Hillary Clinton awards CRC Exec Dir David Levy

Here Hides Clinton’s Pedophile Network

Truth is stranger than fiction. The conspiracy theory claims Hillary, Bill and the Democrats operate a pedophile network. The truth lies in legislation that reconstructed social services passed under Clinton’s watch.

Pedophiles need access to children. Pedophiles seek positions of authority. Priest. Scout leader. Parent. Guardian. Pedophiles need cover — no oversight, no accountability, no prosecution. During Clinton’s administration, pedophiles took hold of Health and Human Services Administration of Children and Families (ACF). Judicial orders dictate ownership and access to children. ACF funds operation and writes the policy.

In 2007, what I learned about the people, organizations and government money that hides father’s incest prompted my independent study. This article is meant to be an introductory exploration into the deep, dark world of government-sanctioned child maltreatment.

CLINTON-ERA LEGISLATIVE TRANSACTIONS

Welfare Reform and Child Welfare legislation created the playing field. Molestation of one’s own child is not an automatic crime. Social workers, employees of Child Welfare or Child Protection Units, investigate and substantiate. Family court connected units do not prosecute –they treat and manage. This administrative maneuver decriminalizes molestation of one’s own child. Homegrown pedophilia is a civil litigation matter operated out of family court. Parental molestation is obscured by programs beholden to family values. Repressing evidence of child maltreatment is a staple element of federally-funded family court services — counseling, mediation, parent education, and supervised visit centers.

THE SOCIAL CONTRACT

Clinton’s reign ushered in social reconstruction — Clinton privatized poverty relief and child welfare programs. By stigmatizing poor, minority single mothers, government ceased to provide for their basic needs. Federal assistance shifted to fund services and service providers. The shift exacerbated societies economic bifurcation. Welfare money funded elites. Judges, lawyers, psychologists, social workers, university professors, sociologists, received grants to open and operate treatment and management centers. Research was created to substantiate policy and practice.

ACF funds command centers. Judicial orders dictate behavior of those unfortunate enough to encounter the new environment of “personal responsibility.”

THE REBUILD

Consider how deeply society changed in the twenty-five years since the passage of Welfare Reform. More than half the population cannot meet their basic needs: shelter, food, health care, transportation, personal care.

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, (PRWORA), or “Welfare Reform” renegotiated the terms of poverty programs. Need was no longer an eligibility factor. States could spend TANF monies promoting social goals — abstinence and “two-parent families” now called “Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood.” In addition to male-headed families, Welfare Reform funded a sexual contract that punished teen and out-of-wedlock pregnancy (a later article will delve into this absurdity).

Welfare Reform demanded female recipients work a minimum of 20 hours a week. Unmarried mothers were required to disclose paternity so states could retrieve their output by initiating child support litigation. Money collected on behalf of welfare recipients is pocketed by the state not the children. Child support offices advised and aided dads to obtain custody in order to “pay” and “switch” obligation. “Paved With Good Intentions” explains the problem.

The Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) incentivized judicial appointment of privatized “family court services” designed by father’s rights advocates. The legal and mental health fields supplied the “service providers” or “practitioners”. Specialists in the needs of children (educators, pediatricians) did not contribute to the development of service models. Sociologists wrote psychological diagnosis and treatment models. Mediation (or conciliation) is the professed intention; punishment for non-compliance is the norm.

HIERARCHY OF NEEDS

Welfare Reform’s social contract is based on legal and mental health services, not, provision of physiological needs. Yet, “the hierarchy of needs” was developed by a psychologist, Maslow. Over half of society lives in precarious economic conditions, unable or barely able to meet their basic physical and safety needs. Housing is unaffordable. Poor, working class communities are dangerous. An inadequate, precarious standard of life leads to mental breakdown and acting out. Instead of meeting basic needs, building nice homes in safe neighborhoods, Welfare Reform instituted social service systems that offer counselling, psychotropic drugs, and safety plans. Child sexual abuse hides within this network.

FOLLOW THE MONEY

A wide berth of funding accompanies Welfare’s societal reorganization. Below I showcase money streams hide the pedophile network. Embedded practices and administrative rules disregard familial sexual abuse. Conversely, children removed from parental homes for minor infringements are likely to be molested in the foster care system.

TANF — Block “Welfare” Grants

States distribute TANF at will, directing less than 15% to cash assistance. A left-leaning think tank that keeps track of disbursement categories advocates for separately funded direct cash payments. The logical mind would advocate for oversight and accountability of the current system, instead of throwing good money after bad.

Social Service Block Grants

Social Service Block Grants (Title XX) permit state-initiated grants to nonprofits and “community service providers” whose stated mission fits a wide-range of vague goals (counseling and support, health and well-being, at-risk youth). In addition to $1.68 billion yearly, states transfer $1.10 billion out of TANF. Recipients and amounts are not available for public purview. Citizens must file Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to view awardees. Grants act as political slush funds and graft.

Fatherhood Initiatives and Marriage Promotion Grants

Explicit grants fund Fatherhood and Marriage as a social goal. In 2 ½ decades, billions have been given to recipients (Catholic Charities, Lutheran Services, Goodwill, YMCA, universities, state agencies, local community groups). Community fatherhood programs support university-generated research that justifies practices. Judicial custody awards and treatment orders are made to create a research outcome.

