Senior Advisor for the Office to Combat Trafficking in Trump #47. Fmr Chairman for the COGOP. First latino elected to CO House District 15 from 2017-2023.
We thank the Lord God Almighty for giving us the opportunity to earn President Trump’s support.
#Trump knows Congress needs #AmericaFirst champions in DC who will work alongside him to secure our borders and get this economy working again.
👉 Donate now: https://t.co/NPvBxSdyFj
The Trump Administration calls on all governments to do their part to punish traffickers and protect their citizens and communities. Read the 2026 Trafficking in Persons Report: https://t.co/SVZmOGqwG8
A man objected to allowing a woman to kill her three young kids and get away with it, so NBC is trying to smear that juror, whose identity should be protected. Another low for legacy media.
If the juror is being harassed, Florida will provide asylum — I’m sure he’d be welcomed and appreciated.
One year ago, we tragically lost a fearless patriot. A champion for freedom and for our country.
Charlie Kirk changed the course of American history. His courage, conviction, and love of country will never be forgotten. ❤️
"Well done, good and faithful servant"
“He had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children.”
VICIOUSLY.
Not accidental.
Not unimaginable.
Not unknowingly.
VICIOUSLY.
And yet… SHE just moved past that???
These juror interviews are extraordinary. They are admitting openly that they disregarded the law entirely for the sake of letting Clancy off the hook. There’s no other way to read it.
One juror says she originally wanted to vote guilty but changed her mind so that “Lindsay could get the help she needs.” That is a clear violation of the law. They were supposed to make a determination solely about guilt or innocence. They were not there to make sure anyone “gets help.”
Another juror says she voted not guilty because the prosecution never produced “character witnesses” proving Clancy was a “bad mother.” The problem is that A) killing your children IS definitive evidence that you’re a bad mother, and B) the prosecution would not have been allowed to call those kinds of witnesses. A witness solely testifying that Clancy was a bad mother would have been purely prejudicial. So this juror acquitted because the prosecution failed to provide evidence that they weren’t allowed to provide and which would have been irrelevant anyway. Extraordinary. This same juror even admitted that it was a “fact” that Clancy “viciously killed her children.” The word vicious literally means “done maliciously and with intent.” So if that’s a fact then they were obligated to vote guilty. But they didn’t.
Meanwhile another juror swooned over the defense attorney’s “entertaining” demeanor. And another one said that all of the facts of the case — “everything,” her words — “proved” that Clancy “loved her children.” Apparently strangling your children to death, in this juror’s mind, does not at all call your love for them into question.
Just a collection of the most morally obtuse idiots ever assembled. Amazing.
Somebody actually asked DA Timothy Cruz if the Clancy prosecution was "insensitive."
He had to ask again to make sure he understood the idiocy of the question before responding:
"Insensitive?? Insensitive is killing three children."