Sorry we have not been in touch sooner, but we have been busy. We are working on a few different fronts. So — since our meeting in October — true to form– Trump has not ‘calmed down’ or become more presidential. In fact he continues to damage to our country, our democracy and bring us closer and closer to war each day so our job is not over.

We accomplished our initial mission- to warn the public at large about the dangers of Donald Trump. The subject is all over the news and various media now, and we can take some pride in knowing that our group– DTW– played an important part in educating the public. Remember when the election took place the information on this was extremely sparse.
— Carol Linda Dreyfus email, DC Duty to Warn Meeting Attendee

They “accomplished” their mission, their “subject is all over the news” and educated the public?

Can you say delusional?

For more than a decade, the American people had to endure the destructive policies of Democrats, their media, and the unelected in many government agencies who inflicted their desires on the rest of us. With the election of President Donald Trump, the left has become unhinged as the surgical removal of their impediments moves along.

After more than a year and a half of investigations, there is no reported proof that the Russians “colluded” with the Trump campaign to deny Hillary Clinton’s inevitable presidential victory. They believe Donald Trump is unsuited for the presidency because only a crazy man would want to undo the brilliance of the liberal agenda implemented by Barack Obama.

Donald Trump is dangerous and unfit to serve. We are mental health professionals and other concerned individuals advocating to remove Trump from office.
— Duty to Warn Facebook page

In a clear illustration of the pot calling the kettle black, Duty to Warn’s leader, “psychologist” Dr. John Gartner, says his agenda isn’t partisan but wants to help Democrats retake the House so they can “contain” and eventually invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Donald Trump.

Below is an excerpt of one of his latest Facebook videos. Tell us who the crazy one really is….

Gartner calls President Trump Adolph Hitler and believes there’s insurmountable evidence that the Trump campaign worked with the Russians to defeat Hillary Clinton, despite all fingers pointing to Hillary Clinton and her sycophants in the FBI, DOJ plotting to shield her and aid in her victory.

It would also appear Duty to Warn has trouble accepting the slightest push-back to their “self serving vitriolic hate & lie filled BS” planned presidential overthrow.

Aww….

Think about that next time you hear about any of your friends wanting to go see a shrink.

On October 14, Duty To Warn events will be held around the country. Mental health professionals and community members will gather at teach-ins to learn and march together, warning the public about the dangers posed by Donald Trump.

Duty To Warn is a group of mental health professionals and other concerned Americans who are acting on their ethical and legal obligation to warn when someone presents a danger. Mental health professionals overwhelmingly describe Donald Trump as psychologically impaired, unfit to serve, and dangerous. Over 60,000 of them have signed a petition to call attention to this impairment and calling for his removal under the 25th Amendment.
— Duty To Warn GoFundMe page

I requested permission to shoot video of the event as this was a legitimate news event and received an email at Friday, October 13th at 1:35 am from event organizer John Gartner granting permission and he asked me to ask for him when I arrived at the event.

A little background on Mr. Gartner….

Upon my arrival at the Kimpton Glover Park Hotel in Washington, D.C., as instructed I asked for Mr. Gartner and a woman at the desk in the lobby escorted me in and pointed to Mr. Gartner. As he was surrounded and talking to attendees, I found a place close to the table where the panel would be sitting and started to set up the equipment. Within a minute, another woman walked up to me and asked me if I had signed the waiver and had proof of company insurance with me; if not, I could not record the event. I told this woman (who it turns out was Carol Dreyfus, event coordinator who also works for The World Bank) that Mr. Gartner had approved me to shoot yet Ms. Dreyfus said that no one could shoot without those documents. Dreyfus attempted to justify by saying that other videographers had to scramble yesterday to get the required documents so no exceptions could be made.

I immediately walked over to Mr. Gartner and informed him about this sudden “requirement”. He replied that this was something he only found out about Friday afternoon around 5:30pm and there was nothing he could do and apologized. I then walked over, got my equipment and was escorted out by Ms. Dreyfus.

As you know, I always like to look at a situation as if it were the other way around.

Let’s say there was a stealth conservative event that centered around the removal of Barack Obama because he was this dangerous narcissist who was undoing policies they liked.

Let’s say this conservative event of around 50 people, only TWO of whom were black and ONE other working, told the ONLY black videographer he had to leave and escorted him out in a rather humiliating fashion. Chances are that black videographer would be now doing the rounds on CNN, MSNBC, maybe ABC This Week, Meet the Press, etc. decrying the racist conservatives that denied him his First Amendment right of Freedom of the Press. It would also be asked why they didn’t want a complete, unedited recording of this event out there?

First, I have been a professional video producer, cameraman, editor on every level of print and video production for over 30 years. I have obtained press credentials to cover events for myself and video crews for events including RNC and DNC conventions. I’ve set up and shot interviews in and around Capitol Hill so I know the protocols and this is the FIRST time I’ve ever run into a requirement that I have “insurance” to cover an event.