Fatherhood and Marriage awardees can be searched on HHS’s TAGGS site. I found results to be inconsistent, results varied with each search. A print-out of fatherhood grant awards funded under Obama’s Claims Reconciliation Act produced 1” of awardees (6/pg). Each awardee can be searched to find a program or research.

Some grantees appear to be fly-by-night operations. Professional Counseling Resources of Wilmington Delaware received $250,000 in 2010 for “Collaborative Fatherhood.” A guidestar search gave 2007 as the most recent 990 tax-form. Professional Counseling Resources claimed to have received over $1.5million in government grants. LuLu Mae Nix is listed as the Chief Executive Officer, devoting 2,080 hours per week to her job for a compensation of $173,063.

• Gateway Community Services received $787, 814 in 2014 for responsible fatherhood. Gateway’s website (not updated since 2020), states they teach spirituality, morality, and good values. The website states the ability to make good decisions Is reflected in being sexually pure, drug free, and without a criminal record.
• Temple University received $1million in 2014 and $789,408, in 2015 for Responsible Fatherhood Research Network. Temple University’s Jay Fagan is a co-Director of the Fatherhood Research Practice Network (FRPN). FRPN receives grants to review fatherhood programs. Fagan’s co-Director, Jessica Pearson, an elite father’s rights operator, single-handedly directs and reviews fatherhood programming since its inception. ACF’s Office of Policy and Planning does not independently administer or review fatherhood programming.

Program to Research Pipeline

• Dads For Life and Supporting Fathers Involvement generate mother disparaging research cited in APA Parenting Coordinator Guidelines.
• The University of Texas at Austin Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, operates a “hub”, selecting research that legitimizes federal fatherhood policy, and serving as an informational go-between.
• Grantee University of Florida’s fatherhood/marriage/domestic violence class typifies the intermingling of varied interests.
• Grantee Yale University’s Fathers for Change uses children to reform violent, drug abusing Dads. Professors then generate favorable, NIH-published research.

CLINTON CRIME BILL

The Clinton Crime Bill Title XL funded grants to non-profits to operate Supervised Visit Centers. Supervised Visit Network (SVN) is a parent organization began by the father’s rights mediator Robert Strauss. SVN claims to have over 800 member centers. SVN is instrumental in promoting “alienation” — the theory that mothers who refuse to coparent or make allegations of father’s maltreatment should lose all custody. Primary caregiving mothers should be ordered to supervised visits.

Prison to Fatherhood Pipeline

The Crime Bill reconstructed prison services. Instead of literacy or trade skills, men receive fatherhood training. Inside/Out Dad, developed and sold by the National Fatherhood Institute (NFI), is taught in federal and state prisons. Child Welfare funds California’s class.

Dads Back is another California based program funded to aid the male prison population with custody and support litigation.

SOCIAL SECURITY TITLE IV

Social Security Title IV funds Child Welfare and Child Support Enforcement Office (OCSE).

Title IV-D allocates over $5billion/year to reimburse states for expenditures related to administering and collecting child support. Welfare Reform’s Fatherhood Access/Visitation incentive grant privatized collection of evidence, judicial determinations, and management of cases. The trade association AFCC commands operations.

Title IV-B and Title IV-E allocate over $9billion/year to Child Protection services.

CHILD WELFARE

CAPTA (Child Abuse, Protection and Treatment Act) is funded at $5billion/year.

Child Welfare Data is not available to the general public. Since 1993, ACF releases data to a “list-serv” of institution or higher education faculty, research organizations and government agencies. Data is compiled and published by Kids Count Data Center and Child Trends, funded by the private endowment, Annie E. Casey Foundation.

SOCIAL RECONSTRUCTION GRANTS ABOUND

A President Clinton-era 244-page publication expounds on the wealth of grants available. Government and private grants built programs that encourage dads to marry or obtain child custody. Grants fund parenting classes. Federal subsidies such as housing, food stamps, medical care, and the Earned Income Child Tax Credit offer additional incentives. Examples include:

• Department of Justice — grants fund prison fatherhood classes; reentry reunification; and support and custody assistance.
• Department of Labor — offer men classes in support reduction by way of state unemployment centers.
• Department of Agriculture — land grant universities offer Parent Education and co-parenting classes such as Focus on Kids.
• Department of Education — programs seek to increase father involvement.
• Department of Housing and Urban Development — low income fathers who obtain primary custody are eligible for subsidized housing.
• Department of Health and Human Services — while the Access/Visitation program operates judicial appointee services, the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), reimbursements and administration, remains chief arbiter.

PEDOPHILE GRANTEES

Pedophile appreciation is hidden in the details. Research origins approved of and overlooked incest. (A future article will delve into the laundering.)

Pedophilia is a father’s right. Accusations are a mothers vengeance. Children are brainwashed to believe they were molested. These statements represent the ideology of fatherhood grantees. The private actors who operate the new social service system.

CRC (Children’s Rights Council) is the primary father’s rights, and men’s rights, organization that worked with government to pass legislation and become grantees. The Department of Education houses a decade of CRC newsletters which chronicle not only Welfare Reform’s passage, but the intent of reconstructed social services.· 1989–1992; 1992–1994; 1995–1996; 1997–1998; 1998–1999; 1999–2000.

OCSE Fatherhood Access Visitation Reporting Instructions confirm child sexual abuse is not a factor.

For fun, I’m posting screenshots relevant to Clinton’s involvement.