I read the part of the affidadit that was available.
I would suggest the “Oath Keepers” distant themselves from this guy.
Agreed, they seem like skanky people to me.
Obviously they are not a militia and the people preparing the affidavit were in error.
Now, about the guy whipping up on his girlfriend and kids, she's still married to some other guy so technically the baby isn't his.
Sounds like she has some problems herself anyway.
What happens when it's your turn?
The issue is that CPS went after Oath Keepers, the cops let 'em, and the judge didn't question the honesty of the affidavit regarding the description of the Oath Keepers. That would call into question the honesty of the entire affidavit, and exposes a political motive in CPS action.
Whatever other shortcomings this man may have, the central point is that the government is listing his association with Oath Keepers as one of the reasons for forcibly taking his newborn daughter away from him.
THAT is what's important about this story.
I would suggest the “Oath Keepers” distant themselves from this guy.”
If I were you, I'd rethink that statement. His association with Oath Keepers & possession of firearms, both legal and constitutionally protected rights, were used to determine that his child should be taken, and that argument was accepted by the court. If it was just the abuse allegations, that should have been enough, and there was no reason to include the Oath Keepers and firearms. Do you see the point, now?
Who is next? You? Me? All the folks in the military who wear Oath Keeper patches on their uniforms? The retirees who also remember what oath they swore?
WRM, MSgt, USAF(Ret.) AKA Old Student