Lou Pelletier talks to Glenn about the contempt of court charges and what comes next for his family

Despite the fact that the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF) filed for Lou Pelletier, the father of 15-year-old Justina Pelletier who is being held against her parents’ will, to be held in contempt of court, Lou joined Glenn on radio this morning to discuss what comes next in the fight to save his daughter’s life.

Below is a rough transcript of the interview:

GLENN: I can't believe that Lou is coming on again, but he is on the phone with us now from Connecticut. Hello, Lou.

LOU: Good morning, again. And again, many, many thanks to you and your team for spreading the word of Justina's nightmare.

GLENN: So what happened? When did you hear -- can you even talk about any of this?

LOU: We're all in, Glenn. We're here to save my daughter Justina.

GLENN: Okay. So when did they call you and tell you, and what could possibly happen to you now?

LOU: I was actually at the train station, which was -- speaking of another system -- took forever to get back from New York to Connecticut last night. But I was at the train station waiting and I got the email from my attorney that Mass DCF has filed the contempt of court for speaking to the media, which violates the gag order.

GLENN: And the punishment for that is what?

LOU: It can either be a civil punishment, but it could be criminal.

GLENN: So speaking out to try to save your daughter you could -- a civil punishment would be that they will fine you.

LOU: Correct.

GLENN: Which is, good news is, I don't know if you know this, you don't have anything left anyway. So good luck collecting that one. But the other is you could go to jail. How long could you go to jail for?

LOU: Don't no.

GLENN: Do you know now what you're going to -- what's going to happen? I mean, when do you -- how do you fight this, what, do you go -- have to go to court now? What, because you're doing it again.

LOU: As of now we do have a regular court date session scheduled for February 24th, this coming Monday. I have not heard if we need to be there earlier. Because the first time when this whole gag order issue came out, which was November 17th, I literally had to hop in a car and get to Boston within two hours to be in front of the judge. So who knows if they'll wait until Monday, the next scheduled court date, or they'll try to do something sooner.

GLENN: All right. So tell me what else happened. Tell me, is there any good news that has happened since yesterday?

LOU: Well, again as I said when we first got on, thank you so much. People have been flagged us obviously with donations, with God bless each and every one of you people out there because we are fighting the two-headed monster, the ultimate David against Goliath, State of Massachusetts and DCF, Harvard and Boston Children's Hospital. And their pockets are pretty deep. So again, many, many thanks to everybody that's contributed.

GLENN: Well, I want you to know, Lou, that I was in the meeting this morning and we wanted to call and verify what we had heard, that, you know, you were getting hit from DCF. And I instructed TheBlaze and all of my entire, you know, media empire, if you will, TheBlaze television, TheBlaze.com, Blaze Radio that this is the story, we are doing this story that we've done this one other time before and it was with Terri Schiavo. And so I pushed all the chips in the center of the table today, and we will do whatever we can to help right this wrong and --

LOU: Thank you so much.

GLENN: -- make sure she's not forgotten. I think they are literally trying to bury this story.

LOU: Because there's other pieces too that also need to come out because, you know, it's so hard even in an hour to try to explain the length of what's going on.

GLENN: Give me --

LOU: One of the things I didn't even mention, when Justina was 6 or 7, she had a stroke which we didn't even know about it. It was the left side of her brain. It was a massive stroke. Severely impacted her short-term memory. So one of the things is stress, that little thing that we've been living with for the last year, for somebody who has a stroke and has mitochondrial disease can push them over the edge, could lead them to another massive stroke or worse.

GLENN: Seizures, yeah. Well, is there anything that you -- anything that we can do right now, anything you want to share before we let you go and spend time with your attorneys, who I'm sure you're going to be spending time with?

LOU: Biggest thing is, as I said yesterday, there are people with the power to stop this now. The governors of both states hide behind legal things. But the governors, the attorney generals, DCF commissioners all have the power, executive authority, to stop this.

GLENN: Do you have the numbers and everything on FreeJustina.com?

