums or delays on oil and gas leasing. “At a time when fuel prices are at record highs, the Biden administration has not let up on its regulatory assault on American energy producers. As a result, Americans are paying more for fuel and nearly everything else. That’s why I’m proud to introduce the Unleashing American Energy Act, which would reverse Biden’s war on American energy and unleash domestic production. Although this bill won’t solve all our energy problems overnight, it will help lower energy prices and bring much-needed relief to millions of Americans. Under the Trump administration, we had regular oil and gas lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico, and the United States became energy independent. My bill would require two new oil and gas lease sales each year in the Gulf of Mexico and in Alaska, while also prohibiting oil and gas lease sales from being blocked or slowed down again,” said Carl. House Committee on Natural Resources Ranking Member Bruce Westerman argued that this legislation will help stop America’s energy dependence. “Today, we are taking a necessary step to end President Biden’s repeated assaults on American energy. The American people continue bearing the brunt of these disastrous policies. Enough is enough. The bills we introduced today will allow us to tap into the rich stores of resources America already has, and further both our energy independence and our innovation in the energy sector. Together with legislation promoting development of American critical minerals and energy independence that our members introduced earlier this Congress, we are advancing an all-of-the-above energy approach that will strength our nation and allow us to lead the world into the future,” said Westerman. According to Carl’s press release, the U.S. Department of the Interior is required by law to publish regular five-year leasing plans. The current plan expires on June 30, 2022. The Biden administration has not initiated the process to publish a new one. The Unleashing American Energy Act is cosponsored by House Committee on Natural Resources Ranking Member Bruce Westerman (R-AR), House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik (R-NY), and Reps. Troy Balderson (R-OH), Russ Fulcher (R-ID), Garret Graves (R-LA), Yvette Herrell (R-NM), Doug Lamborn (R-CO), Tom McClintock (R-CA), Blake Moore (R-UT), Dan Newhouse (R-WA), Matt Rosendale (R-MT), Pete Stauber (R-MN), Chris Stewart (R-UT), Tom Tiffany (R-WI), Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ), Beth Van Duyne (R-TX), and Robert Wittman (R-VA).
Congressman Mike Rogers joins colleauges to voice concern over safety of Olympic athletes in China
Congressman Mike Rogers joined China Task Force Chairman Michael McCaul and House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy in sending a letter to Board Chair of the U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee (USOPC) Susanne Lyons. The letter expresses concern and the importance of ensuring U.S. Olympians are educated on how to stay safe during the Olympics. Additionally, they commented on the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) gross human rights abuses, including genocide. The letter specifically asks that Olympians are informated on how to keep themselves safe. The Beijing Organizing Committee and the CCP has made clear that they will have an unprecedented level of control over the athletes. The letter also asks that the USOPC prepare athletes with the knowledge they need about their rights while in China and also requests an explanation of what steps have been taken to ensure the safety of athletes who may exercise their freedom of speech. “The United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC) has a responsibility to ensure our athletes are prepared for these unprecedented Olympic games,” the lawmakers wrote. “Congress legislatively empowered the USOPC with the exclusive privilege of representing the United States in the Olympic community. American values are a core part of the USOPC’s Congressional charter, including a duty to ‘promote a safe environment in sports.’ In recent weeks, Congress has acted to further increase the preparedness and safety of American athletes representing the United States in human rights-violating countries, by codifying the American Values and Security in International Athletics Act.” The Republican-led China Task Force aims to help reinforce Congressional efforts to counter current and emerging cross-jurisdictional threats from China. The letter was also signed by China Task Force Members Reps. Andy Barr (R-KY), Liz Cheney (R-WY), Mike Gallagher (R-WI), Michael Waltz (R-FL), Darin LaHood (R-IL), Guy Reschenthaler (R-PA), Chris Stewart (R-UT), Neal Dunn (R-FL), Mark Green (R-TN), Mike Garcia (R-CA), Austin Scott (R-GA), Diana Harshbarger (R-TN), and Young Kim (R-CA). Rogers stated on Twitter, “The abhorrent reality of the Olympics occurring in a genocidal state will leave a permanent stain on the legacy of Beining 2022 and the International Olympic Committee.” The full text of the letter is below: Dear Chair Lyons, The 2022 Winter Olympic Games in Beijing will be the first Olympic games to take place in a country that is conducting an ongoing genocide. Therefore, these games are an unprecedented threat to American values, inalienable human rights, and the spirit of the Olympics. It is vital that our athletes arrive fully informed about the reality of the genocide occurring in China, as well as the broad range of other human rights abuses and malign actions committed by the Chinese government and Communist Party. The United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC) has a responsibility to ensure our athletes are prepared for these unprecedented Olympic games. Congress legislatively empowered the USOPC with the exclusive privilege of representing the United States in the Olympic community. American values are a core part of the USOPC’s Congressional charter, including a duty to “promote a safe environment in sports.”1 In recent weeks, Congress has acted to further increase the preparedness and safety of American athletes representing the United States in human rights-violating countries, by