lifesitenews--2020-11-13--Viganò‘s full interview with EWTN’s Raymond Arroyo on what Vatican got wrong in McCarrick Report

November 13 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – In the following Nov. 12 interview with EWTN ’ s Raymond Arroyo , Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò , the former papal representative to the United States , responds to the recently released McCarrick Report .
Raymond Arroyo : Your Excellency , the report claims you “ did not come forward ” to present evidence for this Vatican inquiry : were you asked to provide information ?
Did anyone reach out to you ?
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò : I am surprised to discover that a Report in which I am mentioned 306 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come forward ” to testify in this Vatican inquiry on Theodore McCarrick .
But according to the norm of canon law , the calling of witnesses is the responsibility of the one who is in charge of the process , on the basis of evidence gathered in the investigation phase .
My first intervention about McCarrick , which I made as Delegate for Pontifical Representations in the Secretariat of State , dates back to December 6 , 2006 , following a report of the then-Nuncio to the United States , Archbishop Pietro Sambi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presented a second Memorandum that reported facts of such gravity and in such detail that it led me to recommend that McCarrick be deposed as Cardinal and that he be reduced to the lay state .
My Testimony of August 2018 is known to everyone , as are my subsequent declarations .
It is completely incomprehensible and anomalous that it was not considered opportune to call upon me to testify .
But it is even more disturbing that this deliberate omission was then used against me .
And they can not claim that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of State has my personal email address , which is still active .
On the other hand , just as I was not consulted for the drafting of the McCarrick Report , so also in 2012 , the three cardinals whom Benedict XVI placed in charge of the Vatileaks 1 investigation , did not call upon me to give testimony , even though I was also personally involved .
Only after my explicit request , did Cardinal Julian Herranz , the head of the Commission , permit me to give a deposition , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really want to ... !
” Furthermore , it also seems significant to me that James Grein , the only victim of McCarrick ’ s sexual molestations who had the courage to denounce him publicly , does not appear in the Report , and that there is no trace of his testimony , in which he would have also reported the trip he made with McCarrick to St. Gallen at the end of the 1950s .
From the public statements of James Grein , it is clear that the beginning of McCarrick ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ young , newly ordained priest – coincided with that visit to Switzerland , to a monastery that was later the site of the meetings of the conspirators of the so-called “ St .
Gallen mafia.
” According to the declarations of the deceased Cardinal Godfried Danneels , that group of prelates decided to support the election of Bergoglio both after the death of John Paul II as well as during the conclave that followed the controversial resignation of Benedict XVI .
I recall that during a conference at Villanova University on October 11 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having supported the election of Cardinal Bergoglio at the beginning of the General Congregations prior to the conclave that had been held a few months earlier [ in March 2013 ] .
I wonder what sort of reliability a judicial body can have that has such an obvious conflict of interest due to its past relationship with the accused .
How can Bergoglio and the Secretariat of State that depends on him pretend to appear impartial when McCarrick went to the Vatican with an abnormal frequency ; when in June 2013 he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a diplomatic trip to China ?
And how can one not think that their repeated attempts at cover-up and denial of their responsibility are the cause of the systematic effort to discredit me as a witness , in order not to bring to light the complicity and connivances that exist between them and McCarrick himself ?
The Pope , according to the report , maintains that you did not inform him of McCarrick ’ s activities or restrictions in June of 2013 .
Your response ?
This statement is absolutely false .
First @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , on June 23 , 2013 , who explicitly asked me my opinion of McCarrick .
As I testified in my 2018 Memoir : I answered him with complete frankness [ … ] : “ Holy Father , I don ’ t know if you know Cardinal McCarrick , but if you ask the Congregation for Bishops there is a dossier this thick about him .
He corrupted generations of seminarians and priests and Pope Benedict ordered him to withdraw to a life of prayer and penance.
” The Pope did not make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ words of mine and did not show any expression of surprise on his face , as if he had already known the matter for some time , and he immediately changed the subject .
But then , what was the Pope ’ s purpose in asking me that question : “ What is Cardinal McCarrick like ?
” He clearly wanted to find out if I was an ally of McCarrick or not .
It should be noted that I had learned from McCarrick himself that Bergoglio had received him four days before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authorized him to go to China .
What was the point of asking me for an opinion , when Bergoglio already held McCarrick in the highest esteem ?
McCarrick meanwhile came quietly to Rome , received assignments from the Vatican , including official ones , and carried on with his activities as if nothing had happened .
In May 2014 , I learned from the Washington Times of a trip McCarrick made to the Central African Republic on behalf of the Department of State ( the Secretary of State was then John Kerry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Report .
We are talking about 2014 .
And yet beginning in 2008 , Benedict XVI had ordered the American Cardinal to retire to a private life , not to celebrate or attend public events , and not to make trips .
For this reason , given the way that McCarrick was being treated , I asked Cardinal Parolin if the sanctions against McCarrick were still to be considered valid .
But I received no response .
At that point , having reported to the Pope in person , and having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State , what more could I do ?
To whom could I appeal ?
From the Report , I learn that McCarrick ’ s continuous assignments and travels abroad were considered by Archbishop Wuerl and even by Nuncio Sambi ( deceased in 2011 ) as a “ sufficient form of removal ” ( cf .
footnote 1013 of the Report ) .
And I remain sincerely shocked to learn from the Report that : …the indications were not “ sanctions ” ; they were not imposed by Pope Benedict XVI ; McCarrick was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; McCarrick was not prohibited from giving lectures ; Cardinal Re did not impose on McCarrick “ the obligation ” of dedicating himself to a life of prayer and penance ; and McCarrick remained free to conduct activities , including travel , with the permission of the Holy See , including the Nuncio ( cf .
footnote 1006 , ibidem ) .
If this is so , it means that despite the Cardinal ’ s reprehensible conduct , the Holy See did not consider it appropriate to take disciplinary measures against McCarrick , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Curia .
The report goes to great pains to attempt to paint you as somehow lax in investigating the claims of Priest 3 .
( They brush by the fact that it was you who brought these concerns to the Holy See in the first place ) .
Did you avoid placing yourself “ in a position to ascertain the credibility of Priest 3 ” ?
It is obvious what my role was in bringing McCarrick ’ s scandals to light , and that I have always taken steps to report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Holy See .
I recall that we are talking about 2012 , when I had just been appointed Nuncio to the United States .
In the Report I am accused of not having followed up on the request for information regarding the accusations made by “ Priest 3 ” against McCarrick .
This is absolutely false !
It is the writers of the Report themselves who provide the evidence of the deception they have concocted in order to crush me and discredit me .
In fact , elsewhere in the Report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 2013 , I wrote to Cardinal Ouellet , sending him both the letter that Bishop Bootkoski had written to me , as well as the letter sent to “ Priest 3.
” I informed him that the civil case of “ Priest 3 ” had been dismissed without the possibility of appeal .
Bishop Bootkoski characterized the accusations of “ Priest 3 ” as false and slanderous .
I would like to emphasize one aspect in particular .
Those who accuse me of not having sent a written communication to Bishop Bootkoski @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” and Bishop of Metuchen , know very well that this depends on the precise directions of the Secretariat of State .
And they know equally well – as the Report confirms – that there was a telephone communication between Bishop Bootkoski and me , about which I in turn informed Cardinal Ouellet .
It should not be forgotten that in those years there were lawyers who were not content to bring Dioceses to judgment for crimes committed by priests , but who wanted to demonstrate that the Holy See itself – like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ held the ultimate responsibility for giving compensation to victims of molestation .
Lawyer Jeffrey Lena knows something about this ; he succeeded in two separate trials in preventing responsibility for the cover-up of abuse from falling on Pope Benedict XVI .
And what are your thoughts on the Report placing the lion share of the blame for McCarrick ’ s rise and place in the Church at the feet of John Paul II and Benedict XVI ?
The intentions of the one who drafted the Report are clear : to pass off responsibility @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Predecessors , one of whom is deceased and canonized ( John Paul II ) , the other who is old and weak ( Benedict XVI ) .
The former can not defend himself from the grave , while the latter is too meek to blatantly disavow his successor by calling him a liar and discrediting him , as well as the function he holds .
The disturbing thing is that within the Report itself – which was obviously put together by many hands – there are numerous contradictions , enough to make the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I wonder then : who convinced John Paul II and Benedict XVI not to take into account the serious accusations against McCarrick ?
Who had an interest in getting McCarrick promoted , so that he could gain an advantage in terms of power and money ?
Someone probably made John Paul II believe that the accusations against McCarrick were fabricated , following the model of the discrediting operations that communist Poland had already carried out against good bishops and priests who opposed the regime .
In the case of John Paul II , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of McCarrick was definitely Cardinal Sodano .
He was Secretary of State until September 2006 : all information came to him .
In November 2000 Nuncio Montalvo sent him his report and the accusations of grave abuse committed by McCarrick .
Let ’ s not forget that in this period the Father Maciel scandal broke out .
Sodano sought to cover it up by falsifying a statement of Benedict XVI , in which it was said that the Pope considered the case closed .
Benedict XVI called a plenary session of the Congregation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cardinal Arinze succeeded in having Maciel condemned , despite the opposition of the Secretary of State .
The name of Cardinal Sodano also appeared in connection to a scandalous real estate speculation .
In 2003 , the Cardinal ’ s nephew , the engineer Andrea Sodano , with letters of recommendation from his uncle the Secretary of State and in his capacity as a consultant to the Follieri real estate group ( in some official documents he is also indicated as vice-president of the group ) , acquired property at rock bottom prices @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compensate damages from civil sexual abuse cases , obtaining an enormous economic advantage for himself to the detriment of the Church .
Raffaello Follieri , the owner of the group , was convicted of fraud and money laundering , precisely because of reckless transactions in the sale of these properties .
Needless to say , Follieri had a close relationship with the Clinton Global Initiative and with the Clinton family , as well as the Democratic party : “ The former President and Senator Hillary are our friends , ” Follieri boasted .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the same acquaintances always recur : McCarrick , Clinton , Biden , the Democrats , and the Modernists , along with a procession of homosexuals and molesters that is not irrelevant .
With regard to Benedict XVI , the ones who had daily , direct access to the Pope were the Secretary of State Bertone and the Substitute Sandri , who were able to control and filter information about McCarrick and exert pressure on the Holy Father .
Once again , the Report speaks for itself .
The one who presented the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cardinal Bertone , who , contrary to what I had repeatedly proposed – namely , that the very grave and detailed accusations against McCarrick required an exemplary canonical process leading to his removal from the College of Cardinals and his reduction to the lay state – led Pope Benedict to decide that no canonical process should be undertaken nor should any canonical sanctions be prescribed , but that instead “ a simple appeal to McCarrick ’ s conscience and ecclesial spirit ” would be made .
And here yet another flagrant contradiction appears @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reconcile a simple appeal to conscience with the formal instructions that were given both to Nuncio Sambi and to me , according to which McCarrick could not reside in the seminary where he was living , could not participate in public activities , could not travel , and had to lead a retired life of prayer and penance ?
The corruption of the highest levels of the Vatican is so evident that it leads one to consider the Report as an unworthy attempt to make Bergoglio appear absolutely alien to the manipulations of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of implacable persecutor of the corrupt , while the evidence of the facts demonstrates the opposite .
I would say that Bergoglio is to the deep church what Biden is to the deep state ...
I would like to also note that the fact of blaming John Paul II for the appointment of McCarrick , despite the negative opinion of the Congregation of Bishops and its Prefect Cardinal Re , could be applied also to Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself , about whom the Superior General of the Jesuits expressed strong reservations .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for this reason , is considered implicitly responsible for the scandals that occurred , what prevents this judgment from also being extended to the promotion of Bergoglio as Archbishop of Buenos Aires and then as Cardinal ?
Let ’ s remember that in the Consistory of 2001 , in addition to McCarrick and Bergoglio , other leading members of the Saint Gallen Mafia received the red hat ... Is there anything else we should cover ?
In conclusion I would like to quote a recent article by Riccardo Cascioli , adopting his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the figure of a McCarrick who was a serial predator emerges from the Report , no great reaction was triggered until 2017 , when the first report of the abuse of a minor arrived .
[ ... ] In practice we are told that “ immoral behavior with adults , ” while certainly not a good thing , is however in the end something that is tolerated .
The real alarm , the one that provides for penalties , even heavy ones , is sounded only if the one abused is a minor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of future priests who shared a bed with McCarrick , and who were thus for the most part condemned to an unbalanced priestly life , didn ’ t really count for much .
As if the moral devastation and the destruction of faith caused by a bishop-predator – lost vocations , priests who in turn repeated the abuse , episcopal appointments distorted by pathological ties – were all only a minor problem .
[ … ] It was deliberately ignored that what permitted McCarrick ’ s irresistible rise is a system of power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which favors the appointment and career of bishops with certain characteristics .
[ ... ] No , there really is no sign at all that the Church has learned anything from the McCarrick affair ; there is rather the sense that one person was made to pay so that others could quietly continue .
And in the meantime advancing the idea that if a priest has homosexual tendencies , it ’ s no problem .
In this grotesque farce , which is now cloaked in a false semblance of legalism , there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through the mud – its prestige before the world , its authority over the faithful – in order to save the now-compromised image of corrupt , unworthy , depraved prelates .
I limit myself to observing that even now , in the Vatican , Bergoglio still surrounds himself with notorious homosexuals and people with gravely compromised reputations .
This is the most blatant disavowal of Bergoglio ’ s supposed moralizing work .

