Joe’s Chain Reaction 2

JOE: I. . .no charges filed, no nothing. They spent eight weeks interrogating my kids. And, okay this is, go back. Thursday, they took the two olders Wednesday night, uh, uh, I dropped the other eight kids off Thursday morning and then we had to go to court Thursday afternoon, so I got Nicole out of jail, just before we went to court. And, uh, we show up and we’re sitting there, and so my lawyer’s like, well, what’s the situation, what’s, you know, what are our concerns, and so he just kind of, well, that’s not against the law, that’s not against the law, and what it broke down to was one of my Facebook pictures showed one of my kids walking on a dirt, on the dirt ground, and she’s like, well I’m just concerned that that’s your cabin floor. I said, well first of all, it’s not illegal in the state of Kentucky to have a dirt floor in your cabin. There are a lot of people in the Appalachian area that have dirt floors in their cabin.

And if that’s your issue, then my lawyer said well let’s put this off for 72 hours and have the Cabinet come down that Friday, that next morning, uh, and just inspect it. So, two workers and our lawyer met that Friday and she was like, oh, I see you’ve got an actual floor. She’s like, uh, and I told her we plan on building a bigger cabin, and I says, but she’s like, well, this cabin is fine, uh, I see how you opened it up with the warmer weather, um and she says, just before winter make sure you have the fourth wall up, yeah, that’s fine, we just took the fourth wall down to open it up into like a picnic area.

And she said everything was fine and as we were walking off, she can see where we had a little, uh, because the property we bought had a bunch of trailers on it that kind of were broken down, with furniture still in it, it was weird, but there was a lot to clean up, and we had a staging area where we had metal recycling and stuff. She’s like could you just fence in this area, that’ll just, no, not that there’s any laws but just for my concern and you know, for the children’s safety, and I says, that’s fine. Not a problem, I’ll just, I’ll fence in this area.

So, she’s like okay good. So we were planning on going back to court on Monday and everything was gonna be fine, they were gonna say everything’s fine and the kids are gonna be returned, but then, uh, my older son, from a previous engagement, um, showed up. (1) He just walks into this courtroom and gives the bizarrest testimony of sexual abuse and abuses. I hadn’t seen him. . .

HOST: Oh, no.

JOE: . . .since he was (unclear) old. Yes, I hadn’t seen this kid since he was 4 ½ years old and, the court documents from New Hampshire, because we were living in Texas at the time, we were expecting our third child, so we couldn’t, we had no money to go up and deal with the situation that was going on in New Hampshire.(2) So, but the situation in New Hampshire, there was no, no allegations of that at all. So he gives this bizarre testimony, the court figured, well, that good enough for us to reconvene in a week and we’ll, we’ll investigate those original charges, we’ll request those court documents, which they did and they saw that there was never any allegations of sexual abuse,(3) and they also interrogated, the sheriff and CPS decided they would sit down and talk to every single one of my children. So, over that week, they did just that.

So, Friday comes along and they say, okay, and we’re staying at a friend’s house, and so they say, well, we’re allowed to give you supervised visits, we’re gonna let you have your children back from Friday until Monday when we, [aside to kid] No. [child’s name], I don’t want him up there. [Back to camera] And, uh, Friday until Monday when we go back to court and you’re fine, your children are amazing. Uh, they’re very well-spoken, very well-mannered, very intelligent, they’re articulate, they couldn’t say enough words to describe how awesome we are.(4)

And um, so they kept saying everything (unclear) we’re 100% sure that the kids are going home.

So Monday shows up and there’s bickering going on between the Guardian Ad Litem and everybody and there’s arguing and finally the judge goes okay, okay, and she looks at the sheriff and she says, sheriff, on, on the record, this is his testimony on the record, sheriff, is there any reason why these children shouldn’t be returned home? And his testimony was, no, they’re not breaking any laws, I think the way they’re living is kinda neat, uh, and there’s no reason why the children shouldn’t be returned home,(5) and so she looks at the Cabinet, CPS, and says, asks them the same question. Is there any reason why these children shouldn’t go home, and they go on even further, like, no these kids are amazing, this family’s amazing, they described what they walked into, we didn’t even tell them we were coming, we walked in, the people that we were staying at had six kids and our ten kids and they were like, there was no fightin’ goin’ on, it was rainin’ out all day, they were cooped up inside but there was no fightin’ no arguing, they were getting along and they were just going on about how amazing we are, and how loving we are.

And so, but the Guardian Ad Litem starts sitting there saying, well, they could be brain-washed. And the Cabinet’s like, have you met these kids?

HOST: What?

This is reaching at this point. Making stuff up. Brainwashed in what way? Oh, you mean, to not be totally in line with your statist paradigm?

They could be Russian spies, I mean you can’t be too sure.

JOE: That’s it. And I, and, and so the Cabinet goes, are you kidding me, they told us that Dad smokes pot. They said, Dad smokes pot, and he also, uh, uses, uh, his disciplinary method is pushups and running laps. Sometimes he pulls out a switch and we get a switch on the butt. Uh, we haven’t used that method in quite some time, uh, but, uh, you know, they even said, none, there’s no negative effects to the marijuana smoking, he has no criminal background, he has, there’s no violent background, there’s, there’s nothing illegal about spanking a kid on the butt in Kentucky.

