The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she >helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up >to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when >these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge >led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the >hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and >watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately >proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump >administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar >breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
. . .
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway, where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she >> helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up >> to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when >> these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge >> led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the >> hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
He was also charged with battery against the sister (unintentional) and another man who was trying to intervene.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately >> proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >> and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
I was going to post about this the other day but I've had a lot of
trouble finding reporting that went beyond the legal filings. What I get
is that no one in the courthouse was enthusiastically cooperating with
ICE. She was told they were coming for him by a court clerk. She
consulted with the chief judge who didn't want him taken into custody in
a courtroom but in a public part of the courthouse. She led the man and
his attorney into a nonpublic hallway used for jurors and defendants in custody, I hope not at the same time. They got outside the building. The
man tried to run but ICE tackled him.
This is all from the court filing. I haven't found any reporting.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
. . .
Yeah, there's no CNN reporting here. I even saw a video clip of a woman reporting for CNN standing in front of the county courthouse who merely repeated all this stuff.
No reporter has interviewed witnesses. This is ridiculous.
I'm truly flabbergasted that the man's own attorney didn't attempt to
arrange a peaceful surrender, like have his client wait in an interview
room to be taken into custody.
On 4/26/2025 12:39 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, >>> and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
He was also charged with battery against the sister (unintentional) and
another man who was trying to intervene.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
I was going to post about this the other day but I've had a lot of
trouble finding reporting that went beyond the legal filings. What I get
is that no one in the courthouse was enthusiastically cooperating with
ICE. She was told they were coming for him by a court clerk. She
consulted with the chief judge who didn't want him taken into custody in
a courtroom but in a public part of the courthouse. She led the man and
his attorney into a nonpublic hallway used for jurors and defendants in
custody, I hope not at the same time. They got outside the building. The
man tried to run but ICE tackled him.
This is all from the court filing. I haven't found any reporting.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
Yeah, there's no CNN reporting here. I even saw a video clip of a woman
reporting for CNN standing in front of the county courthouse who merely
repeated all this stuff.
No reporter has interviewed witnesses. This is ridiculous.
I'm truly flabbergasted that the man's own attorney didn't attempt to
arrange a peaceful surrender, like have his client wait in an interview
room to be taken into custody.
I've been seeing multiple reports from multiple locations that ICE
agents are "staking out" courthouses in plain clothes wearing masks.
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge >> led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, >> and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately >> proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >> and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged >> in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest. >>
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the >> individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on >> immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from >> the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the >> subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said >> on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on >> foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly >> regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public >> safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents >> went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the >> judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway, >> where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the >> chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the
prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents >> say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they >> tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to >> the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz >> outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but >> was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has >> not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing >> justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom >> and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be >> tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the >> law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody >> should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor >> or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after >>>she helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE >>>showed up to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the
day when these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying
seeing this judge led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his
wife in the hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, >>>sitting in court, and watching the judge in your case help your abuser >>>escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, >>>immediately proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions"
of the Trump administration without the slightest hint of irony
or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar breathlessly declared that this is a >>>"constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >>>and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and >>>charged in federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant >>>avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing >>>the individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court
and was released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump >>>administration’s focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates >>>to immigration enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly >>>asserted that it will investigate any local officials who interfere
with federal authorities on immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away >>>from the subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, >>>allowing the subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director >>>Kash Patel said on X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents >>>chased down the perp on foot and he's been in custody since, but the >>>judge's obstruction created increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan >>>wholeheartedly regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in
the interest of public safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal >>>agents went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of >>>arresting Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed >>>from the United States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he
was back in the country illegally because of his arrest in a local >>>domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy,
the judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was >>>'absurd', left the bench, and entered chambers," court documents
say. Witnesses told investigators that Dugan confronted the federal >>>agents in a public hallway, where she repeatedly demanded they leave, >>>saying they needed a different kind of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan >>>ordered the agents to speak with the chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the >>>prosecutor and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- >>>allegedly recounted seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his
attorney to leave through a "jury door", which leads to a non-public
area of the courthouse, court documents say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as >>>they tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying >>>something to the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the >>>agents were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found >>>Flores-Ruiz outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took
off running but was eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz >>>has not yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to >>>evade arrest and is being detained, according to his court record. This >>>is a separate case from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after
the arrest was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you
are obstructing justice, when you have victims of domestic violence >>>sitting in a courtroom and you are escorting the criminal defendant
out the back door, it will not be tolerated. I think some of these
judges think they are beyond and above the law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that >>>"Nobody should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second >>>judge he is referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who
is charged with harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on
his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly >>>harbor or conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted,"
Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was >>invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was >telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another >tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
The FBI arrested a state judge
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway, where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, >>> and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was >>> released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will >>> investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on >>> immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created >>> increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the >>> United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the >>> judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different >>> kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the >>> chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the
prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a >>> "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but >>> was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate >>> case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing >>> justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is >>> referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with >>> harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after >>>> she helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE >>>> showed up to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the
day when these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying
seeing this judge led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his
wife in the hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim,
sitting in court, and watching the judge in your case help your abuser >>>> escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story,
immediately proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions"
of the Trump administration without the slightest hint of irony
or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar breathlessly declared that this is a
"constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and
charged in federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant >>>> avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing >>>> the individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court
and was released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump
administration’s focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates >>>> to immigration enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly
asserted that it will investigate any local officials who interfere
with federal authorities on immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away
from the subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, >>>> allowing the subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director >>>> Kash Patel said on X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents
chased down the perp on foot and he's been in custody since, but the
judge's obstruction created increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan
wholeheartedly regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in
the interest of public safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal
agents went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of
arresting Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed >>> >from the United States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he
was back in the country illegally because of his arrest in a local
domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy,
the judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was
'absurd', left the bench, and entered chambers," court documents
say. Witnesses told investigators that Dugan confronted the federal
agents in a public hallway, where she repeatedly demanded they leave,
saying they needed a different kind of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan >>>> ordered the agents to speak with the chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the
prosecutor and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- >>>> allegedly recounted seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his
attorney to leave through a "jury door", which leads to a non-public
area of the courthouse, court documents say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as
they tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying
something to the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the
agents were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found
Flores-Ruiz outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took
off running but was eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz >>>> has not yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to >>>> evade arrest and is being detained, according to his court record. This >>>> is a separate case from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after
the arrest was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you
are obstructing justice, when you have victims of domestic violence
sitting in a courtroom and you are escorting the criminal defendant
out the back door, it will not be tolerated. I think some of these
judges think they are beyond and above the law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that
"Nobody should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second
judge he is referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who
is charged with harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on
his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly
harbor or conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted,"
Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was >>> invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was >> telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another >> tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Warrant? ICE doesn't serve warrants on aliens subject to removal.
Courtroom? At no time had they entered the courtroom during court.
Why is moviePig making shit up?
...
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction chargesIf the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was >>> invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE
showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day >>>> when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this >>>> judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife >>>> in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story,
immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy >>>> Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the >>>> law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis. >>>>
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and >>>> charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid >>>> arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing >>>> the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was >>>> released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump
administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration >>>> enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing >>>> the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel >>>> said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting >>>> Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the >>>> United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the >>>> country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', >>>> left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told >>>> investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public
hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the >>>> prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly >>>> recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying
something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the >>>> agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade >>>> arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the >>>> arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above >>>> the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with >>>> harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property. >>>>
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said. >>>
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was >> telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another >> tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
Why do you automatically assume
she'd invite (at least) censure in order to abet a serial wife-beater?
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she >helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up >to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when >these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge >led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the >hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and >watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately >proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump >administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar >breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in >federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the >individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was >released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administrations >focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration >enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will >investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on >immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the >subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the >subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on >X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on >foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created >increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly >regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public >safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents >went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting >Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United >States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country >illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the >judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left >the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told >investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway, >where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind >of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the >chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor >and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruizs case-- allegedly recounted >seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury >door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents >say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they >tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to >the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents >were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz >outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was >eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not >yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest >and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case >from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest >was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing >justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and >you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be >tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the >law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody >should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is >referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with >harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or >conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she >>helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up >>to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when >>these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge >>led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the >>hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and >>watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
He was also charged with battery against the sister (unintentional) and >another man who was trying to intervene.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately >>proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump >>administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >>and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
I was going to post about this the other day but I've had a lot of
trouble finding reporting that went beyond the legal filings. What I get
is that no one in the courthouse was enthusiastically cooperating with
ICE. She was told they were coming for him by a court clerk. She
consulted with the chief judge who didn't want him taken into custody in
a courtroom but in a public part of the courthouse. She led the man and
his attorney into a nonpublic hallway used for jurors and defendants in >custody, I hope not at the same time. They got outside the building. The
man tried to run but ICE tackled him.
