Investigative journalist John Solomon has issued a stern warning to government officials, using the recent indictment of former FBI Director James Comey as a cautionary tale.
Solomon, known for exposing corruption within the intelligence community, emphasized that Comey’s legal troubles should serve as a wake-up call.
“The James Comey case is just the tip of the iceberg,” Solomon said. “If you abuse your power, if you lie to Congress, there will be consequences.”
He pointed to Comey’s mishandling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation as one example of bureaucrats acting above the law.
“This isn’t about politics,” Solomon added. “It’s about accountability. People who think they’re untouchable are being reminded that no one is above the law.”
Solomon warned that other officials could face scrutiny if investigations continue. “There are others in the system who think they can play fast and loose with the rules,” he said.
He praised President Donald J. Trump’s administration for pursuing justice. “The fact that Comey has been indicted under Trump’s DOJ shows that corruption will not be tolerated,” Solomon explained.
Solomon also highlighted the importance of transparency in government, stressing that public trust depends on holding officials accountable.
“The American people deserve honesty,” he said. “They need to know that the people in charge are not manipulating investigations for personal or political gain.”
He referenced recent revelations about misuse of surveillance powers, saying, “These actions have real consequences. People who think they can operate in the shadows will be caught.”
Solomon noted that Comey’s indictment sends a message to other deep-state operatives. “It’s a warning shot,” he said. “Follow the law, or face prosecution.”
The journalist also discussed the broader impact on federal agencies, suggesting that the culture of impunity may be coming to an end.
“This is a historic moment,” Solomon said. “We’re seeing accountability being restored in agencies that have long acted above the law.”
He called on Congress to support oversight efforts, ensuring that no official is able to evade responsibility.
“This is a test for our democracy,” Solomon said. “If leaders can commit crimes without consequences, the system fails.”
Solomon praised Trump’s DOJ for acting decisively. “This is what leadership looks like. When you see wrongdoing, you take action, no matter how powerful the person involved may be.”
He also stressed the importance of media scrutiny. “Investigative reporting matters. Without journalists asking hard questions, abuses would go unnoticed.”
Solomon warned that the ripple effect of Comey’s indictment could reach beyond Washington. “Other states and agencies should take note — accountability is coming.”
He highlighted that whistleblowers and insiders have a role to play. “If you see misconduct, report it. The system is listening now.”
Solomon said he expects further revelations as investigations continue. “The Comey case is not an isolated incident. There are others whose actions will soon be exposed.”
He noted that this era could be a turning point in restoring public trust in federal institutions. “This is about cleaning house and restoring integrity,” Solomon said.
BREAKING: Anna Paulina Luna Claims The Biden DOJ DESTROYED…
Representative Anna Paulina Luna has leveled explosive information against the Biden Department of Justice, claiming that critical materials related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation have been deliberately destroyed.
This assertion, if proven true, would represent one of the most damning instances of governmental obstruction and cover-up in recent history.
Luna, who chairs a congressional task force focused on federal transparency, has stated unequivocally that she possesses evidence implicating high-ranking officials in the DOJ.
According to her, these officials not only failed to disclose materials related to Epstein but actively destroyed them to conceal the extent of powerful individuals’ involvement in Epstein’s criminal network.
She introduced legislation titled the SHRED Act, aimed at imposing severe penalties on government agents who destroy or conceal federal records. The proposed bill calls for 20 years to life in prison for anyone caught eliminating evidence in cases of national significance.
“Even if they are conducting a criminal investigation, you should probably pick up the phone and call us,” Luna told Fox News. “We have been more than patient.”
These developments come amid growing conservative suspicion that the Biden administration has no interest in unmasking Epstein’s full network. The notion that key records could be gone forever only intensifies fears that justice is being buried under a bureaucratic rug.
Luna’s office has reportedly sent multiple requests to the Department of Justice demanding clarity on the handling of Epstein-related materials. So far, those inquiries have been met with either vague responses or complete silence.
The congresswoman did not mince words in her public statements, suggesting that the DOJ’s behavior constitutes a deliberate act of obstruction. If true, such actions could violate federal law and trigger an entirely new legal battle.
“The Biden DOJ has obstructed Congress, ignored subpoenas, and now appears to have destroyed critical evidence,” Luna said. “This is corruption at the highest level.”