And uh, so she just, they’re all arguing, and so the Guardian Ad Litem goes on even more with this whole, well, he could, you know, they’re Christians, and uh, they’re a large family, and, eh, you know, the father’s a patriarch kind of blowhard kind of a thing. (6) He’s just manipulating and controlling these people and uh, if you met my wife, you know, uh, we both wear pants in this family.

HOST: Yeah.

Yeah, he might be a blowhard, but not a patriarch.

JOE: [laughs] But, uh, so it just turned into, well, we’re gonna keep the kids and we’re gonna put them through, my kids, over those eight week period, met with psychologists, psychiatrists, uh, doctors, a plethora of different specialists, from bone scans to brain scans to heart scans, you name it, my, they were dropping money like it was candy just to have my kids interrogated. They met with educators, and every time they came back, there would be a lot of political jargon, like, oh, the children weren’t allowed to go to public school, or the children weren’t vaccinated and the children don’t go to see a doctor on a regular basis, you know, Dad stitched the oldest kid’s finger back on himself, and the finger’s in good shape, but, then at the bottom it would always say, the kids are healthy, they have no recommendation.

It was just so. . . you don’t need to add all that other stuff to say my kid’s healthy. Now let’s get on with the show.

Um, but, oh, no.

HOST: I still have you.

Yeah, I don’t know if you can hear us, but you’re still on

JOE: I have somebody calling in.

HOST: Oh, gotcha.

JOE: So, um, during the next seven weeks of them doing this to my children, and then after seven weeks, uh, the, there, because I did test positive for marijuana twice (7) and then they said if you test, you give us a negative test, we’ll lift supervision and we’ll be able to place them with you. So, I, I, I had, I had stopped smoking some time, and it took like sixty days to get out of my freaking system. . .

HOST: Yeah

JOE: . . .but I finally cleaned the marijuana out of my system, uh, and uh, they were lifted supervision. After eight weeks, the children were placed back with us and uh, and whatnot, and we kept kind of going on, goin’ on, we still had these criminal charges, I was facing

HOST: You’re freezing up a little

[Technical problems and a little discussion about that]

JOE: . . . misdemeanor. . . we record every conversation we could, except for actually in the courthouse, I meant in the court room. In the family court room. The judge would not let us bring our cell phones in there. Uh, but we can order those transcripts, I’m not sure if she’s gonna, you know, seal some of it, because they were talking about that the last court date, of sealing some of it, but we recorded everything, every interaction, every phone call, everything. And uh, so the, my lawyer calls me up and says, listen, you know, you guys have a case, they violated your rights, these things can take years to resolve. He says, and you see how bizarre this has been from the beginning. He says, now, I’ll defend you if that’s what you want, but I’m gonna come home at the end of the day, I’m gonna eat my steak, and I’m gonna make love to my wife and I’m gonna go to bed. He says, they’re gonna find something. They’re gonna. Because at one point, the, the county attorney walks in and says, well, your honor, because they’re not being cooperative in their criminal charges, because we were like, no, we’re not, we’re not plea-dealing, we’re not, I was not guilty of menacing, and my wife was not guilty of, of, disorderly conduct or resisting arrest and that’s it. We’ll take it to trial. I, we don’t care.

And he knew he had no case. He knew that there was gonna be lawsuits, they knew that the county screwed up. And so, he comes into family court, and he says, your honor, because they’re not being cooperative in the other criminal cases, I want to add contempt charges in their family court case. And he actually put two of our kids on the witness list, making it to where we can’t even talk to them now.

And we’re like, so we couldn’t find out what was going on, what was gonna be said, or else we would have felony witness tampering charges as well. He made that clear too, that if we tried to contact them and whatever.

So, we’re now looking at contempt charges, which is six months jail time for each of us. And she was about to give birth, you know, coming up. So, uh, our lawyer made it clear that they were gonna find something. They were gonna hold us in contempt. He said he’d already know, this is, he was telling us that it had already been discussed, that district court was gonna find us in contempt, put us both in jail, take our kids away, get them immune, put them in public school, Nicole would have the baby in jail, they would take the baby, and yeah, we’ll get the kids back when we get out. . .

HOST: Under new terms

JOE: But look at all the damage, six months, just being separated from each other and separated from us and foster care is not a pleasant place.

HOST: Not at all.

JOE: My oldest kids were in a detention center up in Louisville, uh, and he’s, my kids were like, they’d just never seen anything that bizarre, people flipping out, throwing tables. .

HOST: Yeah. [Note: he sounds oddly enthusiastic about this]

JOE:. . . fighting each other

HOST: Oh, those environments aren’t sane.

JOE: . . .all sorts of. . . and, um, so he said, they’re gonna hold you in contempt and they’re gonna find something. Now the circuit court, which is also in the county, they’re gonna rubber stamp what district court did. That’s gonna cost you, you know, when you appeal, you go to circuit court first, that’s gonna cost you ten thousand and they’re gonna rubber stamp it. This is, he’s like, my lawyer’s like, this has already been discussed.

