The early-morning paramilitary-style raids on citizens’ homes were conducted by law-enforcement officers, sometimes wearing bulletproof vests and lugging battering rams, pounding on doors and issuing threats. Spouses were separated as the police seized computers, including those of children still in pajamas. Clothes drawers, including the children’s, were ransacked, cell phones were confiscated, and the citizens were told it would be a crime to tell anyone of the raids.

Some raids were precursors of, others were parts of, the nastiest episode of this unlovely political season, an episode that has occurred in an unlikely place. This attempted criminalization of politics in order to silence persons occupying just one portion of the political spectrum has happened in Wisconsin, which often has conducted robust political arguments with Midwestern civility.

From the progressivism of Robert La Follette to the conservatism of Governor Scott Walker today, Wisconsin has been fertile soil for conviction politics. Today, the state’s senators are the very conservative Ron Johnson and the very liberal Tammy Baldwin. Now, however, Wisconsin, which to its chagrin produced Republican senator Joe McCarthy, has been embarrassed by Milwaukee County’s Democratic district attorney, John Chisholm. He has used Wisconsin’s uniquely odious “John Doe” process to launch sweeping and virtually unsupervised investigations while imposing gag orders to prevent investigated persons from defending themselves or rebutting politically motivated leaks, which have occurred.

According to several published reports, Chisholm told members of his staff subordinates that his wife, a teachers’-union shop steward at her school, is anguished by her detestation of Walker’s restrictions on government employees’ unions, so Chisholm considers it his duty to help defeat Walker.

In collaboration with Wisconsin’s misbegotten Government Accountability Board, which exists to regulate political speech, Chisholm has misinterpreted Wisconsin campaign law in a way that looks willful. He has done so to justify a “John Doe” process that has searched for evidence of “coordination” between Walker’s campaign and conservative issue-advocacy groups.

read more here:  http://www.nationalreview.com/article/391130/done-john-doe-george-will

Views: 485

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

DEAR GOD THE PROGRESSIVE/LIB/DEMS HAVE I WULD SAY GONE SO BEYOND WHAT IS RIGHT IN AMERICA TO END SOMEONE ELSES RIGHTS BE IT POLITICAL OR ANYTHING ELSE LETS SEE IF THEY LIKE IT WHEN IT HAPPENS TO THEM HUH DOUBT THAT WOULD BE THE CASE.  

AMERICA THIS IS IT; TIME FOR WTP TO DO OUR JOB AND NOW.  THE GOVT IS DONE IT IS NOT OURS NOW AND IT MUST GO BACK TO US.   TIME FOR THEM TO REMEMBER WHO RUNS THIS NATION WE DO DAM IT AND BOY I AM SICK AND TIRED OF THESE ELITIST MORONS

YES!!!!

There is no place in a free society for the "John Doe" law or any such law that is so vague that it can be willfully used to violate law abiding citizens rights. And Mr. Chisholm and his wife need to be prosecuted for their part in these shameful acts. Wisconsin citizens need to stop this now.

In 1930's Germany, the people went along with their lives either with horse blinders or with a fervent belief that "der Fuhrer's" policies were benign and positive and progressive. It was only after the fangs of National Socialism  bit down hard to the very souls of the German people did they realize, too late what Hitler was really about and by then it was too late. ( Please watch the History Channel documentary Third Reich, The Rise & Fall).Sadly I see the same scenario playing out to its inevitable conclusion through Obama's progressive, socialistic agenda, once again the people have such a fervent belief that Obama is their new "Bread King" ( See Jesus feeding the 5000) that they will gladly sacrifice their American birthright on the altar of false security. All we need to do is read articles like the one above to see how LITTLE true security we have while under control of this treacherous regime!

this is tyranny!!

John Doe warrants have been outlawed by the Supreme Court, as unconstitutional.  It's been decades since I have even heard the term, in law enforcement communities.  I, myself, used one, one time (fill in the blanks at the curbing) during my very short stay in LE, but that was in the '60s.  As I recall, the use of the JD warrants expired around 1978.

This makes me sick to my stomach.  We fought wars so people did not have to live under this kind of law, written just for personal use .  I am so astonished when I hear that the police allow them selves to be used this way.  What happens when it is one of their children's or parents or friends homes? This was what Hitler and every dictator did, attacking anyone for political reasons.  This country was built on people being safe in their own homes and not having to fear our government.  I do not want to believe this is happening in my country, but we hear about it happening more and more.  The mentality of our government has to change and they have to stop using and making laws for their personal use.  Every law passed must be constitutional.  That is where we have lost our way, We should not live in fear of our government.  I still can not believe this happening. 

