July 13, 2026, marks the two-year anniversary of the attempted assassination of then candidate Donald Trump at Butler, PA and, after numerous official investigations and no transparency by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the public is none the wiser about who the shooter was. The U.S. Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Office of the Inspector General of the DHS, the Pennsylvania State Police/Butler County officials including the coroner, the Senate Homeland Security and Judiciary Committees, the House of Representatives Task Force on the Attempted Assassination of Donald J. Trump and the lead investigative body, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), all investigated what happened in Butler, Pa on July 13^th. The problem with all those august institution’s conclusions is that none can, or will, provide basic information about the identity of the alleged shooter, making it extraordinarily difficult to conclude who did what, where and when. The FBI, as the lead investigative body of the alleged shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, has been the least cooperative or transparent. The FBI began its decent into transparency hell during FBI Director, Christopher Wray’s, tenure when the Congressional Task Force Chairman, PA Representative, Mike Kelly, wrote “the FBI stonewalled” the investigation, refusing to share crucial files that was the result of either “deliberate” obstruction or pure “incompetence.”  Without the often-requested transparency from the Biden FBI, all the above investigations were completed, but the lack of transparency from the FBI on the Butler shooting continued into the Trump Administration with Kash Patel. Remember it was FBI Director Kash Patel who said “I pledge full transparency with Congress. Hundreds of lawmakers’ questions to the FBI have gone unanswered. That will not happen if I am confirmed, and all appropriate requests for information will be responded to expeditiously and fully.”  Patel also said, “The American people deserve an FBI that is transparent, accountable, and committed to justice…” Apparently Patel’s promises don’t include any information dealing with the Butler shooting investigation. Judicial Watch, a conservative investigative group, filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in July of 2025, requesting comprehensive investigative files relating to the alleged shooter, Crooks. Judicial Watch was successful in its FOIA request, and the FBI has been supplying the organization with heavily redacted documents for a few months. With an admitted 75 thousand documents on the case, at the rate of current release most people alive today won’t be alive by the time the FBI completes the document dump to Judicial Watch. Worse though is that the few documents being released are so heavily redacted that little information is gained from their release. So, what information has been withheld and what is needed to provide the truth to the American people? While there are too many questions that need to be answered in this limited space, there are a few that stand out, like, for instance, what physical evidence (DNA, dental or blood-based test) were conducted to identify the alleged shooter? Currently, no information has been provided by any of the released investigations about how the recovered body, lying on the AGR Building roof, was identified and by whom. Oddly, enough, none of the official investigations mention that the alleged shooter’s body lay on the AGR Building roof all night, until 6a.m. the morning after the shooting. How does a thorough investigation miss such an important piece of information, especially when it comes to chain of custody issues? For that matter, and perhaps more importantly, how is it possible that not one of the official investigations, nor the Allegheny County Medical Examiner (ME), or the Butler County Coroner, make any notes about the eyeglasses that the alleged shooter, Crooks, wore that day. Photographs posted on social media accounts show no eyeglasses on the deceased body, but worse, it is the Butler County Coroner’s job to list everything that was on the deceased body. According to the data provided by the Allegheny County ME, the only items that were passed on to the ME from the Butler County Coroner was a “clear plastic bag containing medium length brown hair (submitted as evidence)" and zip ties around the deceased wrists. Why was hair put into a plastic bag as evidence when the ME had the body and could have snipped some hair during autopsy?  