Critics argue that this is yet another example of double standards in Washington. “Had this been a Republican-led DOJ accused of destroying documents in a child sex trafficking case, the media would be apoplectic,” one conservative commentator noted.
For years, the Epstein case has symbolized the deep rot within America’s elite circles. The financier’s suspicious death in prison and the subsequent lack of high-profile indictments have fueled accusations of a widespread cover-up.
Now, Luna’s allegations breathe new life into those concerns. If records were indeed destroyed, the implications are profound. It would mean that the DOJ, under Biden, actively shielded criminals from justice.
What’s more troubling is that these destroyed materials could have named prominent individuals—politicians, celebrities, and global financiers—who participated in or enabled Epstein’s crimes.
In this context, Luna’s SHRED Act isn’t just legislative symbolism. It is a clarion call for accountability in an era marked by elite impunity. Her bill seeks to ensure that future officials think twice before erasing truth from the historical record.
Despite Luna’s repeated calls for transparency, there has been no formal response from Attorney General Merrick Garland. The silence speaks volumes to many who believe the DOJ is stonewalling on purpose.
Meanwhile, conservative lawmakers have rallied behind Luna. A growing number of Republicans in the House and Senate are voicing support for investigations into the DOJ’s handling of Epstein evidence.
Some have even floated the idea of appointing a special counsel to probe the matter independently. Given the stakes, such a move may be the only path forward to restore public confidence.
This latest scandal further erodes the credibility of an already battered Department of Justice. From the Hunter Biden laptop fiasco to the political targeting of conservatives, the agency has been repeatedly accused of partisanship.
Now, with Epstein documents allegedly destroyed, the DOJ’s credibility is in tatters. Public trust, once broken, is hard to rebuild.
The American people deserve the truth. And if Luna’s allegations are accurate, they deserve justice, no matter how high the guilty parties sit.
BREAKING: Tom Homan Reveals an Investigation is Underway Into AOC For…
Border Czar Tom Homan confirmed that a federal investigation is underway into Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for allegedly employing a criminal illegal alien and helping others evade federal immigration authorities.
Speaking from his post as one of President Trump’s top immigration officials, Homan revealed that ICE has launched a formal probe after multiple allegations emerged against the congresswoman.
“This is a live federal investigation. We’ve asked ICE to take immediate action,” Homan said during a televised interview.
The individual in question is reportedly an undocumented alien with a criminal record, unlawfully hired by AOC’s office.
According to internal reports, the employee had multiple encounters with law enforcement and should have been deported years ago.
Homan stressed that AOC’s potential interference with ICE operations could amount to obstruction of justice.
“This goes beyond hiring an illegal alien. There’s evidence she actively helped shield this person from deportation,” he stated.
Conservative leaders are sounding the alarm, warning that this may be only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to far-left officials flouting immigration laws.
AOC has long been known for championing sanctuary cities and attacking border agents, often labeling them as “racist” and “oppressors.”
Now, critics say her reckless rhetoric has crossed over into potentially criminal behavior.
“If a sitting congresswoman used her office to harbor an illegal alien, that’s a clear violation of federal law,” Homan declared.
Sources inside ICE say agents have already gathered documentation and begun interviewing individuals connected to the case.
Evidence suggests AOC may have leveraged her political power to block enforcement action against the individual she employed.
House Republicans are demanding accountability, with several calling for a formal ethics investigation into her conduct.
“This is what happens when radicals gain power. They think the law doesn’t apply to them,” said Rep. Andy Biggs.
Democrats quickly circled the wagons, accusing Homan of launching a political smear campaign.
But Homan stood firm, reminding the public that the law is the law and political office offers no immunity from prosecution.
“This isn’t about politics. It’s about national security and public trust,” he said.
Homan emphasized that ICE agents are working independently and that the White House is not interfering in the investigation.
“We are following the facts. If those facts point to criminal activity, then action will be taken,” Homan confirmed.
Legal experts say AOC could face charges ranging from unlawful employment to obstruction of federal agents, depending on the evidence.
Citizens outraged by the news are demanding swift justice and a full public accounting of the congresswoman’s actions.
Homan urged Americans not to let political ideology blind them to the seriousness of the allegations.