And so he says, in an appeals court, which is where it goes next, that’s gonna cost you another ten thousand dollars, and you’ll win but that could take up to three years. And I was like, holy crap. So he’s like,well, here, here’s, you know, the prosecutor wants to plead you. So I was like what does he want. And, uh, at first it was some bizarre things, so I was like, no. I want my wife’s charges dropped, or whatever, just, uh, uh, whatever they called it, deferred, or whatever, they just wanted her to admit that he had a reason to pull her over. So that way they can, we’ve already talked to lawyers, that still doesn’t negate from a lawsuit, uh, and then they want me to plead guilty on my Class B misdemeanor. I don’t have a criminal background. I’m forty-three years old and I have no criminal background. Ah, and um, so, they wanted to give me like sixty days jail time. I was like you got to be kidding me. And so, I ended up talking it down, (8) I ended up doing four days jail time and I did an Alford plea, which just means I maintain my innocence, um, but the county, they’re gonna screw me over anyway.

And then family court, we would both plead, uh, dependent [asking Nicole], yeah, dependency for living in a dilapidated home and because I smoked marijuana.

HOST: [incredulous] Dilapidated?(9)

You’re fucking me. That’s serious?

JOE: (unclear) . . . but dependency. Right. And, uh, which just means basically that I can’t work at a day care center or an old folks’ home or whatever. (10)

HOST: That’s truly insane.

JOE: So we said, okay, we’ll do it. And that was in November of 2015. So, and it was all supposed to go away. So they rush our criminal pleas through, uh, uh, I, uh, plead and I said I would do the four days jail time and Nicole said, yeah, he had probable cause to pull me over, and then as we’re getting ready to do the family thing, the Guardian Ad Litem starts throwing a fit. Just starts throwing a fit. Talking about she wants us to be forensically evaluated. Forensically evaluated. All of us. All of our children and us, so. . .

HOST: Now what exactly is that?(11)

JOE: . . . the judge goes ahead and orders it. In our deposition. Which is supposed to be . . . it. It’s like, in the (unclear) CPS worker, she’s like never heard of this. Usually, people have forensic evaluations to see if the children should be returned, not after, after the children have been returned, but after custody has been returned. So, CPS has been beside themselves this whole time, my lawyer’s been beside themselves the whole time, and, and it’s just amazing, so they did this forensic evaluation order them, it’s like a year later, they still hadn’t gotten any of us in. They kept going to court, saying, well, the lady had her father die, that runs the forensic evaluation and then other stuff going on, and uh, so finally they do me and Nicole, and now we’re talking over a year later.

So we go back into court and the results haven’t come back from them, but I convince the judge, and I speak up, and I convince the judge to sit there and say, (12)  well, let’s just call off the kids being evaluated and if we find something in the parents, then we’ll have the kids evaluated.

So, that was fine, so we set up another court date and they get the results in and basically it’s thirty-nine pages of, uh, political opinion.(13) At the end of it, it says, these parents are not suffering from any mental illness, but because, and she goes further, she says, and I, and she even states in her evaluation that her test doesn’t measure anything she’s about to say. But that the forensic evaluation actually (unclear) to prove that we don’t suffer from any mental illness. But because, but because we’re so adamant and outspoken about our lifestyle, about our political opinions, about our, about our faith, that it puts us in a contentious environment to where people react contentious towards us and that puts our children in danger. (14)

And I was like, what?

HOST: This is like blaming a woman who may dress a little (unclear) for being raped.

JOE: And, uh, they want to argue that, um, uh, that they want to see progress with this, and I was like what are you guys talking about, so I, I speak up again, and I tell her that, listen, these tests show that we’re not mentally ill, we’re not suffering from any mental illness, that would put our children in danger, uh, you know as far as the test results are concerned, as far as how they evaluate it and according to law, and uh, the psychological, you know, the different things, schizophrenia, uh, whatever, uh, they have on that list, um, and uh, and so I tell them that listen, because if the Guardian Ad Litem, my lawyer start talking about, oh, are you going to, you know, get every Amish person in here, or are you gonna get every homeschool kid in here and start eval. . . are you actually going to change Kentucky law and say that you need to have every homeschool kid evaluated?

And so the lady’s like, no, because they’re not sitting here in my courtroom. The Nauglers are sitting here in my courtroom. So at this point I speak up and I say, just because we’re sitting here doesn’t mean we’ve lost our rights. We still have our rights. And I have yet to see a charge with us being charged with anything. Nonetheless convicted of anything.

HOST: Right.

JOE: And I tell the lady, the, the, the tests, judge, I tell the judge, that you know, these tests, these forensic evaluations show we’re not suffering from any mental illness, uh, and that the Cabinet who is the investigative arm for family court testified profusely every time we’ve walked in that we’re a very loving family, our kids are very intelligent, very well-mannered, very well-spoken. Eh, and that, uh, they’re very impressed with us. Every time. And um, but the Guardian Ad Litem is a, she’s um, she’s one of those people that got really upset when Trump won, uh, she’s a liberal Democrat and she’s very anti-religious and anti-large-family and anti-traditional. Uh, you know, we seem to be dealing with a lot of those people at this moment for the past 20 months, we have, uh, a, a fanatic liberal blog writer who is, has been writing blogs for quite some time about us, everything. (15) Uh, we post, um. . .

HOST: Do you mind telling us who that is?

Yeah, I’m curious. I’d like to look up on them.

JOE: I don’t know if it’s my phone or you guys, I’m having a hard time hearing you.

HOST: Well, do you mind telling us who that is. If you aren’t comfortable with that, then that’s fine, but it’d be interesting to read what she (16) has to say

JOE: (garbled due to transmission problems) . . . dropping names. . . .you mean?

HOST: Yes.

JOE: Are you referring to the blog writer?

HOST: Yes.

JOE: (phone issues) There’s a different volume on this.

