In recent years, I haven’t posted nearly as much as I used to.
Part of the reason is that now, there are so many others writing and exposing issues related to the corporatization of public entities, including our nation’s public schools, that we are many voices, on social media and more formal, traditional media, as opposed to the few voices breaking through even just 13 years ago when I began my blog. It is not that I feel my voice is less important, but the fight against the privatization of public infrastructure certainly requires more than just a few of us, and for sure, we are many, and we are loud.
My main reason for pulling back on my writing is that I bear a great responsibility in caring for my mother. I have written about this change in my life in other postings.
My mother is of sound mind, but her mobility is limited, and so are her physical strength, balance, dexterity, and stamina. She turned 80 on December 6th. I gave her a new walker because she wears them out working in her garden and with her chickens. On Facebook, I posted a picture of the walker graveyard on her porch (which she has agreed to do something about once she goes through each of the carrying bags on the walkers of yesteryear).
Working full time and keeping her in an independent living situation is a mammoth challenge for me. But I have been at it now for six years, and I am in for the long haul.
My commitment to my mother’s independence is cemented. If it weren’t, two things she said to me recently would have done the trick.
My mother doesn’t talk too much about her childhood, but she has talked more in the last few years. Little stories. Vignettes that seem to come from nowhere.
She spent the first 13 years of her life in an orphanage, then went to live with relatives, which (understatement) was no easy ride. Her parents split up when she was born, and neither one wanted to take their five children, four young boys and my newborn mother.
So, they were put in orphanages in New Orleans. My mother was in Sacred Heart orphanage, which later became Cabrini High School.
Some months ago, I was doing dishes at her kitchen sink, and she said this:
“When I was a girl, I liked to catch lizards, but I didn’t think that God liked that, and I told God that I would give up catching lizards if he would send someone to visit me. I tried it, but no one came.”
My heart froze, then cracked. My hands kept doing dishes, but it was all I could do to not break down sobbing for that little girl with no visitors on visiting day.
And recently, more than once, my mother has asked me not to put her in a home.
And I thought, “My God. She began life in a home for unwanted children, and how terrible to be afraid of ending life in an old folks home.”
And once again, her words gripped my heart so tight that I feel it breaking even as I write.
I will do my best, by God’s grace and with His help, to keep my mother from having a life book-ended by living in a home.
So, blogosphere, I am still here. It has been a challenge to adjust my life in difficult but necessary ways and to remain psychologically balanced. I miss writing and traveling, but I have come to terms with what I must do in order to enable my mother to have a quality life. I’ll not kid anyone: It has its tough, vise-grip moments when I am tired and pulled in many directions sorting out the needs of her life and my own.
On numerous occasions, my mind wants to write, but my mind and body are so tired.
So, I roll with it.
Merry Christmas.
_________________________________________
Donald Trump has razed the East Wing of the White House.
On October 21, 2025, the National Trust for Historic Preservation (“National Trust”), sent this letter regarding the demolition to the National Capital Planning Commission, the National Park Service, and the Commission of Fine Arts. One point was the “legally required public review” that never happened:
We respectfully urge the Administration and the National Park Service to pause demolition until plans for the proposed ballroom go through the legally required public review processes, including consultation and review by the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts, and to invite comment from the public.
On October 23, 2025, three members of the House sent a letter to Trump requesting documentation related to the demolition, including a detailed budget and those related to historical preservation.
ABC News reports that the White House moved “historical components” out of the East Wing “for future use”:
A White House official said “all the historical components of the East Wing … have been preserved and stored under the supervision of the White House Executive Residence and the National Park Service with support from the White House Historical Association. Plans are in place for future use.”
However, this information has not been publicly confirmed by the National Park Service, or any other entity. No published East Wing inventory, including current location.
No public input into this entire process.
What contents were saved, if any, remains anybody’s guess, as does what will (or perhaps already has) happened to those contents. After all, this is a president who only weeks ago wanted to give Eisenhower’s sword to King Charles. When he was told no, the director of the Eisenhower Library fould himself “exiting his position.”
In a press release dated July 31, 2025, the Trump administration put in writing its intention to demolish the East Wing without input from anyone:
The White House Ballroom will be substantially separated from the main building of the White House, but at the same time, it’s theme and architectural heritage will be almost identical. The site of the new ballroom will be where the small, heavily changed, and reconstructed East Wing currently sits. The East Wing was constructed in 1902 and has been renovated and changed many times, with a second story added in 1942.
“Renovated and changed,” yes, but not demolished.
On July 31, 2025, as NBC News recounts, Trump publicly stated that the East Wing would not be touched:
The demolition is a significant expansion of the ballroom construction project from what President Donald Trump said this summer.
“It won’t interfere with the current building,” Trump said on July 31. “It’ll be near it, but not touching it, and pays total respect to the existing building, which I’m the biggest fan of.”
The New York Times first reported the extent of the demolition.
His admin had already published its intent in a press release, but Trump lied publicly and then followed through on what he intended in the first place.
NBC News continues by referencing the October 21, 2025, National Trust letter:
The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a nonprofit agency created by Congress to help preserve historic buildings, warned administration officials in a letter Tuesday that the planned ballroom “will overwhelm the White House itself.”
…
The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital Planning Commission and D.C. State Historic Preservation Office are the regulatory agencies that would traditionally be involved in greenlighting any major renovations at the White House, according to a person familiar with the matter.
The lawsuits have begun, as PoliticoPro reports:
GREENWIRE | A Virginia couple is taking President Donald Trump and the National Park Service to court over demolition of the East Wing of the White House to make way for a massive ballroom.
Their lawsuit, filed Thursday in federal court in Washington, says the administration failed to secure “legally required approvals or reviews” to destroy part of a building that they — and former White House occupants this week — said belongs to the American people.
Regarding the suit, Newsweek adds:
At stake is whether a sitting president can unilaterally alter one of the country’s most symbolically important buildings, or whether the “People’s House” must remain subject to the same review and accountability standards that govern other federal projects.
Then there’s the matter of asbestos.