Who put hair into the plastic bag and when was this done? Zero answers. And none of the official investigators thought to ask. The fact is that the alleged shooter died instantly on the AGR roof by sniper fire so there is no way that the alleged shooter could have removed the eyeglasses. Every publicly available photo of Crooks reveals the boy/man wearing eyeglasses. In fact, just moments before the shooter climbs onto the AGR Building roof, a photo is taken of the alleged shooter wearing eyeglasses while looking at a cellphone. So, is it the body of Thomas Crooks? If it is the body of Crooks, where are the eyeglasses? Further, little information has been made public about the family of the alleged shooter. Reportedly mother and father are mental health professionals but apparently failed to connect observations of a son experiencing mental difficulties. For example, Crooks’ father told investigators that “he observed Thomas dancing around in his basement bedroom throughout the night, in addition to occasionally talking to himself while waving his hands.” It must be noted that the father of the alleged shooter noticed the above odd behavior (dancing and waving of hands) of his son, but failed to notice all the bomb making materials in the son’s basement bedroom and the explosive precursors delivered to the family home for six months prior to the shooting? Whether or not the alleged shooter was suffering from a mental illness, as hinted by the father, is still unclear. Two years later the public is no closer to knowing who shot and wounded Trump and two others and killed Corey Comperatore in Butler, PA. The reason the public is still in the dark is due to state and federal officials purposefully withholding investigative material. Why? FBI Director Patel promised transparency and yet has failed to release to the public the FBI’s complete, unredacted, investigation of the alleged shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks. With no physical evidence proving that Crooks was the body on the AGR Building roof, the public cannot accept the official version of events. There is no public documentation about how, or who, identified the body on the AGR Building roof and there is no documentation about where the eyeglasses of the alleged shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, are. That’s physical evidence and even the FBI Director must admit is important and odd that no one mentions it. Unfortunately, without the release of the FBI Butler investigation, Patel’s promises to “commit to due process and transparency to address the erosion of trust in the department,” rings hollow and doesn’t bode well for changing that “erosion of trust” problem in the FBI. AbleChild is a 501(3) C nonprofit organization that has recently co-written landmark legislation in Tennessee, setting a national precedent for transparency and accountability in the intersection of mental health, pharmaceutical practices, and public safety. What you can do.  Sign the Petition calling for federal hearings! Donate! Every dollar you give is a powerful statement, a resounding declaration that the struggles of these families will no longer be ignored. Your generosity today will echo through generations, ensuring that the rights and well-being of children are fiercely guarded. Don’t let another family navigate this journey alone. Donate now and join us in creating a world where every child’s mind is nurtured, respected, and given the opportunity to thrive.  As a 501(c)3 organization, your donation to AbleChild is not only an investment in the well-being of vulnerable children but also a tax-deductible contribution to a cause that transcends individual lives.    

Arnold Ventures is not just another charity with good intentions. It is a billionaire‑run, political organization that has significant influence in Utah’s justice system and has intersected in all aspects of the Charlie Kirk Assassination. Within a single year, Arnold Ventures met privately with Governor Spencer Cox, funded tools and response systems similar to those used in the investigation and later partnered with the state to reshape how violent crimes are solved. At the same time, it has supported research on plea deals and public defense, work that could directly affect how alleged assassin Tyler Robinson’s case is handled. Arnold Ventures calls itself an “evidence‑based” philanthropy founded by billionaire and former Enron executive John Arnold and his wife, Laura. But the Venture’s reach goes far beyond simple charity. It operates across both sides of the justice system at a time when Utah is dealing with a high‑profile political assassination. John Arnold came out of one of the worst corporate scandals in modern history: Enron. Arnold was a young star trader, making huge bets in the energy markets while the company’s books were being twisted by fraud. When Enron collapsed in 2001, thousands of employees lost jobs, retirement savings, and any sense of security. Arnold, however, walked away with a fortune, reportedly earning hundreds of millions of dollars before the crash and then moving on to run a hedge fund and build the “philanthropy” now known as Arnold Ventures. Today, that fortune funds a different kind of power. The group provides grants for criminal‑justice reform, backing both law enforcement and public defense. On the surface, that may seem balanced. In practice, it means one private organization, through financial donations, is influencing police, prosecutors, and defense attorneys. In early 2025, Arnold Ventures announced more than $15 million in criminal‑justice grants. That money supported police recruitment, investigative technology, and crisis‑response programs. At the same time, its Public Defense program funded research on how defense lawyers perform and case outcomes, while Laura Arnold urged states to fully fund public defenders just as they do police and prosecutors. This raises a basic concern: one billionaire‑backed group is helping shape both how crimes are investigated and how defendants are represented. By mid‑2025, Arnold Ventures had already directed millions into tools for law enforcement and crisis