#Governor Greg Gianforte | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

coochiequeens · 4 months

Text

Update on a story I already posted about

By Anna Slatz February 5, 2024

The family at the center of a custody battle with Montana Child and Family Services over their 14-year-old “transgender” daughter is reportedly facing imminent arrest after speaking to media about their ordeal. Krista and Todd Kolstad had previously been ordered by a judge to remain silent on the case, but chose to speak out about their situation last week.

Reduxx was first to break the story after speaking to the Kolstads about their tragic situation on January 29. In the interview, the Kolstads revealed that their 14-year-old daughter, Jennifer*, had been removed from their custody after they declined to actively “affirm” her newfound gender identity. Montana Child and Family Services (CFS) argued to a court that it was in the child’s “therapeutic best interest” to have her gender identity “respected,” and a petition was presented for the child to be sent to a family member in Canada.

Stepmom Krista and “Jennifer” Kolstad. Photo Source: Provided.

The removal was the culmination of a months-long battle between the Kolstads and CFS which started on August 18, 2023, after Jennifer claimed to a friend that she was suicidal and suffering from terminal cancer. The friend reported the claims to police, who reached out to the Kolstads to confirm that Jennifer was alright.

Later on that evening, a CFS case worker arrived at the Kolstad home for an inspection and private interview with Jennifer, at which point the child declared she had drank toilet bowl cleaner and overdosed on pain medication.

Though she showed no symptoms of illness and had no access to either substances, Jennifer was taken to the hospital on an emergency basis for bloodwork, which conclusively determined she had fabricated her claim of overdosing. She also does not have a medical history of cancer despite having claimed to her friend that she was terminal.

The Kolstads attempted to inform CFS that Jennifer had a tendency of attention-seeking behavior and fabricating wild claims, but throughout the incident, Jennifer’s “gender identity” was the main point of contention. The child told CFS she identified as a “boy” named Leo, and that her parents were abusive and not willing to facilitate her gender transition.

Jennifer spent two days in the hospital for suicide monitoring, at which point the Kolstads agreed with CFS that she would benefit from being sent to a residential treatment facility for counseling. While there were a number of Montana-based facilities floated as options, the possibility of Jennifer being sent to Wyoming was also mentioned as an unlikely alternative.

The Kolstad family. Photo Source: Provided.

On August 22, the Kolstads were told that Jennifer was next in line for a bed in Billings. But, later on that same day, they received a call from the hospital informing them that she was instead being sent to an unnamed facility in Wyoming. Faced with a number of unanswered questions and a concern about Wyoming’s laws allowing children to transition, the Kolstads expressed a hesitancy to allow Jennifer to be sent across state lines.

Within 10 minutes of refusing to immediately sign paperwork releasing Jennifer to the facility, Montana Child and Family Services arrived at the Kolstad residence with police and served them with paperwork temporarily removing Jennifer from their custody.

Jennifer was eventually returned to Montana to enter a youth group home for additional counseling, but the Kolstad’s fight with CFS had only just begun.

Though initially told that Jennifer would be returned to their care after her time at the group home was finished, CFS petitioned the court to remove Jennifer from their custody completely and have her sent to her long-estranged biological mother in Canada.

“We were told that letting Jennifer transition and live as a boy was in her ‘therapeutic best interest’ and because we aren’t willing to follow that recommendation, the court gave CFS custody of Jennifer for six months,” Krista told Reduxx. “CFS is now going to place Jennifer in the care of her birth mother in Canada, who has never really been a part of her life. The judge said to us ‘you need to expect that reunification with your family may not be what you are expecting.’”

In response to the decision, the Kolstads released a video on social media pleading for help. The court demanded they remove it and issued a gag order restricting the Kolstads from speaking further on the case.

They voluntarily defied the order, re-uploaded the video, and spoke to press regardless out of concern over what was happening to their family. While a contempt of court hearing was set for January 29, the Kolstads had to file for a continuance in order to leave the state and attend to a severely ill family member in Ohio.