“We must restore the rule of law,” he concluded. “No one, no matter how powerful, is above it
Peter Navarro, a senior advisor to former President Donald Trump on trade and economic issues, has laid out what he says is a plausible scenario in which former President Barack Obama could face criminal charges for his alleged role in creating what has been dubbed the “Russian collusion hoax.”Navarro’s remarks come against the backdrop of his own legal troubles. He was convicted of contempt of Congress and sentenced to a federal prison term after refusing to comply with a subpoena issued by the House committee investigating the events of January 6, 2021.The committee, formed under Democratic leadership and chaired by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, demanded Navarro’s testimony, but he declined, citing executive privilege.Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon made a similar claim of privilege and also faced prosecution. In Navarro’s case, however, the courts sided with the Department of Justice (DOJ), which rejected his immunity claim.
On Thursday, Navarro posted to X, formerly Twitter, outlining what he sees as the dangerous precedent set by the DOJ in his case. “Before my contempt of Congress conviction, the Department of Justice held that senior White House aides and even presidents were immune from congressional subpoenas. Then Biden’s DOJ flipped the script in my case,” Navarro wrote.He added that the Biden DOJ now claims he has no testimonial immunity and that such protection does not extend to former presidents or White House aides.
According to Navarro, this “flawed law” is what he is currently fighting on appeal.The significant point, Navarro argues, is that the same legal logic could apply to former officials from the Obama and Biden administrations — including the former president himself.“The kicker,” he wrote, “is that former Obama and Biden officials are also subject to prosecution due to the precedent set in cases against Bannon and myself. They’re headed for the slammer.” The renewed discussion over Obama’s legal exposure stems from allegations made by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. When Gabbard declassified a memo on the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation, she named Obama as a conspirator in crafting the collusion narrative under what she claimed were false pretenses.Obama’s name was included in a Justice Department referral connected to the matter.
However, his potential vulnerability is complicated by a Supreme Court ruling last year affirming presidential immunity for official acts performed while in office.Trump, speaking last Friday about his predecessor, acknowledged that the immunity ruling is likely a strong legal shield for Obama. “It probably helps him a lot. Probably helps a lot. The immunity ruling, but it doesn’t help the people around him at all. But it probably helps him a lot,” Trump said.Nevertheless, Trump left no doubt about his personal view of Obama’s actions.
“He’s done criminal acts, there’s no question about it. But he has immunity, and it probably helps him a lot… he owes me big, Obama owes me big,” he told reporters.The suggestion is that while Obama might escape prosecution for actions deemed official, close aides or advisors who participated in the alleged scheme could face serious legal jeopardy under the DOJ’s current interpretation of immunity.David Schoen, a veteran trial attorney who represented Trump during his second impeachment trial, has offered another perspective on why Obama’s immunity might not be absolute.Schoen pointed out that during Trump’s second impeachment, House impeachment managers from the Democratic Party argued that a former president could still be impeached even after leaving office.
By their logic, he said, any president — including historic figures like Abraham Lincoln or George Washington — could be impeached post-tenure.According to Schoen, this argument could backfire on Democrats in the present moment. “As I predicted at the time, this would come back, they would rue the day because President Obama could be impeached if this evidence really says what it says,” Schoen told Newsmax.He further explained that Article I, Section 3, Clause 7 of the Constitution specifies that after impeachment, a convicted individual is barred from holding further office and “shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law.”This clause, Schoen suggested, could be interpreted to mean that impeachment proceedings against Obama — if undertaken and successful — could strip him of immunity and expose him to criminal prosecution.While Navarro and Schoen’s interpretations differ slightly, both agree that recent legal developments open the door to greater scrutiny of former presidents and their senior staff.Navarro’s position focuses on the DOJ’s application of testimonial immunity in congressional investigations, while Schoen’s centers on constitutional mechanisms for removing immunity through impeachment.