This is all from the court filing. I haven't found any reporting.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
. . .
Yeah, there's no CNN reporting here. I even saw a video clip of a woman >reporting for CNN standing in front of the county courthouse who merely >repeated all this stuff.
No reporter has interviewed witnesses. This is ridiculous.
I'm truly flabbergasted that the man's own attorney didn't attempt to
arrange a peaceful surrender, like have his client wait in an interview
room to be taken into custody.
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she >> helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up >> to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when >> these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge >> led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the >> hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately >> proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >> and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest. >>
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the >> individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administrations >> focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the >> subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on >> foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly >> regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public >> safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents >> went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country >> illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left >> the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway, >> where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruizs case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents >> say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they >> tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to >> the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents >> were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz >> outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest >> and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest >> was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be >> tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the >> law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody >> should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was >invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 17:19:25 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Wait, so you just defended a judge breaking federal law????
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge >>> led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately >>> proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >>> and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest. >>>
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the >>> individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will >>> investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on >>> immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the >>> subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on >>> foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created >>> increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly >>> regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public >>> safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents >>> went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the >>> judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway, >>> where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the >>> chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents >>> say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they >>> tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to >>> the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz >>> outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing >>> justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be >>> tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the >>> law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody >>> should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is >>> referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 19:11:07 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she >> helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up >> to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when >> these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge >> led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the >> hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately >> proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >> and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest. >>
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the >> individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the >> subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on >> foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly >> regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public >> safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents >> went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country >> illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left >> the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway, >> where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents >> say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they >> tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to >> the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents >> were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz >> outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest >> and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest >> was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be >> tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the >> law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody >> should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges >>>>> after sheIf the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was >>>> invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE >>>>> showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this >>>>> judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife >>>>> in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story,
immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump >>>>> administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy >>>>> Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis. >>>>>
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and >>>>> charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid >>>>> arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump
administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration >>>>> enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting >>>>> Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the >>>>> country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told >>>>> investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public >>>>> hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the >>>>> prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly >>>>> recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying
something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the >>>>> agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade >>>>> arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the >>>>> arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property. >>>>>
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said. >>>>
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
No.
Why do you automatically assume
she'd invite (at least) censure in order to abet a serial wife-beater?
Because she's a leftist open-borders lunatic.
On 4/27/2025 12:45 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges >>>>>> after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE >>>>>> showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this
judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife
in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in >>>>>> court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest. >>>>>>
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, >>>>>> immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump >>>>>> administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis". >>>>>>
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and >>>>>> charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid >>>>>> arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump
administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration >>>>>> enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal
authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents >>>>>> away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the >>>>>> perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan
wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of >>>>>> public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal >>>>>> agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the
country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case. >>>>>>
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom >>>>>> deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public >>>>>> hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak >>>>>> with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the >>>>>> prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court >>>>>> documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two >>>>>> as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying >>>>>> something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the
agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found >>>>>> Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off >>>>>> running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment.
Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade
arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the
arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are >>>>>> obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a >>>>>> courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will >>>>>> not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that >>>>>> "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property. >>>>>>
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly >>>>>> harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she >>>> was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
No.
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Why do you automatically assume
she'd invite (at least) censure in order to abet a serial wife-beater?
Because she's a leftist open-borders lunatic.
Oh, I see. Hmm, I wonder why the article didn't mention that.
So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
She actively aided and abetted their escape from the courthouse. And even the
judge didn't claim the warrant wasn't valid, just that it should have been on
a different form.
I'm picking this point out. What warrant? Why would it have been served
on her? ICE wasn't in her court while it was in session.
Why would ICE have used a warrant at all? This disagreement makes no
sense.
She actively aided and abetted their escape from the courthouse. And even the >judge didn't claim the warrant wasn't valid, just that it should have been on >a different form.
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:38:20 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 12:45 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges
after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE
showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this
judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife
in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in
court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest. >>>>>>>
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, >>>>>>> immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis". >>>>>>>
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and
charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid
arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump >>>>>>> administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal >>>>>>> authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents >>>>>>> away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the
perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan >>>>>>> wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of
public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal
agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the
country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case. >>>>>>>
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom >>>>>>> deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public
hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak >>>>>>> with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the
prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court >>>>>>> documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two
as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying >>>>>>> something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the
agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found >>>>>>> Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off >>>>>>> running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. >>>>>>> Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade
arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the
arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are >>>>>>> obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a >>>>>>> courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will
not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that
"Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly
harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she
was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
No.
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
She actively aided and abetted their escape from the courthouse. And even the judge didn't claim the warrant wasn't valid, just that it should have been on a different form.
Why do you automatically assumeBecause she's a leftist open-borders lunatic.
she'd invite (at least) censure in order to abet a serial wife-beater? >>>
Oh, I see. Hmm, I wonder why the article didn't mention that.
All you have to do is research her.
So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
She took herself down. Nothing would have happened to her had she not obstructed ICE.
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them. They shouldn't have it in the first place.
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them. They shouldn't have it in the first place.
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in the book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose >>>> the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we >>>> are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they >> won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them. They >> shouldn't have it in the first place.
national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short
order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who
jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat offender!
On 2025-04-27 4:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the
wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in the >>> book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever? >>>>
won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them. >>>> They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short
order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who
jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.
highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it. Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy",
where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to
him to ask.
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in the
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose >>>>> the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we >>>>> are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they >>> won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them. They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and
national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short
order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who
jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.
On 2025-04-27 4:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino"A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the
<no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in the >>> book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:which they
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and >>>>>> choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone >>>>>> else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever? >>>> With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and
won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from
them. They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short
order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who
jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat
offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.
highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it. Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy",
where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to
him to ask. Mind you, this must have been 40 years ago.
By contrast, one of our Supreme Court justices got into a bit of a
scuffle with a local while down in Scottsdale a year or two back. (I'm
not saying it was anim and I'm not saying that it wasn't....) He
insisted he had done no wrong but the optics were not deemed good for
him or the Supreme Court so he soon resigned from the court!
If Judge Dugan had similar standards, she'd have resigned long ago
rather than using her job to aid her "activism".
On 4/27/2025 5:27 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-27 4:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino"A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the
<no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>> wrote:As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in the >>>> book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:which they
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and >>>>>>> choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone >>>>>>> else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever? >>>>> With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and
won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from >>>>> them. They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short >>>> order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who
jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat
offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.
highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it.
Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously
off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy",
where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't
answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to
him to ask. Mind you, this must have been 40 years ago.
By contrast, one of our Supreme Court justices got into a bit of a
scuffle with a local while down in Scottsdale a year or two back. (I'm
not saying it was anim and I'm not saying that it wasn't....) He
insisted he had done no wrong but the optics were not deemed good for
him or the Supreme Court so he soon resigned from the court!
If Judge Dugan had similar standards, she'd have resigned long ago
rather than using her job to aid her "activism".
In a hypothetical, note that "optics" of a drunken brawl are somewhat
more unseemly than those of a refugee abettor.
On 2025-04-27 4:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino"<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they
won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them. TheyAs long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in the book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short order.
shouldn't have it in the first place.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the
highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it.
Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously
off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy",
where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to
him to ask. Mind you, this must have been 40 years ago.
By contrast, one of our Supreme Court justices got into a bit of a
scuffle with a local while down in Scottsdale a year or two back. (I'm
not saying it was anim and I'm not saying that it wasn't....) He
insisted he had done no wrong but the optics were not deemed good for
him or the Supreme Court so he soon resigned from the court!
If Judge Dugan had similar standards, she'd have resigned long ago
rather than using her job to aid her "activism".
On Apr 27, 2025 at 2:27:05 PM PDT, "Rhino"<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
On 2025-04-27 4:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino"<no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they
won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them.As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in the
They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it. Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy", where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to
him to ask.