But the already-mind boggling story has only continued to grow in complexity after the Governor of Montana, Greg Gianforte, released a statement on X (formerly Twitter) siding with the decision of the state’s Child and Family Services.

While not directly accusing the Kolstads of abuse, Gianforte suggested that Jennifer was removed from the household for legitimate reasons.

While the CFS affidavit does extensively detail the child’s complaints of abuse for not being “affirmed” in her desire to live as a “boy,” the argument made by CFS that resulted in her being removed from her parent’s care was their hesitancy to immediately sign paperwork sending her to Wyoming.

Both the CFS affidavit and the accompanying report neglect to acknowledge that Jennifer had lied about having terminal cancer, drinking Clorox toilet cleaner, or overdosing on prescription medication — all statements that would lend weight to the parent’s initial warnings that Jennifer had a history of attention-seeking behavior.

The Montana Safety Assessment completed by CFS.

Previous accusations of household instability detailed in the CFS report from 2016 and 2017, both of which involved Todd’s ex-wife, were noted “unsubstantiated,” and there has never been any history of Todd nor Krista physically harming or otherwise neglecting any of their children’s care.

But despite the clear indications that the “abuse” in the Kolstad residence was limited to not affirming Jennifer’s “gender identity” and expressing a hesitancy to sign paperwork allowing Jennifer to go to Wyoming, a push to paint the Kolstad’s as legitimately abusive has begun in an apparent effort to justify CFS’s actions. Disturbingly, many of those pushes appear to originate directly from the Governor’s office.

Travis Hall, Governor Gianforte’s senior advisor, has shared two posts to his social media account in which it is implied that the Kolstads were severely abusing Jennifer.

In one post shared by Hall, a user claims that even children living in “absolute filth, meth labs, with both parents being dealers and addicts” were not taken away from their parents in the way Jennifer was, implying what was happening in the household was far worse.

Another post shared by Hall features a link to an article from TownHall reporter Stephen Brown which appears to have been created with the input of the Governor’s office. In the article, Brown refers to Jennifer with “they/them” pronouns, and runs defense for Gianforte’s suggestion that the Kolstads were abusing Jennifer and that CFS acted appropriately.

On X, an individual claiming to be a lawyer who works to “protect trans kids” in Montana has been spreading the false accusation that Todd Kolstad, Jennifer’s father, was “convicted” of domestic abuse. In actuality, documents reviewed by Reduxx demonstrate the charges, which were unrelated to Jennifer, were dropped in 2021. The Kolstads are currently engaged in a lawsuit against the Glasgow Police Department for their alleged mismanagement of that case, and the officer at the center of the suit is also being pursued by other Glasgow residents for similar acts of misconduct.

But while the Kolstads have experienced an outpouring of support on an international level after taking their story public, Governor Gianforte appears to be doubling down once again.

This time, the Kolstads have been made aware through their lawyer that they may be arrested when they return to Montana from Ohio where they are still caring for a sick relative.

“We were very concerned, but not surprised, to learn from a credible source that the Governor of Montana plans to arrest us the moment we step foot back in Montana. We are also told that he has tasked his senior adviser and director of strategic communications to use the media to punish us for speaking out about the state’s medical kidnapping of our daughter,” Krista Kolstad said to Reduxx in an exclusive statement.

“It was an abuse of power for the state to revoke custody of our daughter because we wouldn’t affirm her ‘gender identity.’ It is an abuse of power to use tax-dollars to smear us as negligent in the press despite records that prove we have always proactively sought care for our daughter’s ongoing, unrelated mental health issues. We have also followed medical recommendations pertaining to these issues since she has been in state custody. The only thing we ever objected to is ‘transitioning’ our daughter.”

Krista continued: “Any accusation that she was taken from our home due to abuse or neglect secondary to this issue is a bald-faced lie with political foundations. Our daughter is not a political pawn. She is a child and she should be with her family – not the state. We are never going to stop fighting for our daughter.”

Since receiving the news of their possible arrest, the Kolstads have no plan to return to Montana at this time.