'The corruption of the highest levels of the Vatican is so evident that it leads one to consider the Report as an unworthy attempt to make Bergoglio appear absolutely alien to the manipulations of the Curia, indeed as a sort of implacable persecutor of the corrupt, while the evidence of the facts demonstrates the opposite'
November 13, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In the following Nov. 12 interview with EWTN’s Raymond Arroyo, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the former papal representative to the United States, responds to the recently released McCarrick Report.
Raymond Arroyo: Your Excellency, the report claims you “did not come forward” to present evidence for this Vatican inquiry: were you asked to provide information? Did anyone reach out to you?
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: I am surprised to discover that a Report in which I am mentioned 306 times accuses me of not having “come forward” to testify in this Vatican inquiry on Theodore McCarrick. But according to the norm of canon law, the calling of witnesses is the responsibility of the one who is in charge of the process, on the basis of evidence gathered in the investigation phase.
My first intervention about McCarrick, which I made as Delegate for Pontifical Representations in the Secretariat of State, dates back to December 6, 2006, following a report of the then-Nuncio to the United States, Archbishop Pietro Sambi. Subsequently, in 2008, I presented a second Memorandum that reported facts of such gravity and in such detail that it led me to recommend that McCarrick be deposed as Cardinal and that he be reduced to the lay state. My Testimony of August 2018 is known to everyone, as are my subsequent declarations.
It is completely incomprehensible and anomalous that it was not considered opportune to call upon me to testify. But it is even more disturbing that this deliberate omission was then used against me. And they cannot claim that I made myself untraceable: the Secretariat of State has my personal email address, which is still active.
On the other hand, just as I was not consulted for the drafting of the McCarrick Report, so also in 2012, the three cardinals whom Benedict XVI placed in charge of the Vatileaks 1 investigation, did not call upon me to give testimony, even though I was also personally involved. Only after my explicit request, did Cardinal Julian Herranz, the head of the Commission, permit me to give a deposition, with these words: “If you really want to…!”
Furthermore, it also seems significant to me that James Grein, the only victim of McCarrick’s sexual molestations who had the courage to denounce him publicly, does not appear in the Report, and that there is no trace of his testimony, in which he would have also reported the trip he made with McCarrick to St. Gallen at the end of the 1950s.
From the public statements of James Grein, it is clear that the beginning of McCarrick’s climb – he was then a young, newly ordained priest – coincided with that visit to Switzerland, to a monastery that was later the site of the meetings of the conspirators of the so-called “St. Gallen mafia.” According to the declarations of the deceased Cardinal Godfried Danneels, that group of prelates decided to support the election of Bergoglio both after the death of John Paul II as well as during the conclave that followed the controversial resignation of Benedict XVI.
— Article continues below Petition — U.S. Catholic Bishops: Retract premature and offensive statement "congratulating" Biden-Harris Show Petition Text 13406 have signed the petition. Let's get to 15000 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition PETITION UPDATE (12/10/20) Prior to the election on November 3, the U.S. bishops as a whole did not address Joe Biden’s anti-Catholic position regarding faith and morals. The bishops’ lack of clarity is a scandal in itself and probably contributed to the possible election of a pro-abortion “Catholic” to the presidency. The bishops could have spoken out against Biden’s stance collectively, but they were overwhelmingly silent. Because of this, they will be at least partly responsible for the policies advanced by a Biden administration, in the event that Biden is sworn into office. Please SIGN and SHARE this petition today! Since Archbishop José H. Gomez and the USCCB prematurely congratulated Joe Biden as “the second United States president to profess the Catholic faith,” Gomez has announced that Archbishop Allen H. Vigneron will lead a “working group” to deal with a Biden Administration. Although Joe Biden professes to be a Catholic, he supports policies that directly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church, including abortion, homosexual “marriage,” and transgenderism for children. “[Biden has] given us reason to believe that he will support policies that are against some fundamental values that we hold dear as Catholics. These policies include the repeal of the Hyde Amendment and the preservation of Roe v. Wade. Both of these policies undermine our pre-eminent priority of the elimination of abortion,” said Gomez. On November 9, Archbishop Strickland of Tyler, Texas tweeted: “A dark cloud has descended on this nation when the USCCB and Planned Parenthood speak in unison in support of a Biden-Harris administration that supports the slaughter of innocents by abortion for all 9 months of pregnancy.” Additionally, Archbishop Samuel Aquila of Denver, Colorado and Archbishop Charles Chaput have both declared publicly that Joe Biden “should not receive Holy Communion." Unfortunately, Cardinal Wilton Gregory of Washington, D.C. has said that he will give Holy Communion to Biden because “it’s a matter of the responsibility that I have as the archbishop to be engaged and to be in dialogue with him, even in those areas where we obviously have some differences.” Bishop W. Francis Malooly of Wilmington, Delaware and Bishop McElroy of San Diego also congratulated Biden in statements, but they have not indicated whether or not they would administer Holy Communion to him. The bishops should not congratulate someone who has betrayed his Catholic Faith like Joe Biden has. It's an embarrassment and a scandal. FOR MORE INFORMATION: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/us-bishops-concerned-about-pro-abortion-biden-previously-hailed-him-as-second-catholic-president https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/abp-aquila-backs-call-for-pro-abortion-catholic-joe-biden-to-be-denied-holy-communion?utm_source=top_news&utm_campaign=standard https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/former-philly-archbishop-biden-not-in-full-communion-with-the-catholic-church https://www.thesoutherncross.org/news/bishop-mcelroy-offers-prayers-and-congratulations-to-president-elect-biden/ https://www.ncronline.org/news/politics/us-catholics-weigh-mixed-reaction-biden-win _______________________________________________________________________ The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has finally spoken on Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.... Not to chastise them for their blatant anti-life, anti-family and anti-Catholic views, but to "congratulate" them on "[being elected]"! BUT, as everyone know, the anti-Catholic Biden-Harris ticket has NOT been elected. Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition to the U.S. Catholic bishops telling them to retract their premature and offensive statement on the media's call of the election in Biden's favor. As of the launch of this petition on November 9, NOT ONE STATE has certified the election results. All of the results are tentative and many are being litigated. So, this is not the time for the bishops to falsely assert that Biden "has received enough votes to be elected the 46th President of the United States." That's just not true, and for the bishops to willingly play along with the media's attempt to sweep allegations of voter fraud under the rug, is shocking behavior. And, while Joe Biden may profess the Catholic Faith, he has also stated his support for abortion, homosexual "marriage," and recently, transgenderism for children. For bishops, therefore, to congratulate a traitor to the Catholic Faith like Joe Biden, it requires a disturbing level of arrogance and pride. That is not to say they should stand in judgement. But to congratulate such a man, rather than chastise him, sends exactly the wrong message to the faithful, 50% of whom are believed to have supported Biden in his election bid. Stop ingratiating yourselves to a person who is advocating mass murder! Stop congratulating this anti-Catholic "Catholic." For goodness' sake, grow a backbone and start defending the Faith! FOR MORE INFORMATION: 'US Bishops hail Biden as second Catholic president, ignoring his pro-abortion record and disputed election outcome' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/us-bishops-hail-biden-as-second-catholic-president-ignoring-his-pro-abortion-record-and-disputed-election-outcome **Photo Credit: Screen grab from USCCB's Twitter feed. Original photo: CNS Photo/Colton Machado/Archdiocese of LA Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
I recall that during a conference at Villanova University on October 11, 2013, then-Cardinal McCarrick admitted to having supported the election of Cardinal Bergoglio at the beginning of the General Congregations prior to the conclave that had been held a few months earlier [in March 2013].
I wonder what sort of reliability a judicial body can have that has such an obvious conflict of interest due to its past relationship with the accused. How can Bergoglio and the Secretariat of State that depends on him pretend to appear impartial when McCarrick went to the Vatican with an abnormal frequency; when in June 2013 he was tasked [by Bergoglio] with making a diplomatic trip to China? And how can one not think that their repeated attempts at cover-up and denial of their responsibility are the cause of the systematic effort to discredit me as a witness, in order not to bring to light the complicity and connivances that exist between them and McCarrick himself?
The Pope, according to the report, maintains that you did not inform him of McCarrick’s activities or restrictions in June of 2013. Your response?
This statement is absolutely false. First of all, it was Bergoglio himself, on June 23, 2013, who explicitly asked me my opinion of McCarrick. As I testified in my 2018 Memoir:
I answered him with complete frankness […]: “Holy Father, I don’t know if you know Cardinal McCarrick, but if you ask the Congregation for Bishops there is a dossier this thick about him. He corrupted generations of seminarians and priests and Pope Benedict ordered him to withdraw to a life of prayer and penance.” The Pope did not make the slightest comment about those very grave words of mine and did not show any expression of surprise on his face, as if he had already known the matter for some time, and he immediately changed the subject. But then, what was the Pope’s purpose in asking me that question: “What is Cardinal McCarrick like?” He clearly wanted to find out if I was an ally of McCarrick or not.
It should be noted that I had learned from McCarrick himself that Bergoglio had received him four days before my audience, and that Bergoglio had authorized him to go to China. What was the point of asking me for an opinion, when Bergoglio already held McCarrick in the highest esteem?
McCarrick meanwhile came quietly to Rome, received assignments from the Vatican, including official ones, and carried on with his activities as if nothing had happened. In May 2014, I learned from the Washington Times of a trip McCarrick made to the Central African Republic on behalf of the Department of State (the Secretary of State was then John Kerry): this trip is also mentioned in the Report. We are talking about 2014. And yet beginning in 2008, Benedict XVI had ordered the American Cardinal to retire to a private life, not to celebrate or attend public events, and not to make trips.
For this reason, given the way that McCarrick was being treated, I asked Cardinal Parolin if the sanctions against McCarrick were still to be considered valid. But I received no response.
At that point, having reported to the Pope in person, and having received no answer from the Secretary of State, what more could I do? To whom could I appeal?
From the Report, I learn that McCarrick’s continuous assignments and travels abroad were considered by Archbishop Wuerl and even by Nuncio Sambi (deceased in 2011) as a “sufficient form of removal” (cf. footnote 1013 of the Report). And I remain sincerely shocked to learn from the Report that:
…the indications were not “sanctions”; they were not imposed by Pope Benedict XVI; McCarrick was never forbidden to celebrate Mass in public; McCarrick was not prohibited from giving lectures; Cardinal Re did not impose on McCarrick “the obligation” of dedicating himself to a life of prayer and penance; and McCarrick remained free to conduct activities, including travel, with the permission of the Holy See, including the Nuncio (cf. footnote 1006, ibidem).
If this is so, it means that despite the Cardinal’s reprehensible conduct, the Holy See did not consider it appropriate to take disciplinary measures against McCarrick, which confirms my denunciation of the corruption of the Curia.
The report goes to great pains to attempt to paint you as somehow lax in investigating the claims of Priest 3. (They brush by the fact that it was you who brought these concerns to the Holy See in the first place). Did you avoid placing yourself “in a position to ascertain the credibility of Priest 3”?
It is obvious what my role was in bringing McCarrick’s scandals to light, and that I have always taken steps to report any information that came into my possession to the Holy See. I recall that we are talking about 2012, when I had just been appointed Nuncio to the United States.
In the Report I am accused of not having followed up on the request for information regarding the accusations made by “Priest 3” against McCarrick. This is absolutely false! It is the writers of the Report themselves who provide the evidence of the deception they have concocted in order to crush me and discredit me. In fact, elsewhere in the Report it says that, on June 13, 2013, I wrote to Cardinal Ouellet, sending him both the letter that Bishop Bootkoski had written to me, as well as the letter sent to “Priest 3.” I informed him that the civil case of “Priest 3” had been dismissed without the possibility of appeal. Bishop Bootkoski characterized the accusations of “Priest 3” as false and slanderous.
I would like to emphasize one aspect in particular. Those who accuse me of not having sent a written communication to Bishop Bootkoski, the Ordinary of “Priest 3” and Bishop of Metuchen, know very well that this depends on the precise directions of the Secretariat of State. And they know equally well – as the Report confirms – that there was a telephone communication between Bishop Bootkoski and me, about which I in turn informed Cardinal Ouellet.
It should not be forgotten that in those years there were lawyers who were not content to bring Dioceses to judgment for crimes committed by priests, but who wanted to demonstrate that the Holy See itself – like the headquarters of a multinational company – held the ultimate responsibility for giving compensation to victims of molestation. Lawyer Jeffrey Lena knows something about this; he succeeded in two separate trials in preventing responsibility for the cover-up of abuse from falling on Pope Benedict XVI.
And what are your thoughts on the Report placing the lion share of the blame for McCarrick’s rise and place in the Church at the feet of John Paul II and Benedict XVI?
The intentions of the one who drafted the Report are clear: to pass off responsibility for the promotions of McCarrick to his Predecessors, one of whom is deceased and canonized (John Paul II), the other who is old and weak (Benedict XVI). The former cannot defend himself from the grave, while the latter is too meek to blatantly disavow his successor by calling him a liar and discrediting him, as well as the function he holds. The disturbing thing is that within the Report itself – which was obviously put together by many hands – there are numerous contradictions, enough to make the arguments set forth have little credibility.
I wonder then: who convinced John Paul II and Benedict XVI not to take into account the serious accusations against McCarrick? Who had an interest in getting McCarrick promoted, so that he could gain an advantage in terms of power and money?
Someone probably made John Paul II believe that the accusations against McCarrick were fabricated, following the model of the discrediting operations that communist Poland had already carried out against good bishops and priests who opposed the regime.
In the case of John Paul II, the main party interested in the promotion of McCarrick was definitely Cardinal Sodano. He was Secretary of State until September 2006: all information came to him. In November 2000 Nuncio Montalvo sent him his report and the accusations of grave abuse committed by McCarrick.
Let’s not forget that in this period the Father Maciel scandal broke out. Sodano sought to cover it up by falsifying a statement of Benedict XVI, in which it was said that the Pope considered the case closed. Benedict XVI called a plenary session of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Cardinal Arinze succeeded in having Maciel condemned, despite the opposition of the Secretary of State.
The name of Cardinal Sodano also appeared in connection to a scandalous real estate speculation. In 2003, the Cardinal’s nephew, the engineer Andrea Sodano, with letters of recommendation from his uncle the Secretary of State and in his capacity as a consultant to the Follieri real estate group (in some official documents he is also indicated as vice-president of the group), acquired property at rock bottom prices from American dioceses that were condemned to compensate damages from civil sexual abuse cases, obtaining an enormous economic advantage for himself to the detriment of the Church. Raffaello Follieri, the owner of the group, was convicted of fraud and money laundering, precisely because of reckless transactions in the sale of these properties. Needless to say, Follieri had a close relationship with the Clinton Global Initiative and with the Clinton family, as well as the Democratic party: “The former President and Senator Hillary are our friends,” Follieri boasted.
The same connections, the same complicities, the same acquaintances always recur: McCarrick, Clinton, Biden, the Democrats, and the Modernists, along with a procession of homosexuals and molesters that is not irrelevant.
With regard to Benedict XVI, the ones who had daily, direct access to the Pope were the Secretary of State Bertone and the Substitute Sandri, who were able to control and filter information about McCarrick and exert pressure on the Holy Father.
Once again, the Report speaks for itself. The one who presented the question directly to Pope Benedict XVI was Cardinal Bertone, who, contrary to what I had repeatedly proposed – namely, that the very grave and detailed accusations against McCarrick required an exemplary canonical process leading to his removal from the College of Cardinals and his reduction to the lay state – led Pope Benedict to decide that no canonical process should be undertaken nor should any canonical sanctions be prescribed, but that instead “a simple appeal to McCarrick’s conscience and ecclesial spirit” would be made.
And here yet another flagrant contradiction appears evident: how is it possible to reconcile a simple appeal to conscience with the formal instructions that were given both to Nuncio Sambi and to me, according to which McCarrick could not reside in the seminary where he was living, could not participate in public activities, could not travel, and had to lead a retired life of prayer and penance?
The corruption of the highest levels of the Vatican is so evident that it leads one to consider the Report as an unworthy attempt to make Bergoglio appear absolutely alien to the manipulations of the Curia, indeed as a sort of implacable persecutor of the corrupt, while the evidence of the facts demonstrates the opposite. I would say that Bergoglio is to the deep church what Biden is to the deep state…
I would like to also note that the fact of blaming John Paul II for the appointment of McCarrick, despite the negative opinion of the Congregation of Bishops and its Prefect Cardinal Re, could be applied also to Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself, about whom the Superior General of the Jesuits expressed strong reservations. If Wojtyla made a mistake with McCarrick and, for this reason, is considered implicitly responsible for the scandals that occurred, what prevents this judgment from also being extended to the promotion of Bergoglio as Archbishop of Buenos Aires and then as Cardinal? Let’s remember that in the Consistory of 2001, in addition to McCarrick and Bergoglio, other leading members of the Saint Gallen Mafia received the red hat…
Is there anything else we should cover?
In conclusion I would like to quote a recent article by Riccardo Cascioli, adopting his lucid judgment as my own:
Although the figure of a McCarrick who was a serial predator emerges from the Report, no great reaction was triggered until 2017, when the first report of the abuse of a minor arrived. […] In practice we are told that “immoral behavior with adults,” while certainly not a good thing, is however in the end something that is tolerated. The real alarm, the one that provides for penalties, even heavy ones, is sounded only if the one abused is a minor. As if the dozens and dozens of future priests who shared a bed with McCarrick, and who were thus for the most part condemned to an unbalanced priestly life, didn’t really count for much. As if the moral devastation and the destruction of faith caused by a bishop-predator – lost vocations, priests who in turn repeated the abuse, episcopal appointments distorted by pathological ties – were all only a minor problem.
[…] It was deliberately ignored that what permitted McCarrick’s irresistible rise is a system of power also known as the gay lobby, which favors the appointment and career of bishops with certain characteristics. […]
No, there really is no sign at all that the Church has learned anything from the McCarrick affair; there is rather the sense that one person was made to pay so that others could quietly continue. And in the meantime advancing the idea that if a priest has homosexual tendencies, it’s no problem.
In this grotesque farce, which is now cloaked in a false semblance of legalism, there is no hesitation to drag the entire Church through the mud – its prestige before the world, its authority over the faithful – in order to save the now-compromised image of corrupt, unworthy, depraved prelates. I limit myself to observing that even now, in the Vatican, Bergoglio still surrounds himself with notorious homosexuals and people with gravely compromised reputations. This is the most blatant disavowal of Bergoglio’s supposed moralizing work.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-11-14--Liberals launch attack against conservatives’ right to a lawyer