According to the Asbestos Institute, residential buildings constructed early- to mid-1900s are highly likely to contain asbestos:
So, where is the oversight? Hazardous materials assessments? Hazardous materials protocols? Health precautions for workers? Safeguards for the public?
Opaque here, as well.
That doesn’t mean people aren’t searching. From the Daily Dot:
Sarah Boardman (@sarah.boardman.design), who stated that she has been a licensed contractor and designer for nearly three decades, posted a video questioning whether the demolition adhered to basic safety and permitting rules.
In the clip, Boardman explained that she had researched President Donald Trump‘s project and found “no permits” for the work. She added that if she conducted a demolition like the one seen at the East Wing, “I would be fined out of existence.”
According to her, the situation appeared unregulated and potentially hazardous, especially given the age of the building.
…
Boardman introduced herself in her TikTok by saying, “Hey y’all. So a lot of you know I’m an interior designer, have been for 30 years, have owned my own company. I’m also a general contractor and a builder.” She mentioned she had been one of just eight women in Chicago with a Class B license in the late 1990s, allowing her to construct nearly any type of building “but a skyscraper.”
She pointed to the East Wing’s long history of renovations, noting, “This building was started in 1798. Major renovations, 1814, 1840, and then tons of renovations in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.”
Because of that history, she said, “This building is full of asbestos. This building is full of mold. It has been known to leak.”
In an email to the Daily Dot, Boardman wrote, “This part of the East Wing was built in 1942,” adding that during this time, “asbestos was widely used as insulation on pipes, in walls, and ceilings, and multiple different kinds.”
“The way that this was done is very destructive, and the rest of the building should have had supportive structure already in place,” she added.
“Soil testing would have been done. Air testing would have been done. Multiple sites of the building would have been tested for asbestos for lead, for lots of diseases that mice and rats carry Legionnaires. The list is endless.”
…
According to Boardman, proper safety measures weren’t visible in footage of the demolition. “There is one guy spraying a tiny hose,” she said, adding that she would have been required to “shroud the entire building.”
“If they had been doing this properly for the remediation, which could have taken up to a year, the entire building would have been shrouded,” she wrote in her email.
“There would have been no one working in the building surrounding areas might have been alerted and relocated.”
“I worry about the construction workers,” Boardman wrote. “None of them appear to be wearing any kind of protection. I worry about the people that are working in the White House. The timeline for this is bonkers, and I’m not understanding why they think this would go unnoticed.”
She named McCrary Architects and Clark Construction as the companies reportedly involved, urging viewers to “make the calls” but to “be nice to the receptionists. They are not responsible for this.”
Before ending her video, she said she planned to share contact information for the firms and encouraged viewers to reach out to D.C.’s Department of Buildings about what she described as “illegal construction.”
Boardman isn’t the only one speaking out about the demolition. On Threads, @mutedfiligree posted, “Tearing down the white house with zero asbestos/lead management. Cause what could go wrong.”
Commenters echoed that concern, with one TikToker writing, “they don’t have permits because demoing the white house, a historic landmark and museum, requires a literal act of Congress.” Another asked, “Has anyone looked into Clark Construction to see about possible ties with the trump family? It’s hard to imagine that they bid and won the contract.”
Others questioned the project’s funding, such as one person who commented, “And the money is coming from private donors but they aren’t releasing who is paying for it?” A final commenter added a reminder about the risks involved. “East Wing was built in 1942. So asbestos, lead paint, all the fun stuff.”
So, there’s that huge, hazardous materials issue.
And guess where Trump is sending the likely-asbestos-laden, East Wing rubble?
A golf course.
Fron the Nancy Waleki of the Atlantic:
When the president of the United States decides to demolish the East Wing of the White House to construct a ballroom, all that stucco and molding and wood has to go somewhere. So I tried to find it.
I’d heard that the dirt from the East Wing demolition was being deposited three miles away, on a tree-lined island next to the Jefferson Memorial called East Potomac Park. So yesterday I drove around until I saw trucks and men in construction gear. They were congregating at an entrance to the public East Potomac Golf Links, where rounds of golf carried on as usual, except every few minutes, dump trucks entered the green.
The trucks would cut across the course to a cordoned-off site in the middle, where the grass had been torn away and replaced with piles of dirt. It did not look like much, but several employees at the site confirmed: This was not just any dirt. This was White House dirt. The precursor to the East Wing was constructed during Theodore Roosevelt’s administration in 1902 and updated during Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration in the ’40s. Maybe this was not just White House dirt but Roosevelt-era dirt. I gazed upon the golfers going about their games. Do they know, I wondered, that they are in the presence of such particularly American soil?
I asked one employee what the plan was for all this dirt. “Oh, they’re gonna turn it into another hole,” he said. Other reporters have heard the same. But when I asked a different employee about it, he demurred; his boss drove by and said, “No comment” before my colleague Grace Buono had even asked him a question. Donald Trump has reportedly been considering rebranding East Potomac Golf Links as the Washington National Golf Course and giving it a makeover. He even mocked up a new golden logo for it that’s nearly identical to those of the courses he owns.
What a perfect ending for the once-East Wing dirt.
And not just any dirt:
Likely-asbestos-laden dirt.
______________________________________
James D. Kirylo has been a friend of mine for many years and has been a guest contributor to my blog in the past. Among other books, Kirylo is the author of Paulo Freire: The Many from Recife (2nd Edition), The Catholic Teacher: Teaching for Social Justice with Faith, Hope, and Love, and The Thoughtful Teacher: Making Connections with a Diverse Student Population.
In this unedited guest post, Kirylo underscores America’s terrible romance that results in an all-too-familiar scenario at schools nationwide.
***
America’s Peculiar Love Affair
by James Kirylo
The date August 27, 2025 for Annunciation Catholic Church and School community in Minneapolis, MN has marked its before-and-after-history date, as does May 24, 2022 for the Robb Elementary School community in Uvalde, TX, as does February 14, 2018 for the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Community does in Parkland, FL, and as does December 14, 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary School Community in Newtown, CT. The before—when innocence brightened the dinner table—to the after—when the empty chair hovers an unimaginable darkness, forever altering families and searing the collective consciousness of entire communities. And this is but a handful of school shootings, resulting in a total of 66 deaths, 57 injuries, and countless traumatized lives.
