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
What does their attorney have to say about this?