In either scenario, the risk to Obama would depend on several factors: the classification of his actions as official or unofficial, the willingness of Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings after his presidency, and the DOJ’s appetite for prosecuting a former president.The alleged wrongdoing — described by critics as the orchestration of a false narrative linking Trump’s 2016 campaign to Russian interference — has been a political flashpoint for years.Multiple investigations, including special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, examined the matter without charging Trump or his campaign with conspiracy, though questions remain among both supporters and detractors about the motives behind the investigation’s launch.The cases against Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro are particularly significant in this discussion because they involve contempt of Congress charges for defying subpoenas on executive privilege grounds.Historically, courts have recognized some degree of immunity for senior White House officials, but the rulings in these recent cases narrow that scope.If former aides can be prosecuted for refusing congressional testimony, as Bannon and Navarro were, then theoretically, aides to any past president could face similar charges if subpoenaed in future congressional inquiries.Navarro’s warning that “they’re headed for the slammer” reflects his belief that this legal precedent will be applied to former Obama and Biden officials. Whether Congress will issue such subpoenas — and whether the DOJ would pursue charges — remains uncertain, but the legal door is now ajar.
Even with these legal arguments in place, the practical path to prosecuting a former president like Obama is fraught with political and constitutional hurdles. Initiating impeachment proceedings against a former president is unprecedented and would almost certainly ignite a partisan firestorm.Additionally, determining whether Obama’s alleged actions in connection with the Russia investigation were “official acts” under the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling could require extensive legal analysis and could be contested all the way back to the high court.The political appetite for such a move would likely depend on the balance of power in Congress, the strength of newly uncovered evidence, and public opinion.The conversation sparked by Navarro’s post and Schoen’s legal interpretation points to a larger debate about the scope and limits of presidential immunity.
The Supreme Court’s ruling provides a measure of protection for official acts but leaves open the possibility of accountability for unofficial conduct or actions taken after leaving office.Critics of broad immunity argue that it creates a dangerous precedent by allowing presidents to act with impunity while in office. Supporters contend that without such protections, presidents could be paralyzed by the threat of post-term prosecution, making it difficult to govern effectively.The precedent from the Bannon and Navarro cases — limiting the reach of testimonial immunity — adds another layer to this debate, suggesting that former aides and potentially former presidents themselves could be compelled to testify before Congress in ways that were previously thought off-limits.For now, Navarro is focused on appealing his own conviction, which he sees as central to the broader legal battle.
If his appeal fails, the precedent will remain intact, potentially shaping the legal exposure of former officials for years to come.In the meantime, Obama’s legal standing remains a topic of speculation. While Trump, Navarro, and Schoen have all indicated that immunity may protect him for now, the evolving legal landscape means that protection could erode under the right circumstances.Whether through congressional subpoenas, impeachment proceedings, or changes in the interpretation of immunity law, the question of holding former presidents accountable for alleged misconduct is far from settled.For Navarro, the issue is personal as well as political. His own prosecution has become the lens through which he views the potential for future cases — including, potentially, one against Barack Obama.As he put it bluntly: “They’re headed for the slammer.”
Silent Scent, Loud Rescue: How Max the K9 Uncovered a Hidden Horror
What started as a routine patrol through a quiet neighborhood quickly turned into a life-changing mission — all because of Max, a specially trained K9 with instincts sharper than any human’s.
On an otherwise ordinary day, Max caught a faint, almost imperceptible scent that didn’t belong. It led him to a house that seemed perfectly normal — maybe even too normal. There was something off, something no one else had noticed.
Trusting his loyal partner, Officer John followed Max inside. What they found was a secret so dark it would shatter the illusion of safety for dozens of families.
Inside, a young child — isolated, silenced, and desperate — was trapped in a nightmare no one knew existed. Thanks to Max’s relentless determination and extraordinary senses, this hidden cry for help was finally heard.
What began as a simple sniff turned into a full-scale police operation. The discovery unraveled a widespread network of exploitation, leading to the rescue of dozens of vulnerable individuals. Max’s sharp nose and unyielding spirit became the catalyst for hope and healing in a community shadowed by fear.
Max’s heroism didn’t just save lives — it restored a community’s faith in protection and justice. His actions are a testament to the unbreakable bond between handler and dog, where trust, courage, and intuition come together to shield those who cannot defend themselves.
The last location one would expect to see a river of blood is Antarctica, the planet’s coldest, driest, and most merciless region. However, a bizarre sight that defies the monotony of white can be seen deep within its ice expanse: a scarlet waterfall that spills from the tall Taylor Glacier like an open wound.