Big Tech is censoring us .
Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news .
Subscribe now .
November 13 , 2020 ( Family Research Council ) — How far does the Left want to go to cancel opposing viewpoints ?
Far enough to deprive citizens of their constitutional right to legal representation , apparently .
Recently , a $ 500,000 negative ad campaign has been launched against law firms that are representing President Trump in his claims of voting irregularities and possible fraud in the various swing states .
Dr. John Eastman , Henry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Chapman University 's Fowler School of Law and Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence at Claremont Institute , joined `` Washington Watch '' to discuss the Left 's growing intolerance and marginalization of anyone who does not accept the latest , constantly evolving progressive worldview , particularly in the area of legal representation .
`` This is not new , '' Dr. Eastman said .
`` The Left has been trying to cancel legal representation for positions they disagree with for near [ ly ] 20 years .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ examples of this disturbing trend : `` I remember when I tried to file a brief in support of the Boy Scouts way back in 1999 at a fairly conservative-leaning law firm , I was told 'we 're not allowed to do that . '
And yet there were hundreds of briefs coming in from major law firms on the other side .
The same thing went on in the David Daleiden exposé of Planned Parenthood selling baby parts .
No major law firm would allow their lawyers to work on his behalf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little non-profit helping him with scores of lawyers on the other side with some of the most prominent law firms in the country .
This is an attempt to deprive people of valid representation . ''
What 's truly alarming about this trend is that it strikes at the very heart of the rule of law in our free republic by denying people access to justice .
`` You can not have a legal system that succumbs to that kind of extortionist tactic , '' Dr. Eastman observed .
`` Because then one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get adequate representation , and the results of the litigation are not going to be in pursuit of justice and truth , as we expect the adversarial system to lead to .
When you 've got 100 lawyers at the top firms with all of their resources against two or three lawyers on the other side with little or no resources , it 's just not a fair fight , and yet that 's the playing field they 're trying to establish . ''
So how do we push back against this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people due process in court ?
Dr. Eastman suggested that one strategy is to be very selective about the products we buy and the companies we support , because corporations have a huge sway over the legal system due to their financial stake in the top law firms they hire .
`` If Coca-Cola is pushing this , then we need to go to Pepsi , '' he said .
`` We need to use our power in the market if they are going to use their power in the market to counteract @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Family Research Council .
Help stop voter fraud : The Trump Campaign has created “ Defend Your Ballot ” to report election issues .
Report fraud here or call 888-630-1776 .
Project Veritas is also accepting voter fraud tips here .
The FBI says to report suspected instances of voter suppression/fraud to your local FBI field office or at tips.fbi.gov .