response. Yet there is no clear public record showing which agencies in Utah received that money or how those tools are being used. Reports on the Kirk case describe the same types of tools Arnold Ventures supports—advanced video analysis, forensic lab work, and structured response systems. It is not clear whether specific tools used in the investigation were funded by Arnold Ventures. But the group has openly said it invests in building and testing these systems across the country. That means Utah may be using tools shaped by private money, without the public knowing where that influence begins or ends. The timeline adds more questions. On September 4, 2025, Governor Cox traveled to Washington, D.C. for a private meeting with John Arnold. Six days later, Charlie Kirk was killed at Utah Valley University. Cox later called it a political assassination. At the same time, serious problems were reported in how the event and its aftermath were handled. A large campus event took place without an ambulance on site or a clear medical response plan. There have been concerns about how key evidence was handled during the autopsy. In the early hours after the shooting, the crime scene was not fully locked down. These failures raise questions about how the case was managed from the beginning. Against that backdrop, the private meeting between the governor and a major justice‑system philanthropist becomes more than a calendar note. It is not known what was discussed, but the timing alone demands public scrutiny. Soon after, Arnold Ventures moved into a formal partnership with Utah. Through H.B. 137, the Violent Crime Clearance Rate Fund, the state set aside $250,000 to help solve violent crimes. Arnold Ventures agreed to match that funding and joined Governor Cox and other officials at the bill signing. The group praised the legislation for providing police better tools and publicly thanked the Governor for backing increase. The sequence is striking: a private meeting, followed by a public partnership, and then direct involvement in reshaping how violent crimes are handled. This raises a larger question about transparency and the role of private money in public policy. Arnold Ventures also funds a plea‑bargaining research project through Duke Law that works with prosecutors in Provo, Utah. The project studies how charges are filed, how plea deals are reached, and how sentences are decided, some of the most important choices in any serious criminal case. At the same time, the group continues to shape how public defense systems are funded and evaluated. Arnold Ventures’ role in Utah is not distant or abstract. It runs through the exact parts of the system now handling Tyler Robinson’s case. It affects how violent crimes are investigated and cleared, including the tools used to gather and interpret evidence. It reaches into prosecutors’ offices, where decisions about charges and plea deals are made. And it extends into the public‑defense system, where funding and performance are being reshaped. This is not minor involvement. It is presence at every key stage: investigation, charging, negotiation, and defense—in the same system now deciding the outcome of a politically charged homicide. It is already public that Charlie Kirk and Governor Cox had sharp political differences, and Cox himself called the killing a political assassination. When a private, billionaire‑funded group can meet with a governor, help fund crime policy, and influence how cases are handled, it raises a simple but serious question: who is shaping public policy, and on whose terms? As Utah moves toward trial in the Kirk case, the system around the case deserves as much attention as the case itself. A private organization has touched the tools police use, the way prosecutors make decisions, and how defense systems operate, while also working with leaders who are changing those systems in real time. That overlap may be coincidence, or it may mark a deeper shift in how public systems are steered. But without clear information about where that influence starts and ends, the public is left judging a justice process it cannot fully see. The Kirk trial is serious and transparency is not optional; it is the foundation of trust. If that transparency is missing, the question is no longer just what happened in the Kirk trial, but who is shaping how justice is defined and delivered. AbleChild is a 501(3) C nonprofit organization that has recently co-written landmark legislation in Tennessee, setting a national precedent for transparency and accountability in the intersection of mental health, pharmaceutical practices, and public safety. What you can do.  Sign the Petition calling for federal hearings! Donate! Every dollar you give is a powerful statement, a resounding declaration that the struggles of these families will no longer be ignored. Your generosity today will echo through generations, ensuring that the rights and well-being of children are fiercely guarded. Don’t let another family navigate this journey alone. Donate now and join us in creating a world where every child’s mind is nurtured, respected, and given the opportunity to thrive.  As a 501(c)3 organization, your donation to AbleChild is not only an investment in the well-being of vulnerable children but also a tax-deductible contribution to a cause that transcends individual lives.  