Once thought as one of the safest grounds in America, schools are now—and have been for some time—vulnerable spaces to unimaginable violence, provoking a very real fear among parents, students, and teachers. To the statistical extent of the problematic nature of the latter, one only needs to examine the comprehensive work of David Riedman, architect of K-12 Shooting Database (SSDB), thrusting an ominous spotlight on a uniquely American phenomenon. This year alone at this writing, there have been 173 gun-related incidents on K-12 properties.
After the terrorizing attack that took place at Annunciation, the now-tired-predictable-rhetoric-outrage ensued—for a day or two—and then onto the next news cycle. School shootings, do I dare say, have become a normalized happening, almost expected, with a desensitizing feel. But for the affected families, from Newton to Parkland, to Uvalde to Minneapolis, and numerous other American communities, the pain, the scars, the emptiness never goes away; it is just dealt with in whatever way possible. Yet, another school shooting will occur and another and another. This is not pessimistic thinking; it is facing reality straight in the face. And truth is exposed in reality. We are not doing enough to prevent this madness. That is the obvious truth.
Because America loves its guns; the bigger, the better; the more, have at it. America approves. The background check loopholes to obtain a firearm have more holes in it than a slice of Swiss Cheese. While the open carry of guns exposes the worst of us with a cheap sense of intimidation and aggression, the conceal carry allowances triggers uncertainty and a major headache in conducting police work. The more bullets that can be fired per minute, the better. Enter in the semi-automatic-assault style weapons. And for good measure, let’s be inclusive with bump stocks (enabling a rifle to have machine gun rapid-rate capability). Gun shows, gun auctions, gun stores, and around 78,000 licensed gun dealers, translates into more dealers of guns in America than there are Subway, Burger King, McDonald’s and Wendy’s establishments combined.
Yes, indeed, America loves its guns. And the mother lode validation for this love affair is the Second Amendment, perversely contorted to fit the interpretation propagated by the National Rifle Association. After all, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.” How dare we question the multi-billion-dollar business that is the firearm industry. Capitalism at its ugly worst, leaving in its wake a killing field that has become America. Hyperbole? Just ask the folks at Annunciation, Robb Elementary, Marjory Stoneman Douglas, and Sandy Hook (not to mention those at that supermarket, nightclub, church, music festival, and the disturbing list goes on and on).
We don’t want to accept that the gun problem in the U.S. is a national security emergency and an epidemic, no more than one who won’t admit a problem with alcohol. We would rather wallow in our sickness; we would rather be dishonest with ourselves, defiantly peering at the lying image in the mirror. And like a crafty swindler with the gift of gab, we would rather slyly preach to the choir how everything and everyone else is the problem. Because we are in love.
_______________________________________
I was born in 1967 in Chalmette, Louisiana (St. Bernard Parish), a suburb of New Orleans so close to the city that is is the actual site of the 1815 Battle of New Orleans.
I did not know that my father moved to Chalmette in the mid-1950s as part of the “white flight” from New Orleans.
I did not know why the St. Bernard-Orleans Parish line was so starkly white on the St. Bernard side and black on the Orleans side.
I did not know that the black teachers at my all-white elementary and middle schools were part of an effort for local officials to dodge federal mandates to racially integrate the schools (as in integrating the student body).
(I do remember seeing what I think was one black student in the special education, self-contained classroom of my elementary school– such an unusual, remarkable event that it puzzled my young mind to see him as a student assistant in the cafeteria, and the moment remains clearly in my memory to this day.)
I did not know that when I moved to a more rural section of St. Bernard Parish as I started high school that the African-American residents “down the road” knew full well of the dangers of trying to reside in certain sections of the parish (namely, Chalmette and Arabi).
I did not know that the school-superintendent uncle of one of my favorite teachers tried circa 1961 to create an “annex school” near the Arabi-New Orleans city line in order to enable white parents in the city to avoid racial integration by using school vouchers from New Orleans to enroll their children in an all-white public school just across the parish line.
I did not know that the proliferation of parochial schools in New Orleans was fueled by white flight from the New Orleans public schools.
I did not know that the reason I attended an all-girls public middle- and high school was for local officials to try to sham-integrate the St. Bernard public schools but to keep “those black boys away from our white girls.”
There’s a lot that I did not know and did not begin to learn until I was in my twenties and started asking questions.
But there were a lot of lessons that many white adults in my life tried to instill in me, lessons that indeed needed some serious questioning:
“You know property values will drop if the blacks start moving into a neighborhood.”
“It is better for a white woman to have a physically-abusive white boyfriend or husband than a black one, even if he does treat her well.”
“Interracial marriage is cause for a family disowning a child.”
“The city is a wreck because blacks are lazy and destroy everything.”
As I began reading about New Orleans officials’ cross-generational efforts to obliterate the black middle class in New Orleans (by, for example, by destroying multiple black owned businesses in order to build both the Desire housing project in 1956 and construct Interstate 10 in 1966), I felt like I had been lied to for decades– and my views as a white child and young adult repeatedly manipulated in order to purposely cement in me a sense of white superiority that no amount of personal maturity would ever shake.
Nevertheless, I am happy to say that such twisted, misplaced superiority is indeed and forever shaken in me and shown to be the mammoth lie that it is– the very lie that happens to fuel the white saviors who would impose themselves on black communities– including the center of the community:
The community school.
The community should be the final word on its schools, and when it is, those schools are successful, even in the face of racially-imposed hardship and intentional, multi-generational deprivation of basic resources, including physical space, current textbooks, and even ready supplies of toilet paper.
Such is the story of George Washington Carver High School in New Orleans– a school created as part of a school complex and housing project and build in New Orleans, Louisiana, to intentionally be a segregated school despite its opening post-Brown vs. Board of Education.
In her book, What We Stand to Lose: Bleack Teachers, the Culture They Created, and the Closure of a New Orleans School (2025, Beacon Press), Dr. Kristen Buras offers to readers a detailed history and daily life of G. W. Carver High School in New Orleans, from its inception to its white-savior closure in 2005, post-Katrina, when the state of Louisiana refused to grant the returning Carver community a charter to operate their own school. Buras details what no pro-charter, education reformer discussed at any length as regards traditionally-black New Orleans public schools: the repeated, intentional, multi-generational, systematic fiscal neglect of both the schools and the black community in New Orleans.