codifying the American Values and Security in International Athletics Act2. The abhorrent reality of the Olympics occurring in a genocidal state will leave a permanent stain on the legacy of Beijing 2022 and the International Olympic Committee. The USOPC has a responsibility to ensure our athletes know that Congress and the Administration have designated the Chinese Communist Party’s crimes against Uyghurs as genocide, a term the U.S. government reserves for history’s most grave human rights atrocities. Over one million Uyghurs and members of other religious and ethnic minorities have been forced into concentration camps, been subject to abusive brainwashing and political indoctrination, have had their families forcibly separated, have been put to forced labor, and have been subject to sexual violence and efforts to reduce their population’s birth rate. We also remain seriously concerned that the American delegation to Beijing may be unprepared for personal security risks, particularly for individuals who exercise their freedom of speech. The “closed loop management system” enforced by the Beijing Organizing Committee – allegedly in response to the pandemic – will give the Chinese government an unprecedented level of control over international athletes, while at the same time hindering access by the U.S. State Department. The Department has been forthright that its consular access to athletes in need remains uncertain, and that the entirety of its China Travel Advisory applies to the games, including major threats of arbitrary detention “for sending private electronic messages critical of the PRC government,” a lack of due process, and the use of propaganda campaigns to target U.S. citizens. These risks are very likely to be heightened given the Chinese government’s total control inside the “closed loop” and the pervasive surveillance the CCP demands over events prioritized in its external propaganda efforts. This week, a Beijing Organizing Committee official issued a veiled threat to those who would speak out, saying “Any behavior or speech that is against the Olympic spirit, especially against the Chinese laws and regulations, are also subject to certain punishment.” Public statements from yourself and other USOPC officials acknowledge the danger, but sadly such statements indicate that our athletes are being encouraged to self-censor: “The laws of China are distinct and different… The expectation is we abide by the rules of that country.” Rather than push American athletes to follow the CCP’s party line, the USOPC should empower Team USA with the resources to understand the human rights crisis they face when representing our country in China and take action to ensure their safety. We urge you in the strongest terms to ensure that Team USA is fully informed about the human rights situation in China, including its ongoing genocide, and request that you reply with: An explanation of USOPC’s efforts to educate American participants in Beijing 2022 about the Chinese Communist Party’s malign actions including its
GOP Representative pitches LGBTQ bill with religious exemptions
As Democrats champion anti-discrimination protections for the LGBTQ community and Republicans counter with worries about safeguarding religious freedom, one congressional Republican is offering a proposal on Friday that aims to achieve both goals. The bill that Utah GOP Rep. Chris Stewart plans to unveil would shield LGBTQ individuals from discrimination in employment, housing, education, and other public services — while also carving out exemptions for religious organizations to act based on beliefs that may exclude those of different sexual orientations or gender identities. Stewart’s bill counts support from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Seventh-day Adventist Church, but it has yet to win a backer among House Democrats who unanimously supported a more expansive LGBTQ rights measure in May. But the uphill climb for his plan doesn’t daunt Stewart, who sees the bill as a way to “bridge that gap” between preventing discrimination and allowing religion to inform individual decisions. “I don’t know many people who wake up and say ‘I want to discriminate’. Most people find that offensive,” Stewart told The Associated Press. “There are people who, and I’m included among them, have religious convictions that put them in a bind about how to reconcile those two principles.” The Utah lawmaker’s legislation comes as the Supreme Court prepares to rule on cases that touch squarely on the issue of employment discrimination against LGBTQ people, who currently do not receive specific protection in federal civil rights laws. While 21 states have laws that bar employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, Democrats in Congress and running for president are pushing for a federal statute that would provide broader protections. But that more sweeping bill’s chances of passage are low unless Democrats take back full control of Congress as well as the White House, given President Donald Trump’s opposition and Republican critics who warn of a risk to religious freedom. That prospect has informed Stewart and outside groups’ work on a proposal to enshrine rights for the LGBTQ community while also preserving the right for religious groups to act in accordance with their faiths. Among other faith-based exemptions to anti-discrimination protections in the bill is an allowance for religious groups such as churches and schools to employ those who align with their internal guidelines, according to a summary provided in advance of its release. The bill also would prohibit religious groups that oppose same-sex marriage from having their tax-exempt status revoked. “We have taken back the religious liberty principle from extremists who I think do want to do harm to LGBTQ people and minority rights,” said Tyler Deaton, a senior adviser to the American Unity Fund, a nonprofit supporting Stewart’s bill that seeks to build conservative support for LGBTQ rights. Deaton added that some religious conservative groups who were consulted on the bill ultimately chose not to endorse it. By Elana Schor Associated Press. Republished with the Permission of the Associated Press.