Much of the prosecution’s case against Tyler Robinson begins with the alleged “Text Message” Robinson allegedly sent to his lover Lance Twiggs just after Robinson allegedly shot Charlie Kirk. The contents of the alleged “Text Message” are made much more interesting because of the person the Robinson family allegedly used to help Tyler turn himself into authorities. Before discussing the absurd story line of retired Sheriff and family friend Mike Mitchell let’s recall just how insulting the alleged “Text Message” is. Afterall this is the information that is being used as proof that Robinson “confesses” to his lover that he killed Kirk. The extremely bizarre “text message” allegedly sent by Robinson to his fury partner, Lance Twiggs, while Robinson waited to retrieve the rifle from the woods, is of great interest because of Robinson’s unique ability to see into the future…the alleged assassin is a clairvoyant. For example, one statement made in the “text message” explains to Twiggs “I haven’t seen anything about them finding it.” Robinson is referring to the rifle while waiting in his Dodge Challenger to retrieve it from the wooded area where he left the rifle on the run. Then Robinson writes in the “text message” “the feds released a photo of the rifle.”  No. The feds did not release a photo of the rifle while Robinson was allegedly texting this message on September 10th. More importantly, whoever put the ridiculous “text message” together, sent on September 10^th (the day of the shooting) got the sequence of events out of order when Robinson reportedly writes, “my dad wants photos of the rifle…he says grandpa wants to know who has what, the feds released a photo of the rifle.” The release of the photo of the rifle did not occur while Robinson was allegedly sitting in his car texting his partner. According to statements made on September 11^th (the day after the shooting) to the police by Robinson’s parents, Robinson’s father did not contact his son until the day after the shooting when the alleged shooter’s photograph was made public. According to the State of Utah charging document on September 11, after seeing a photo of the shooter on television “Robinson’s father contacted his son and asked him to send a photo of the rifle.” Unless the alleged shooter is clairvoyant and can see into the future, this information in the “text message” is false and the confession is insultingly fake. Finally, in case there is any confusion about the date of the reported “confession” text message, the State of Utah charging document reports “Count 5 Tampering with a witness…in that on or about September 10, 2025, in Utah County…attempted to induce or otherwise cause his roommate to (ii) withhold testimony, information, a document, or an item, to wit: directing his roommate to delete incriminating text messages.” Get it? The confession “text message” was sent on September 10^th. Ironically, the State of Utah charging document appears to have an error when in Count 6 it refers to September 11 in Utah County Robinson tried to induce his roommate to stay silent if police questioned the roommate. According to all news reports, Robinson was back at his apartment on September 10 and that residence is located in Washington County, three and a half hours from Utah County. Further, it is made clear in the September 10^th Text Message that Robinson allegedly instructs his roommate “don’t talk to the media please, don’t take any interviews or make any comments… if any police ask you questions ask for a lawyer and stay silent.” So, it is anyone’s guess what Count 6 is referring to because no text message has been made public that was sent on September 11. The oddities associated with the alleged September 10^th confession text message gets a little more interesting when one considers that the retired Sheriff and family friend Mike Mitchell was, according to press accounts in the late 1990s and early 2000s, doing undercover work in online chat rooms, where Mitchell intentionally crafted deceptive online communications to draw out suspected child predators. Mitchell apparently provided testimony in 1999 about how he understood how offenders used language, typos, and persona-building to manipulate perceptions in digital spaces, and how to construct convincing online identities for investigative purposes. In a nutshell, this family friend and former Sheriff is an expert in shaping narratives. For example, according to the unsealed search warrant “on April 11/2025 Sheriff Smith with the Utah County Sheriff’s Office received a phone call at approximately 2004 hours from Sheriff Brooksby with the Washington County Sheriff’s office. According to Sheriff Brooksby, he had received a phone call from a former deputy who had previously been employed with the Sheriff’s Office. The former deputy, identified as Mike