by Frank Holmes, reporter
Child porn is the most sickening plague in the world. Hiding it from decent people’s eyes is one of the best things any government can do — unless the degenerate material they’re hiding belonged to a Supreme Court nominee.
Covering up a High Court candidate’s complicated history with child porn would be one of the most despicable things any government could do. The Biden administration may be guilty of just that.
They’re reportedly hiding tens of thousands of pages of documents that Senate Republicans want to look at, from when “KBJ” served on the U.S. Sentencing Commission under Barack Obama (2010 until 2014).
Ketanji Brown Jackson’s supporters say they’ve gone above and beyond the call of duty, releasing 12,000 documents. But document dumps release lots of useless material and duplicates—three copies of the same memo asking about coffee supplies and the like. Republicans critics say it was all a smokescreen.
Senator Chuck Grassley, R-Ia., said the Biden administration ponied up a “limited number of useful records.” But then they sat on four times as many documents, and they still haven’t turned over those 48,000 pages.
The public still doesn’t know what’s in the rest of the records — and, if Biden and Kamala have their way, we never will — but what is known is damning enough.
As part of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote that she felt child pornography sentences were unfair to the criminals.
Jackson wrote that she had spent her entire life thinking child pornographers were bad people. She wrote that she “mistakingly assumed that child pornography offenders are pedophiles,” but now she somehow believes that people who get their sexual satisfaction from watching children being violated aren’t pedophiles.
As part of the commission, Jackson said that she wanted “to understand this category of nonpedophiles who obtain child pornography.”
In her time on the U.S. Sentencing Commission, Judge Jackson said she “mistakingly assumed that child pornography offenders are pedophiles” and she wanted “to understand this category of nonpedophiles who obtain child pornography.” pic.twitter.com/ZM16VAqpLo
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) March 16, 2022
But Ketanji Brown Jackson’s soft on kiddie porn record doesn’t start with her work on this Obama-Biden era commission. It goes back at least as far as 1996, when she wrote a scholarly article for the prestigious Harvard Law Review saying maybe the criminal justice system should go easy on child pornographers.
Her article was titled “Prevention Versus Punishment: Toward a Principled Distinction in the Restraint on Released Sex Offenders” … and it’s almost an apology for enforcing laws against child molesters.
Jackson complained in the 1996 article that many new laws required molesters to become registered sex offenders, notify their neighbors of their sexual offender status, and submit to other restrictions. These laws are aimed at the “prevention” of a relapse, but Jackson said they seem like “punitive enactments that violate the rights of individuals who already have been sanctioned for their crime.”
Sure, notifying families that a child molester has just moved down the block might let parents know they need to protect their children. But “Community notification subjects ex-convicts to stigmatization and ostracism, and puts them at the mercy of a public that is outraged by sex crimes,” Jackson complained.
Sure, these laws protect kids from being molested, filmed, trafficked, and possibly killed—but think of the poor perverts’ “stigma”…it probably really hurts their feelings!
These are just a few stray sentences from a handful of documents. We know, thanks to Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley, that Ketanji Brown Jackson went easy on child pornography offenders as a federal judge. What we don’t know, at least not fully, is why.
Opening the records the Biden administration is hiding might just tell us that…and that’s why the president is keeping them under lock and key.
What’s in those records? Do the proceedings of this official government body—made long before Jackson thought she’d be nominated to the highest court in the land—tell us about the way she would make legal decisions on the bench?
Would they show that the judge has a soft spot for criminals? Could they tell us she’s an easy mark for a sob story?
Or is it possible they show that she just doesn’t care about the pain and suffering of victims of crime? Did these documents catch her making a cold comment about someone victimized by one of the monsters she would like to turn loose?
Is it possible there’s something in these mountains of papers the Democrats have hidden away from our eyes that would explain her real views on child pornography and the sexual abuse/exploitation of children?
We know one thing: When Washington tells you that you don’t need to see something, that’s the document you need to see more than any other.
What are they hiding? We need to know. Our children’s safety may just depend on it.
Frank Holmes is a veteran journalist and an outspoken conservative that talks about the news that was in his weekly article, “On The Holmes Front.”