Again, had this been the other way around, this would have been deemed racist behavior, so let’s go there!

I don’t know if this “insurance” requirement was dreamed up to weed out those deemed undesirable. It’s clear they don’t want the American people to know what they’re up to, especially those who support President Trump. Even if I decided to shell out the money to obtain “insurance” to cover the event, there was no way at last minute notice I could contact a company after 5:30 late Friday afternoon to obtain such insurance before an event 17 hours later.

Did Ms. Dreyfus look at me and think I was some stupid black man she could just issue some bullshit excuse so she could escort me out like I had done something improper?

What’s ironic is these people, I was told, made much about the First Amendment yet look how they honor it.

And they’re accusing Donald Trump of being a delusional narcissist to the seal claps of almost all in that room.

A group of mental health professionals gathered at Yale University Thursday to discuss what they believe is their duty to warn the public of the “danger” posed by President Donald Trump. The “Duty to Warn” event was attended by roughly two dozen people and was organized Dr. Bandy Lee, assistant clinical professor in the Yale Department of Psychiatry.
— Common Dreams, 4/21/17

If one were to use the same professional psychological standard, it could be argued that Dr. Gartner is also exhibiting narcissistic, “grandiose thinking” in that HIS reasoning is superior to the hundreds of psychiatrists before him who, to this day, observe the wisdom behind their own “Goldwater Rule”.

Section 7
A physician shall recognize a responsibility to participate in activities contributing to the improvement of the community and the betterment of public health.

On occasion psychiatrists are asked for an opinion about an individual who is in the light of public attention or who has disclosed information about himself/herself through public media. In such circumstances, a psychiatrist may share with the public his or her expertise about psychiatric issues in general. However, it is unethical for a psychiatrist to offer a professional opinion unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement.
— Principles of Medical Ethics with Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry

Apparently, liberal psychiatrists didn’t care for the candidacy of Republican Barry Goldwater and tried to pull a similar, professionally embarrassing stunt back in 1965. So embarrassing, those in the profession nicknamed “Section 7” of their medical ethics after Goldwater and considered it a rule that has to be brought up for timely review.

We live in an age where information on a given individual is easier to access and more abundant than ever before, particularly if that person happens to be a public figure. With that in mind, I can understand the desire to get inside the mind of a Presidential candidate. I can also understand how a patient might feel if they saw their doctor offering an uninformed medical opinion on someone they have never examined. A patient who sees that might lose confidence in their doctor, and would likely feel stigmatized by language painting a candidate with a mental disorder (real or perceived) as “unfit” or “unworthy” to assume the Presidency.
— APA President Maria A. Oquendo, M.D., Ph.D., 8/3/16

Given the statements issued in the event the media was NOT allowed to record, let’s not overlook the “ethics” Gillian and Garner are professionally bound by.

Psychiatric diagnosis occurs in the context of an evaluation, based on thorough history taking, examination, and, where applicable, collateral information. It is a departure from the methods of the profession to render an opinion without an examination and without conducting an evaluation in accordance with the standards of psychiatric practice. Such behavior compromises both the integrity of the psychiatrist and of the profession itself.

Simply put, breaking the “Goldwater Rule is irresponsible, potentially stigmatizing, and definitely unethical.
— APA Ethics Committee Opinion, 3/15/17

Using the argument of James Gilligan, a psychiatrist and professor at New York University, there are many cases that could be made against Hillary Clinton, who probably was his preferred general election candidate in 2016.

Over the years, we’ve been witness to her public meltdowns, read stories of her emotional tirades, verbal abuse of staff and the political destruction of women who spoke of her husband’s indiscretions and criminal attacks. That can’t make her psychologically fit to hold the highest office in the land, but who are WE to make that kind of diagnosis?

Oh, and Dr. Gartner’s “Duty to Warn”… it’s a closed Facebook group!

As these mental health professionals are taking their warnings to Congress, let’s not leave out the many stories we’ve seen and heard of our elected officials on Capitol Hill saying and doing things that not only are embarrassments to their constituents, but make you wonder if those people are in their right mind, period.

We’ve heard an elected member suggest NASA steer their Mars rover to where the astronauts left the American flag, another suggest putting troops on Guam would make the island tip over, multiple have concocted sophisticated bios regarding military service and heroism that never happened (we assume that falls into the sociopath category?), and the consistent practice of lying to The People can’t be shrugged off as normal behavior.

But this is really all about liberal Democrats who’ve again blown off the words of candidate Hillary who mocked Donald Trump for not promising he’d respect the results of the election and are still coming off like petulant, tantrum-throwing children who didn’t get their way.

Like that’s normal behavior.