Mitchell, explained that he had received a phone call from the father of Tyler Robinson. Mike Mitchell explained that Tyler Robinson confessed to his father that he was the shooter at Utah Valley University. Tyler Robinson’s parents worked with law enforcement to arrange a way for Tyler Robinson to turn himself in without confrontation. Mike Mitchell coordinated with law enforcement to have Tyler Robinson meet with law enforcement at the Washington County Sheriff’s Office. Tyler Robinson arrived at the Washington County Sheriff’s Office accompanied by his parents at approximately 2226 hours.” Furthermore, Utah County Attorney, Jeffrey Gray, reported the surrender this way: “They talked about Robinson turning himself in and convinced Robinson to speak with a family friend who is a retired deputy sheriff. At Robinson’s father’s request, the family friend met with Robinson and his parents and convinced Robinson to turn himself in. The family friend spoke to police and reported telling Robinson that it would be best if he brought all evidence with him to the sheriff’s office to avoid police having to search his parent’s home...” So, it appears that family friend and former Sheriff, Mike Mitchell, was the coordinator of the alleged Robinson surrender. Of course, there is no video of the surrender as those tapes are reportedly deleted every thirty days. And it can’t be lost on anyone that it’s just a little odd that the narrative of how Robinson surrendered is not directly reported by Mitchell, but rather by Utah Governor Spencer Cox,  Washington County Sheriff Nate Brooksby, Utah County Sheriff Mike Smith, Utah County Attorney Jeffrey Gray, and everyone else reporting on the surrender. Shaping narratives is important to this case because, to date, no signed documents, no signed affidavits, have been made public by the neighbor and family friend about what was and wasn’t said leading up to the surrender. According to official reports, it’s clear that Mike Mitchell was instrumental in assisting in the surrender of Tyler Robinson and now, an apparent master of deception, is credited with the narrative that has become gospel in Robinson’s murder trial. AbleChild is a 501(3) C nonprofit organization that has recently co-written landmark legislation in Tennessee, setting a national precedent for transparency and accountability in the intersection of mental health, pharmaceutical practices, and public safety. What you can do.  Sign the Petition calling for federal hearings! Donate! Every dollar you give is a powerful statement, a resounding declaration that the struggles of these families will no longer be ignored. Your generosity today will echo through generations, ensuring that the rights and well-being of children are fiercely guarded. Don’t let another family navigate this journey alone. Donate now and join us in creating a world where every child’s mind is nurtured, respected, and given the opportunity to thrive.  As a 501(c)3 organization, your donation to AbleChild is not only an investment in the well-being of vulnerable children but also a tax-deductible contribution to a cause that transcends individual lives.    

There are so many questions, so many theories and not enough information being given to the public about how Turning Point USA, CEO and co-founder Charlie Kirk was killed. Of late there is lively discussion about the microphone that was pinned underneath Kirk’s white Freedom t-shirt being the deadly weapon. Maybe. Maybe not. But the status of Kirk’s microphone is a good starting point to understand who had control of the evidence in the case and, while the microphone is just one piece of the puzzle, let’s call it an example of who should be responsible for what. Everyone can view the death scene of Kirk on any number of social media websites, and it will show how Kirk’s “security” team went into action immediately following the kill shot and almost immediately had haphazardly moved Kirk’s body to a waiting black SUV for transport to the Timpanogos Regional Hospital about seven minutes from the UVU campus. On the other hand, Utah County Sheriff Mike Smith’s office was 17 miles from the UVU campus and about 14 miles from the Timpanogos Regional Hospital. Mike Smith, having jurisdiction over the shooting investigation, could have been at either location within minutes of hearing about the assassination, if he wasn’t already present at the UVU rally. Where Sheriff Smith was and what he was doing is anyone’s guess, but he had statutory responsibilities including securing the crime scene. But anyone perusing the video of the aftermath of the shooting can clearly see that the crime scene appears to be anything but secure and violated by numerous people, including TPUSA employees returning to confiscate a video camera that was attached to the tent behind Kirk’s