Relates to Pizzagate in that she envoked the name to dismiss it and is a child advocate apparently
https://twitter.com/kimberlykeith/status/848310781468966913
Kimberly Keith
@kimberlykeith
child welfare, training design, rural community development, counselor, special education, complexity and change, poverty and families
takes to twitter to say:
"Have #benswann and @cbs46 apologized to the people of Atlanta for the #pizzagate lie on their news programming yet?"
"Jones apologized so I was curious. I'd be a ticked-off Atlantan after this on the local news. Now, especially."
She's from Southern Arkansas University: (full bio here) http://kimberlykeith.snappages.com/about.htm
follow on
follow on
follow on
follow on
follow on
Kimberly Keith Bio
Education and Licensure:
Licensed Professional Counselor, Appraisal Specialization
MEd Agency Counseling, Southern Arkansas University
BA Psychology, The University of Texas at Dallas
Professional Experience:
Director, Community Connections, SAU
Training Development and Design, Academic Partnership in Public Child Welfare, SAU
Instructor of Social Work, SAU
Parent Educator, Guide to Parenting of K-6 Children, About.com, a New York Times company
Community Work:
HEALTH Coalition of Columbia County, Treasurer 2007-2012, Chair 2013 - Present
13th Judicial District Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA), Board
Rotary, Paul Harris Fellow
South Arkansas Women's Network, Career Achievement Award, 2009
Child Abuse Prevention Council of Columbia County
Magnolia Junior Charity League, Board
Leadership Magnolia, Board
Magnolia Arts, Board
view the rest of the comments →
PizzaGateTwiceRetard ago
The Clinton Foundation does a lot of work for youths and Pizzagate has targeted the CF specifically. It's not surprising that someone involved with the CF would fire back.
I want to see evidence that the CF doesn't do any good and acts as a conduit for human trafficking. I've seen a lot of speculation, but nothing substantial. Nobody has come forward, no CF "victims" have surfaced, no bodies, no specific disappearances.
Otherwise, all you've got is a circle-jerk acting on an arbitrary premise.
If you want to investigate a crime, you have to prove that a crime has been committed.
ZalesMcMuffin ago
No, you only need to have a situation where a crime has been committed, whether or not you can "prove" that it has.
Silverlining ago
Zales You merely have to have reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed for there to be an investigation. And then the crime can be proved or not. The biggest beef here is that there is no investigation of anything pizza or pedo. If the DC police had examined Alefantis's computer when they had the chance - and found nothing, people might have a different approach to pizzagate. But the circumstantial evidence and the established evidence is it has been historically covered up by the authorities everywhere and that is what I personally suspect is happening again.
ZalesMcMuffin ago
You're talking about an investigation by police (and you're right). I was talking more generally; we are all investigating this, to the extent that we can.
PizzaGateTwiceRetard ago
Did you witness the crime? Because that's literally the only situation in which that logic applies.
If you want other people to investigate a crime, you either need proof of a crime, or you need people who will take your word for it. You have to have at least witnessed the crime. Otherwise, there's always the chance that you're investigating nothing.
Silverlining ago
A hacker allegedly found child porn on the Comet computer and told the police. They did - you guessed it - nothing!
ZalesMcMuffin ago
Yeah, well... (1) we don't KNOW what was turned over to the police; as you say, it was alleged, and (2) we really don't KNOW what the police have done or may be doing, only that we've not heard of anything yet that indicates any action. Titus Frost comes across to me as a sincere guy, but maybe that's why "they" picked him. ;-)
The lack of government transparency and lack of official communication and lack of evidence of any official action is all rather rough on all of us, especially when so many things point to corruption. I want to let them do their jobs, if they're going to do them... but...
ZalesMcMuffin ago
Of course there's the chance, if you don't know. But you can investigate a crime before proving that it occurred. It either did or did not occur. If it did not occur, then it cannot be investigated, because it is not real to be investigated. However, the appearance of a crime can be investigated, and a proper investigation will illuminate whether or not it did occur.
If a treasure is buried someplace, or if it isn't but you think that it is, you can dig for it. You don't have to prove it exists, or even know that it does, before digging. You can dig based on a hypothesis. The results will indicate whether or not your hypothesis was right.
If you find nothing, then your hypothesis was evidently wrong.
If you find the treasure, then you were digging for it prior to proving it was there. In the same way, if you investigate based on a suspicion of a crime and then establish, by the investigation, that the crime did occur, then you were investigating the crime prior to proving that it happened. QED
PizzaGateTwiceRetard ago
Well, then, Pizzagate is a pretty poor investigation since you've all been at it for six months now and no proof of any crime has been uncovered.
So, what's your deadline for admitting that you've found nothing?
Sorry, but if you want to claim that you're investigating a crime, then you need to have a crime to investigate. If it's taken this long to find a crime and you still haven't found a crime, you aren't actually investigating anything at all.
ZalesMcMuffin ago
As you well know, we aren't permitted to go beyond certain "lines", so it's absurd to insist that we have to produce the same results as those who are.
Frankly, that you say we've found no proof of anything is sufficient reason to end this discussion. The wiki and innumerable infographics await you if you want to look over what has been assembled.