Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Wisconsin Judge Arrested for Obstruction for Helping Illegal
 Alien Escape ICE
Date: Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 137
Message-ID: <vv5d76$3o7t6$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vujb4b$2v233$3@dont-email.me> <vus5c0$3d1h5$1@dont-email.me>
 <vus6rp$3cpns$4@dont-email.me> <vutg3n$j462$1@dont-email.me>
 <vutpmm$r254$1@dont-email.me> <vutqlh$r88d$1@dont-email.me>
 <mfm61kdlq5pnc0fuqom631bo5d6aumq55d@4ax.com> <vv07jq$328im$4@dont-email.me>
 <ega91kl6v6ug28qk30i246kf8gtuvtfjh9@4ax.com> <vv2qf8$1e24b$2@dont-email.me>
 <tc7c1k1faiqp2lmgq0i8j1i7l7qnbspoto@4ax.com>
Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 17:37:10 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="92b50b280d1dbb30020fd99067a4ebd2";
	logging-data="3940262"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18CoYQQk0yxbuuiYxFaI/dkCx5xvNEs0xQ="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:FlYbh/BF/UlEbgagMT8W6uiZpuQ=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <tc7c1k1faiqp2lmgq0i8j1i7l7qnbspoto@4ax.com>
Bytes: 7363

On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:
> On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:37:37 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:37:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>      On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>      
>>>>>>>>>>      On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>        On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>        
>>>>>>>>>>>>        On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>          On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            Actions always speak louder than words.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            violating the law.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>          ...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      warrant,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          which is perfectly sufficient for arresting someone in a public place,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          courthouse. The judge was insisting on a judicial warrant, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that's only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          necessary if making entry on private property to effect the arrest
>>>>>>>>>>>>> against
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          consent of the owner.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          So it turns out the judge was wrong, either because she's a state court
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        judge
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          and doesn't have knowledge and expertise on federal law, or, more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> likely,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        she
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          was just fucking around and delaying things to give the illegal time to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          escape.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>        Ironically, that increases the chance she made an honest mistake.
>>>>>>>>>>>        
>>>>>>>>>>>        An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
>>>>>>>>>>>      none
>>>>>>>>>>>        of her business in the first place.
>>>>>>>>>>>        
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            No, it is about arresting a judge who broke the law by letting an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            accused criminal loose from her court.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            Yes.  'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>            Which has  NOTHING to do with what I said.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>          What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> escape
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        law
>>>>>>>>>>>>>          enforcement by a judge who is sworn to uphold the law.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>        As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases.  I.e.,
>>>>>>>>>>>>        he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be.
>>>>>>>>>>>        
>>>>>>>>>>>        I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
>>>>>>>>>>> directs me
>>>>>>>>>>>      to
>>>>>>>>>>>        a back door to evade the cops, either.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>      *If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
>>>>>>>>>      
>>>>>>>>>      No, it wouldn't.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sure it would, if not legally then ethically.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
>>>>>>> recognized that and did their time for breaking the law in pursuit of their
>>>>>>> higher cause. This judge should be prepared to do the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
>>>>>> disobedience would be inadvertent.
>>>>>
>>>>> She doesn't get to rule on the validity of the warrant.
>>>>>
>>>>> Duh....
>>>>
>>>> She didn't issue a ruling.  She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant.
>>>
>>> So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a
>>> ruling?
>>
>> She consulted her knowledge of the law.  We all think we have some.
>>
> She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
> disregard law.

We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.

   >>> You just made a case for her removal from the bench.  She makes 
up her
>>> own law.
>>
>> You make up your own conclusions.
>>
> 
> Yes I do and I don't break a law just because I disagree with it.
> 
> It's amazing what you will say to attempt to justify her illegal
> behavior.

What I will say is that she may have thought the warrant invalid.  Any 
discussion proceeds from that point, and not from your presumption of 
premeditation and guilt.