PETITION UPDATE (1/15/2021) -
The events of the past month, and especially the past 10 days, have shaken the faith Americans have in their elected and appoint officials.
We continue to call for investigations to be made into allegations of election fraud. Texas is in the process of prosecuting one political operative for illegal ballot harvesting, and multiple state legislatures have called for investigations, too.
However, the judiciary has severely let down the American electorate.
As we have said all along, the integrity of the election is much bigger than President Trump. Election integrity is at the heart of republican democracy, and if we don't have it, we no longer have a functioning republic.
Therefore, we continue to seek the truth for the election outcome. Perhaps that will only be known in the future when state or federal commissions are established to investigate the instances of election fraud which were witnessed and sworn to, by thousands of Americans of all political persuasions.
In the meantime, you may still sign this petition. Thank you!
___________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (12/10/20) -
On Wednesday, President Trump tweeted: "We will be INTERVENING in the Texas (plus many other states) case. This is the big one. Our Country needs a victory!"
He is referring to the lawsuit which the state of Texas has filed against Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Georgia in the Supreme Court over changes those states made to their election rules, claiming they violated the U.S. Constitution in the process.
Here is the central part of the argument: if Texas were to allow possible voter fraud to go unchecked in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Georgia, it would be akin to committing fraud upon the people of Texas, who cast their ballots within the framework of the law.
Indeed, this would apply equally to all citizens who voted within the framework of the law across the United States!
President Trump also tweeted that this case is, "very strong...ALL CRITERIA MET."
Please continue to SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition, now.
____________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (12/7/20) - Since this petition was launched, President Trump's legal team, as well as other concerned citizens, have discovered what appears to be irrefutable evidence of voter fraud in several of the key battleground states, and have initiated legal challenges in six states.
While the situation continues to evolve, this remains a hugely important petition which we encourage you to SIGN and SHARE.
Below, please WATCH and READ about the mounting evidence of voter fraud and how the mainstream media seem determined to ignore even the most egregious instances of vote tampering. Then, please SIGN and SHARE this petition.
'Trump: ‘Our election system is now under assault and siege’ and as president I must defend it'
'Tens of thousands 2020 election votes illegally scanned in Detroit, says Dominion IT contractor'
'Trump campaign files lawsuit demanding ‘a new statewide election for president’ in Georgia'
'Experts flag over 500k ballots in PA with new evidence of major 2020 election voter fraud'
''Smoking gun'? Pennsylvania vote fraud hearing gets gasps from audience'
'FBI and Justice Department have dragged their feet investigating 2020 vote fraud'
''CNN top brass in leaked tape: We won't give Trump 'too much of a platform on his not conceding'
'Twitter censored Trump 63 times over Thanksgiving holiday, Biden untouched'
LifeSite supports President Trump with this petition because we believe he is trying to defend the Constitution, ensuring that electoral fraud does not taint the result of the 2020 general election.
But, since starting this petition, we have launched a separate petition related to the disputed election outcome, calling on the Department of Justice to 'do their job' and engage in meaningful investigations of the mounting evidence of voter fraud.
We believe that conducting forensic audits of ballots and voting machines, as well as issuing subpoenas to collect more evidence, would be a good start.
Thankfully, some of the state started to demand investigations independent of federal agencies. But we still believe that the DoJ needs to use its enormous fact-finding resources to help resolve allegations of election fraud.
Thank you for continuing to SIGN and SHARE all our election-related petitions.
_____________________________________________________________________
Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition which calls on all Americans to Stand With President Trump as he uses every legitimate means to find out if voter fraud played any role in the election outcome.
Amid allegations of voter fraud, and at a time when the situation with COVID has been used by many of the states to facilitate the use of mail-in ballots on a massive scale, we need to be very careful in dismissing the possibility of voter fraud.
The fact is, the possibility of wide-spread fraud with mail-in ballots is significant.
But, this is not about Donald Trump or Joe Biden! This about whether or not the sanctity of the ballot box has been tampered with!
Please Stand With President Trump as he attempts to defend the integrity of this election, as well as well as the right to vote itself!
Indeed, this is so important, not so much because one election hangs in the balance, but because our democracy, itself, hangs in the balance.
Americans not only have a right to know, but should demand that every legitimate means be used to discover the truth about these elections!
Please SIGN this petition and Stand With President Trump to ensure that these elections were conducted freely and fairly!
While most all Americans believe in playing by the rules, we also know that some very devious, politically-motivated operatives have been trying to harm the Trump administration from before he even took the oath of office.
This fact should lead us to question how some allegations of voter fraud can be so easily dismissed by state election authorities.
We demand to know the truth, and, for the sake of our democracy, we demand that President Trump keep fighting to learn the truth.
Thank you for SIGNING and SHARING this petition today!
**Photo Credit: Shealah Craighead / White House / Flickr