seat. Did Sheriff Smith order that the crime scene be secured directly after the shooting? If so, why were people milling around where Kirk was shot and allowed to remove objects from the area? Further, did Smith interview the men who immediately returned to the scene to remove the video camera? It seems logical that Smith, at the least, should have immediately cordoned off the crime scene posting officers to ensure that evidence wasn’t taken, destroyed or made useless. Maybe Sheriff Smith went directly to Timpanogos Hospital because he learned early on that rather than wait for an ambulance, Kirk’s body was immediately driven to Timpanogos Hospital by his security team. In fact, it's odd that there was no EMT or ambulance stationed at the rally, as required. And it’s at the hospital where everybody’s responsibilities get clouded. For example, under Utah statutory regulations, “the person or persons finding or having custody of the body shall immediately notify the nearest law enforcement agency… the law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the case shall then proceed to the place where the body is and conduct an investigation concerning the cause and circumstances of death.”  Because the body is not at the crime scene, one must wonder if Sheriff Smith drove to UVU or directly to the hospital? Sheriff Smith also was responsible for notifying the district attorney having criminal jurisdiction and contacting the medical examiner (ME). Once in the medical examiner’s hands, the ME “assumes jurisdiction over the deceased body, clothing on the body, biological samples taken and any article on or near the body which may aid the medical examiner in determining the cause of death, except those articles which will assist the investigative agency to proceed without delay with the investigation.” So, let’s circle back to the microphone pinned under Kirk’s white Freedom t-shirt exploding theory. When Kirk’s security team drove Kirk to the hospital did any one of the men remove the microphone from under Kirk’s shirt? This is a question that needs to be answered because one of the men in the SUV reported to be giving Kirk CPR. This would be made difficult if the microphone was still under Kirk’s shirt. If the microphone had been removed prior to arriving at the hospital, who removed it and who has the microphone which apparently still would have been recording until purposefully turned off. And if the microphone was turned off, when was it turned off and if it was still recording while Kirk is being driven to the hospital, what is his security team saying? More importantly, did Sheriff Smith interview the men who brought Kirk to the hospital about the whereabouts of the microphone? Now, what if it was an exploding microphone? Did the coroner note any evidence of an explosion on his chest…any burns on Kirk’s chest or clothing? Afterall, despite the nonsense regarding the ATF not being able to match the bullet fragment to the alleged weapon, whether there is evidence about an exploding mic would certainly be important. Also, there are rumors that the black SUV that transported Kirk to the hospital has been sold. Gee, did the coroner or Sheriff Smith do any investigating into the black SUV that transported Kirk’s body to the hospital? If yes, did Sheriff Smith find any evidence of an exploding microphone and make note? Between the coroner and Sheriff Smith, the success or failure of the alleged shooter’s defense, whether Tyler Robinson is executed by lethal injection, depends entirely on whether these key Utah state employees did their job. Unfortunately, if the work of the Utah County Coroner is even remotely similar to the work done in the Butler, PA assassination attempt, it’s not looking good for Tyler Robinson. But the public can only hope that Sheriff Smith did his job. A young man’s life depends on it. AbleChild is a 501(3) C nonprofit organization that has recently co-written landmark legislation in Tennessee, setting a national precedent for transparency and accountability in the intersection of mental health, pharmaceutical practices, and public safety. What you can do.  Sign the Petition calling for federal hearings! Donate! Every dollar you give is a powerful statement, a resounding declaration that the struggles of these families will no longer be ignored. Your generosity today will echo through generations, ensuring that the rights and well-being of children are fiercely guarded. Don’t let another family navigate this journey alone. Donate now and join us in creating a world where every child’s mind is nurtured, respected, and given the opportunity to thrive.  As a 501(c)3 organization, your donation to AbleChild is not only an investment in the well-being of vulnerable children but also a tax-deductible contribution to a cause that transcends individual lives.  