HOST: Yeah, the uh, the uh blog writer.

[Silence, more phone issues.]

HOSTS: (talking over each other) We can’t hear you right now.

[laugh] Well you silenced yourself successfully.

[laugh] yeah, we can’t hear anything now.

You changed the microphone volume.

[More technical issues, garbled, Joe in and out.]

HOST: You should have heard the technical issues we had last week. (laughing) Yes, it was a lot worse than that.

JOE: Now you sound like you’re whispering, and I can’t figure out how to turn up my volume here.

Um, well the lady that writes the blog, her name is Sally Davis, and uh, the name of the blog is Blessed Little Blog, and she’s been writing it since, since when? (asking Nicole)

NICOLE: About a year, or a little over a year.

JOE: A little over a year. And uh, first of all, they have no facts about family court, (17)

because no facts have been released except for the ones that we’ve released. Like um, the cabinet based the CPS saying the only thing they found out of everything, they have access to all the results, all tests, everything, the only thing they found to substantiate, is that educational neglect. And they specified, not because our kids are retarded or anything, but just because we didn’t tell Breckinridge County School Board, that we were homeschoolers.

HOST: Oh, oh no!

JOE: (talking over Host) That’s all they found. We released that paper.

HOST: That is insane, I wish I could, (garbled)

[More phone technical difficulties, don’t really understand what Joe is saying, but he is asking someone in the cabin if they know how to do something with the phone.]

HOST: Well, got it figured out Joseph?

JOE: I got it.

HOST: All right

JOE: Say that again.

HOST: No, never mind. Um, let’s try, let’s try to wrap this up. (18)It sounds like things are getting a little bit more difficult for uh, us to communicate.

  1. Joe tells this story as though somehow, they were just sitting there in court, and out of the blue, Alex walked in from nowhere, and nobody knew he was coming and it was all sort of Perry Mason-ish. The surprise witness.  He doesn’t mention the history behind all this or Nicole’s horrible actions about Alex.
  2. This is the most ridiculous excuse for child abandonment I have ever heard in my life. I don’t have 12 children. I only had one. But I would have crawled to New Hampshire if I’d had to before I would have allowed a court to rescind my parental rights. This man portrays himself as such a wonderful, loving father, but abandoned his first-born child.
  3. I call complete bullshit on this. In the first place, those were sealed, old records. He doesn’t say how long it supposedly took to get those records, but it wasn’t a few days. In the second place, I doubt seriously that they would have told Joe what was in those records. They are sealed. Joe didn’t go to court. Joe wasn’t a party and has no right whatever to the information in them. Bullshit.
  4. Does anyone else get tired of Joe blathering about how awesome he and Nicole and the kids are?  When you’re really awesome, you don’t have to tell people about how awesome you are.  One of the first things I noticed about Joe was his propensity to carry on about how “everyone who meets me loves me.”  Only they don’t.  I’ve met Joe and I certainly don’t love him.  Eric met Joe and didn’t love him one single bit.  His neighbors don’t love him. He keeps getting dragged into court because he cannot get along with anyone.
  5. First of all, why would the judge ask Sheriff Pate’s opinion on whether or not those kids should be returned?  What in the world would Pate know and what would he have to do with it?  It was not his decision to remove those children and it wasn’t his decision to return them. He’s a law enforcement officer, not a social worker.  Second, even if she actually did that, which I doubt, Joe’s quote about how Pate thought their “lifestyle” was “kinda neat” comes from Nicole’s encounter with Pate, not from court.  I grant that maybe he said it twice, but I doubt it.  Joe has a tendency to conflate stuff.  And third, if he did say what Joe says he said, and I am totally wrong, why have Joe and Nicole decided to go after Sheriff Pate with a vengeance and vilify him every time they possible can?  Seems that when it came to court, according to Joe, Pate was an ally.
  6. The Guardian Ad Litem simply would not use the “they’re Christians” argument in a courtroom where every single person present is probably Christian.  Seriously, this is Kentucky.  Finding a non-Christian in Kentucky is a difficult task.  The patriarch thing is much more plausible, as we’ve seen multiple cases of very nasty situations involving patriarchal men.  Joe likes to pretend he’s one of those, but he isn’t.
  7. Thank you for confirming that, Joe. For the record: I am in favor of legalizing pot, but when your whole family lives in a shed not fit for my cattle and your children are sleeping on a plywood board with no mattress, admitting you were spending money on pot is enough to make my blood boil.
  8. Joe, for all his bluster, caves when confronted with real authority. Plea deals are always engineered so that the defendant gets to “talk it down.”  It’s a bit like selling a house. The price is always more than the seller will actually take.  Negotiation is expected and normal.
  9. Yes. Dilapidated.
  10. I find this interesting.
  11. forensicevaluation
  12. Joe didn’t convince the judge of anything. Sigh.
  13. Read the definition above. Forensic evaluations are not “political opinion(s).”
  14. The translation of this is that Joe and Nicole are both assholes who create conflict everywhere they go and live in a perpetual environment of strife and controversy. This isn’t good for children. I concur with that.
  15. Oh, goody. They’re talking about me.  But read this section carefully and notice something.
  16. How did the host know my gender?
  17. I have never claimed to have any facts about family court apart from what Joe and Nicole have revealed.  Please show me where I ever did that. I do have copies of publicly available court documents for their other bazillion cases, and have published them here, but not family court.  We don’t know about family court beyond their account because it’s not public, which means that Joe and Nicole get to tell their side of the story, but nobody gets to hear the other side. So take it with a very large grain of salt.
  18. First indication that the hosts are getting beyond bored with Joe’s pontificating. They have a whole lot more to listen to, however. Joe is just getting started good.