lifesitenews--2020-11-14--Atty general cracks down on whistleblower alleging Michigan vote issues

November 13 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Leaked audio from a poll worker training session , recently posted online with commentary by reporter Shane Trejo , reveals that poll worker procedures were taught in Detroit that leave ballot-counting vulnerable to fraud , prompting Michigan attorney general Dana Nessel to issue a letter to Trejo demanding that he “ cease and desist use of # Detroit Leaks video across all media platforms.
” The October 28 audio recording captures key sound bites of an instructor teaching procedures — most of which are now official in Michigan — that buck previous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the audio exposé with a clip of the instructor telling trainees that poll-watchers and challengers have to stay six feet away from them on Election Day .
One trainee began to ask , “ So the six feet back , unless they have really good vision , they can ’ t actually see — ” “ Exactly .
Unless they got really good vision or they brought their binoculars , ” the instructor replied , triggering laughter from the trainees .
Michigan ’ s initial 2020 election training policy incorporated social distancing guidelines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ six feet of distance from election workers .
However , this policy was legally challenged , and the very same day of the training captured in the audio — Oct. 28 — a settlement was reached in court that allowed for poll-watchers and challengers to stand closer to election workers as needed .
The agreement stated that while challengers and poll-watchers “ should maintain at least six feet of distance between themselves and election workers and voters as reasonably possible , ” they were also “ permitted ” to “ temporarily stand in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order to perform their legal duties .
It was declared during the court proceedings that “ amended written guidance ” expressing the substance of the agreement should be issued to local election officials “ no later than ” October 29 at 5 P.M .
It is unclear whether election workers received the memo , as there are numerous reports of poll-watchers and challengers in Detroit being prevented from observing election workers , and even from entering a vote-counting hall .
The leaked audio also reveals that poll workers are being trained to submit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by voters whose eligibility is in question , together with unchallenged ballots into the tabulating machine .
This procedure all but defeats the point of challenging a ballot , as it means that the challenged ballots are automatically counted except possibly in the event of a recount , as Trejo points out in his commentary : Big Tech is censoring us .
Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news .
Subscribe now .
“ All challenged ballots WILL be counted immediately on Election Night , and only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenged ballot is rejected , will an election official locate the ballot box , break the seal , and fish out the challenged ballot from the pile of thousands to find the one with the Post-It tape covering up the challenged ballot number.
” In the leaked audio , the instructor is heard saying , “ How do you challenge a ballot ?
You take the ballot , you write under the barcode , 2003 , and you cover it with what kind of tape ?
Post-It !
The Post-It tape !
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to put it in the secrecy sleeve , and Mr. Stark is going to vote as normal .
So his ballot is going through what ?
The tabulator.
” Michigan ’ s attorney general , Dana Nessel , demanded that Trejo remove all # DetroitLeaks videos in her “ cease and desist ” letter , dated Oct. 28 , and accuses him of “ intentionally misleading and altering information pertaining to elections.
” She claims in her letter , “ At 6:36 , you state that challenged ballots will be tabulated and can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a false statement as the challenger has six days to prove the improper vote.
” It is unclear just what Nessel is referring to here , as Trejo ’ s precise comment at 6:36 in the video refers to “ regular , ” not “ challenged , ” votes : “ A vote processed as a ‘ regular voter ’ on Election Day will be tabulated and can not be un-counted later.
” One of the points highlighted by Trejo in the leaked audio is that voters can present an “ easily forged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voter registration on Election Day .
The instructor is heard explaining to her class that people who have registered to vote only a day or two before Election Day , and whose registration therefore won ’ t appear in the system , can present a paper receipt as proof of registration .
Trejo maintains that “ it only takes a crude forgery for anyone to vote , anywhere , ” and that “ anyone with the know-how could generate thousands of fake late-registration receipts .
Complete with valid address and polling location address.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ trainee is heard asking what to do if poll challengers start “ yelling and making a scene.
” The instructor replies , “ 9-1-1 .
They got standards , they got conduct standards .
If they make a scene , get ’ em up out of there .
Call the police on them.
” The last instruction revealed in the leaked audio refers to a scenario when someone comes in to the poll to vote , but his record indicates that an absentee ballot was “ sent and received.
” In this case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Do not issue him a ballot !
” If that person protests , saying he hasn ’ t voted , and gets “ loud ” or “ rude , ” students are instructed to provide him a “ provisional envelope.
” The instructor exclaims , “ Why ?
Where ’ s it goin ’ ?
Not in the tabulator !
It ’ s goin ’ in that envelope , right ?
We have how many days ?
Six !
So what is the Department of Elections going to do with it ?
Destroy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video why this is a problem : “ [ The ] trainer assumes the voter has already voted absentee .
Unsaid is the possibility the absentee ballot was stolen , or some other error possibly occurred.
” Trejo commented to LifeSiteNews , “ There is a terror campaign against whistleblowers that is underway .
We need to support whistleblowers as they fight to save our republic.
” “ This vote steal is the most ghastly crime in U.S. history .
We can not let it stand .
Officials are issuing these threats because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Help stop voter fraud : The Trump Campaign has created “ Defend Your Ballot ” to report election issues .
Report fraud here or call 888-630-1776 .
Project Veritas is also accepting voter fraud tips here .
The FBI says to report suspected instances of voter suppression/fraud to your local FBI field office or at tips.fbi.gov .