Mattie Watkins, the family’s media representative reiterated Krista’s sentiments, and slammed Gianforte’s office for participating in the “smear” campaign against the Kolstads.

“We anticipated Governor Gianforte’s next move would be to smear US Air Force veteran, Todd Kolstad and his wife, Krista, as abusive parents. It’s clear that his top priority is his political reputation – not the child at the center of this increasingly political fight,” Watkins said.

“Surely to defame parents as abusive, to take away their child, requires some standard of evidence. If not, where does this stop? Which family, in which state, is next? In my opinion, Gianforte is giving state agents a manual on how to sever the parent-child relationship and bypass all levels of law and government in order to put any minor they like on the affirmation to lifelong medicalization pipeline. Our children are not safe in government care.”

*The child’s name has been changed at the request of her parents.

#usa #montana #Montana Child and Family Services #Transitioning minors without the consent of parents #The kid lied about consuming toxic products #She lied about having cancer #Wyoming #Governor of Montana Greg Gianforte

16 notes · View notes

politicaldilfs · 2 months

Text

Montana Governor DILFs

Greg Gianforte, Ted Schwinden, Marc Racicot, J. Hugo Aronson, Elmer Holt, Brian Schweitzer, Forrest H. Anderson, John E. Erickson, Frank Henry Cooney, Stan Stephens, Thomas Lee Judge, John W. Bonner, Roy E. Ayers, Sam C. Ford, Steve Bullock, Tim Babcock

#Greg Gianforte #Ted Schwinden #Marc Racicot #J. Hugo Aronson #Elmer Holt #Brian Schweitzer #Forrest H. Anderson #John E. Erickson #Frank Henry Cooney #Stan Stephens #Thomas Lee Judge #John W. Bonner #Roy E. Ayers #Sam C. Ford #Steve Bullock #Tim Babcock #GovernorDILFs

18 notes · View notes

metalheadsforblacklivesmatter · 1 year

Note

Hey, I wanted to thank you for disussing what’s happening in Florida right now. I also want to bring more awareness to what’s happening in my home state.

Montana governor Greg Gianforte just signed into law Senate Bill 458, legislation that inserts binary, reproduction-based (ie XX or XY chromosomes) definitions of “male,” “female” and “sex” into dozens of parts of state code.

This is but one of a recent slew of attacks on the LQBTQ+ community. Myself and most of my friends will be impacted by this and are scared about the precedents this sets.

Wow. I haven't heard about this one. Thank you for letting me know!

-fae

34 notes · View notes

the-football-chick · 1 year

Text

Lawmakers in Montana’s House voted 54-43 to approve a bill, SB419, to ban TikTok in the state. Should Republican Governor Greg Gianforte sign the bill, it would take effect in January 2024, and prohibit TikTok from operating within state lines and app stores from offering TikTok for downloads.

Most assuredly if signed, the bill will face significant legal challenges.

IG: worldstar (4/14/23)

#tik tok #lol #montana #tiktok ban

22 notes · View notes

fatehbaz · 2 years

Text

The most iconic predators in the American West are under attack, and top government officials and agencies are failing to uphold the law to protect them. Those are the allegations in a pair of lawsuits filed in federal and state court recently. Though filed separately, the two claims share a common concern: that wolf and grizzly bear populations in the Northern Rocky Mountains will be decimated. In the past year, leading wildlife biologists have spoken out with rising alarm about the fate of the predators in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana, where Republican lawmakers have advanced some of the most aggressive laws and proposals targeting the two species in recent history. [...]

In the past year, many top wildlife researchers in the Rocky Mountains have warned of a return to the bad old days of the 1880s following political changes in the region. [...] While politics have always shaped carnivore conservation, recent events have left many scientists horrified and outraged that decades of work could soon be lost. In January, 35 of the region’s most prominent wildlife biologists wrote an open letter objecting to petitions from Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho to delist grizzly bears. [...] If grizzlies were delisted, the biologists argued, they would likely face the same treatment that wolves across the Northern Rockies were already experiencing.