In contrast, Buras not only discusses these issues; she brings them to life through her numerous interviews with Carver faculty and staff, a life that begins even before Carver High School opened its doors in the 1958-59 school year.
Right out of the gate, the community served by Carver High School– families residing in the Desire Housing Project– had to face the reality that the project homes were poorly constructed and were starting to fall apart due to a lack of concrete foundations on swampland, no less.
Indeed, the location of what was known as the “Carver Complex” was originally a Maroon colony for escaped African slaves in a backswamp area that 1973 Carver graduate describes as “really not made for residential living.”
Separate was not equal, but to the Carver community, it was theirs, and in the midst of profound racism, the faculty and staff at Carver High devoted themselves to their students and the students’ families, who also happened to be their neighbors.
What speaks loudly to the teacher commitment to Carver High students, as Buras notes, is their multi-decade commitment. Despite being chronically underfunded and under-maintained across its almost-fifty years pre-Katrina, Carver High School had a very low teacher turnover.
In What We Stand to Lose, readers are introduced to the precise and disciplined teachings of music teacher Yvonne Busch, who was known for offering free music lessons during summer break. Former student Leonard Smith produced a documentary about Busch, who retired in 1983 after a 32-years at Carver. We learn of the 38-year career of social studies teacher, Lenora Condoll, who wanted so much for her students to experience the larger world that she organized fundraisers to take her students on Close-Up trips to Washington, DC, and who, on a practical note, showed students that they could make a dressy wardrobe out of a few basic items, including her “black, cashmere skirt.” We meet Enos Hicks, head coach of track and football and athletic director once Carver High opened. By that time, Hicks had been teaching for twenty years already. When Hicks’ students saw “his bag of medals” for track and field, they believed that they, too, could excel and receive their own medals.
These are real teachers whose legacy is undeniable among Carver alumni. They inspired their students to hold their heads high in self-respect despite the cultural pressures and dangers to be pressed into a Whites Only mold of “forever less-than.”
Carver High School was at most 30 minutes from my own high school. I had no idea such quality against the odds was so nearby.
In order to correct the record in my own mind, I need to read and reread histories like the one Buras skillfully offers in What We Stand to Lose. So do any would-be, white saviors who pretend that the problems of New Orleans schools are somehow unrelated to decades of entrenched racism within the selfsame city.
In pretending that school and community quality can and should somehow be surgically separate, we all stand to lose so much.
On April 11, 2025, California teen Adam Raine took his own life.
In seeking answers, Raine’s parents discovered his eight-month, intense history of confiding in ChatGPT– including not only exploring suicide as an option but also attempting suicide multiple times.
On August 27, 2025, Raine’s parents sued Open AI for ChatGPT’s alleged role in their son’s death.
As the lawsuit demonstrates, a number of ChatGPT responses arguably encouraged Raine in that direction.
The details about how artificial intelligence was able to both ingratiate itself with and systematically and stealthily advise the very destruction of a human being are both sobering and shocking.
Parents and teachers must take note.
Below are excerpts from the 40-page suit filed in California Superior Court (San Francisco):
****
The suit continues with the number of opportunities that Open AI’s monitoring systems failed to flag Raine’s suicidal discussions and planning. On the contrary, ChatGPT actively encouraged and actively assisted in the planning of Raine’s suicide attempts.
One key conclusion:
Parents and teachers must take note.
AI is already too powerful to continue to evade comprehensive regulation.
__________________________________
Ghislaine Maxwell is not a victim. She is a sexual predator who for at least a decade trafficked minor females, chiefly for financier Jeffrey Epstein, but also for others to abuse, including herself.
From the June 28, 2022, press release about Maxwell’s sentencing (US Attorney’s Office, Southern District of New York):
Ghislaine Maxwell Sentenced To 20 Years In Prison For Conspiring With Jeffrey Epstein To Sexually Abuse Minors
Damian Williams, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced that GHISLANE MAXWELL was sentenced today in Manhattan federal court by United States Circuit Judge Alison J. Nathan to 240 months in prison for her role in a scheme to sexual exploit and abuse multiple minor girls with Jeffrey Epstein over the course of a decade. MAXWELL was previously found guilty on December 29, 2021, following a one-month jury trial, of conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts, transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts, sex trafficking conspiracy, and sex trafficking of a minor.
…
According to the allegations in the Indictment, court documents, and evidence presented at trial:
From at least 1994, up to and including in or about 2004, GHISLAINE MAXWELL assisted, facilitated, and participated in Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse of minor girls by, among other things, helping Epstein to recruit, groom, and ultimately abuse victims known to MAXWELL and Epstein to be under the age of 18. The victims were as young as 14 years old when they were groomed and abused by MAXWELL and Epstein, both of whom knew that their victims were in fact minors. As a part and in furtherance of their scheme to abuse minor victims, MAXWELL and Epstein enticed and caused minor victims to travel to Epstein’s residences in different states, which MAXWELL knew and intended would result in their grooming for and subjection to sexual abuse.
MAXWELL enticed and groomed minor girls to be abused in multiple ways. For example, MAXWELL attempted to befriend certain victims by asking them about their lives, their schools, and their families, and taking them to the movies or on shopping trips. MAXWELL also acclimated victims to Epstein’s conduct simply by being present for victim interactions with Epstein, which put victims at ease by providing the assurance and comfort of an adult woman who seemingly approved of Epstein’s behavior. Additionally, Epstein offered to help some victims by paying for travel and/or educational opportunities, and MAXWELL encouraged certain victims to accept Epstein’s assistance. As a result, victims were made to feel indebted and believed that MAXWELL and Epstein were trying to help them. MAXWELL also normalized and facilitated sexual abuse for a victim by discussing sexual topics, undressing in front of the victim, being present when the victim was undressed, and encouraging the victim to massage Epstein.