For more than a century, scientists and explorers have been perplexed by this unsettling sight, known as Blood Falls, which has fueled hypotheses of ancient underground lakes, mysterious forces, and even alien-like germs.
What might transform even the most pristine countryside into a scene straight out of a science fiction book? Buried beneath miles of ice, in a world obscured for millions of years, is the solution.
Beneath its red exterior, Blood Falls conceals mysteries that transcend the planet and provide insight into how resilient life can be under the harshest circumstances. In addition to being a geological wonder, its origins offer a window into the planet’s distant history and may perhaps hold the key to extraterrestrial life.
When Australian geologist Griffith Taylor conducted an expedition through the McMurdo Dry Valleys in Antarctica in 1911, the enigma of Blood Falls initially attracted scientific attention.
In the midst of the seemingly endless white and blue, Taylor and his group came across something completely unexpected: a scarlet waterfall gushing from the tall Taylor Glacier.
The ice itself appeared to be bleeding, a bizarre sight. Speculation was rampant at the time since no one could explain why this occurrence occurred in such an unfriendly environment.
One of the first theories proposed that red-pigmented algae could be the source of the red color. The idea that algae might be the cause of the unsettling tint was not out of the question because scientists had already found hardy microbes in Antarctica that could endure intense cold, high salt, and extended darkness.
If accurate, this would have been yet another instance of life adjusting to one of the planet’s harshest environments. Nevertheless, no concrete proof of algae was ever discovered in the falls, regardless how appealing this theory sounded.
As scientists discovered that something much more peculiar was at work, the theory began to wane.
Another popular notion was based on chemistry instead than biology. According to some experts, the red hue resulted from iron-rich water oxidizing when exposed to air, in a similar way to how metal rusts when exposed to oxygen.
Although this theory made sense, it also brought up more serious issues, such as where the iron-laden water was coming from.
In one of the world’s coldest places, how might liquid water survive beneath a glacier? The solutions were buried under kilometers of ice, awaiting further investigation.
Blood Falls was a mystery for many years, but contemporary studies have finally revealed its mysteries. The remarkable red color is the consequence of a natural chemical reaction that has been taking place beneath the ice for millions of years, not algae or surface pollution.
Under Taylor Glacier, a body of water cut off from the outer world for more than a million years, is an old, iron-rich subglacial lake that holds the secret.
Only the most hardy types of life could survive in this severe environment, which is far saltier and oxygen-deficient than conventional freshwater lakes.
Despite the extremely cold Antarctic temperatures, this water’s salinity is so high that it stays liquid. For the first time in millions of years, the saline, iron-rich water is exposed to oxygen when it eventually leaks out from beneath the glacier and reaches the surface.
In the same way that iron and air combine to make rust, this starts a quick oxidation process.
The outcome? As the ice falls, a striking, blood-red outflow stains it.
The fact that this subglacial system has been concealed and unaltered for such a long time just adds to the intrigue of Blood Falls.
The idea that Antarctica’s interior is entirely frozen solid is refuted by the ancient water gradually moving toward the surface through a complicated system of salty tunnels beneath the thick ice.
By keeping the lake from completely freezing and allowing the constant outpouring of iron-rich water, scientists now think that this subterranean flow is maintained by geothermal heat from the Earth’s interior.
In addition to resolving the riddle surrounding Blood Falls, this revelation casts doubt on accepted theories regarding the behavior of water in harsh conditions.
There may be more undiscovered lakes in Antarctica, each with its own mysteries, given the presence of a deep, liquid ecology beneath kilometers of ice. More significantly, it sheds light on how life could continue to exist in some of the most hostile environments, both on Earth and elsewhere.
A habitat long believed to be lifeless and arid flourishes in total solitude beneath the glacial expanse of Taylor Glacier. In addition to being a storehouse of prehistoric water, the subglacial lake that supplies Blood Falls is a time capsule that protects an environment that has not been touched in millions of years.
This hidden habitat, cut off from sunlight, fresh air, and outside nutrients, tests our knowledge of how life may persist in harsh environments.
Researchers have found that the lake beneath Blood Falls is home to microbial life, which are microscopic organisms that have evolved to live in an oxygen-free environment and rely primarily on iron and sulfur for energy.