---

Outside the protected confines of Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming has long permitted a shoot-on-sight approach to wolves across much of the state. Last year, Republican lawmakers in Idaho and Montana took major steps in the same direction, passing laws to drastically slash wolf populations — in Idaho by as much as 90 percent — by granting individual hunters and trappers the authority to wipe out entire packs, and legalizing wolf bounty programs, aerial hunting, the use of snares, night hunting with night-vision goggles and other measures long seen as far outside the ethical bounds of “fair chase” hunting, which requires that hunters not take unfair advantage over the animals they seek.

---

In Montana specifically, the biologists wrote, science-based wildlife management “was replaced by anti-predator hysteria.”

“It doesn’t take a lot of imagination to realize that if grizzly bears were delisted and turned over to state management,” the letter said, “that the Montana legislature and governor would do the same thing to grizzlies that they are currently doing to wolves.” In addition to the states’ requests to delist the bears, Wyoming Republicans Rep. Liz Cheney and Sen. Cynthia Lummis have introduced bills to not only delist grizzlies, but also to bar public comment and prevent any judicial review of the decision. [...]

---

On October 27, the environmental groups WildEarth Guardians and Project Coyote, filed suit in a county court against the state of Montana; its Fish, Wildlife and Parks department; and the panel of citizen commissioners who make policy for FWP.

As The Intercept reported in an investigation in July, the 2020 election of Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte ushered in a radical reordering of the state’s wildlife governance, stacking the commission overseeing FWP with representatives from the trapping and trophy hunting industry, as well as campaign donors.

Among the core claims in the WildEarth Guardians-Project Coyote lawsuit is an argument is that the justification for Montana’s ultra-aggressive wolf hunt is based on unreliable data. [...]

During the 2021 session, Republican state legislators Bob Brown and Paul Fielder advanced a series of anti-wolf bills — all signed into law by Gianforte, endorsed by his handpicked FWP commissioners, and enforced by the department — based on the argument that Montana had too many wolves and at least 450 of the animals needed to be killed. “We’re not talking about necessarily ethical management of them,” Fielder said in the run-up to the 2021 hunt. “We want to reduce wolf numbers.” [...]

The Montana legislature reconvenes in January. In a public meeting in September, Fielder signaled that the state would ratchet up its war on wolves in 2023. “It was stated on the floor last session that this is not about ethical or fair chase, it was about reducing the number of wolves. Management starts with M-A-N, man. We’ve got to take control of things,” he said.

---

Image, caption, and all text by: Ryan Devereaux. “The fight to stop Republicans from killing wolves and grizzlies.” The Intercept. 5 November 2022.

45 notes · View notes

geezerwench · 1 year

Text

Republican "small government" passed yet another law. In Montana, state lawmakers passed a bill, SB419, banning TikTok. Completely. For everyone, not just state employees. Next, it goes to the governor's desk for signing.

----

"Montana became the first US state on Friday to pass legislation banning TikTok on all personal devices, sending a bill to Gov. Greg Gianforte prohibiting TikTok from operating within state lines and barring app stores from offering TikTok for downloads." - - CNN

Get you a VPN, gentles and ladymen.

#Montana #Republicans #nanny state #small government liars #small government #TikTok banned #TikTok #vpn #censorship

9 notes · View notes

tomorrowusa · 10 months

Text

An unusual legal victory for Planet Earth. And it happened in red Montana – of all places.

In a historic decision on Monday, a Montana state court ruled in favor of 16 young climate activists who claimed the state’s provisions to an environmental act violated their constitutional right to a clean and healthy environment. “Today, for the first time in U.S. history, a court ruled on the merits of a case that the government violated the constitutional rights of children through laws and actions that promote fossil fuels, ignore climate change and disproportionately imperil young people,” said Julia Olson, chief legal counsel and executive director of Our Children’s Trust, in a statement. Along with Our Children’s Trust, the young plaintiffs — now ages 5 to 22— are represented by attorneys with the Western Environmental Law Center and McGarvey Law. Together, they helped the plaintiffs sue Montana, its Governor Greg Gianforte and several state agencies in a lawsuit representing the first constitutional climate case in the United States.