Nancy Pelosi invites Donald Trump to testify as new witnesses prepare
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi invited President Donald Trump to testify in front of investigators in the House impeachment inquiry ahead of a week that will see several key witnesses appear publicly. Pushing back against accusations from the Republican president that the process has been stacked against him, Pelosi said Trump is welcome to appear or answer questions in writing, if he chooses. “If he has information that is exculpatory, that means ex, taking away, culpable, blame, then we look forward to seeing it,” she said in an interview that aired Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” Trump “could come right before the committee and talk, speak all the truth that he wants if he wants,” she said. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer echoed that suggestion. “If Donald Trump doesn’t agree with what he’s hearing, doesn’t like what he’s hearing, he shouldn’t tweet. He should come to the committee and testify under oath. And he should allow all those around him to come to the committee and testify under oath,” Schumer told reporters. He said the White House’s insistence on blocking witnesses from cooperating begs the question: “What is he hiding?” The comments come as the House Intelligence Committee prepares for a second week of public hearings as part of its inquiry, including with the man who is arguably the most important witness. Gordon Sondland, Trump’s ambassador to the European Union, is among the only people interviewed to date who had direct conversations with the president about the situation because the White House has blocked others from cooperating with what it dismisses as a sham investigation. And testimony suggests he was intimately involved in discussions that are at the heart of the investigation into whether Trump held up U.S. military aid to Ukraine to try to pressure the country’s president to announce an investigation into Democrats, including former Vice President Joe Biden, a leading 2020 candidate, and Biden’s son Hunter. Multiple witnesses overheard a phone call in which Trump and Sondland reportedly discussed efforts to push for the investigations. In private testimony to impeachment investigators made public Saturday, Tim Morrison, a former National Security Council aide and longtime Republican defense hawk, said Sondland told him he was discussing Ukraine matters directly with Trump. Morrison said Sondland and Trump had spoken approximately five times between July 15 and Sept. 11 — the weeks that $391 million in U.S. assistance was withheld from Ukraine before it was released. And he recounted that Sondland told a top Ukrainian official in a meeting that the vital U.S. military assistance might be freed up if the country’s top prosecutor “would go to the mike and announce that he was opening the Burisma investigation.” Burisma is the gas company that hired Hunter Biden. Morrison’s testimony contradicted much of what Sondland told congressional investigators during his own closed-door deposition, which the ambassador later amended. Trump has said he has no recollection of the overheard call and has suggested he barely knew Sondland, a wealthy donor to his 2016 campaign. But Democrats are hoping he sheds new light on the discussions. “I’m not going to try to prejudge his testimony,” Rep. Jim Himes, Democrat-Conneticut, said on “Fox News Sunday.” But he suggested, “it was not lost on Ambassador Sondland what happened to the president’s close associate Roger Stone for lying to Congress, to Michael Cohen for lying to Congress. My guess is that Ambassador Sondland is going to do his level best to tell the truth, because otherwise he may have a very unpleasant legal future in front of him.” The committee also will be interviewing a long list of others. On Tuesday, it’ll hear from Morrison along with Jennifer Williams, an aide to Vice President Mike Pence, Alexander Vindman, the director for European affairs at the National Security Council, and Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine. On Wednesday the committee will hear from Sondland in addition to Laura Cooper, a deputy assistant secretary of defense, and David Hale, a State Department official. And on Thursday, Fiona Hill, a former top NSC staffer for Europe and Russia, will appear. Trump, meanwhile, continued to tweet and retweet a steady stream of commentary from supporters as he bashed “The Crazed, Do Nothing Democrats” for “turning Impeachment into a routine partisan weapon.” “That is very bad for our