More later.

Part 1 is here.

Joe’s Chain Reaction 1

Joe wanted to be on a podcast. He could have come over to Naugler Nation.  He’s welcome there, but I don’t think they have the sort of audience he was looking for. He found a podcast done by three guys who look like they’re trying to be Rush Limbaugh and bent their ears for more than an hour. Here’s the link if you want to wade through the whole thing. Joe starts at about the 27 minute mark.

This is going to take several posts and probably a couple of days. I can’t spend all day long transcribing video.

Note: I am not going to differentiate between the three hosts. Transcribing this is laborious enough as it is, and they actually don’t say very much, so I am just going to call them all “Host.”

HOST: I don’t know much about him, um, or his family. (1) Is he up? Is he on? Joseph, can you hear us?

HOST2: He’s trying.

HOST1: Okay. All right.

HOST: [Begins to talk about something else since Joe is not online.]

HOST: Here we are. (Joe appears in upper corner of screen on Skype, complete with a bunch of kids.)

Wow, I love your crew, Joseph.

How are you guys doing?

How are you doing?

Hello? [Joe is smiling and obviously cannot hear them.]

There’s a big delay.

JOE: A lot of people to fit into one little screen.

HOST: Yeah, it certainly is.

Joseph, who’s going to be speaking? Do you prefer to be called Joseph, or Joe, or do you care?

You’re having issues hearing me.

JOE: Joseph will be fine.

HOST: Okay. And then, wow. Oh boy. If you’re listening in the audio, all the. . . there are. . .how many kids in the background there.

Oh, my god.

So, we’re all. . .

JOE: Ten (unclear)

HOST: Ten and your wife.

See, that is why we’re all kind of sitting here slack-jawed, in awe, amazed by this.

So, Joseph, tell us a little bit about yourself and what you do, please.

JOE: Um, well, uh, a little bit about myself is, um, I guess fundamentally I’m just a very intimate father and a husband.(2)

HOST: Nice.

JOE: And those are my main goals in life is to be as intimate as I can be with my children and my wife. . . we’ve been together. . . we just celebrated 23 years.

HOSTS: Congratulations

JOE: And, um, I, uh, my wife runs a pet grooming business and I homeschool the kids and run the homestead here. (2) It works for us and uh, you know, some of the older kids that you see in the pictures here, they go and help Mom out at the work. It’s part of how we homeschool. Teach them a trade.

HOST: Awesome

JOE: You know the customer service, the bookkeeping and stuff so, uh, but, uh, we just, it all, I guess it just comes down to, you know, a lot of people ask us, cause we homeschool, about the socialization, and I say, you know, it’s a peer-based kind of society and I want to change that to a family-based society.

You know, we no longer have grandpas sitting their grandchildren on their laps telling them moral-relative stories. Uh, we’ve kind of lost that connection, we’ve lost our connection with our food, with, uh, with the way we pass on, with death, even, I mean, a lot of people send their elders to old folks’ homes. So, I’ve really focused on trying to change that.

HOST: Yeah, you have a classroom full of kids in your house anyway.

Thank you for, thank you for being a compassionate father that wants to be intimate with his children. I know you don’t need my thanks, but I just want you to know, I really appreciate the way you are making the future a better place by loving your children well.

Um, would you. . .

JOE: (unclear). . .you can push a lot of laws, you can push a lot of policies and political beliefs but fundamentally, you know, Ghandi said it right, be the change you want to see in the world and that’s kind of where I’m starting.

HOST: Can you tell us first a little bit. . .tell us what a homestead is and then can you tell us why you wanted to start one?

JOE: Okay. Um, well, I like to consider us a quasi-homestead. (3) I use the word “quasi” because a lot of people want to push their purity, their ideas and how they think and “oh, well, you’re just not a real homesteader because you’re doing this, this and this” or I have internet so I’m not a real off-gridder and you know it gets kind of annoying having those conversations all the time, so I just kind of interject the word “quasi” and just hey, this is our concept.

Uh, but as far as homesteading, it, uh, what we do is, we’re trying to, you know, I studied psychology, and I notice a lot of people who suffer from anxiety and depression are disconnected from their food. (4) I mean, look what happens when there’s a storm. People run to get their, uh, you know, their, uh, milk-bread, their milk sandwiches. You know, so I just feel it’s important that we connect fundamentally with how we grow our food, and how we kill our food, how we , uh, uh, raise our food and those things, and uh, so our homesteading. . .we kind of do it on the, you know, I also add the word “wilderness,” uh, because we foliage, (5) we go out in the wild, we know what mushrooms and what plants we can eat, and what ones are used for medicine, and which ones are poisonous.

HOST: That’s awesome.

.JOE: So, but the more my children, it, I have seen them so fundamental and grounded in who they are and in their environment knowing these things. Uh, so they, you know, my children, even after what we went through in May of 2015, uh, they don’t suffer from a lot of those things that other people suffer from with anxiety and depression and things, (6) so that’s fundamentally what our concept of homesteading is

HOST: Okay, thank you. Can you tell us a little bit, if you’re willing to, about what you went through in 2015? Did you hear that? Okay.