LOU: They're out there. They have been posted. If you go to the -- there are other, along with, you know, the original site was a Miracle for Justina, which, the judge even put a gag on that. Part of that November 17th gag order was we were not allowed to add anything to the A Miracle for Justina website. So many other websites have been spawned.

GLENN: What do you mean you're not -- what do you mean you're not allowed to add anything to that?

LOU: When that gag order was issued, first of all, we knew nothing of it. It was set in a sidebar basically. You know, we were just told to not add anything to the Free Justina -- to A Miracle for Justina. And this whole idea that we can't speak to the media and all this stuff, you know, was not said directly to us, which, jeez, I thought we had the thing called the First Amendment and that's why we're at the stage we're at right now, making sure we get the word out to try to save our daughter's life.

PAT: Lou, has Duval Patrick said anything about this at all? Has he brought this up? Has he mentioned it?

LOU: Not to me personally.

PAT: Has he spoken to anybody in the media?

LOU: No.

PAT: No?

LOU: But if you just Google Mass DCF and Duval Patrick, he's had a few other things going on in his plate up there.

PAT: Yeah.

LOU: Kids, you know, a third of the Mass DCF social workers not licensed, kids dying left and right you understand their watch. You can just pick your -- you know, they are trying to get rid of Olga Roche, the DCF commissioner who Duval Patrick is backing to the Nth degree. So I think that's been taking up a little bit of his time versus the story of a child that not even from his state that they have full control over.

STU: Good news is people are starting to move here, Lou. Right now on Twitter nationally, the hashtag freeJustina is trending for the first time that we know of. And that's the people just starting to wake up on this story and just starting to hear about it. So at least there's some positive momentum.

GLENN: Can I tell you something, Lou? I thought about this, this morning in the meeting. As you're sitting there in bed at night and if you're anything like my wife and I, you know, we'll go to bed and that's when we really start to talk, and I have to believe that there have been times when you have said "We've got to speak out. We have got to do this. We are going to post on -- we're going to post on Free -- or A Miracle for Justina. We're going to do it." And you had the argument back and forth, "Honey, you can't. Because it will make things worse. Because if you make things worse, then what good are you? And we've got to keep the family going." I mean, you have had to have those conversations with your wife.

LOU: Many times. Because it's a double, double-edge sword. Can something happen to me? Well, I'll take the bullet for that. But even more importantly, can they do something even worse to Justina, above and beyond what they've already done to her. You know, she's defenseless. From the get-go she's totally been treated than any other patient when she was at Boston Children's. That's verifiable and identifiable. Hidden, you know, holidays and things where everybody else could see their families and talk to them, she was never allowed to see or talk to them, on Easter, Mother's Day, you name it, you know. So tell me that they haven't had their own agenda for Justina from the get-go.

GLENN: Lou, people are probably going to start listening to this for the first time. This will start to hit people in a different way. And I know my wife said this, I know Pat's wife said this. I don't know if Stu's wife said this. But when we went home and we said this to our wives for the first time, each of our wives said, that can't be. There's got to be something.

PAT: This is America.

GLENN: This is America. There's got to be something we don't know. Could you just address that, for anybody who is hearing this for the first time that say "There's got to be something about the family, there's got to be something here that's not being told"?

LOU: The bottom line is, you look at two key components of this situation. Number one is a doctor who diagnosed her, Dr. Korson from Tufts Medical Center. He's the one that officially diagnosed, you know, Jessica, Justina's older sister, with a medical -- a biopsy to prove that she has mitochondrial disease. So Dr. Korson, who's been treating her successfully for almost two years, has not been allowed to have any involvement in her care. Number two, the doctor she came to see who transferred from Tufts to Boston Children's just a month earlier who Dr. Korson wanted her to see because he was involved with her whole stomach scenario, her GI system, was involved with putting in the cecostomy tube which really saved her life because she wasn't able to go to the bathroom, he has been blocked. I mean, when Justina was taken over by Mass DCF roughly on February 14th, about a week later Dr. Flores tried to go see her. My wife was in the room, my other daughter. We were downstairs and visiting. Dr. Flores came into the room, gave my daughter a big hug, gave my wife a big hug. In the blink of an eye, a social worker came into the room, literally grabbed Dr. Flores by collar and dragged him out saying, "You're not allowed to see this patient. You cannot be in here."