As MAXWELL and Epstein intended, these grooming behaviors left minor victims vulnerable and susceptible to sexual abuse by Epstein. MAXWELL was then present for certain sexual encounters between minor victims and Epstein, such as interactions where a minor victim was undressed, and ultimately was present for sex acts perpetrated by Epstein on minor victims. That abuse included sexualized massages during which a minor victim was fully or partially nude, as well as group sexualized massages of Epstein involving a minor victim where MAXWELL was present. In some instances, MAXWELL participated in the sexual abuse of minor victims.
Ultimately minor victims were subjected to sexual abuse that included, among other things, the touching of a victim’s breasts or genitals, placing a sex toy such as a vibrator on a victim’s genitals, directing a victim to touch Epstein while he masturbated, and directing a victim to touch Epstein’s genitals. MAXWELL and Epstein’s victims were groomed or abused at Epstein’s residences in New York, Florida, and New Mexico, as well as MAXWELL’s residence in London, England.
In the earlier phase of the conspiracy, from at least approximately 1994 through approximately 2001, MAXWELL and Epstein identified vulnerable girls, typically from single-mother households and difficult financial circumstances. This earlier phase required the defendant and Epstein to identify one girl at a time to target for grooming and abuse. In the later phase, from approximately 2001 until at least approximately 2004, MAXWELL and Epstein enticed and recruited, and caused to be enticed and recruited, minor girls to visit Epstein’s Palm Beach Residence to engage in sex acts with Epstein, after which Epstein, MAXWELL, or another employee of Epstein’s would give the victims hundreds of dollars in cash. MAXWELL and Epstein encouraged one or more of those victims to travel with Epstein with the intention that the victim engage in sex acts with Epstein. Moreover, and in order to maintain and increase his supply of victims, MAXWELL and Epstein also paid certain victims to recruit additional girls to be similarly abused by Epstein. In this way, MAXWELL and Epstein created a network of underage victims for Epstein to sexually exploit.
* * *
In addition to the prison sentence, MAXWELL, 60, was sentenced to five years of supervised release and ordered to pay a $750,00 fine.
Mr. Williams praised the outstanding work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
This case is being handled by the Office’s Public Corruption Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach are in charge of the prosecution.
Epstein and Maxwell prosecutor, Maurene Comey, who also prosecuted Sean “Diddy” Combs, was abruptly fired on July 17, 2025, without explanation. However, as the BBC points out:
Her exit comes as Trump and the justice department’s leader, Attorney General Pam Bondi, face backlash over the administration’s handling of files relating to Epstein.
Now, Maxwell is angling for immunity from future prosecution as a condition for her testimony before Congress. As the July 29, 2025, Reuters reports, the Republican-led House Oversight Committee, which subpoenaed Maxwell’s testimony, swiftly denied her request.
Still, some media outlets are trying to shift the narrative in order to reinvent convicted sexual predator Maxwell as a victim. This June 29, 2025, Mahomet Daily article confronts that attempted narrative shift by including victim interviews as well as links to court documents, including Maxwell’s appeal to the US Supreme Court.
Maxwell is no innocent. That narrative is trash. Some abhorrent excerpts:
Maxwell’s grooming tactics followed a consistent pattern that prosecutors called her “playbook.” She would approach victims with offers of financial opportunities, fake modeling auditions, promises of investments in careers or travel, and educational assistance.
The grooming process was gradual and calculated. Maxwell would first befriend the girls, taking them shopping for expensive clothes, including lingerie from Victoria’s Secret, discussing their personal lives, and gradually introducing sexual topics into conversation.
She would expose herself to victims and encourage them to undress in front of her, normalizing inappropriate behavior.
She created an environment where sexual abuse came to seem “casual and normal” through patient psychological manipulation.
…
Like many of Maxwell and Epstein’s victims, this was not the only encounter. “Jane” said Maxwell and Epstein would take advantage of her during massages, where Epstein would also masturbate, and that she was subject to abuse with sex toys and oral sex orgies where Maxwell would participate with other young girls.
“Carolyn,” also 14 years old, testified that she ended up at Epstein’s home after a friend said she could make money.
Maxwell personally groped Carolyn’s naked body, telling her she had a “great body for Epstein and his friends” after touching her breasts, hips, and buttocks. Carolyn returned to Epstein’s home hundreds of times over the next several years, with Maxwell arranging appointments and sometimes handing over cash payments of $300 per session. The abuse continued until Carolyn turned 18.
…
Maxwell’s manipulation of Kate was particularly calculated. She would ask Kate afterward, “How did it go? Did you have fun? Was it good?” treating the sexual abuse as a casual social interaction.
This happened more than once, with Epstein raping the girl more than once. “Kate” said, Maxwell told her, “You’re such a good girl. … He really likes you.”
…
Annie Farmer, the only victim to testify under her real name, was 16 when she encountered Maxwell and Epstein at his New Mexico ranch in 1996. Her story revealed Maxwell’s hands-on participation in sexual abuse.
Farmer, met Epstein through her sister, Maria, who was also one of Epstein’s victims.
Epstein asked Annie to visit New Mexico, which she was hesitant about until she learned a woman, Maxwell, would also be there. After Maxwell showed Farmer how to massage Epstein’s feet, she offered to give Farmer a massage.
…
Another survivor, Sarah Ransome, who was recruited at age 22, said Epstein and Maxwell threatened to kill her family if she tried to escape. After fleeing to the UK in 2007, Ransome told the judge she has proof Epstein searched for her a decade later.
The Department of Justice recognized that Epstein had over 1,000 victims in the July memo.
Jeffrey Epstein made substantial financial payments to Maxwell totaling at least $30.7 million between 1999 and 2007, with prosecutors stating he transferred approximately $23 million to her during the timeframe of their criminal conspiracy.
…
The jury in Maxwell’s criminal trial was unanimous in their verdict, consisting of 12 jurors (6 women and 6 men) who deliberated for approximately 40 hours across six days before reaching their decision on December 29, 2021.
Guilty Verdicts:
- Count 1: Conspiracy to entice a minor to travel to engage in illegal sex acts the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity
- Count 4: Transporting a minor with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity
- Count 5: Conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of minors
- Count 6: Sex trafficking of a minor
Release the files.