Power in the hands of unscrupulous political hacks is truly terrifying.  Wisconsin is a very odd place.  Liberals are completely lawless thugs.

Just look at the IRS, BLM, DHS, ICE, Dept of Justice..on and on..This ADM has no problem destroying our laws and our constitution.

I read up on this.  It was declared UNconstitutional back in the 60s by the supremes.  WI has chosen to ignore that little fact.

There are two kinds of Police, Cops that do their under the Constitution and then there's Pigs!!

So Wisconsin....what are you doing about these SS troops and gestapo??????

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

Political Cartoons by Michael RamirezPolitical Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

ALERT ALERT

YIKES!!! Chelsea Clinton Emphatically States A Person With A Beard And A Penis Can ‘Absolutely’ Identify As A Woman

  • The one issue Hillary and Chelsea don’t appear to agree on entirely is transgender self-identification
  • In an interview with The Sunday Times, journalist Decca Aitkenhead asked the Clintons about transgender self-identification
  • Chelsea Clinton replied ‘yes’ emphatically when asked if someone with a beard and penis can ever be a woman
  • ‘It’s going to take a lot more time and effort to understand what it means to be defining yourself differently,’ Hillary said
  • Aitkenhead said Hillary became ‘uneasy’ when the question was asked while Chelsea shot a ‘furious stare’ at the journalist as her mother answered
  • Hillary added: ‘It’s a very big generational discussion, because this is not something I grew up with or ever saw’

(Daily Mail) – It may appear Hillary and Chelsea Clinton always see eye-to-eye, but in a recent interview one topic cracked the facade of the like-minded mother-daughter power duo.

The one issue Hillary and Chelsea don’t appear to agree on entirely is transgender self-identification.

In an interview with The Sunday Times, journalist Decca Aitkenhead asked the Clintons if someone with a beard and a penis can ever be a woman, to which Chelsea replied emphatically, ‘Yes.’

However, as Aitkenhead describes it, Hillary looked ‘uneasy’, and blamed generational gaps for being less accepting.

‘Errr. I’m just learning about this,’ Hillary responded. ‘It’s a very big generational discussion, because this is not something I grew up with or ever saw. It’s going to take a lot more time and effort to understand what it means to be defining yourself differently.’

The Clintons sat sown with Aitkenhead to promote the book they co-authored, The Book of Gutsy Women: Favorite Stories of Courage and Resilience.

The book features Danica Roem, the first trans woman elected to a U.S. state legislature.

According Aitkenhead’s account, she tells Hillary during the interview that many British feminists of Hillary’s generation have a problem with the idea that a ‘lesbian who doesn’t want to sleep with someone who has a penis is transphobic.’

Hillary nods in agreement, while Chelsea ‘stiffens and stares at me’, according to Aitkenhead.

The journalist then adds that many women of Hillary’s generation are uncomfortable with biological males sharing women’s bathrooms.

‘I would say that, absolutely,’ Hillary nods firmly. ‘Absolutely. Yes.’

That’s when Chelsea begins shooting a ‘furious stare’ at Aitkenhead, who points it out to her.

‘I’m a terrible actor’, Chelsea laughs.

Chelsea then says she is thrilled with the National Health Service’s decision to assign patients to single-sex wards according to the gender they identify as, instead of their biological make up.

‘How can you treat someone if you don’t recognize who they feel and know in their core they are?’ Chelsea says.

‘And I strongly support children being able to play on the sports teams that match their own gender identity,’ she adds. ‘I think we need to be doing everything we can to support kids in being whoever they know themselves to be and discovering who they are.’

At this point Hillary looks conflicted.

‘I think you’ve got to be sensitive to how difficult this is,’ Hillary says. ‘There are women who’d say [to a trans woman], ”You know what, you’ve never had the kind of life experiences that I’ve had. So I respect who you are, but don’t tell me you’re the same as me.” I hear that conversation all the time.’

Despite the clear tension in the room, the pair say they don’t argue about this topic.

But according to Aitkenhead, ‘I get the impression they don’t like to present anything less than a united front to the world.’

BONUS VIDEO

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service