I always identified myself and if the cop asked why that would matter, I'd say, "Because I have a loaded handgun on my hip and for your safety and mine, I wanted to make you aware of it and the reason why I'm authorized to have it."
Not much they could say to counter that. Cops use "officer safety" on the public at every turn. They can't very well claim officer safety suddenly doesn't matter when it's inconvenient for them.
It's a valid way of putting it out there that you're a cop without directly suggesting you want special treatment. If you get off with a warning or a "have a nice day", great. If not, oh well.
On Apr 27, 2025 at 7:48:17 PM PDT, "moviePig"<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 5:27 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-27 4:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in theBut would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they
won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them. They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short
order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it. Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy", where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to
him to ask. Mind you, this must have been 40 years ago.
By contrast, one of our Supreme Court justices got into a bit of a scuffle with a local while down in Scottsdale a year or two back. (I'm not saying it was anim and I'm not saying that it wasn't....) He
insisted he had done no wrong but the optics were not deemed good for
him or the Supreme Court so he soon resigned from the court!
If Judge Dugan had similar standards, she'd have resigned long ago
rather than using her job to aid her "activism".
In a hypothetical, note that "optics" of a drunken brawl are somewhat
more unseemly than those of a refugee abettor.
Only if you insist on calling him a "refugee abettor"** when (1) there's no
evidence he's a refugee, and (2) what he really is, is an illegal alien who routinely and viciously beats his wife.
Getting into a tussle in a bar in another country pales in comparison to aiding and abetting the escape of a guy who likes using his wife as a punching
bag.
**The media is using this trick with Abrego Garcia, constantly describing him as "a Maryland man", when he is nothing of the sort.
He's a foreign national from El Salvador covered in MS-13 tattoos who entered the country illegally. The fact that he may have ended up in Maryland while evading law enforcement does not make him a "Maryland man". But that's how the
media describes him because they're not biased at all.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 14:35:34 -0700, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 2:27:05 PM PDT, "Rhino"<no_offline_contact@example.com> >> wrote:
A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the
highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it.
Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously
off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy", >> > where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't >> > answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to
him to ask.
I always identified myself and if the cop asked why that would matter, I'd >> say, "Because I have a loaded handgun on my hip and for your safety and
mine,
I wanted to make you aware of it and the reason why I'm authorized to have >> it."
Not much they could say to counter that. Cops use "officer safety" on the >> public at every turn. They can't very well claim officer safety suddenly
doesn't matter when it's inconvenient for them.
That sounds like you're requesting special treatment.
Telling people you are armed can be seen as a threat.
On 4/27/2025 5:27 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-27 4:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone
else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in theBut would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and
which they
won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them. They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it. Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy", where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to
him to ask. Mind you, this must have been 40 years ago.
By contrast, one of our Supreme Court justices got into a bit of a
scuffle with a local while down in Scottsdale a year or two back. (I'm
not saying it was anim and I'm not saying that it wasn't....) He
insisted he had done no wrong but the optics were not deemed good for
him or the Supreme Court so he soon resigned from the court!
If Judge Dugan had similar standards, she'd have resigned long ago
rather than using her job to aid her "activism".
In a hypothetical, note that "optics" of a drunken brawl are somewhat
more unseemly than those of a refugee abettor.
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:01:22 PM PDT, "Pluted Pup"<plutedpup@outlook.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 14:35:34 -0700, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 2:27:05 PM PDT, "Rhino"<no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it. Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy", where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to him to ask.
I always identified myself and if the cop asked why that would matter, I'd
say, "Because I have a loaded handgun on my hip and for your safety and mine,
I wanted to make you aware of it and the reason why I'm authorized to have
it."
Not much they could say to counter that. Cops use "officer safety" on the public at every turn. They can't very well claim officer safety suddenly doesn't matter when it's inconvenient for them.
That sounds like you're requesting special treatment.
Prove it.
Telling people you are armed can be seen as a threat.
Since we don't have uniforms and dress in plain clothes, it was literally my agency's official policy and the policy of the U.S. Attorney that to identify yourself and advise that you're armed when encountering local law enforcement
On 4/27/2025 9:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 17:19:25 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Wait, so you just defended a judge breaking federal law????
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was >>>> released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administrations
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will >>>> investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on >>>> immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on >>>> foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created >>>> increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly >>>> regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public >>>> safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents >>>> went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the >>>> judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the >>>> chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruizs case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents >>>> say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they >>>> tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz >>>> outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing >>>> justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be >>>> tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody >>>> should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is >>>> referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with >>>> harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was >>> invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Umm, I asked a question. Sorry if you found it defensive/offensive...
On 4/27/2025 12:45 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges >>>>>> after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE >>>>>> showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this
judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife
in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest. >>>>>>
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, >>>>>> immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump >>>>>> administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy >>>>>> Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and >>>>>> charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid >>>>>> arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump
administrations
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration >>>>>> enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the >>>>>> country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case. >>>>>>
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public >>>>>> hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the >>>>>> prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruizs case-- allegedly >>>>>> recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying >>>>>> something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the
agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade
arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the
arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property. >>>>>>
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
No.
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Why do you automatically assume
she'd invite (at least) censure in order to abet a serial wife-beater?
Because she's a leftist open-borders lunatic.
Oh, I see. Hmm, I wonder why the article didn't mention that.
So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 19:11:07 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge >>> led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately >>> proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >>> and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest. >>>
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the >>> individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administrations
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will >>> investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on >>> immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the >>> subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on >>> foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created >>> increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly >>> regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public >>> safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents >>> went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the >>> judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway, >>> where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the >>> chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruizs case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents >>> say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they >>> tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to >>> the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz >>> outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing >>> justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be >>> tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the >>> law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody >>> should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is >>> referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
On 4/27/2025 1:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:38:20 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 12:45 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:No.
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically >>>>>> assume she
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction >>>>>>>> charges
after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse >>>>>>>> when ICE
showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought >>>>>>>> I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying >>>>>>>> seeing this
judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having >>>>>>>> put his wife
in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, >>>>>>>> sitting in
court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape >>>>>>>> arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the >>>>>>>> story,
immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of >>>>>>>> the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or >>>>>>>> hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges >>>>>>>> to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system >>>>>>>> in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-
wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI >>>>>>>> Friday and
charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented >>>>>>>> immigrant avoid
arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction >>>>>>>> and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in >>>>>>>> court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump >>>>>>>> administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to >>>>>>>> immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly
asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal >>>>>>>> authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal >>>>>>>> agents
away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores- >>>>>>>> Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI
Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased >>>>>>>> down the
perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's >>>>>>>> obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan >>>>>>>> wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the >>>>>>>> interest of
public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that
plainclothes federal
agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention >>>>>>>> of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been >>>>>>>> removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was >>>>>>>> back in the
country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse >>>>>>>> case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom
deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation >>>>>>>> was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. >>>>>>>> Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in >>>>>>>> a public
hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they >>>>>>>> needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to >>>>>>>> speak
with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and >>>>>>>> both the
prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- >>>>>>>> allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to >>>>>>>> leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, >>>>>>>> court
documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped >>>>>>>> the two
as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, >>>>>>>> saying
something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse >>>>>>>> before the
agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents >>>>>>>> found
Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off
running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. >>>>>>>> Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his >>>>>>>> efforts to evade
arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This >>>>>>>> is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox >>>>>>>> News after the
arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are
obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence >>>>>>>> sitting in a
courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back >>>>>>>> door, it will
not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are >>>>>>>> beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post >>>>>>>> on X that
"Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The >>>>>>>> second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is >>>>>>>> charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his >>>>>>>> property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you >>>>>>>> knowingly
harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," >>>>>>>> Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her >>>>>>> courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as >>>>>> yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
She actively aided and abetted their escape from the courthouse. And
even the
judge didn't claim the warrant wasn't valid, just that it should have
been on
a different form.
That sounds like a distinction without a difference. What requirement
of "form" could go unmet without attenuating a warrant's validity?
Why do you automatically assumeBecause she's a leftist open-borders lunatic.
she'd invite (at least) censure in order to abet a serial wife-
beater?
Oh, I see. Hmm, I wonder why the article didn't mention that.
All you have to do is research her.
So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
She took herself down. Nothing would have happened to her had she not
obstructed ICE.
Ah, so she's guilty of past thought-crimes. Even then, it's hard to
picture a female judge so dedicated to razing borders that she'd free a serial wife-beater. Not impossible, just unrealistic...
