Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford released his border security package on Sunday.
Lankford, a Republican, took the lead in brokering a deal to protect the southern U.S. border. However, former President Donald Trump, who is hoping to win his party’s nomination for the general election, previously spoke out against that deal.
Trump pressured lawmakers to reject any deal with Democrats, while Lankford’s proposal does that by tying Israel and Ukraine’s support to border funding.
It was a total disaster and many Republicans or conservative voters asked the question if someone was blackmailed to broker such a disastrous deal!
Well after his statement from 2010 become viral this morning people raised suspicion that the Democrats might have some information that forced the Senator to broker this deal!
Before he became a leading voice for conservative causes on Capitol Hill, U.S. Senator James Lankford spent more than a decade as the director of youth programming at the Falls Creek Baptist Conference Center, a sprawling campground about 80 miles south of Oklahoma City that attracts more than 50,000 campers in grades six through 12 each year.
The Republican lawmaker’s tenure at the camp is a prominent feature of his political profile, noted in the first paragraph of his official Senate biography. That experience is also coming under renewed scrutiny as the Southern Baptist Convention, which is affiliated with the group that owns the camp, faces a reckoning over its handling of sexual abuse cases.
In 2009, while Lankford worked at the camp, the family of a 13-year-old girl sued a 15-year-old boy who was alleged to have had sex with her at the camp. Lankford, who was not in Congress at the time, is not alleged to have had any direct knowledge of the alleged assault, has not been accused of any wrongdoing and was not a defendant in the lawsuit, which was settled for an undisclosed amount before it was scheduled to go to trial.
But in a 2010 deposition in the case, given a week after he was elected to his first term in the U.S. House, Lankford testified that he believed a 13-year-old could consent to sex.
“Yes, I think they can,” Lankford told Kenyatta Bethea, a lawyer for the girl’s family, according a 155-page transcript of the deposition obtained by The Associated Press.
The age of consent in Oklahoma is 16, and although there is an exception in the law for minors between the ages of 14 and 17 who have sexual contact, there is no provision under which a 13-year-old could consent to sex. When Bethea pressed if his answer was still the same “if I ask you that question in terms of your position as a father,” Lankford maintained his stance.
“Yes, they can,” he said.
Under additional questioning about whether he would allow his two daughters to consent to sex at the age of 13, Lankford gave a more expansive answer but it made things even more difficult!
The comments online were not nice to say the least:
Just another DC pedo.
— Dr. Sam McGregor 🏌🏻♂️🛥🍹☀️🌴🇹🇭 🇺🇸🇨🇦 (@SamMcGregor67) February 5, 2024
SICK!
— ALL IN ON CRYPTO (@aesagt) February 5, 2024
When a terrible crime is covered up, it can also provide huge leverage down the road. If Epstein taught us anything, it taught us that. Can't think of any other reason the invasion facilitating border bill could exist in its current form.
— Commerce-USA (@Commerce_US) February 5, 2024
That's why. He's one of the ones who has been caught in bed with a minor. Are they pedophiles before they get to DC, or are they seduced by the decadence and depravity that is our nation's capitol?
— Dr. Bobbie Bobbee (@Dr_BobbeeBobbie) February 5, 2024
The case itself is not that strange but his statement is!
As I’ve brought up many times, they’re creating a legal term “mature minor”
This enables:
1. 12+ year olds wouldn’t require parental consent for medical procedures
2. 12+ year olds would be able to consent sexually
3. If parents question this, the state will interfere
4. This is to separate parents from children, make the state the guardian, and potentially remove kids from parents
4a. Insurance companies will merely bill the parents, but will not disclose what the bill is for (hormone blockers, etc)
5. This is soft population control especially considering “transitioning” and adverse events from drugs/injections resulting in sterility.
(This post may contain disputed claims. We make no assertions as to the validity of the information presented by our Opinion Columnist. This is an opinion article, and this post should be treated as such. Enjoy.)