AbleChild was first to expose Montana’s plan to outsource the redesign of its behavioral health system to a China‑linked consulting firm, and now the traumatic brain injury of a 13‑year‑old boy at Provo Canyon School sadly demonstrates how badly that promised “mend” missed the mark. Montana’s lawmakers promised a historic fix. With a $300 million behavioral health investment and a high‑priced consulting firm, the State’s lawmakers said they would “transform” and “mend” a system that had failed vulnerable people for years. Behind that language was a decision AbleChild flagged from the start: the state handed the redesign of its behavioral health system to Alvarez & Marsal, a private firm with business ties in China, instead of building transparent, accountable capacity in Montana. That choice was not a technical detail. It was the blueprint for what would count as “reform.” A $300 Million “Mend” That Left a 13‑Year‑Old in a Hospital Bed While consultants and state lawmakers talked about strategy and transformation, the state continued quietly sending children to Provo Canyon School in Utah, for-profit residential psychiatric and behavioral facility with a long history of complaints and abuse allegations. Montana has paid Provo Canyon roughly $26 million over the last decade, proving this was a pipeline, not a one‑off placement. Then a 13‑year‑old Montana boy allegedly suffered a traumatic brain injury at Provo Canyon. Families, backed by Paris Hilton, have now taken the facility to court, alleging delays and failures in his care. Only after that catastrophic harm did Montana officials suspend new referrals to the facility.  This is what “mend” looks like in practice: a child badly injured in a facility the state has patronized for years, and reform arriving only after the fact. The China Question No One in Power Wants to Ask The China connection is not about Provo Canyon being a Chinese institution. It is about who Montana chose to trust with redesigning its behavioral health system and how it impacts national security and vulnerable children. Alvarez & Marsal is a global consulting firm that does business in and with China. Montana’s decision was to pay that firm, at hundreds of dollars an hour, help steer how a $300 million “Future Generations” behavioral health investment would be structured and spent. That included advising on the overall continuum of care, financing strategies, and the shape of state services. At a minimum, the choice raises a basic question the public deserves answered: why would any American state outsource the redesign of its already failing behavioral health system to a consulting firm tied to China, instead of building transparent, accountable capacity at home? If the result of that choice is a polished reform narrative on paper and a child with a brain injury in real life, then the outsourcing model—not just its implementation—has to be on trial. What Real “Mending” Would Have Done If this were genuine reform, certain basics would have been non‑negotiable:

• Reducing reliance on controversial out‑of‑state corporate psychiatric institutions.
• Building in‑state, community‑based alternatives with real oversight with a high focus on educational resources.
• Systematically reviewing high‑risk legacy vendors like Provo Canyon and closing dangerous pipelines, not leaving them to run until disaster forced a pause.

Instead, while the consulting machinery turned, the state kept exporting high‑risk youth to Provo Canyon. The facility stayed open. The contracts stayed in motion. The checks kept going out. The only real break in the pattern came not from the consulting plan, but from a crisis: a 13‑year‑old boy allegedly suffering a traumatic brain injury, and families refusing to stay quiet.  That is not a system that has been mended. It is a system that has been rebranded. The Outsourcing Logic Exposed Defenders of the status quo will say that consultants do not make individual placement decisions. That is true on paper. But it misses the point. Alvarez & Marsal was hired to shape the architecture in which those decisions happen: what capacities the state builds, what it buys, which gaps it accepts, how much it leans on out‑of‑state facilities, and what “success” looks like when the money has been spent. When that architecture leaves intact a pipeline sending Montana children to a controversial, for‑profit psychiatric institution—and a child comes home with a brain injury—the redesign cannot be treated as separate from the harm. AbleChild’s earlier reporting on the China‑linked outsourcing called this risk plainly: that a system run through external consultants, rather than rebuilt with public accountability, would protect contracts and narratives before it protected children. The Provo Canyon case is that warning made visible. Who Does This System Really Serve? Montana’s lawmakers have talking points: historic investments, commissions, and “Future Generations” strategy documents. Families have a 13‑year‑old boy with a traumatic brain injury, a facility that should have been scrutinized long ago, and a state that only acted when the damage was too severe to ignore.  The contrast forces an uncomfortable but necessary question: who does this $300 million system really serve? The children whose lives depend on safe, effective care or the institutions and consultants that profit from the appearance of reform? Until Montana can answer why it chose China‑linked consultants to reengineer a system that still ships kids to Provo Canyon, and why it took a child’s catastrophic injury to revisit that decision, the claim that the state has “mended” its behavioral health system rings hollow. AbleChild is a 501(3) C nonprofit organization that has recently co-written landmark legislation in Tennessee, setting a national precedent for transparency and accountability in the intersection of mental health, pharmaceutical practices, and public safety. What you can do.  Sign the Petition calling for federal hearings! Donate! Every dollar you give is a powerful statement, a resounding declaration that the struggles of these families will no longer be ignored. Your generosity today will echo through generations, ensuring that the rights and well-being of children are fiercely guarded. Don’t let another family navigate this journey alone. Donate now and join us in creating a world where every child’s mind is nurtured, respected, and given the opportunity to thrive.  As a 501(c)3 organization, your donation to AbleChild is not only an investment in the well-being of vulnerable children but also a tax-deductible contribution to a cause that transcends individual lives.