On Apr 27, 2025 at 2:27:05 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
On 2025-04-27 4:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the
wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in the >>>> book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever? >>>>>
won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them.
They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short >>>> order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who
jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.
highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it.
Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously
off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy",
where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't
answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to
him to ask.
I always identified myself and if the cop asked why that would matter, I'd say, "Because I have a loaded handgun on my hip and for your safety and mine, I wanted to make you aware of it and the reason why I'm authorized to have it."
Not much they could say to counter that. Cops use "officer safety" on the public at every turn. They can't very well claim officer safety suddenly doesn't matter when it's inconvenient for them.
It's a valid way of putting it out there that you're a cop without directly suggesting you want special treatment. If you get off with a warning or a "have a nice day", great. If not, oh well.
On 2025-04-27 3:22 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/27/2025 1:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:You "progressives" have no trouble in championing one cause at the
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:38:20 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 12:45 AM, BTR1701 wrote:She actively aided and abetted their escape from the courthouse. And
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:No.
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically >>>>>>> assume she
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on
obstruction charges
after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse >>>>>>>>> when ICE
showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought >>>>>>>>> I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying >>>>>>>>> seeing this
judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having >>>>>>>>> put his wife
in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, >>>>>>>>> sitting in
court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape >>>>>>>>> arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the >>>>>>>>> story,
immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of >>>>>>>>> the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or >>>>>>>>> hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional >>>>>>>>> crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow >>>>>>>>> judges to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole >>>>>>>>> system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-
wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI >>>>>>>>> Friday and
charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented >>>>>>>>> immigrant avoid
arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction >>>>>>>>> and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in >>>>>>>>> court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump
administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to >>>>>>>>> immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly >>>>>>>>> asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal >>>>>>>>> authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal >>>>>>>>> agents
away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores- >>>>>>>>> Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI >>>>>>>>> Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased >>>>>>>>> down the
perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's >>>>>>>>> obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan
wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the >>>>>>>>> interest of
public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that
plainclothes federal
agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention >>>>>>>>> of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been >>>>>>>>> removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was >>>>>>>>> back in the
country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse >>>>>>>>> case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her >>>>>>>>> courtroom
deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation >>>>>>>>> was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. >>>>>>>>> Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in >>>>>>>>> a public
hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they >>>>>>>>> needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents >>>>>>>>> to speak
with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy >>>>>>>>> and both the
prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case--
allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to >>>>>>>>> leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the
courthouse, court
documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan >>>>>>>>> stopped the two
as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, >>>>>>>>> saying
something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the
courthouse before the
agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents >>>>>>>>> found
Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took >>>>>>>>> off
running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. >>>>>>>>> Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his >>>>>>>>> efforts to evade
arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. >>>>>>>>> This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox >>>>>>>>> News after the
arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you >>>>>>>>> are
obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence >>>>>>>>> sitting in a
courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back >>>>>>>>> door, it will
not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are >>>>>>>>> beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post >>>>>>>>> on X that
"Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The >>>>>>>>> second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is >>>>>>>>> charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his >>>>>>>>> property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you >>>>>>>>> knowingly
harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," >>>>>>>>> Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her >>>>>>>> courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling >>>>>>> as yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you? >>>
even the
judge didn't claim the warrant wasn't valid, just that it should have
been on
a different form.
That sounds like a distinction without a difference. What requirement
of "form" could go unmet without attenuating a warrant's validity?
Why do you automatically assumeBecause she's a leftist open-borders lunatic.
she'd invite (at least) censure in order to abet a serial wife- >>>>>> beater?
Oh, I see. Hmm, I wonder why the article didn't mention that.
All you have to do is research her.
So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
She took herself down. Nothing would have happened to her had she not
obstructed ICE.
Ah, so she's guilty of past thought-crimes. Even then, it's hard to
picture a female judge so dedicated to razing borders that she'd free
a serial wife-beater. Not impossible, just unrealistic...
expense of people you're also supposed to champion. For example, you'd
think that "progressives" would be opposed to FGM (female genital
mutilation) as an affront to feminism and human rights but, instead, you declare it to be a cultural matter and therefore exempt from criticism. ("Progressives" apparently seek to ally with Muslims against their
enemies so give them a pass on FGM.)
Giving a wife-beater a pass to further the cause of defending Open
Borders seems a very similar sort of strategic decision to me.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 12:45 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges >>>>>>> after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE >>>>>>> showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this
judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife
in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest. >>>>>>>
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, >>>>>>> immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump >>>>>>> administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis". >>>>>>>
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and
charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid
arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump >>>>>>> administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the
country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case. >>>>>>>
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public >>>>>>> hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the
prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying >>>>>>> something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the
agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade
arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the
arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
No.
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of "logic".
THEN
Explain why you don't have a problem with an "impartial" judge let a
person, who is currently on trial, essentially telling the accused to
"take off" and she won't make him stand trial.
Why do you automatically assume
she'd invite (at least) censure in order to abet a serial wife-beater?
Because she's a leftist open-borders lunatic.
Oh, I see. Hmm, I wonder why the article didn't mention that.
Actions always speak louder than words.
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.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:40:57 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 17:19:25 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Wait, so you just defended a judge breaking federal law????
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after sheIf the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was >>>> invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis. >>>>>
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was >>>>> released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will >>>>> investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on >>>>> immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created >>>>> increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting >>>>> Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the >>>>> judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told >>>>> investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the >>>>> chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing >>>>> justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is >>>>> referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with >>>>> harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said. >>>>
Umm, I asked a question. Sorry if you found it defensive/offensive...
Evasion noted.
Are you attempting to the defend the judge or do you believe it was
correct to arrest the judge for BREAKING THE LAW?
This is a yes or no question.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 15:25:22 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose >>>>> the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we >>>>> are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they >>> won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them. They >>> shouldn't have it in the first place.
Suffice to say that I doubt that "bright line" can be so easily drawn.
Letting a criminal out the back door can't get much brighter.
On 2025-04-27 10:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/27/2025 5:27 PM, Rhino wrote:Maybe to you....
On 2025-04-27 4:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino"A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the
<no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig"As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick >>>>>>>> and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone >>>>>>>> else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion
whatsoever?
which they
won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from >>>>>> them. They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
in the
book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and
national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short >>>>> order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who
jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat
offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.
highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it.
Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously
off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional
courtesy", where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions
but he didn't answer directly. I got the impression it would never
have occurred to him to ask. Mind you, this must have been 40 years ago. >>>
By contrast, one of our Supreme Court justices got into a bit of a
scuffle with a local while down in Scottsdale a year or two back.
(I'm not saying it was anim and I'm not saying that it wasn't....) He
insisted he had done no wrong but the optics were not deemed good for
him or the Supreme Court so he soon resigned from the court!
If Judge Dugan had similar standards, she'd have resigned long ago
rather than using her job to aid her "activism".
In a hypothetical, note that "optics" of a drunken brawl are somewhat
more unseemly than those of a refugee abettor.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:46:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:Judges do not have discretion to break the law.
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 19:11:07 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was >>>> released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will >>>> investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on >>>> immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on >>>> foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created >>>> increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly >>>> regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public >>>> safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents >>>> went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the >>>> judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the >>>> chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents >>>> say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they >>>> tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz >>>> outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing >>>> justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be >>>> tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody >>>> should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is >>>> referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with >>>> harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
What is wrong with you?
On 4/27/2025 5:27 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-27 4:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 12:48:23 PM PDT, "Rhino"A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the
<no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-27 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig"As long as police don't face the requirement to enforce every law in
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:which they
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick >>>>>>> and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone >>>>>>> else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever? >>>>> With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and
won't?
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from
them. They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
the
book! With the millions of laws at the local, state/province, and
national levels, we'd ALL be in jail or broke from fines in very short >>>> order.
Just imagine everyone who went 1 mph over the speed limit or who
jay-walked getting a ticket or even jail time if they are a repeat
offender!
Just so long as the cops themselves are held to the same standard.
highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it.
Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously
off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional
courtesy", where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions
but he didn't answer directly. I got the impression it would never
have occurred to him to ask. Mind you, this must have been 40 years ago.
By contrast, one of our Supreme Court justices got into a bit of a
scuffle with a local while down in Scottsdale a year or two back. (I'm
not saying it was anim and I'm not saying that it wasn't....) He
insisted he had done no wrong but the optics were not deemed good for
him or the Supreme Court so he soon resigned from the court!