Online testing, AI platforms, and internet capabilities in general have made cheating in and across academic courses so very easy.
For some, the entire college experience is little more than one huge cheat fest.
The reckoning comes when such students realize that in cultivating cheating habits, they have actually cheated themselves. They feel insecure (rightly so) about graduating on empty– having a degree but not the knowledge they were supposed to have acquired and self-discipline they were supposed to have cultivated by legitimately completing their own work.
And they feel like academic frauds because, well, they are.
Here’s a brief, November 2024 posting from Reddit, entitled, “Cheated my way through most of college. Am I screwed?”:
Title pretty much explains it. I’m in my first semester of senior year as a Undergrad Finance major and have cheated a lot of my way through college. It depends on the courses though. Some classes have in-person exams and so I have always studied enough to pass those type of tests. Any exam online has been cheated through. Most of my HW (homework) I cheat on too. I feel like a failure, and I am worried that I will be underprepared for the real job market. I feel like I have a grasp on a lot of general concepts in Accounting, and Finance in general, but when it comes to the nitty gritty and hard stuff, I feel like I will be lost. My one hope is that I have heard a lot of what you learn is on the job, and being clueless going into the job market is somewhat expected. Anybody here that can give me hope, or am I actually screwed?
Also this post is not me trying to gain pity from anyone. I acknowledge this was solely on me and no one else. I am just so anxious right now about the outcome of my future that I am holding on to strings about possibilities.
The post has a number of responses. Here is one pointed take:
You feel like a failure because you are. People saying you can just grind and learn what you need on the job are missing a key point: you didn’t have the initiative to grind while in school and you won’t suddenly learn how to grind once you get a job.
And another:
I think that one of the biggest things you should think about at this point in your life/career is whether or not you are willing to develop the skills to LEARN, not just PASS. You are entering the job market with a knowledge deficit, which may hold you back in the short term. Now is a pivotal time for you to work on redeveloping your learning skills and improve your ability to think critically about subjects you might not have cared about. Once you graduate (assuming you are not expelled for academic dishonesty), try your hardest to “retrain” yourself to learn. Take some free LinkedIn Learning classes. Try learning a new hands-on skill or language. Whatever you choose to learn, work on discipline and comprehension. This will ensure that you’re quick on your feet to learn new skills when it’s crunch time.
In another post, categorized as “True off my chest” and entitled, “I cheated my way thru college” (August 2023), the writer asks for advice on how to deal with the guilt:
It’s not something I’m proud of, but I figured I’d share my story here anonymously and maybe get some advice or understanding from you all.
During my time in college, I was overwhelmed with coursework and deadlines, and I thought cheating was a quick way out. It started with small stuff like searching answers on quizlet, but it eventually spiraled into more serious cheating like plagiarizing and using ChatGPT for essays and google for exam questions.
Looking back, I can see how wrong and unfair it was to myself and others who worked hard to earn their grades honestly. It’s a regret I’ll carry with me for the rest of my life. As messed up as it sounds, I have to admit that I didn’t really learn much from college because of all the cheating. Sure, I passed exams and got decent grades, but deep down, I know I missed out on the real learning experience. College is supposed to be about growth, expanding your horizons, and gaining knowledge, both academically and personally. But with my constant cheating, I missed the chance to truly challenge myself, discover my passions, and develop critical thinking skills. It’s like I took the easy way out, and now I regret it big time. I am now graduating this month with a 3.6 GPA.
Has anyone else been through something similar? How did you deal with the guilt, and how did you move forward from it? Any advice or support would be greatly appreciated.
This posting has only one comment, basically saying no big deal because “undergrad is all about showing up.” This response misses the point; the writer is confessing to not really “showing up” and struggling with the resultant regret.
There are those who also brag about getting away with cheating and being proud to do so. Interestingly, in one such case, the writer apparently directed incredible time, money and energy into cheating (and covering up the cheating) instead of devoting the same toward honest academics– and ends with stating, “Everyone thinks I’m smart but I know I’m a total impostor.” From March 2022, another “True off my chest” post, “I’ve cheated half of my degree at university”:
This is a throwaway account but I had to confess it to someone.
As the topic says, I’ve cheated half of my degree and I don’t regret it. I’ve never cheated during high school and I was considered a good student (always between 2nd and 3rd in my class) but once I got into university (Health/Science profession) I was overwhelmed by the huge loads of material in such a few time that I started to spend my time searching ways to cheat instead of learning them.
You might be thinking “oh, everybody has done that before” but you can’t believe the amount of money I’ve spent buying all kinds of gadgets and my main methods were:
– For topics where we had to use a calculator, I bought an HP50G so I could insert all texts/formulas/whatever needed inside it. For those who don’t know, this calculator is well known by Engineering students but my teachers from the Health university didn’t have a clue you can cheat with it.
– For topics where I had to learn lots of terminologies, texts, etc, I bought those spy earpieces and recorded everything on an mp3. I came to a point where I bought one of those where you can switch/stop tracks with your toes. Yes, I looked like James Bond. A few years ago I was moving and decided to get rid of it all since my wife was asking what was all that stuff and I had 15 earpieces of all kinds and brands imaginable. Guys, I wasn’t even buying it from a “local shop”, I was buying directly from the reseller in China.
Roast me if you want, but I don’t regret a thing and it has been years since I have my degree and never told a soul about it. Everyone thinks I’m smart but I know I’m a total impostor.
Numerous comments to this one, including, “Always good to hear a health care professional cheated his way through school,” and “All the time researching gadgets, you could have been studying and actually learning.. especially in a medical field. I hope you’re not an actual doctor.”
And so:
“I don’t regret it” but “I had to confess it to someone.”
Hmm.
Cheating one’s academic life away carries quite the self-reproachful hangover– as it should.
The best course of action: Don’t start walking this path in the first place.
And if you have, college student, even though it may be difficult in the short run, for the sake of your long run, cut it out.
_______________________________________
In June 2025, Louisiana governor Jeff Landry signed into law two bills aimed at giving Louisiana teachers a permanent pay raise (as opposed to the string of annual $2k stipends approved three years in a row).