PAT: How can a social worker stop a --

LOU: A social worker.

PAT: -- physician from seeing a patient? That's inconceivable. That's amazing.

LOU: It's all verifiable.

PAT: Wow.

LOU: This is the world we've been fighting. This is world we've been dealing with. It's like at times you wonder, is the whole world crazy and we're the only sane ones? Or maybe we're the crazy ones. It's -- you get to a point where left and right just don't -- nothing seems to add up anymore. You know, in the last piece -- and I have to repeat this -- is regarding this gag order. The largest newspaper in Massachusetts came to us back in April because there was many other people this had happened to. We were going to be the final piece to this story, and everybody knew that this newspaper was going to be printing a story. DCF, the legal system, the judges. But no gag order. It wasn't until the local Fox Connecticut station aired the story on November 17th seven months after the Globe announced they were going to publish the story that a gag order came out. So why was there no gag for seven months when the largest newspaper in Massachusetts was going to print something but then Fox Connecticut was going to air something and all hell breaks loose. Those are the things that just make you shake your head, among so many other things.

GLENN: Lou, thank you so much. We'll talk again.

LOU: Glenn, God bless. God bless America.

GLENN: All right. Thank you. Bye-bye.

Learn more about how you can help the Pelletier family HERE.

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November? 

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?

What is the Secret Service trying to hide about Trump's assassination attempt?

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor, Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

This past weekend we were mere inches away from a radically different America than the one we have today. This was the first time a president had been wounded by a would-be assassin since 1981, and the horrific event has many people questioning the competency and motives of the supposedly elite agents trusted with the president's life.

The director of the Secret Service apparently knew about the assassin's rooftop before the shooting—and did nothing.

Kimberly Cheatle has come under intense scrutiny these last couple of weeks, as Secret Service director she is responsible for the president's well-being, along with all security operations onsite. In a recent interview with ABC, Cheatle admitted that she was aware of the building where the assassin made his mark on American history. She even said that she was mindful of the potential risk but decided against securing the site due to "safety concerns" with the slope of the roof. This statement has called her competence into question. Clearly, the rooftop wasn't that unsafe if the 20-year-old shooter managed to access it.

Glenn pointed out recently that Cheatle seems to be unqualified for the job. Her previous position was senior director in global security at America's second-favorite soda tycoon, PepsiCo. While guarding soda pop and potato chips sounds like an important job to some, it doesn't seem like a position that would qualify you to protect the life of America's most important and controversial people. Even considering her lack of appropriate experience, this seems like a major oversight that even a layperson would have seen. Can we really chalk this up to incompetence?

Former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Secret Service and DHS said they'd be transparent with the investigation...

Shortly after the attempted assassination, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees the Secret Service, launched an investigation into the shooting and the security protocols in place at the rally. The DHS promised full transparency during the investigation, but House Republicans don't feel that they've been living up to that promise. Republican members of the House Oversight Committee are frustrated with Director Cheatle after she seemingly dodged a meeting scheduled for Tuesday. This has resulted in calls for Cheatle to step down from her position.

Two FBI agents investigate the assassin's rooftop Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Why is the Secret Service being so elusive? Are they just trying to cover their blunder? We seem to be left with two unsettling options: either the government is even more incompetent than we'd ever believed, or there is more going on here than they want us to know.

Cheatle steps down

Following a horrendous testimony to the House Oversight Committee Director Cheatle finally stepped down from her position ten days after the assassination attempt. Cheatle failed to give any meaningful answer to the barrage of questions she faced from the committee. These questions, coming from both Republicans and Democrats, were often regarding basic information that Cheatle should have had hours after the shooting, yet Cheatle struggled with each and every one. Glenn pointed out that Director Cheatle's resignation should not signal the end of the investigation, the American people deserve to know what happened.