If Judge Dugan had similar standards, she'd have resigned long ago
rather than using her job to aid her "activism".
In a hypothetical, note that "optics" of a drunken brawl are somewhat
more unseemly than those of a refugee abettor.
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you? >>
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 21:57:14 -0700, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:01:22 PM PDT, "Pluted Pup"<plutedpup@outlook.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 14:35:34 -0700, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 2:27:05 PM PDT, "Rhino"<no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
A friend of a friend was travelling in the USA and got stopped by the >> > > > highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it. >> > > > Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously >> > > > off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy",
where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't
answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to >> > > > him to ask.
I always identified myself and if the cop asked why that would matter, I'd
say, "Because I have a loaded handgun on my hip and for your safety and >> > > mine,
I wanted to make you aware of it and the reason why I'm authorized to have
it."
Not much they could say to counter that. Cops use "officer safety" on the
public at every turn. They can't very well claim officer safety suddenly
doesn't matter when it's inconvenient for them.
That sounds like you're requesting special treatment.
Prove it.
Telling people you are armed can be seen as a threat.
Since we don't have uniforms and dress in plain clothes, it was literally my
agency's official policy and the policy of the U.S. Attorney that to
identify
yourself and advise that you're armed when encountering local law
enforcement
So the department is making you do so. It still sounds like
asking a favor. It just doesn't seem like good policy for
a plains clothes man to tell someone that he is an officer
and armed.
Wouldn't the cop want to verify that you are
who you're claiming to be?
What if the cop doing the pulling over is a crook?
On 2025-04-27 5:35 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 2:27:05 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> >> wrote:Good on you for giving them that heads-up. Mind you, you've also given
A friend of a friend was traveling in the USA and got stopped by the
highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it.
Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously
off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy", >>> where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't >>> answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to
him to ask.
I always identified myself and if the cop asked why that would matter, I'd >> say, "Because I have a loaded handgun on my hip and for your safety and
mine,
I wanted to make you aware of it and the reason why I'm authorized to have >> it."
me a flashback to a video I saw a few years back where a black guy got stopped and he warned the officer at the window that he had a gun in the glovebox (or maybe under the seat). The officer immediately panicked, screamed "Gun gun gun!" and shot the black guy dead (as I remember it).
I believe the black man was Philando Castile. This video spooked the
crap out of me - and still does. Castile was NOT threatening the
officer, had a carry permit, and was warning the cop just to avoid any misunderstanding and he STILL wound up dead.
Not much they could say to counter that. Cops use "officer safety" on the >> public at every turn. They can't very well claim officer safety suddenlyDid you ever get a break in those incidents? Just curious.
doesn't matter when it's inconvenient for them.
It's a valid way of putting it out there that you're a cop without directly >> suggesting you want special treatment. If you get off with a warning or a >> "have a nice day", great. If not, oh well.
On 4/28/2025 12:33 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-27 10:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/27/2025 5:27 PM, Rhino wrote:Maybe to you....
By contrast, one of our Supreme Court justices got into a bit of a
scuffle with a local while down in Scottsdale a year or two back.
(I'm not saying it was anim and I'm not saying that it wasn't....) He >>>> insisted he had done no wrong but the optics were not deemed good for >>>> him or the Supreme Court so he soon resigned from the court!
If Judge Dugan had similar standards, she'd have resigned long ago
rather than using her job to aid her "activism".
In a hypothetical, note that "optics" of a drunken brawl are somewhat
more unseemly than those of a refugee abettor.
...and, I think, to anyone who anticipates that someday someone they
care for may stand before such a judge.
On Apr 28, 2025 at 9:46:04 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of >>> "logic".
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you? >>>
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
And we all know state court judges are experts on federal law, procedure, and warrants...
On Apr 28, 2025 at 9:59:18 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/28/2025 12:33 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-27 10:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/27/2025 5:27 PM, Rhino wrote:Maybe to you....
By contrast, one of our Supreme Court justices got into a bit of a >>>>> scuffle with a local while down in Scottsdale a year or two back.
(I'm not saying it was anim and I'm not saying that it wasn't....) He >>>>> insisted he had done no wrong but the optics were not deemed good for >>>>> him or the Supreme Court so he soon resigned from the court!
If Judge Dugan had similar standards, she'd have resigned long ago >>>>> rather than using her job to aid her "activism".
In a hypothetical, note that "optics" of a drunken brawl are somewhat >>>> more unseemly than those of a refugee abettor.
...and, I think, to anyone who anticipates that someday someone they
care for may stand before such a judge.
I imagine the woman who actually *was* standing before *this* judge hoping for
justice after being hospitalized twice by her shitbag of a husband certainly was happy to see the judge in her case take her abuser under her wing and help
him flee the authorities. I'm sure that made her feel she was going to get a fair hearing in that woman's courtroom.
On 4/28/2025 1:34 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 28, 2025 at 9:46:04 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of >>>> "logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
And we all know state court judges are experts on federal law, procedure, and
warrants...
Yes, she *could* have been deliberately lying. But that's a *theory*.
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 12:45 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges
after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE
showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this
judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife
in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest. >>>>>>>>
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, >>>>>>>> immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis". >>>>>>>>
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and
charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid
arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump >>>>>>>> administrations
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the
country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case. >>>>>>>>
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public
hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the
prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruizs case-- allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying >>>>>>>> something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the
agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade
arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the
arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
No.
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
THEN
Explain why you don't have a problem with an "impartial" judge let a
person, who is currently on trial, essentially telling the accused to
"take off" and she won't make him stand trial.
Oh... did she say "and don't come back"?
Why do you automatically assumeBecause she's a leftist open-borders lunatic.
she'd invite (at least) censure in order to abet a serial wife-beater? >>>>
Oh, I see. Hmm, I wonder why the article didn't mention that.
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
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...
On Apr 28, 2025 at 9:46:04 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you? >>>
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
And we all know state court judges are experts on federal law, procedure, and >warrants...
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 12:45 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges
after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE
showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this
judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife
in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest. >>>>>>>>
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, >>>>>>>> immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis". >>>>>>>>
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and
charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid
arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump >>>>>>>> administrations
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the
country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case. >>>>>>>>
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public
hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the
prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruizs case-- allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying >>>>>>>> something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the
agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade
arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the
arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
No.
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
On 4/28/2025 7:30 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:46:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:Judges do not have discretion to break the law.
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 19:11:07 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis. >>>>>
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was >>>>> released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administrations
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will >>>>> investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on >>>>> immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created >>>>> increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting >>>>> Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the >>>>> judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told >>>>> investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the >>>>> chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruizs case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing >>>>> justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is >>>>> referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with >>>>> harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said. >>>>>
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
What is wrong with you?
Afaik, deliberately aiding an improper seizure is breaking the law...
On Apr 28, 2025 at 9:32:11 AM PDT, "Rhino"<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
On 2025-04-27 5:35 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 2:27:05 PM PDT, "Rhino"<no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
A friend of a friend was traveling in the USA and got stopped by the highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it. Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy", where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to him to ask.
I always identified myself and if the cop asked why that would matter, I'dGood on you for giving them that heads-up. Mind you, you've also given
say, "Because I have a loaded handgun on my hip and for your safety and mine,
I wanted to make you aware of it and the reason why I'm authorized to have
it."
me a flashback to a video I saw a few years back where a black guy got stopped and he warned the officer at the window that he had a gun in the glovebox (or maybe under the seat). The officer immediately panicked, screamed "Gun gun gun!" and shot the black guy dead (as I remember it).
I always made sure to show the badge and crews *before* mentioning the gun.
I believe the black man was Philando Castile. This video spooked the
crap out of me - and still does. Castile was NOT threatening the
officer, had a carry permit, and was warning the cop just to avoid any misunderstanding and he STILL wound up dead.
Not much they could say to counter that. Cops use "officer safety" on the public at every turn. They can't very well claim officer safety suddenly doesn't matter when it's inconvenient for them.
It's a valid way of putting it out there that you're a cop without directlyDid you ever get a break in those incidents? Just curious.
suggesting you want special treatment. If you get off with a warning or a "have a nice day", great. If not, oh well.
Every time except one. And even with that one, I didn't get a ticket. Just a screaming lecture from an airport cop that was so frustrated that his career plans had stalled and he was never going to get into the FBI, that he had a hate-on for federal agents and spent his days trying to fuck with them.