JOE: Yeah, uh, (some garbled stuff due to poor connection, I think), we’re very big on, on sharing our testimony and sharing our way of life and things like that, and we know what it does. It, it, you know, it inspires some people and um, but for the most part, it, in our culture, with such a politically-charged environment, it does cause a lot of contention. Um, but, uh, we oftentimes, I think it’s happened like seven or eight times, we’ve had people try to use the state and its overreaching abilities they’ve acquired, um, to target us.

Uh, we’ve, uh, you know, had conversations over circumcision and people have called CPS, you know, these anonymous calls, you know, which are unconstitutional. . .

HOST: Oh, my goodness

JOE: . . . because we have a right to face our, our accuser, but there was an anonymous to CPS from a woman, uh, who was upset that I, uh, it was two women involved, one of them was upset that I deleted her on Facebook. . (7)

HOST: (laughs)

JOE: Yeah, I know, it’s just bizarre. And so, I went over to where they were living, and they’re renting a trailer from the people that actually own the place and they have a great well. And we have to cart our water in, just like our neighbors do, they cart their water in, and uh, the owners of the property are preppers and we got along with them quite well. We’d share ideas, and we’d share prepping, you know, resources and things, and they had given me permission to, and I went over to get some water, and, and, she started acting, you know, aggressive and hostile and such and uh, she had another woman and they were kind of approaching us and whatever, but they had never been on our property, they’d never met us or our children, and uh, she sent some nasty messages to my wife and said she was gonna call CPS, so, uh, this had been the second time as we lived here because we have video recorded of the first time that the sheriff of Breckinridge County had come to our property (8)and was in my wife’s face and threatening, you know, emergency removal order.

At that time, uh, 18 months prior, my wife was ready to give birth, any day now, so, uh, I was being diplomatic, um, pretty much, you know, as we were exercising our rights, he was being very aggressive. We called the state police, they showed up, uh, and we allowed CPS to talk to our children. And, and it wasn’t like they said, “Oh, are you guys abused” or, or this or that. It was “are you happy?” I was, like, go to a public school. Ninety percent of the kids there are gonna tell you they’re not happy. Are you gonna remove them?

HOSTS: [a little snickering] Right.

JOE: But, it, it, basically they, they just went down to that and they never came back out. They never were concerned about anything they saw, any issues, or anything.

HOST: Really?

JOE: So, eighteen months later, they get another anonymous call and they wanna do a, well, in the state of Kentucky, anonymous calls are not probable cause. But much like the mailman, they’re allowed to come knock on your door and say, “Hey, this is our concern” and you tell them to leave, to come back with a warrant and they’ve got to respect that. And so, and it was basically that. And we recorded the conversations with the sheriff and he makes mention of a couple of posts we made on Facebook on how to exercise your rights and how to deal with police, and he’s making these kind of issues, threatening that he’ll get SWAT team involved and all sorts of, uh, you know, and he just basically tells us we don’t have any rights. (9)

HOST: Wow.

JOE: And without any, off of an anonymous call, without any probable cause or imminent danger for him to justify, just on the fact that we weren’t cooperating, we were exercising our rights, he gets a judge, out of Breckinridge County to issue an emergency removal order.

HOST: Ugh.

JOE: And it starts off with him pulling my wife over and taking the two oldest boys, arresting her for disorderly conduct. . .

HOST: Wow.

JOE: . . . for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. But in the recording you can hear that she’s just exercising her rights. “I want to see a warrant. . .”

HOST: Yeah.

JOE: “On what grounds?” “Why did you even pull me over?” He never once says anything. He just says, “Well, I’ve got a . . . and even upon her saying “I’d like to see the warrant,” never once did they, did they handed over one.

So he just takes the kids, uh, and then I show up. I’m at a friend’s and she called me and I said, oh, they’re gonna kill her. They’re gonna shoot her. My wife knows she’s right, and I don’t care how big you are, I don’t care how many guns you have, if she knows she’s in the right, she won’t stop.

And so I had my friend drive me up, and uh, I get out and my wife and the boys are in different squad cars and. . .

HOST: Wow.

JOE: . . . and at first he grabs his gun and goes to get a little threatening with me and I take a step back. By this time, traffic had kind of built up and I was able to get her phone which had the recordings in it. They were trying to get it and it had flung out of her hands and into the grass and they weren’t able to find it, but I was able to get it before they did.

HOST: Good.

JOE: Um, but then he gives me, on top of everything, he gives me 14 hours to drop the other eight kids off or I’ll face eight counts of felony custodial interference, which didn’t make sense to me.

HOST: With your own children? [Laughs]

JOE: Yes, and the fact that what was the imminent danger or probable cause that’s so imminent that my kids had to be emergency removed, that he’s giving me. . . I could have been in Mexico by then. (10)

HOSTS: Right. Yeah.

JOE: I could have (unclear) out every evidence. I could have, I just could have completely gone, aside from any felony charges he threatened me with.

HOST: They’re gonna hit you with a felony based off basically nothing.

JOE: And so, I dropped them off the next morning. I, I don’t want to battle. . . Right. Just because we exercised our rights, uh, and they make it clear, you can hear the recording, he makes it clear, that that, he’s monitoring our Facebook pages, and, uh, he’s very upset about us teaching people their rights and how to deal with police. Very upset.