lifesitenews--2020-11-13--People with disabilities oppose Canada’s proposed expansion of euthanasia law

November 13 , 2020 ( Euthanasia Prevention Coalition ) — The Parliamentary Committee on Justice and Human Rights had its third hearing on Bill C-7 , the bill to expand Canada 's euthanasia law , on Tuesday November 10 .
Tuesday 's hearing heard testimony from several advocates and people with disabilities concerning the effect of Bill C-7 upon their community .
Link to Tuesday 's Parliamentary Committee meeting ( Link ) .
Kathleen Harris , reporting for CBC news , stated that people with disabilities are warning that Bill C-7 , which expands access to MAiD ( euthanasia ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roger Foley , who was offered MAiD rather than self-directed home-care .
Harris reports : Speaking to MPs on the justice committee via Zoom from his hospital bed in London , Ont.
, Roger Foley pleaded with policymakers to focus on providing more assistance and home care to Canadians with disabilities .
He said he has been denied proper care and was `` coerced '' into choosing MAID because his acute care needs were too much for hospital staff to handle .
Foley , who suffers from an incurable neurological disorder , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pay $ 1,800 per day in hospital costs or face a forced discharge , even though he could n't get the necessary supports to live at home .
`` Assisted dying is easier to access than safe and appropriate disability supports to live , '' Harris reported that Krista Carr , the executive vice-President of Inclusion Canada fears that state provided suicide will become an acceptable response to disability .
... She said the community of Canadians with disabilities and their families have long feared that having a disability would become an acceptable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` Bill C-7 is our worst nightmare , '' she said , adding that equating assisted death to an equality right is a `` moral affront . ''
Carr said family members worry their loved ones will choose MAID to end their suffering because they feel they have no choice .
She said that situation would relieve political leaders of their responsibility to provide adequate medical care , housing and income supports .
`` The lives of people with disabilities are as necessary to the integrity of the human family as any other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the lives of people with disabilities is a threat to us all , '' Jesse Snyder reported for Post Media that Heidi Janz , the chair of the End-of-Life issues Committee with the Council of Canadians with Disabilities ( CCD ) was alarmed by the speed of the committee hearings and called on the government to extend public consultations on Bill C-7 .
An article by Janz on October 26 stated that Canada must ensure revised assisted dying law will not threaten lives of people with disabilities .
Snyder reported that Taylor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same CCD Committee with Janz described her recent experience with pneumonia , where the doctor offered her euthanasia .
Hyatt said her doctor at one point suggested the possibility of medically assisted death , an experience that she worries will be replicated many times over if Bill C-7 passes .
She eventually recovered from her illness , and says today that medical professionals overlooked the chances that Hyatt , who was then in her 20s , would return to health .
`` All the doctor seemed to see , though , was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tired and probably tired of living , '' The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition encourages you to submit a brief to the Committee explaining your concerns with the bill .
Please share personal stories in your brief .
( Link to submit a brief ) .
How does Bill C-7 expand the euthanasia law in Canada ?
Bill C-7 removes the requirement in the law that a person 's natural death be reasonably foreseeable to qualify for MAiD .
People who are not terminally ill can be killed by MAiD .
The Quebec Truchon court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only required this amendment to the law , but Bill C-7 goes further .
Bill C-7 : 1. permits a doctor or nurse practitioner to lethally inject a person who is not capable of consenting , if that person was previously approved for MAiD .
This contravenes the Supreme Court of Canada Carter decision which stated that only competent people could die by euthanasia .
2. waives the ten-day waiting period when a person is deemed to be `` terminally ill. '' A person could request death by euthanasia on a `` bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Studies prove that the `` will to live '' fluctuates .
3. creates a two track law .
A person who is deemed to be terminally ill would have no waiting period while a person who is not terminally ill will have a 90 day waiting period before being killed by lethal injection .
If Bill C-7 is passed , a future court decision will strike down the 90 day waiting period for people whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable because , this provision represents an inequality in the law .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ from two to one .
5. falsely claims to prevent euthanasia for people with mental illness .
The law permits MAiD for people who are physically or psychologically suffering in a manner that is intolerable to the person and that can not be relieved in a way that the person considers acceptable .
However mental illness is considered a form of psychological suffering , which is not defined in the bill .
If the government wants to exclude euthanasia for mental illness the bill would need to define psychological suffering to exclude mental @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believes that their physical or psychological suffering is intolerable to die by lethal injection , even if effective medical treatments for their condition exists , after a 90 day reflection period .
( Link to Bill C-7 ) .
Contact your Member of Parliament and say that you oppose Bill C-7 .
The list of Members of Parliament : https : //www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search Published with permission from the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition .

Tuesday's hearing heard testimony from several advocates and people with disabilities concerning the effect of Bill C-7 upon their community.
November 13, 2020 (Euthanasia Prevention Coalition) — The Parliamentary Committee on Justice and Human Rights had its third hearing on Bill C-7, the bill to expand Canada's euthanasia law, on Tuesday November 10. Tuesday's hearing heard testimony from several advocates and people with disabilities concerning the effect of Bill C-7 upon their community. Link to Tuesday's Parliamentary Committee meeting (Link).
Euthanasia Bill C-7 fast-tracked in Committee (Link).
Kathleen Harris, reporting for CBC news, stated that people with disabilities are warning that Bill C-7, which expands access to MAiD (euthanasia) devalues the lives of vulnerable people. Roger Foley, who was offered MAiD rather than self-directed home-care. Harris reports:
Speaking to MPs on the justice committee via Zoom from his hospital bed in London, Ont., Roger Foley pleaded with policymakers to focus on providing more assistance and home care to Canadians with disabilities. He said he has been denied proper care and was “coerced” into choosing MAID because his acute care needs were too much for hospital staff to handle. Foley, who suffers from an incurable neurological disorder, said he was told he would have to pay $1,800 per day in hospital costs or face a forced discharge, even though he couldn't get the necessary supports to live at home. “Assisted dying is easier to access than safe and appropriate disability supports to live,”
Harris reported that Krista Carr, the executive vice-President of Inclusion Canada fears that state provided suicide will become an acceptable response to disability.
…She said the community of Canadians with disabilities and their families have long feared that having a disability would become an acceptable reason for “state-provided suicide.” “Bill C-7 is our worst nightmare,” she said, adding that equating assisted death to an equality right is a “moral affront.” Carr said family members worry their loved ones will choose MAID to end their suffering because they feel they have no choice. She said that situation would relieve political leaders of their responsibility to provide adequate medical care, housing and income supports. “The lives of people with disabilities are as necessary to the integrity of the human family as any other dimension of humanity, and this threat to the lives of people with disabilities is a threat to us all,”
Jesse Snyder reported for Post Media that Heidi Janz, the chair of the End-of-Life issues Committee with the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) was alarmed by the speed of the committee hearings and called on the government to extend public consultations on Bill C-7. An article by Janz on October 26 stated that Canada must ensure revised assisted dying law will not threaten lives of people with disabilities.
Snyder reported that Taylor Hyatt, who is a member of the same CCD Committee with Janz described her recent experience with pneumonia, where the doctor offered her euthanasia.
Hyatt said her doctor at one point suggested the possibility of medically assisted death, an experience that she worries will be replicated many times over if Bill C-7 passes. She eventually recovered from her illness, and says today that medical professionals overlooked the chances that Hyatt, who was then in her 20s, would return to health. “All the doctor seemed to see, though, was a disabled woman alone, sick, tired and probably tired of living,”
The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition encourages you to submit a brief to the Committee explaining your concerns with the bill. Please share personal stories in your brief. (Link to submit a brief).
*Sign and share the EPC Petition: Reject euthanasia Bill C-7 (Link).
How does Bill C-7 expand the euthanasia law in Canada?
Bill C-7 removes the requirement in the law that a person's natural death be reasonably foreseeable to qualify for MAiD. People who are not terminally ill can be killed by MAiD. The Quebec Truchon court decision, that led to Bill C-7 only required this amendment to the law, but Bill C-7 goes further. Bill C-7:
— Article continues below Petition — Canada: Sign the Geneva Consensus Declaration! Show Petition Text 6733 have signed the petition. Let's get to 7500 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition On October 22nd, thirty-two nations signed the historic Geneva Consensus Declaration, including the co-sponsoring nations, the United States, Brazil, Hungary, Indonesia, and Uganda. However, Canada was not among the signatories. Please SIGN this joint petition, from LifeSite and Campaign Life Coalition, urging Canada to ratify the Geneva Consensus Declaration, which will put Canada at the forefront in the fight to protect genuine human rights. The Geneva Consensus Declaration takes a firm stance against invented human rights by saying, "there is no international right to abortion, nor any international obligation on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion." The Geneva Consensus Declaration further reaffirms: That "protecting the right to life" is an "essential priority."
The "inherent 'dignity and worth of the human person'" and that "'every human has the inherent right to life.'"
That "'the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and state,'" as the Declaration on the Rights of the Child stated. Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition to Canadian MPs, asking them to restore Canada's reputation as a world leader in human rights, and sign the Geneva Consensus Declaration. In the past, Canada had a reputation for supporting conventions and declarations that promote fundamental and universal principles, including the right to life and the centrality of the natural family in society. To that end, Canada signed declarations and conventions supporting the child and the natural family, like the Declaration on the Rights of the Child, in 1959, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, in 1990. However, in recent years, Canada has deviated from its commitments and its historic role in advancing genuine human rights. Instead, Canada has pushed a marginal agenda focused on newly-invented “rights” that are neither based in natural law nor in any international treaty. Among these are a false right to abortion, a false right to choose one’s gender, and a false right to sexual pleasure for children. Indeed, Canada has become a bully on the world stage, imposing its agenda on traditional peoples in developing nations, promoting abortion, gender theory, and radical sex education. It is time for Canada to stand up for genuine human rights like it once did, especially the right to life, and proclaim that the nuclear family is the basis of society. By ratifying the Geneva Consensus Declaration, Canada would join other nations in upholding these very things, and would recommit itself to safeguarding the rights and principles that it formerly promoted and defended. Please SIGN this petition calling on the Members of Parliament to sign the Geneva Consensus Declaration. FOR MORE INFORMATION: Information about the Geneva Consensus Declaration - https://www.hhs.gov/about/agencies/oga/global-health-diplomacy/protecting-life-global-health-policy/geneva-declaration.html The text of the Geneva Consensus Declaration - https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/geneva-consensus-declaration-english.pdf CLC article, 'Canada Must Join the Geneva Consensus Declaration' - https://www.campaignlifecoalition.com/clc-blog/id/118/title/canada-must-join-the-geneva-consensus LifeSite article, '32 nations, including US, declare ‘no international right to abortion’ at UN' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/32-nations-including-us-declare-no-international-right-to-abortion-at-un Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
1. permits a doctor or nurse practitioner to lethally inject a person who is not capable of consenting, if that person was previously approved for MAiD. This contravenes the Supreme Court of Canada Carter decision which stated that only competent people could die by euthanasia.
2. waives the ten-day waiting period when a person is deemed to be “terminally ill.” A person could request death by euthanasia on a “bad day” and die the same day. Studies prove that the “will to live” fluctuates.
3. creates a two track law. A person who is deemed to be terminally ill would have no waiting period while a person who is not terminally ill will have a 90 day waiting period before being killed by lethal injection.
If Bill C-7 is passed, a future court decision will strike down the 90 day waiting period for people whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable because, this provision represents an inequality in the law.
4. reduces the number of independent witness from two to one.
5. falsely claims to prevent euthanasia for people with mental illness. The law permits MAiD for people who are physically or psychologically suffering in a manner that is intolerable to the person and that cannot be relieved in a way that the person considers acceptable.
However mental illness is considered a form of psychological suffering, which is not defined in the bill. If the government wants to exclude euthanasia for mental illness the bill would need to define psychological suffering to exclude mental illness.
Bill C-7 permits anyone who believes that their physical or psychological suffering is intolerable to die by lethal injection, even if effective medical treatments for their condition exists, after a 90 day reflection period. (Link to Bill C-7).
Contact your Member of Parliament and say that you oppose Bill C-7. The list of Members of Parliament: https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search
More Articles on Bill C-7:
Published with permission from the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-11-13--We must not let circumstances, no matter how severe, cause us to lose our faith

To help keep this and other programs on the air , please donate here .
Watch this episode of Mother @ @ @ @ @ on 11.13.2020 .
Today , Mother Miriam reads St. Peter ’ s letter to the @ @ @ @ @ Christians encouraging them to be brave and not lose their faith .
You can tune @ @ @ @ @ EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page .
Never miss a show !
Subscribe to @ @ @ @ @ here .

To help keep this and other programs on the air, please donate here.
Watch this episode of Mother Miriam's Live originally aired on 11.13.2020. Today, Mother Miriam reads St. Peter’s letter to the first century persecuted and scattered Christians encouraging them to be brave and not lose their faith.
You can tune in daily at 10 am EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page.
Never miss a show! Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live email updates here.


lifesitenews--2020-11-13--Trump confidant tells LifeSite: the president has all the proof needed to show massive fraud, vote s

Trump confidant tells LifeSite: the president has all the proof needed to show massive fraud, vote switching

November 13 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Steve Mosher told me today in a blockbuster interview that President Trump is gathering all the evidence needed to show massive , widespread voter fraud occurred in the 2020 presidential race .
“ They picked on the wrong guy to try and bulldoze , ” he said .
The mainstream media is engaging in a “ bloodless ” coup attempt on the president , he added , who won by huge margins in key swing states but was denied victory thanks to “ old school ” and new , high-tech methods of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explained that , “ they 're not just trying to steal the election .
They ’ re trying to steal our country ... if they succeed in the massive election heist that 's currently underway , we 'll never have another free and fair election in this country , I 'm afraid.
” “ Do n't listen to the mainstream media now , ” he remarked .
“ I 'm very disappointed in Fox…because the word came down from Rupert Murdoch and his sons that they were going to shift sides and they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They 've been part of this coup attempt too.
” Steve is an expert on China and global affairs .
He ’ s been in touch with the president ’ s team on a daily basis .
People in the White House know that Trump won , he said , because the numbers that came in on election night were massively in his favor .
But the Democrats didn ’ t expect such a huge difference , so they had to shut down the counting and bring in phony ballots and switch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ President Trump handily won reelection on election night…if those ballots had been accurately counted , President Trump would not only be winning the majority of the Electoral College , he would actually be winning the majority of the popular vote in this country.
” “ The other thing that ’ s probably hard for people to understand is , is how massive , how absolutely massive the fraud has been .
It has encompassed every possible kind of the old school ballot fraud [ but now ] we have the 21st @ @ @ @ @ @ @ systems…enable an entirely new way of cheating on the vote.
” I asked Steve how the left carried out the fraud specifically .
“ If your candidate is behind , you frantically do one of two things .
You either start discarding ballots for your opponent or you start manufacturing ballots for your guy or you do both .
In this instance , they did both.
” “ Why did n't Hillary Clinton challenge the voting results in 2016 ?
” he asked .
“ Because she knew that if she did , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at that time would be revealed.
” Steve urged Americans to not only pray for the president given that this is the worse crisis in our country since the civil war – and given that violence may break out when he is ultimately declared the winner – but also that they stay calm and reject the lies of the corporate news networks .
“ The mainstream media has betrayed us .
They 're part of the coup attempt , this bloodless coup that they attempted that is going to fail .
And they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New media like The John-Henry Westen Show that we 're doing right now where you have a couple hundred thousand subscribers , you will have more as time goes on because people are looking for the truth and they wo n't find it on MSNBC and CNN .
We 've known that for a long time , but they also wo n't find it on Fox , but they will find it here .
John Henry , so I 'm grateful to you for doing this .
”