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 10:50:38 -0700, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 28, 2025 at 9:32:11 AM PDT, "Rhino"<no_offline_contact@example.com> >> wrote:
On 2025-04-27 5:35 PM, BTR1701 wrote:I always made sure to show the badge and crews *before* mentioning the gun. >>
On Apr 27, 2025 at 2:27:05 PM PDT, "Rhino"<no_offline_contact@example.com>Good on you for giving them that heads-up. Mind you, you've also given
wrote:
A friend of a friend was traveling in the USA and got stopped by the >> > > > highway patrol for doing 56 in a 55 mph zone. He got a ticket for it. >> > > > Ironically, Steve was a police officer at the time although obviously >> > > > off-duty and out of uniform. I asked him about "professional courtesy",
where LEOs give each other breaks for small indiscretions but he didn't
answer directly. I got the impression it would never have occurred to >> > > > him to ask.
I always identified myself and if the cop asked why that would matter, I'd
say, "Because I have a loaded handgun on my hip and for your safety and >> > > mine,
I wanted to make you aware of it and the reason why I'm authorized to have
it."
me a flashback to a video I saw a few years back where a black guy got
stopped and he warned the officer at the window that he had a gun in the >> > glovebox (or maybe under the seat). The officer immediately panicked,
screamed "Gun gun gun!" and shot the black guy dead (as I remember it). >>
I believe the black man was Philando Castile. This video spooked the
crap out of me - and still does. Castile was NOT threatening the
officer, had a carry permit, and was warning the cop just to avoid any
misunderstanding and he STILL wound up dead.
Not much they could say to counter that. Cops use "officer safety" on theDid you ever get a break in those incidents? Just curious.
public at every turn. They can't very well claim officer safety suddenly
doesn't matter when it's inconvenient for them.
It's a valid way of putting it out there that you're a cop without
directly
suggesting you want special treatment. If you get off with a warning or a
"have a nice day", great. If not, oh well.
Every time except one. And even with that one, I didn't get a ticket. Just a
screaming lecture from an airport cop that was so frustrated that his career
plans had stalled and he was never going to get into the FBI, that he had a >> hate-on for federal agents and spent his days trying to fuck with them.
I think I saw that movie. "Oh yeah, well I'm a big federal law guy and
you're just a rinky dink one-horse airport tin badge from the cereal
box jealous of ma' awesome authorita'", MC Hammer dance, flashing the
badge "you can't touch this, you can't touch this".
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:27:29 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 1:34 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 28, 2025 at 9:46:04 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>> wrote:
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of >>>>> "logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
And we all know state court judges are experts on federal law, procedure, and
warrants...
Yes, she *could* have been deliberately lying. But that's a *theory*.
Well since that case was not before her to render a ruling her opinion means...nothing.
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 12:45 AM, BTR1701 wrote:Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges
after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE
showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this
judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife
in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest. >>>>>>>>>
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, >>>>>>>>> immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis". >>>>>>>>>
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and
charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid
arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump >>>>>>>>> administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the
country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case. >>>>>>>>>
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public
hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the
prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying >>>>>>>>> something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the
agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade
arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the
arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
No.
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you? >>>
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
The same judge who got arrested for breaking the law????
Laughter.
NO, really. Show us the warrant was invalid.
THEN
Explain why you don't have a problem with an "impartial" judge let a
person, who is currently on trial, essentially telling the accused to
"take off" and she won't make him stand trial.
Oh... did she say "and don't come back"?
Laughter.
Oh I promise I'll come back for my trial (the multiple offense
criminal).
Why do you automatically assumeBecause she's a leftist open-borders lunatic.
she'd invite (at least) censure in order to abet a serial wife-beater? >>>>>
Oh, I see. Hmm, I wonder why the article didn't mention that.
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.
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.
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:52:29 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:30 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 15:25:22 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 27, 2025 at 9:46:55 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:With regard to judges choosing which laws they will follow and which they >>>>> won't?
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose
the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we
are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever? >>>>>
Absolutely, I'd want to take 100% of that 'discretion' away from them. They
shouldn't have it in the first place.
Suffice to say that I doubt that "bright line" can be so easily drawn. >>>>
Letting a criminal out the back door can't get much brighter.
Let's hope people who draft legislation can...
Admission that she committed a crime is thus noted.
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 13:02:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:30 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:46:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 9:33 AM, NoBody wrote:Judges do not have discretion to break the law.
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 19:11:07 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump >>>>>> administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis. >>>>>>
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was >>>>>> released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration >>>>>> enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will >>>>>> investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created >>>>>> increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting >>>>>> Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told >>>>>> investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is >>>>>> referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with >>>>>> harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property. >>>>>>
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said. >>>>>>
Toss her in jail and throw away the key. When judges pick and choose >>>>> the laws they will follow while dictating laws for everyone else, we >>>>> are officially in a Constitutional crisis.
But would you want a system giving judges no discretion whatsoever?
What is wrong with you?
Afaik, deliberately aiding an improper seizure is breaking the law...
Now all you have to do is find a court ruling that this was an
improper seizure.
I ask again: what is wrong with you?
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:47:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:Show us the legal ruling.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/27/2025 12:45 AM, BTR1701 wrote:Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
On Apr 26, 2025 at 8:06:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>
On 4/26/2025 6:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 26, 2025 at 2:19:25 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges
after she
helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE
showed up
to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day
when
these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this
judge
led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife
in the
hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court,
and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest. >>>>>>>>>
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, >>>>>>>>> immediately
proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy
Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis". >>>>>>>>>
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the
law
and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and
charged
in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid
arrest.
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing
the
individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump >>>>>>>>> administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from
the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing
the
subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel
said
on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on
foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly
regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public
safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents
went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the
United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the
country
illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case. >>>>>>>>>
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd',
left
the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public
hallway,
where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different
kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the
prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly
recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a
"jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents
say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they
tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying >>>>>>>>> something to
the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the
agents
were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz
outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but
was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has
not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade
arrest
and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate
case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the
arrest
was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom
and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be
tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above
the
law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody
should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor
or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was
invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
Given the judge's lawless behavior, why do you automatically assume she was
telling the truth about the warrant rather than dissembling as yet another
tactic to give the illegal time to escape?
Wasn't her behavior lawful if the warrant was invalid
No.
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you? >>>
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
On 4/29/2025 7:40 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:47:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:Show us the legal ruling.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of >>>> "logic".
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you? >>>>
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
Show "yourselves" the proper warrant.
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.
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.
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:34:40 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:40 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:47:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:Show us the legal ruling.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of >>>>> "logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
Show "yourselves" the proper warrant.
ICE had the proper warrant.
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.
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.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:34:40 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 4/29/2025 7:40 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:47:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:Show us the legal ruling.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
Show "yourselves" the proper warrant.
ICE had the proper warrant.
She allegedly didn't think so.
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:40:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:34:40 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/29/2025 7:40 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:47:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:Show us the legal ruling.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
Show "yourselves" the proper warrant.
ICE had the proper warrant.
She allegedly didn't think so.
She should have minded her own goddam business. None of it actually concerned her at all.
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.
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*.
On 4/29/2025 11:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:40:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:34:40 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:40 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:47:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:Show us the legal ruling.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper...
Show "yourselves" the proper warrant.
ICE had the proper warrant.
She allegedly didn't think so.
She should have minded her own goddam business. None of it actually
concerned
her at all.
Sounds like we're straying from legal principles...
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:29:26 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:40:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:34:40 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:40 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:47:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:Show us the legal ruling.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper... >>>>>>>>
Show "yourselves" the proper warrant.
ICE had the proper warrant.
She allegedly didn't think so.
She should have minded her own goddam business. None of it actually
concerned
her at all.
Sounds like we're straying from legal principles...
No, you are. A state court judge has no authority or jurisdiction whatsoever over federal immigration matters. The agents weren't trying to arrest him in her courtroom, so none of it was her business in any way, shape or form. She decided to insert herself into a matter that did not concern her.
She chose to fuck around and now she's finding out.
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:Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than >>>>>>> violating the law.
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation. >>>>>>>
...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.
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to escapeSo, 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. >>>>>
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.
On 4/29/2025 11:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:29:26 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 4/29/2025 11:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:40:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:34:40 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:40 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:47:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:Show us the legal ruling.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more >>>>>>>>>>> rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper... >>>>>>>>>
Show "yourselves" the proper warrant.
ICE had the proper warrant.
She allegedly didn't think so.
She should have minded her own goddam business. None of it actually >>>> concerned
her at all.
Sounds like we're straying from legal principles...
No, you are. A state court judge has no authority or jurisdiction whatsoever
over federal immigration matters. The agents weren't trying to arrest him in
her courtroom, so none of it was her business in any way, shape or form. She
decided to insert herself into a matter that did not concern her.