What we DO and DON'T know about Thomas Matthew Crooks

Jim Vondruska / Stringer | Getty Images

It has been over a week since 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks narrowly failed to assassinate President Trump while the president gave a speech at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennslyvania. Despite the ongoing investigations, we still know very little about the would-be assassin, which has left many wondering if the agencies involved are limiting the information that Congress and the public are receiving.

As Glenn has pointed out, there are still major questions about the shooter that are unanswered, and the American people are left at the whim of unreliable federal agencies. Here is everything we know—and everything we don't know—about Thomas Matthew Crooks:

Who was he?

What we know:Thomas Crooks lived in Bethel Parks, Pennsylvania, approximately an hour south of Butler. Crooks went to high school in Bethel Parks, where he would graduate in 2022. Teachers and classmates described him as a loner and as nerdy, but generally nice, friendly, and intelligent. Crooks tried out for the school rifle team but was rejected due to his poor aim, and reports indicate that Crooks was often bullied for his nerdy demeanor and for wearing camo hunting gear to school.

After high school, Crooks began work at Bethel Park Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center as a dietary aide. In fact, he was scheduled to work on the day of the rally but requested the day off. He passed a background check to work at the facility and was reportedly an unproblematic employee. Crooks was also a member of a local gun club where he practiced shooting the day before the rally.

It was recently revealed that sometime before his attempted assassination, Crooks posted the following message on Steam, a popular computer application used for playing video games: "July 13 will be my premiere, watch as it unfolds." Aside from this, Crooks posted no warning or manifesto regarding his attack, and little other relevant information is known about him.

What we don't know:It is unclear what Crook's political affiliations or views were, or if he was aligned with any extremist organizations. Crooks was a registered Republican, and his classmates recall him defending conservative ideas and viewpoints in class. On the other hand, the Federal Election Commission has revealed he donated to a progressive PAC on the day Biden was inaugurated. He also reportedly wore a COVID mask to school much longer than was required.

Clearly, we are missing the full picture. Why would a Republican attempt to assassinate the Republican presidential nominee? What is to gain? And why would he donate to a progressive organization as a conservative? This doesn't add up, and so far the federal agencies investigating the attack have yet to reveal anything more.

What were his goals?

What we know: Obviously we know he was trying to assassinate President Trump—and came very close to succeeding, but beyond that, Crooks' goals are unknown. He left no manifesto or any sort of written motive behind, or if he did, the authorities haven't published it yet. We have frustratingly little to go off of.

What we don't know: As stated before, we don't know anything about the movies behind Crooks' heinous actions. We are left with disjointed pieces that make it difficult to paint a cohesive picture of this man. There is also the matter that he left explosives, ammo, and a bulletproof vest in his car. Why? Did he assume he was going to make it back to his car? Or were those supplies meant for an accomplice that never showed up?

The shocking lack of information on Crooks' motives makes it seem likely that we are not being let on to the whole truth.

Did he work alone?

What we know: Reportedly, Crooks was the only gunman on the site, and as of now, no other suspects have been identified. The rifle used during the assassination attempt was purchased and registered by Crooks' father. However, it is unlikely that the father was involved as he reported both his son and rifle missing the night of the assassination attempt. Crooks' former classmates described him as a "loner," which seems to corroborate the narrative that he worked alone.

What we don't know: We know how Crooks acquired his rifle, but what about the rest of his equipment? He reportedly had nearly a hundred extra rounds of ammunition, a bulletproof vest, and several homemade bombs in his car. Could these have been meant for a co-conspirator who didn't show? Did Crooks acquire all of this equipment himself, or did he have help?

There's also the matter of the message Crooks left on the video game platform Steam that served as his only warning of the attack. Who was the message for? Are there people out there who were aware of the attack before it occurred? Why didn't they alert authorities?

We know authorities have access to Crooks' laptop and cellphone that probably contain the answers to these pertinent questions. Why haven't we heard any clarity from the authorities? It seems we are again at the mercy of the federal bureaucracy, which begs one more question: Will we ever know the whole truth?