It's a first, so that does set a bit of a precedent – even if the fossil fuel pushers get the ruling thrown out on appeal.

Lewis and Clark County Court Judge Kathy Seeley found Montana's energy laws allowed the state to permit projects without considering the impact of increasing greenhouse gas emissions. [ ... ] “By prohibiting consideration of climate change,” Seeley later wrote, “GHG emissions and how additional GHG emissions will contribute to climate change or be consistent with the Montana Constitution, the MEPA limitation violates plaintiffs’ right to a clean and healthful environment as is facially unconstitutional.”

Of course Republicans are hopping mad that the well-being of the planet was placed ahead of fossil fuel producer profits.

“This ruling is absurd, but not surprising from a judge who let the plaintiffs’ attorneys put on a weeklong taxpayer-funded publicity stunt that was supposed to be a trial,” said Emily Flower, spokesperson for Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, in a statement. Flower added that “Montanans can’t be blamed for changing the climate” and that the “same legal theory has been thrown out of federal court and courts in more than a dozen states.” In a previous statement, Flower called the entire lawsuit a “meritless publicity stunt” to increase fundraising for Our Children’s Trust “at the expense of Montana taxpayers.

Republicans care less about Montana taxpayers than they do about campaign contributions from the carbon lobby.

This was a local case decided under Montana law and provides another example of why we must get more involved in state politics and government.

#the environment #montana #our children's trust #climate change #climate law #state government #kathy seeley #fossil fuel lobby #greenhouse gas emissions #held v. the state of montana

4 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 1 year

Text

BREAKING NEWS

The Republican governor of Montana signed a bill into law to restrict transition care for transgender minors.

Friday, April 28, 2023 8:32 PM ET

Gov. Greg Gianforte had been urged by his son, who is nonbinary, to reject the bill. The Republican-controlled House barred a transgender lawmaker from the House floor after the debate.

9 notes · View notes

republicansaredomesticterrorists · 4 months

Text

The current Republican, Greg Gianforte, is a major asshole.

#greg gianforte #republican assholes

36 notes · View notes

isthedogawolfdog · 2 years

Text

So does anyone else remember when Montana governor Greg Gianforte killed a wolf back in 2021, violating Montana’s regulations and got away with only a slap on the wrist?

Cause I sure do.

#lest we not forget that he also body slammed a reporter a while back too #have I mentioned that I hate politicians

17 notes · View notes

kp777 · 1 year

Text

#greg gianforte #montana #abortion law #republicans

6 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 1 year

Text

NEW YORK (AP) — Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte on Wednesday signed into law a first-of-its kind bill that makes it illegal for TikTok to operate in the state, setting up a potential legal fight with the company amid a litany of questions over whether the state can even enforce the law.

The new rules in Montana will have more far-reaching effects than TikTok bans already in place on government-issued devices in nearly half the states and the U.S. federal government. There are 200,000 TikTok users in Montana as well as 6,000 businesses that use the video-sharing platform, according to company spokesperson Jamal Brown.

Here’s what you need to know:

WHY IS MONTANA BANNING TIKTOK?

Proponents of the law in Montana claim the Chinese government could harvest U.S. user data from TikTok and use the platform to push pro-Beijing misinformation or messages to the public.

That mirrors arguments made by a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the U.S. Senate, as well as the heads of the FBI and the CIA, all of whom have said TikTok could pose a national security threat because its Beijing-based parent company ByteDance operates under Chinese law.

Critics have pointed to China’s 2017 national intelligence law that compels companies to cooperate with the country’s governments for state intelligence work. Another Chinese law, implemented in 2014, has similar mandates.

TikTok says it has never been asked to hand over its data, and it wouldn’t do so if asked.

HOW DOES MONTANA PLAN TO BAN TIKTOK?

The law will prohibit downloads of TikTok in the state and fine any “entity” — an app store or TikTok — $10,000 per day for each time someone accesses TikTok, “is offered the ability” to access it, or downloads it.