She chose to fuck around and now she's finding out.
If they weren't "trying to arrest him in her courtroom, one wonders how
she came to be shown the warrant...
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:Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation. >>>>>>>>
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.
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to >>>>>> escapeSo, 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. >>>>>>
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.
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:An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
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:Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation. >>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>
none
of her business in the first place.
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped toSo, 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. >>>>>>>
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.
On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:40:04 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:29:26 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/29/2025 11:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:40:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:34:40 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:40 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:47:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:Show us the legal ruling.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more >>>>>>>>>>>> rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper... >>>>>>>>>>
Show "yourselves" the proper warrant.
ICE had the proper warrant.
She allegedly didn't think so.
She should have minded her own goddam business. None of it actually >>>>> concerned
her at all.
Sounds like we're straying from legal principles...
No, you are. A state court judge has no authority or jurisdiction whatsoever
over federal immigration matters. The agents weren't trying to arrest him in
her courtroom, so none of it was her business in any way, shape or form. She
decided to insert herself into a matter that did not concern her.
She chose to fuck around and now she's finding out.
If they weren't "trying to arrest him in her courtroom, one wonders how
she came to be shown the warrant...
She decided to insert herself into a matter that did not concern her.
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she >helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up >to arrest him. . . .
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:I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she >>>>>> directs me
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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. >>>>>>
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.
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:No, it wouldn't.
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she >>>>>>> directs me
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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. >>>>>>>
to
a back door to evade the cops, either.
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*. >>>>>
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither can a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested and
charged with obstruction.
On Apr 30, 2025 at 12:24:52 PM PDT, "BTR1701" <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:No, it wouldn't.
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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. >>>>>>>>
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either.
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*. >>>>>>
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other >> citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up >> to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested >> and
charged with obstruction.
Apparently the Wisconsin Supreme Court agrees with me. It suspended the judge on its own motion for her clearly unethical actions.
https://apnews.com/article/milwaukee-judge-arrested-supreme-court-suspended-49f25ea7702d3211719f926f8cfc90b7
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:No, it wouldn't.
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she >>>>>>> directs me
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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. >>>>>>>
to
a back door to evade the cops, either.
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*. >>>>>
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither can a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested and
charged with obstruction.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she >> helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up >> to arrest him. . . .
Wisconsin high court suspends Milwaukee judge accused of helping man
evade immigration authorities
By Todd Richmond
AP
Updated 7:05 PM CDT, April 29, 2025 https://apnews.com/article/milwaukee-judge-arrested-supreme-court-suspended-49f25ea7702d3211719f926f8cfc90b7
Before any of you makes a fool of himself making a crack about the composition of this state's Supreme Court, this was the state with record-breaking campaign spending to get a liberal-leaning judge elected
for a 4-3 liberal-leaning majority. It's a nonpartisan election.
The court stated that it issued the suspension on its own initiative. Apparently it's nonpartisan to believe that flouting the law is
noncompliant with the canon of legal ethics judges are subject to.
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:No, it wouldn't.
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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. >>>>>>>>
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either.
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*. >>>>>>
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no >> jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up >> to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither >> can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested >> and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your
wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming
to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:She had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She
On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:37:27 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and >>>>>> Gandhi both
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote:No, it wouldn't.
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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.
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*.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically.
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.
has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than
any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street
can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and
neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be
arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your
wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming
to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to
show *her*
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest,
but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not
some
family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your
scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody.
So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'. Thus,
if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you away
while [you] try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers...
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:
But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her >>>>> disobedience would be inadvertent.
She had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any >>>> other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't >>>> walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your
wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming
to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to show
*her*
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest, but >> you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some >> family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your >> scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody.
So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'.
Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at
the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you
away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers...
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:No, it wouldn't.
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:
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*. >>>>>>>
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no >>> jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither >>> can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your
wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming
to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to show *her* and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest, but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody.
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:Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than >>>>>>>> violating the law.
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation. >>>>>>>>
...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.
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to escapeSo, 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. >>>>>>
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.
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:An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
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:Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation. >>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>
none
of her business in the first place.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she >>>>>> directs meSo, 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. >>>>>>
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.
To me, it's all cockeyed, and I'd like to hear her perspective.
On 4/30/2025 3:51 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 12:24:52 PM PDT, "BTR1701" <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:No, it wouldn't.
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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. >>>>>>>>>
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either.
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*. >>>>>>>
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no >>> jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up >>> to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested >>> and
charged with obstruction.
Apparently the Wisconsin Supreme Court agrees with me. It suspended the judge
on its own motion for her clearly unethical actions.
https://apnews.com/article/milwaukee-judge-arrested-supreme-court-suspended-49f25ea7702d3211719f926f8cfc90b7
"...temporarily suspended...to protect public confidence..."
No mention of throwing her into Lake Michigan to see if she floats.
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your
wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming
to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to show *her*
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest, but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some >> family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your
scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody.
So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'.
Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at
the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you
away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers...
On Apr 30, 2025 at 7:30:29 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:
But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her >>>>>> disobedience would be inadvertent.
She had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any
other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't >>>>> walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your >>>> wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming >>>> to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to show >>> *her*
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest, but
you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some
family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your >>> scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody.
So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'.
Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at
the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you
away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers...
What else could you do even if they showed it to you?
Anyone who's sophisticated enough to show up to your home with a counterfeit marked police cruiser and wearing police uniforms and equipment, wouldn't have
any trouble downloading an arrest warrant from the internet and switching out the names and other pertinent information, forging a judge's signature, and printing it out to have in hand during the kidnapping.
How exactly does the husband looking at the warrant in your scenario serve as a prophylaxis against kidnapping?
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 17:11:06 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 3:51 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 12:24:52 PM PDT, "BTR1701" <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no >>>> jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested >>>> and
charged with obstruction.
Apparently the Wisconsin Supreme Court agrees with me. It suspended the judge
on its own motion for her clearly unethical actions.
https://apnews.com/article/milwaukee-judge-arrested-supreme-court-suspended-49f25ea7702d3211719f926f8cfc90b7
"...temporarily suspended...to protect public confidence..."
No mention of throwing her into Lake Michigan to see if she floats.
And you dodge again!
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:30:29 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your
wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming >>>> to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to show *her*
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest, but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some >>> family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your >>> scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody.
So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'.
Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at
the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you
away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers...
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the
judge's part.
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:No, it wouldn't.
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
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. >>>>>>>
none
of her business in the first place.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she >>>>>>> directs meAs he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,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. >>>>>>>>
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be. >>>>>>>
to
a back door to evade the cops, either.
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*. >>>>>
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....
To me, it's all cockeyed, and I'd like to hear her perspective.Laughter.
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 11:37:27 -0400, 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:An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
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:Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation. >>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>
none
of her business in the first place.
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to escapeSo, 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. >>>>>>>
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.
Quote from the code of ethics that you thinks supports that silliness.
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 11:40:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:29:26 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/29/2025 11:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:40:18 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:34:40 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:40 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:47:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:Show us the legal ruling.
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 12:38:20 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
Why not? Without a valid warrant, what gives them more rights than you?
Show us the warrant was invalid before you proceed with this course of
"logic".
Hmm, I think there was a judge who said it was improper... >>>>>>>>>>
Show "yourselves" the proper warrant.
ICE had the proper warrant.
She allegedly didn't think so.
She should have minded her own goddam business. None of it actually >>>>> concerned
her at all.
Sounds like we're straying from legal principles...
No, you are. A state court judge has no authority or jurisdiction whatsoever
over federal immigration matters. The agents weren't trying to arrest him in
her courtroom, so none of it was her business in any way, shape or form. She
decided to insert herself into a matter that did not concern her.
She chose to fuck around and now she's finding out.
If they weren't "trying to arrest him in her courtroom, one wonders how
she came to be shown the warrant...
Can you stick to known facts and not speculate? You're having enough difficulty with the known facts.
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter.
Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the
judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
May 1, 2025 at 9:28:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. >>>Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the >>>judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
A state judge has no authority to rule on the validity of a federal warrant.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
May 1, 2025 at 9:28:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter.
Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the
judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
A state judge has no authority to rule on the validity of a federal warrant.
If moviePig were her lawyer, she'd get 20 years in prison rather than
a slap on the wrist. His ignorance and repetition of stupidity would contributing harm.
On 5/1/2025 3:14 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
May 1, 2025 at 9:28:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. >>>>> Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the >>>>> judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
A state judge has no authority to rule on the validity of a federal warrant.