Country, and not what the Founders had in mind!!!!” he wrote. He also tweeted a doctored video exchange between Rep. Adam Schiff, the Democratic chairman of the Intelligence Committee, and Republican Rep. Jim Jordan, in which Schiff said he did not know the identity of the whistleblower whose complaint triggered the inquiry. The clip has been altered to show Schiff wearing a referee’s uniform and loudly blowing a whistle. In her CBS interview, Pelosi vowed to protect the whistleblower, whom Trump has said should be forced to come forward despite longstanding whistleblower protections. “I will make sure he does not intimidate the whistleblower,” Pelosi said. Trump has been under fire for his treatment of one of the witnesses, the former ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, whom Trump criticized by tweet as she was testifying last week. That attack prompted accusations of witness intimidation from Democrats and even some criticism from Republicans, who have been largely united in their defense of Trump “I think, along with most people, I find the president’s tweet generally unfortunate,” said Ohio Republican Rep. Mike Turner on CNN’s “State of the Union.” Still, he insisted that tweets were “certainly not impeachable and it’s certainly not criminal. And it’s certainly not witness intimidation,” even if Yovanovitch said she felt intimidated by the attacks. Rep. Chris Stewart, Republican-Utah, said Trump “communicates in ways that sometimes I wouldn’t,” but dismissed the significance of the attacks. “If your basis for impeachment is going to include a tweet, that shows how weak the evidence for that impeachment is,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.” And the backlash didn’t stop Trump from lashing out at yet another witness, this time Pence aide Williams. He directed her in a Sunday tweet
State mental health organizations rally to fight agency cuts
Mental-health service workers and recipients rallied across Alabama on Monday, asking lawmakers to not cut millions in funding for the Alabama Department of Mental Health. The department is at risk of losing $35.2 million in state funds and another $64 million in matching federal funds, which some say would be a severe setback for the thousands who depend on funding. Chris Stewart, president of The Arc of Jefferson County, a nonprofit organization working with the intellectually and developmentally disabled, told hundreds in Birmingham that Alabama ranks last in funding for the disabled. “How do you cut a percentage of a person’s health care? How do you cut a percentage of a person’s residential services? How do you cut a percentage of a person’s food? People are not something that can be dealt with in percentages,” Stewart said. The Legislature is considering a number of measures for how to fill a $290 million deficit in the state’s general fund budget. Gov. Robert Bentley has proposed a $541 million tax package to address both short-term and long-term budget issues, but lawmakers have been slower to consider raising new revenue. This past week, House Republicans unveiled their plan for new taxes that would raise less than a third of the revenue the governor has requested. In an April memo to legislators, Bentley said more than 24,000 people with mental illness would lose or experience reductions in services, and 1,080 community mental-health employees would lose their jobs. Speaking in Mobile at one of several rallies statewide, Bentley said outpatient mental-health services provide better and more financially efficient results than inpatient hospitals. However, many of those services would be reduced if budget cuts are enacted, he said. “People with intellectual disabilities should not be in institutions,” Bentley said. Cindy Smith, whose son Julian was diagnosed with schizophrenia at 19 during his first year at Brown University, said her son, now 43, depends on mental-health services from the state. He depends on funding from Medicare and Medicaid to pay for medication, which she said costs $5,000 a month. In an interview after the Birmingham rally, Smith said she worries what will happen to her son if he loses outpatient services: He would lose his place to live. He would lose his psychiatrist. He would be on his own, she said. “Hopefully he will come home and live with me, but what he does is, he goes in the front door and out the back door and I have no idea where he is,” she said. “And then he doesn’t take his medicine, and he would either be dead, in jail, in prison. It wouldn’t be good.” Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