Steve Mosher is urging Americans to not only pray for the president but to trust that the truth about election fraud will soon come out and that Donald Trump will be re-elected.
November 13, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Steve Mosher told me today in a blockbuster interview that President Trump is gathering all the evidence needed to show massive, widespread voter fraud occurred in the 2020 presidential race.
“They picked on the wrong guy to try and bulldoze,” he said.
The mainstream media is engaging in a “bloodless” coup attempt on the president, he added, who won by huge margins in key swing states but was denied victory thanks to “old school” and new, high-tech methods of voter fraud.
Continuing on, Steve explained that, “they're not just trying to steal the election. They’re trying to steal our country…if they succeed in the massive election heist that's currently underway, we'll never have another free and fair election in this country, I'm afraid.”
“Don't listen to the mainstream media now,” he remarked. “I'm very disappointed in Fox…because the word came down from Rupert Murdoch and his sons that they were going to shift sides and they've shifted sides in a big way. They've been part of this coup attempt too.”
Steve is an expert on China and global affairs. He’s been in touch with the president’s team on a daily basis. People in the White House know that Trump won, he said, because the numbers that came in on election night were massively in his favor. But the Democrats didn’t expect such a huge difference, so they had to shut down the counting and bring in phony ballots and switch votes electronically to make up the gap.
“President Trump handily won reelection on election night…if those ballots had been accurately counted, President Trump would not only be winning the majority of the Electoral College, he would actually be winning the majority of the popular vote in this country.”
“The other thing that’s probably hard for people to understand is, is how massive, how absolutely massive the fraud has been. It has encompassed every possible kind of the old school ballot fraud [but now] we have the 21st century voter fraud. These computer voting systems…enable an entirely new way of cheating on the vote.”
I asked Steve how the left carried out the fraud specifically.
“If your candidate is behind, you frantically do one of two things. You either start discarding ballots for your opponent or you start manufacturing ballots for your guy or you do both. In this instance, they did both.”
“Why didn't Hillary Clinton challenge the voting results in 2016?” he asked. “Because she knew that if she did, the voter fraud that they had attempted at that time would be revealed.”
Steve urged Americans to not only pray for the president given that this is the worse crisis in our country since the civil war – and given that violence may break out when he is ultimately declared the winner – but also that they stay calm and reject the lies of the corporate news networks.
“The mainstream media has betrayed us. They're part of the coup attempt, this bloodless coup that they attempted that is going to fail. And they're the Titanic, you know. New media like The John-Henry Westen Show that we're doing right now where you have a couple hundred thousand subscribers, you will have more as time goes on because people are looking for the truth and they won't find it on MSNBC and CNN. We've known that for a long time, but they also won't find it on Fox, but they will find it here. John Henry, so I'm grateful to you for doing this.”
Follow John-Henry John-Henry is the co-founder and editor-in-chief of LifeSiteNews.com. He and his wife Dianne and their eight children live in the Ottawa Valley in Ontario, Canada. He has spoken at conferences and retreats, and appeared on radio and television throughout North America, Europe and Asia. John-Henry founded the Rome Life Forum an annual strategy meeting for pro-life leaders worldwide. He co-founded Voice of the Family and serves on the executive of the Canadian National March for Life Committee, and the annual National Pro-Life Youth Conference. He is a consultant to Canada’s largest pro-life organization Campaign Life Coalition, and serves on the executive of the Ontario branch of the organization. He has run three times for political office in the province of Ontario representing the Family Coalition Party. John-Henry earned an MA from the University of Toronto in School and Child Clinical Psychology and an Honours BA from York University in Psychology.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-11-13--URGENT: Call Virginia gov. to urge him to cancel draconian lockdown

November 13 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – On a Friday afternoon – the best time for politicians and governments to announce bad or unwelcome news – Virginia Gov .
Ralph Northam announced that he is implementing a new lockdown across the commonwealth , with details yet to be announced .
According to a press release from the governor ’ s office , new lockdown rules will ban indoor or outdoor gatherings of more than 25 people , regardless of whether such gatherings are public or private .
Alcohol sales will be banned after 10 p.m. , with the implication @ @ @ @ @ @ @ night or if people are enjoying themselves .
Whereas Virginia ’ s “ mask mandate ” previously required all children over 10 to cover their faces , anyone over the age of five now must wear a mask in public indoor settings .
At publication time , the governor ’ s office has not released the text of the upcoming executive order that will explain the lockdown rules in greater detail .
All essential retail businesses , including grocery stores and pharmacies , must adhere to statewide guidelines for physical distancing , wearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While certain essential retail businesses have been required to adhere to these regulations as a best practice , violations will now be enforceable through the Virginia Department of Health as a Class One misdemeanor .
The state also apparently has the goal of testing 7,000 citizens every day by the end of the year .
The more tests are done – even if people are “ asymptomatic ” – the higher the number of coronavirus “ cases ” : The new restrictions will go into effect Sunday , November 15 at midnight .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ infringement on basic human rights to contact Northam ’ s office and urge him to cancel the lockdown , or , at the very least , ensure churches and places of worship are exempt and not closed .
Similarly , LifeSiteNews encourages anyone concerned to contact the bishops of Arlington and Richmond – the state ’ s two dioceses – and urge them not to cave to government pressure to cancel Masses once again .

November 13, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – On a Friday afternoon – the best time for politicians and governments to announce bad or unwelcome news – Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam announced that he is implementing a new lockdown across the commonwealth, with details yet to be announced.
According to a press release from the governor’s office, new lockdown rules will ban indoor or outdoor gatherings of more than 25 people, regardless of whether such gatherings are public or private. Alcohol sales will be banned after 10 p.m., with the implication being the coronavirus is more active at night or if people are enjoying themselves.
Whereas Virginia’s “mask mandate” previously required all children over 10 to cover their faces, anyone over the age of five now must wear a mask in public indoor settings.
At publication time, the governor’s office has not released the text of the upcoming executive order that will explain the lockdown rules in greater detail.
Northam’s press release also states:
All essential retail businesses, including grocery stores and pharmacies, must adhere to statewide guidelines for physical distancing, wearing face coverings, and enhanced cleaning. While certain essential retail businesses have been required to adhere to these regulations as a best practice, violations will now be enforceable through the Virginia Department of Health as a Class One misdemeanor.
The state also apparently has the goal of testing 7,000 citizens every day by the end of the year. The more tests are done – even if people are “asymptomatic” – the higher the number of coronavirus “cases”:
Contracts with Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, University of Virginia Medical Center in Charlottesville, and Sentara Healthcare in Norfolk will directly support high-priority outbreak investigations, community testing events, and testing in congregate settings, with a goal of being able to perform 7,000 per day by the end of the year.
The new restrictions will go into effect Sunday, November 15 at midnight.
LifeSiteNews is urging anyone concerned with the infringement on basic human rights to contact Northam’s office and urge him to cancel the lockdown, or, at the very least, ensure churches and places of worship are exempt and not closed.
Similarly, LifeSiteNews encourages anyone concerned to contact the bishops of Arlington and Richmond – the state’s two dioceses – and urge them not to cave to government pressure to cancel Masses once again.
Contact information for respectful communication:
Governor Ralph Northam
Commonwealth of Virginia
Constituent Services
P.O. Box 1475
Richmond, VA 23218
804-786-2211
Online email form
Bishop Michael Burbidge
Catholic Diocese of Arlington
200 North Glebe Road
Arlington, VA 22203
(703) 841-2500
[email protected]
Bishop Barry Knestout
Catholic Diocese of Richmond
7800 Carousel Lane
Richmond, VA 23294
(804) 359-5661
[email protected]
Share