The first bill, HB 473 (now Act 222) became law on June 16, 2025, and involves liquidating three constitutionally-protected education trust funds in order to redirect the money toward paying down $2B in debt (“unfunded accrued liability,” or UAL) held by the Teachers retirement System of Louisiana (TRSL). (For further explanation and back story, see this November 2024 TRSL archive).
Specifically, HB 473/Act 222 calls for the liquidation of these three education trust funds:
- Education Excellence Fund (tobacco settlement funds)
- Louisiana Education Quality Fund (federal effort at equitable mineral revenues for seven coastal states)
- Louisiana Quality Education Support Fund (i.e., 8(g) grants)
HB 473/ Act 222 stipulates that any monies exceeding the $2B redirected to TRSL are to be expended on purposes in keeping with the stipulations of the original fund legislation (i.e., pre-K12 “instructional enhancement” in the case of Education Excellence Fund money; “research efforts” and “endowed chairs for eminent scholars” and the university level in the case of the Louisiana Quality Educational Fund).
The annual amount that each school system would have directed toward paying TRSL debt is to be redirected toward “a permanent salary increase, plus any related benefits, of two thousand two hundred fifty dollars for certificated personnel and one thousand one hundred twenty-five dollars for noncertificated personnel, as provided by law.”
The bill notes that non-TRSL teachers and personnel (i.e., those at charter schools) are to receive the same raises and that the state will cover any shortfall for schools and districts that cannot cover the raises using the amount that they would have otherwise committed to TRSL debt.
HB 473/ Act 222 also states that the constitutional amendment is not meant to replace the work of the state board of ed and the Minimum Foundation Program (MFP) funding but that the amendment will serve as a fiscal placeholder, so to speak, until the state board accounts for the permament raises in its MFP formula.
Keep in mind that HB 473/ Act 222 requires passage of a constitutional amendment to liquidate the three education trust funds at the center of this permanent raise plan. The public is expected to vote on this measure in April 2026.
If the constitutional amendment passes, the state-funded, permanent raises are scheduled to take effect for the 2026-27 school year.
The second bill, HB 466 (Act 266), was signed into law on June 20, 2025, and succinctly details how the raise works:
Moreover, it includes specifics about how schools and districts might spend excess funds (that is, money left over after instituting the permanent raises), including using such funds to enhance school security; purchase technology; provide summer enrichment; fund early childhood education for at-risk children; employ personnel “who qualify for differentiated compensation allocations in critical shortage areas,” and/or even providing an additional, uniform salary increase to certificated personnel, noncertificated personnel, or both.
Again, the funding behind HB 466/ Act 366 is detailed in HB 473/ Act 222, which depends upon public approval via public vote on a constitutional amendment.
On March 29, 2025, the teacher raise was part of Amendment 2, one of four constitutional amendments that Louisiana voters soundly rejected by 2 to 1 margins.
That go-round, the language for Amendment 2 included none of the detail provided by successfully-passed bills already signed into law prior to the vote, and the teacher raise was one of a number of proposed constitutional alterations piled together in one all-too-generally-stated, crowded, hodge-podge of an amendment:
Do you support an amendment to revise Article VII of the Constitution of Louisiana including revisions to lower the maximum rate of income tax, increase income tax deductions for citizens over sixty-five, provide for a government growth limit, modify operation of certain constitutional funds, provide for property tax exemptions retaining the homestead exemption and exemption for religious organizations, provide a permanent teacher salary increase by requiring a surplus payment to teacher retirement debt, and make other modifications? (Amends Article VII, Sections 1 through 28; Adds Article VII, Sections 29 through 42).
That first go-round reminded me of a poorly-constructed survey option. Voters were backed into a motley, pressure-sale corner in altering the state constitution, and they overwhelmingly chose “No, thank you.”
In a July 08, 2025, letter to TRSL and addressed to teachers, Landry acknowledges the Amendment 2 failure and outlines his effort to improve this second go-round:
The second go-round is much improved.
HB 473 will be one of five proposed Louisiana constitutional amendments appearing on the April 18, 2025, ballot. An additional proposed amendment will appear on the November 03, 2025, ballot, for a total of six more possible constitutional amendments for Louisiana voters to consider in 2025:
April 2026 will be here before we know it.
We’ll see what Louisiana voters decide.
_________________________________
Persons traveling in groups, wearing masks and often vests that say “Police” or “ICE”– no other identifiers, including refusing to identify themselves by name– and often offering no Hinton of due process to the individuals they are rounding up and taking to some mysterious “away”– are in locales all over the country, seizing people of color.
They do not necessarily come with arrest warrants. The June 04, 2025, Guardian reports that ICE agents have reportedly been told to be “creative” about arrests, to “push the envelope” and to pursue “collaterals.”
They can show up anywhere– including schools and bus stops.
On May 31, 2025, a Massachusetts junior was arrested on his way to volleyball practice and held for six days.
From the June 03, 2025, Associated Press:
Marcelo Gomes da Silva, a junior born in Brazil, was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents Saturday on his way to volleyball practice. Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons said Monday that agents were looking for the teenager’s father, who owns the car Gomes da Silva was driving at the time.
“Like any local law enforcement officer, if you encounter someone that has a warrant or … he’s here illegally, we will take action on it,” he said when reporters asked about the teen.
Asked why ICE would detain an 18-year-old with no criminal record, Lyons answered, “I didn’t say he was dangerous. I said he’s in this country illegally and we’re not going to walk away from anybody.”
School leaders need to plan for this reality.
I won’t pretend to have any easy answers. However, a first step involves becoming familiar with the situation.
On May 12, 2025, Walter Olsen of the Libertarian think tank, the Cato Institute, published an informative, pointed article about the ICE “secret police.” Below are some excerpts:
ICE Agents Routinely Mask Up When Seizing People—That’s Wrong
Walter Olsen
I had missed the story from two weeks ago about what happened after (apparent) agents of the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), one wearing a balaclava to hide his face, seized two men at the Charlottesville, VA, courthouse. The sequel, as reported by the local paper, the Daily Progress, was that an unnamed (!) ICE spokesperson threatened to prosecute two persons at the scene who challenged the action and asked the agents to identify themselves or show a warrant. The headline read: “ICE promises bystanders who challenged Charlottesville raid will be prosecuted.”