Because they thrive in environments that would be fatal to the majority of known species, these extremophiles are among the most hardy life forms on Earth.
Their capacity to survive in such a hostile, remote environment provides insight into what life may be like in other severe settings, both on Earth and elsewhere.
There are significant ramifications when liquid water is detected beneath the Antarctic ice sheet. It implies that there might be large subglacial lakes and rivers elsewhere, offering microbial life secret havens in what was previously thought to be a frozen wasteland.
More interestingly, it feeds the hypothesis that life exists on other planets and moons with comparable icy environments. Blood Falls has been compared by scientists to the subterranean oceans of Jupiter’s moon Europa and Saturn’s moon Enceladus, which are thought to have liquid water behind thick ice layers.
Could microbial life exist in these strange worlds if it can endure the bitter cold and darkness of Antarctica?
Blood Falls serves as a natural laboratory for research on the functioning of glaciers and subglacial water systems, in addition to astrobiology.
The glacier’s slow, salty trickle provides a unique window into Earth’s distant past by providing hints about the long-term movement of ice and old climate conditions.
Predicting the future of Earth’s ice sheets requires an understanding of these hidden water networks, particularly as polar ecosystems continue to change due to climate change.
Blood Falls is more than simply a peculiar Antarctic phenomenon; it is evidence of nature’s tenacity in the face of adversity. Since life appears to be impossible in an environment where temperatures can drop as low as -50°C (-58°F), microbes have evolved to survive in total darkness, with no oxygen and just iron and sulfur for nourishment.
Their existence rewrites the parameters of what we previously considered to be habitable, demonstrating that life may persist in previously unthinkable sterile environments.
This is a significant discovery for astrobiologists. Similar living forms might survive in the deep oceans of icy moons like Europa and Enceladus, where liquid water is trapped beneath massive layers of ice, if life can endure beneath Antarctica’s glaciers.
Scientists can investigate how species can live in strange regions by using Blood Falls’ extreme circumstances, which are a reflection of these alien ecosystems. Investigating the microorganisms from this subglacial environment may yield important information about the possibility of extraterrestrial life, influencing future planetary and space exploration.
In addition to its significance for space exploration, Blood Falls preserves a record of previous Earth conditions by acting as a natural climate archive.
A window into past ecosystems and atmospheric conditions is offered by the water that emerges from the glacier now, which has been trapped beneath the ice for more than a million years.
Scientists can gain a better understanding of how Antarctica’s glaciers have evolved over time and how climatic shifts have affected ice sheet movement by examining its chemical makeup.
In the quickly warming world of today, this information is essential because it enables scientists to forecast how polar ice may react to climate change and rising global temperatures.
Blood Falls is a live experiment in adaptability, resiliency, and the mysteries hidden deep within our globe. It is more than just a remarkable visual aberration.
It was one of Antarctica’s biggest unsolved mysteries for more than a century, but contemporary science has finally lifted its frozen exterior to uncover an incredible and ancient world.
The rules of survival have been rewritten by life in the subglacial biosphere underneath its crimson flow, which has been unaltered for millions of years.
Its importance extends well beyond Antarctica’s icy landscapes. Our concept of life’s resilience has changed as a result of the discovery of bacteria that can survive in the most hostile circumstances, bridging the gap between the most extreme situations on Earth and the potential for life elsewhere.
Blood Falls is more than simply a geological wonder; it serves as a reminder that there is more to life than meets the eye or what we think is feasible. It pushes us to probe farther—under presumptions, beneath ice, and maybe even beneath the surface of faraway worlds.
scientists might discover more than just ancient water and iron-rich flows as scientists continue to delve into the frozen borders of our own planet.
It is possible that we are looking at the blueprint for survival itself, which transcends space, time, and the boundaries of our current understanding. In all its uncanny beauty, Blood Falls represents the unknown—the vast, uncharted worlds that still to be explored.
Bruce Willis – the action hero who once defined blockbuster cinema – now faces his most poignant role: living with frontotemporal dementia (FTD) at age 70. According to his wife, Emma Heming Willis, the Die Hard star has relocated to a nearby, one-story residence tailored to his health needs, staffed with round-the-clock caregivers. Though removed from the family home, the move ensures both his safety and consistent contact with loved ones.