Yes. Pending charges do not guilt make however.
If you could take an informal poll on how many individuals have been charged and later found innocent, it might be interesting.
However, the “known association with Oath Keepers” a “militia” is disturbing. If the State had enough information, why feel compelled to include that little fact?
>However, the “known association with Oath Keepers” a “militia” is disturbing. If the State had enough information, why feel compelled to include that little fact?
Quite disturbing; it could [in theory] be used as precedence for relieving members of the National Guard for whose states name the National Guard as militia. Even more disturbing is the realization that for many of the states they define the militia [similar to] “every ablebodied male of 18 to 45 years old.”
As an example:
New Mexico State Constitution
ARTICLE XVIII, Sec. 1. [Composition, name and commander in chief of militia.]
The militia of this state shall consist of all able-bodied male citizens
between the ages of eighteen and forty-five, except such as are exempt by
laws of the United States or of this state. The organized militia shall be
called the “national guard of New Mexico,” of which the governor shall be the
commander in chief.
You’re right. The only point I’m trying to make is that there seems to be documented problems on this couple already. DFS has been investigating the background of Irish and found (and noted) he had purchased weapons and made note of that. This was in addition to other information they had.
When this story first went online, it was implied that because he belonged to the Oathkeepers (he’s not a dues paying member btw) the baby was taken. THAT is not the case. That he belongs to Oath Keepers was almost a footnote (as in to shore up their case).
There’s just too much missing information, but people were intentionally mislead.
In any case, Oath Keepers is going to assist.