HOST: How dare you. . . Well, you know there’s that old slogan that don’t steal, the government hates competition, but this is don’t kidnap, the government hates competition.

JOE: Right. So, (garbled due to poor transmission) I didn’t want to have felony charges on top of everything else that we could have been looking at, cause you know the government. Once the government (garbled) resisting arrest, which are just misdemeanor charges. Class A, you know, misdemeanor. So I dropped the other eight kids off, and you know, we walk in and I dropped them off, and, you know, I tried to make it, I mean, we let our kids know clearly what’s going on, and what’s gonna happen. . .

HOST: Right.

JOE: . . . you heard in the recording, let them know, I’m preparing them emotionally and mentally for this. (11) Uh, so, I don’t know how long this is gonna take, uh, Kentucky is one of the worst, uh, has some of the worst corruption in family court and CPS. . .(12)

HOST: Really. . .

JOE: You know, people where no crimes have been charged, nothing has been charged, uh, and they still for years don’t have their kids back. People are like, they’re amazed that we got our kids back after eight weeks, and that breaks my heart. That really does.

HOST: Yeah

JOE: They’re just tearing families apart like this. What we’ve seen, um, there’s so much money involved. There’s so much politics involved. I mean, when I first walked in the courtroom that Thursday, uh, ah, I mean, I’m just walking in the family court and the first question they, they ask me is, uh, “Mr. Naugler. Do you recognize our authority?” (13)


JOE: What. . . Yes! Like, what does that have to do with anything? You have my kids. You have the guns. I’m here. Trust me, I recognize your, imaginary or not, your authority.

HOST: Yeah, your superior firepower.

JOE: That’s right. I mean, really, you walk in and it’s a small little room and on this side of the wall there were like twenty sheriff’s deputies, marshalls, and state police, and on this side of the wall there was like twenty CPS workers. And then you had our lawyer, then us, and the table was just full.

HOST: So this was more about getting you to fall in line more than anything else.

JOE: You know, that, that’s what it was because in this meeting it, and we’re gonna get ahold of the transcripts. Right now our case isn’t closed and it’s almost been two years


JOE: And it’s an (unclear) we’ve had to go through and everything but. . .

HOST: There is no case

End of Part 1, for no particular reason except that’s where I stopped.

  1. And there was the first mistake these wanna-be podcasters made. Information about the Nauglers is simple to find. Their story went viral and ended up being published all over the world.  Ignorance is no excuse. This is sloppy “journalism.” It’s fairly clear from the comments that follow that the hosts didn’t even know that the Naugs have umpty-bazillion children.
  2. Did anyone find that creepy? I found that creepy.
  3. Joe has this ongoing problem when people ask him what he does. They mean: where do you work?  Joe doesn’t work, so he uses this ridiculous “homeschooling” and “homesteading” thing.  He does neither one. If Joe is a quasi-homesteader, then Dave is a quasi-helicopter pilot because he once had a lesson on a simulator.
  4. I’m not sure what to say about this. The Naugler family does not raise or gather or grow any appreciable amount of food. They never have that I can tell.  They’ve butchered one tiny goat.  They’ve grown a very, very few vegetables.  Lots of people live in cities and do more than that.
  5. This not a transcription error. This is what he said.
  6. Do I need to post screen shot after screen shot of Nicole talking about how emotionally damaged the children are from the horrible stay with the horrible statists?  I’m glad to know that none of that is true.
  7. Here’s a little bit about the Alford plea. They do not present you with one of these because somebody got mad about being unfriended on Facebook.  The woman in question refused to allow Joe to get water.  This angered Joe and he has a real tendency to bully women.  Joe conveniently left out the part where he told one of his kids to go to the car and get the gun out of the dash. That is what led directly to the menacing charge (and an Alford plea is in fact a guilty plea) and conviction.
  8. The first time Sheriff Pate came to the Naugler property was because their small daughter had run away and was found walking up the road far from the Shitstead.  Here’s the transcript of that incident, which Nicole helpfully recorded for us so we’d know exactly what happened and who said what.
  9. He never said any such thing. He never implied any such thing.  Here’s the transcript.
  10. He could have been in Mexico but then he would have had eight kids and no working wife.  There was no danger of him going anywhere, ever.
  11. This is a transcript of Joe “preparing them emotionally and mentally.” After reading that, if you still think Joe is telling the truth about all this stuff, then I give up.
  12. I call BS on that one.  Joe makes claims like this without offering the slightest evidence.
  13. If they, in fact, asked him that question (and Joe is prone to alternative facting when it comes to relating the gist of a conversation), they were concerned as hell because Joe and Nicole have hinted a good bit that they wouldn’t mind resorting to violence if they thought their “rights” were being violated. Go back and read the transcripts of the runaway child and the removal of the kids and you’ll see what I mean. Nobody wants to go out to their property ever because you have no idea if you go whether somebody is going to shoot at you or not.

More later when I get to it.

Mueller Blocked

photomuellerMeet Adam Mueller.

He has an alias,  of course. Everyone does, don’t they?  You know, except me. And Al. And maybe two or three other people.

Adam’s alias is Ademo Freeman, and he founded “” which has to be one of Nicole’s favorite places on earth. She shares stuff from his Facebook page almost daily.

Delightful looking, isn’t he?

He isn’t very happy right now, though.

click image for link to source

Of course, he “livestreamed”  his arrest on Facebook.  Naturally he did. Gotta document, don’tcha know.