That means Apple and Google, which operate app stores on Apple and Android devices, would be liable for any violations. Penalties would not apply to users.

The statewide ban won't take effect until January 2024. It would be void if the social media platform is sold to a company that is not based in "any country designated as a foreign adversary” by the federal government.

The governor indicated he wants to expand the bill to other social media apps in order to address some of the bill’s “technical and legal concerns.” But the legislature adjourned before sending him the bill, which meant he couldn’t offer his amendments.

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen has pointed to technology used to restrict online sports gambling apps as a way to curtail TikTok from operating in the state. Those violations can be reported by anyone. And once the state verifies a breach has taken place, it sends a cease-and-desist letter to the company involved, said Kyler Nerison, a spokesperson for Knudsen's office. He said different companies use different methods for compliance and it's up to them “to not allow their apps to work in Montana and other states where they are not legal.”

SO, COULD THE TIKTOK BAN WORK?

Cybersecurity experts say that, other than avoiding the fine, there's nothing incentivizing the companies involved to comply and it will be extremely difficult — if not impossible — to adequately enforce the law.

For one, the U.S. doesn't have anything equivalent to the type of control countries like China have on what their citizens access on the web. Compounding that, internet service providers are out of the picture.

Before the Montana law passed, lawmakers rewrote portions of the bill to let them off the hook after a lobbyist for AT&T said during a February hearing the legislation was “not workable” to put into effect.

COULD TECH COMPANIES BLOCK IT?

Apple and Google have not spoken out against the law. But a representative for TechNet, the trade group that counts the two tech giants as its members, has said app stores don’t have the ability to “geofence” apps in different states and it would be impossible to prevent TikTok from being downloaded in Montana. The group has also said the responsibility should be on an app to determine where it can operate, not an app store.

Telecoms analyst Roger Entner, of Recon Analytics, says he believes the app stores could have the capability to enforce the law, but it would be cumbersome to implement and full of loopholes. Apple and Google’s address-linked billing could be bypassed with prepaid cards and IP geolocation easily masked by using a VPN service, which can alter IP addresses and allows users to evade content restrictions, said mobile security expert Will Strafach, the founder of Guardian, which makes a privacy protection app for Apple devices.

Oded Vanunu, head of products vulnerability research at the cybersecurity firm Check Point, agreed it would be difficult for app stores to isolate a single state from downloading an app. He suggested it would be more feasible for TikTok to comply since it controls the software and can “adjust the settings based on the geographical location or IP addresses" of users.

COULD TIKTOK BLOCK ITSELF?

When users allow TikTok to collect their location information, it can track a person to at least 3 square kilometers (1.16 square miles) from their actual location. If that feature is disabled, TikTok can still collect approximate location information - such as the region, city or zip code in which a user may be located - based on device or network information, like an IP address.

But similar to the app stores, cybersecurity experts note that any enforcement measures the company implements could be easily bypassed with a VPN and efforts to use IP geolocating might lead to other issues.

David Choffnes, the executive director of the Cybersecurity and Privacy Institute at Northeastern University, said cell providers may use the same types of IP addresses for multiple states, which could mean someone who is not in Montana could incorrectly be blocked from using TikTok.

WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN NEXT?

Likely a legal battle.

Knudsen, Montana's attorney general, has already said he expects the law will end up in court.

TikTok spokesperson Brooke Oberwetter said in a prepared statement Wednesday that the law infringes on Montanan's free speech rights and is unlawful.

“We want to reassure Montanans that they can continue using TikTok to express themselves, earn a living, and find community as we continue working to defend the rights of our users inside and outside of Montana,” Oberwetter said.

Oberwetter declined to say if the company will file a lawsuit but described some of the legal issues at play. She argued Montana is attempting to override U.S. foreign policy by claiming the bill addresses a national security risk. She said foreign policy and national security laws are not made at the state level.

NetChoice, a trade group that represents TikTok and other tech companies, says the bill would violate the First Amendment and “bill of attainder” laws that prohibit the government from imposing a punishment on a specific entity without a formal trial.

#nunyas news

4 notes · View notes