Leave aside the question of when, if at all, it is proper to prosecute bystanders under these circumstances. Why is it considered acceptable for ICE enforcers to wear masks to hide their identity in the first place? They did so last week, a video shows, when they arrested Newark, NJ Mayor Ras Baraka as he protested at a detention facility. A casual search reveals that ICE agents have worn face coverings, ski masks, and the like in raids and stops reported from around the country (Westminster, MD; Douglas County, CO; Great Barrington, MA; Bellingham, WA). Federal agents wore masks when they abducted Turkish grad student Rümeysa Öztürk off a street near her Boston-area home. (She was freed by a judge last week.) The Trump Department of Homeland Security appears to have made it standard practice.
At what point will we as a nation find ourselves with a secret police?
People who mask themselves before street confrontations ordinarily do so to avoid legal and public accountability, especially when they are up to no good.
…
So can ICE agents—or at least whoever is conducting these raids and stops in ICE’s name. Aside from the masking, agents in videos are often seen wearing outfits so random and ill-assorted that they have sparked speculation that they are persons borrowed from local or state law enforcement work or even private security. It’s hard to know when dodging identification is part of the plan.
…
Hypotheticals about whether police masking might have proper uses under very extreme circumstances—say, in arresting members of a major criminal gang known for retaliating against law enforcement—are less than relevant to the federal detentions in recent weeks, which have often targeted persons with no police record at all, let alone a record of violence. But masking—as with overkill in the quantity of agents, vehicles, and weaponry sent in to a scene—does convey a message of intimidation.
Certainly, if a group of masked individuals (mostly men) in sketchy law enforcement or military garb hinting immigration enforcement show up at a school office, or are hanging out in a school parking lot, or ball field, of bus loading area, administration needs to have a plan to deal with the situation.
ICE does use warrants. That’s what schools seem to assume. But not always. It appears that 2025 ICE prefers presenting no warrants as its agents appear to be arresting indiscriminately in order to meet quotas.
On June 19, 2025, ICE agents tried hanging out in the parking lot at Dodgers Stadium in Los Angeles.
The Dodgers posted that ICE was “denied entry to the grounds”:
As for raids at farms, hotels, and restaurants, Trump said they would cease, then changed course.
Schools being off limits was not even on the pre-reversal list.
If ICE detains a school bus driver and leaves student riders stranded or otherwise unattended, administration needs to have a plan.
If ICE raids neighborhoods and takes parents and leaves children, or if parents, or students, or faculty are afraid to travel to and from school for fear of being detained by ICE, administration needs to have a plan.
In formulating that plan, here are some additional resources:
- Mass.gov: Guidance regarding K-12 Schools’ obligations to protect students and their information
- NYC Schools: Immigrant Families FAQs
- Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates: Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Schools
- The Conversation: ICE can now enter K-12 schools − here’s what educators should know about student rights and privacy
This off-balance version of America is where we are.
____________________________________
On June 09, 2025, the Louisiana Senate voted 39-0 on HB 1, the House budget bill, which “Provides for the ordinary operating expenses of state government for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.” The bill, which includes some amendments, will return to the Louisiana House.
HB 1 initially passed the Louisiana House by a vote of 99-0 on May 15, 2025, and includes $199M “Payable to the Minimum Foundation Program to provide a pay stipend to be paid in the same manner and to the same positions as the stipend in Fiscal Year 2024-2025, plus the associated employer retirement contributions, which stipend shall be distributed by each school district no later than December 15, 2025” (page 148 of 183).
The “same manner” noted above concerns the $2000 stipend for teachers and $1000 for support staff paid in 2024.
An earlier plan by Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry included a permanent teacher raise (HB 466) contingent upon passage of constitutional amendments. However, on March 29, 2025, all four proposed constitutional amendments were rejected by a two-thirds margin. The March 29, 2025, Louisiana Illuminator calls the sweeping rejection “stunning” and calls the addition of a permanent teacher raise to Amendment 2 Landry’s “attempt[] to sweeten voters” and added that the rejection could have killed not only the raise but also the $2000/$1000 stipends that have been part of the Louisiana budget for the past two years, beginning in 2023:
Landry had attempted to sweeten voters on Amendment 2 by tying it to compensation for public school teachers. Had it passed, temporary stipends worth $2,000 and $1,000 that teachers and school support staff have received for the past two years were expected to become permanent.
Now, the educators are at risk of a pay cut since Landry hasn’t included money for their stipend in his current budget proposal.
Note that Louisiana legislators could approve a teacher/staff pay raise without amending the Louisiana constitution. Tying the proposed raise to a constitutional amendment– and threatening no raise if the amendment failed– was the governor’s game.
Even though all four constitutional amendments failed spectacularly, on May 12, 2025, the Louisiana Illuminator noted that the teacher/staff stipends had returned to the Louisiana House budget:
The Louisiana House of Representatives leadership added money to its state budget proposal to avoid a public school teacher pay cut that was expected after a March constitutional failed to pass.
The House Appropriations Committee approved a budget plan Monday that contains $198 million to cover stipends for K-12 school teachers and school support staff. They are in line to receive $2,000 and $1,000, respectively, in the 2025-26 academic year.
For details on how the Louisiana House came up with the one-time money, continue reading the above article. And it is one-time money. However, the Illuminator adds that the components of the failed Constitutional Amendment 2 could reappear on the ballot in 2026 as smaller ballot items, including that related to a permanent teacher raise. (Perhaps this time without trying to hook it to a Louisiana constitutional alteration.)
The Louisiana House must now decide whether to approve the Senate amendments to HB 1 or to make additional changes and send it back to the Senate. On the positive side, the proposed teacher/staff stipends made it through Senate passage, which is a pretty solid sign the stipends will be approved in the final version of the bill (see page 148 of 183):
Stay tuned for the final word as HB 1 heads back to the Louisiana House.
_____________________________________
deutsch29: Mercedes Schneider's Blog 