And he’s doing an internet fundraiser (can anyone say “GoFundMe”?) because he’s in deep, deep doo-doo.

I am totally in favor of legalizing marijuana, but right now, in Ohio, it is not legal, and possessing 24 pounds of the stuff along with 26 vials of oil is, well, not smart.

However,  it is hilarious.

Family Forward

Joe did a teensy video today.  It amounts to very little, so I’m not going to bother transcribing it.  I will just briefly describe it.  It shows Joe in the van at a post office.

He is mailing a stack of envelopes and yammering about how he’s this great activist for “Connie.”  “A great initiative,” he says.

He’s vague, gives little information, but a wee trip to Connie Reguli’s Facebook page tells us more.

She wrote a letter to Donald Trump.  It’s a relatively long letter and that’s just the first problem. Donald doesn’t read long stuff.  In fact, Donald reads almost nothing. She should instead turn her efforts to getting on Fox and Friends which is where Donald gets all his news.

What she’s done is make umpteen copies of the letter, complete with envelopes already addressed, and she’s divided them up and mailed stacks of them to people in various states.  Apparently Joe is the Kentucky sucker.

Joe then takes his stack of letters and mails them so it looks like letters are coming from all across the country. Because that’s what you do. You make it look like your group protesting is much larger than it actually is. You pretend to be people you are not.  You lie.  You know, kind of like making Facebook profiles and pages so you’ll look like you have more active supporters than you actually do. Joe’s a natural.

I don’t suppose Joe included a note explaining to Donald that he and Nicole don’t believe in government or voting.

And that’s the second problem.

Connie wrote the letter.  And made copies.

How long do you think it will take some poor aide working in the White House mail room to figure out that all these letters were basically composed by the same person?  Ten seconds?  Two minutes?

I have been involved in a letter-writing campaign before in order to influence legislation. To my sorrow (now), we were quite successful. It was at the state level, not the federal, which meant that it was far, far easier to get the attention of legislators.  But we didn’t mail copies of letters.

We actually wrote the letters. We composed them.  And we hand wrote them.  It was very hard work to get dozens and dozens and hundreds of people to write these letters, but we did it. In addition, we drove to Raleigh, and visited key legislators in their offices and begged them to pass our bill.  They listened, and then the legislature passed our horrible bill and destroyed home education in North Carolina. (I’m working on a piece about all that. Later.)  Even though we were really morally wrong, we managed to win because we did it the right way.

And that leads me to another problem.

Connie wants Trump to issue an executive order banning federal aid to states for adoption.

You know, the whole “the state takes kids so they can sell them and make money” complaint.

What is it with people on the right?  When President Obama issued an executive order, they had a collective stroke. Every single time.  He was a “dictator” and it was “unconstitutional.”  He was usurping power from the Congress and “making law.”

But now, that’s all they want.  Donald, just grab a pen and sign this please. Don’t bother to read it. Just sign it.

Here’s the deal. It’s called an “adoption subsidy.”

States are faced with a big problem. They have kids that are in foster care, too many kids, and no permanent homes for them. Some of these kids are cute, and white, and very young,  and developmentally “normal” (I put that in quotes because I don’t like using the idea of “abnormal” to describe special-needs kids). They are easy. They get adopted rapidly.

But some kids are harder. Some of them come from very, very abusive situations and have severe challenges. Some of them were born challenged.  And some potential adoptive families have a whole lot of stability and love to give and not much money.

Let’s take a relatively typical case.  There is a family, the Smiths, who want to adopt a child, Billy.  Billy has a lot of special needs, though, and even though the Smiths are uniquely qualified to deal with Billy’s needs, they are gonna have a real problem because Mr. Smith was laid off from his job and just now found a new one.  During his layoff, they ate through their savings account and they simply cannot afford for Mrs. Smith to stay home with Billy for several months while he acclimates.

So, the state is looking at a situation where Billy will have to just stay in foster care, without a stable family, and potentially end up costing the state way more in care as a result – or – the state can help subsidize the Smiths so that Mrs. Smith can stay home for a while and in the end, Billy will have a real home, and ultimately an increased chance of a more stable adulthood.

Or how about a case I know of personally. The child in question has a heart defect. He required surgery, very, very expensive surgery and he requires ongoing medical care. The family that adopted him couldn’t afford that medical care.  They simply couldn’t have adopted him at all if it weren’t for federal and state funding.

In addition, adopting kids out can be costly. There are court appearances, and legal fees and psychological testing and all sorts of things, in addition to the normal costs of foster care. So the federal government has a program to help states get these adoptable kids adopted.

This is what Nicole bitches about constantly as “selling children.”

And that leads to yet another problem, Connie Reguli.

Connie Reguli is a family-practice lawyer in Tennessee, who has had a kind of rocky history of her own.

click image to link to source

Here’s what her latest kerfuffle with the courts was all about. If I have the story correct, she just got her license back recently (it was suspended for about a year).

Back when the Nauglers  “went viral,” Joe appeared on Connie Reguli’s scare-mongering podcast thing as an example of the state being evil and taking children so they can sell them. (See why I doubt everything Connie Reguli says?) He’s the first interview, so you don’t have to listen to the whole thing to get his part of it.

According to Connie’s FB page, there were a whopping 1000 letters mailed.

I’m sure Donald will be tweeting madly about this in the wee hours three days from now.