If moviePig were her lawyer, she'd get 20 years in prison rather than
a slap on the wrist. His ignorance and repetition of stupidity would
contributing harm.
Speaking of "ignorance and repetition of stupidity"...
On Thu, 1 May 2025 15:23:43 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 3:14 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
May 1, 2025 at 9:28:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>> On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. >>>>>> Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the >>>>>> judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
A state judge has no authority to rule on the validity of a federal warrant.
If moviePig were her lawyer, she'd get 20 years in prison rather than
a slap on the wrist. His ignorance and repetition of stupidity would
contributing harm.
Speaking of "ignorance and repetition of stupidity"...
There seems to be a difference of opinion amongst the lawyers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPQeZalnArY
The FBI Just Arrested Two Judges
On May 1, 2025 at 9:28:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter.
Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the
judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
A state judge has no authority to rule on the validity of a federal warrant.
Thu, 1 May 2025 15:23:43 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>:
5/1/2025 3:14 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
May 1, 2025 at 9:28:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. >>>>>>Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the >>>>>>judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
A state judge has no authority to rule on the validity of a federal >>>>warrant.
If moviePig were her lawyer, she'd get 20 years in prison rather than
a slap on the wrist. His ignorance and repetition of stupidity would >>>contributing harm.
Speaking of "ignorance and repetition of stupidity"...
There seems to be a difference of opinion amongst the lawyers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPQeZalnArY
The FBI Just Arrested Two Judges
Thu, 1 May 2025 18:16:00 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>:
May 1, 2025 at 9:28:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. >>>>Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the >>>>judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
A state judge has no authority to rule on the validity of a federal warrant.
She never questioned the validity but where the agents could execute
the warrant due to it being an administrative warrant and not a
judicial warrant as brought up in the LegalEagle video. >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPQeZalnArY
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
Thu, 1 May 2025 15:23:43 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>:
5/1/2025 3:14 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
May 1, 2025 at 9:28:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>> 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. >>>>>>> Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the >>>>>>> judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
A state judge has no authority to rule on the validity of a federal
warrant.
If moviePig were her lawyer, she'd get 20 years in prison rather than
a slap on the wrist. His ignorance and repetition of stupidity would
contributing harm.
Speaking of "ignorance and repetition of stupidity"...
There seems to be a difference of opinion amongst the lawyers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPQeZalnArY
The FBI Just Arrested Two Judges
Paul Clemente? Impressive
My comments in this part of the thread were limited to moviePig making
shit up about the warrant and then repeating it ad infinitum. Derek
Stone, in the video, does NOT support moviePig's continuing bullshit
about the warrant, and this guy has been posting anti-Trump videos
nonstop. moviePig's contribution of ignorance is always harmful.
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:No, it wouldn't.
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.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she >>>>>>>> directs meAs he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,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. >>>>>>>>>
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be. >>>>>>>>
to
a back door to evade the cops, either.
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*. >>>>>>
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.
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:30:29 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her >>>>>>> disobedience would be inadvertent.
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:
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. >>>>>>>
She had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your >>>>> wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming >>>>> to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to show *her*
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest, but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some
family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your >>>> scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody.
So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'.
Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at
the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you
away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers...
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter.
Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the
judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
On May 1, 2025 at 9:28:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter.
Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the
judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
A state judge has no authority to rule on the validity of a federal warrant.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:28:27 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:30:29 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
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:
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. >>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your >>>>>> wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming >>>>>> to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to show *her*
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest, but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some
family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your >>>>> scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody.
So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'.
Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at >>>> the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you >>>> away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers...
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter.
Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the
judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
So now you ARE saying she issued a ruling?
Make up your mind dude.
She either issued a formal ruling that the warrant was "improper"
OR
She made up her own interpretation without authority and then acted
illegally based on her unauthorized interpretation.
Which is it?
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:No, it wouldn't.
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:Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Actions always speak louder than words. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law.
...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant. >>>>>>>>>>>
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.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while sheAs he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,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. >>>>>>>>>>
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be. >>>>>>>>>
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either.
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*. >>>>>>>
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?
You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes up her
own law.
On 4/26/2025 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
The FBI arrested a state judge in Wisconsin on obstruction charges after she >> helped a wife-beating illegal alien escape the courthouse when ICE showed up >> to arrest him.
There must be snowdrifts in hell today. I never thought I'd see the day when >> these activist judges were held to account. So satisfying seeing this judge >> led out of her own courthouse in handcuffs.
The illegal was in state court facing charges for having put his wife in the >> hospital for the second time. Imagine being the victim, sitting in court, and
watching the judge in your case help your abuser escape arrest.
Of course, Congressional Democrats who, upon hearing the story, immediately >> proceeded to decry the "increasingly lawless actions" of the Trump
administration without the slightest hint of irony or hypocrisy. Amy Klobuchar
breathlessly declared that this is a "constitutional crisis".
I had no idea the Constitution required us to allow judges to break the law >> and that stopping them from doing so puts the whole system in crisis.
--------------------------------
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested
A Milwaukee County Circuit judge was arrested by the FBI Friday and charged in
federal court for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest. >>
Judge Hannah Dugan is facing two charges for obstruction and concealing the >> individual from arrest. She made an initial appearance in court and was
released.
The arrest on federal charges is an escalation in the Trump administration’s
focus on judges' conduct, particularly as it relates to immigration
enforcement. The Justice Department has repeatedly asserted that it will
investigate any local officials who interfere with federal authorities on
immigration matters.
"We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the
subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, allowing the >> subject-- an illegal alien-- to evade arrest," FBI Director Kash Patel said on
X in a post Friday morning. "Thankfully our agents chased down the perp on >> foot and he's been in custody since, but the judge's obstruction created
increased danger to the public."
In court on Friday, Dugan's attorney said that "Judge Dugan wholeheartedly >> regrets and protests her arrest. It was not made in the interest of public >> safety," according to the AP.
In charging documents, investigators said that plainclothes federal agents >> went to Dugan's courtroom on April 18 with the intention of arresting
Flores-Ruiz. A Mexican immigrant, Flores-Ruiz had been removed from the United
States in 2013, but immigration officials learned he was back in the country >> illegally because of his arrest in a local domestic abuse case.
After being informed of the agents' presence by her courtroom deputy, the
judge "became visibly angry, commented that the situation was 'absurd', left >> the bench, and entered chambers," court documents say. Witnesses told
investigators that Dugan confronted the federal agents in a public hallway, >> where she repeatedly demanded they leave, saying they needed a different kind
of warrant to make the arrest. Dugan ordered the agents to speak with the
chief judge of the courthouse.
Several witnesses-- including Dugan's courtroom deputy and both the prosecutor
and the Victim Witness Specialist on Flores-Ruiz’s case-- allegedly recounted
seeing Dugan then direct Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave through a "jury
door", which leads to a non-public area of the courthouse, court documents >> say.
One of the witnesses told investigators that Dugan stopped the two as they >> tried to exit through the normal door to the courtroom, saying something to >> the effect of "Wait, come with me".
Flores-Ruiz and his attorney quickly exited the courthouse before the agents >> were able to catch up to them, investigators say. Agents found Flores-Ruiz >> outside the courthouse and identified themselves. He took off running but was
eventually captured.
CNN has reached out to Flores-Ruiz's attorney for comment. Flores-Ruiz has not
yet entered a plea to federal charges related to his efforts to evade arrest >> and is being detained, according to his court record. This is a separate case
from the charges against Dugan.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an interview on Fox News after the arrest >> was executed that "If you are destroying evidence and you are obstructing
justice, when you have victims of domestic violence sitting in a courtroom and
you are escorting the criminal defendant out the back door, it will not be >> tolerated. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the >> law, and they are not."
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, similarly said in a post on X that "Nobody >> should be surprised by the arrest of two judges." The second judge he is
referring to is former magistrate judge Joel Cano, who is charged with
harboring three alleged illegal alien gang members on his property.
"If you actively impede our enforcement efforts or if you knowingly harbor or
conceal illegal aliens from ICE, you will be prosecuted," Homan said.
If the agents' warrant, and thus their right to be in her courtroom, was >invalid, then what should she have done ...salute?
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:No, it wouldn't.
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:Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Actions always speak louder than words. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law.
...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant. >>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while sheAs he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be. >>>>>>>>>>
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either.
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*. >>>>>>>>
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.
You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes up her
own law.
You make up your own conclusions.
On 5/2/2025 7:22 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:28:27 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:30:29 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
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:
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. >>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your >>>>>>> wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming >>>>>>> to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to show *her*
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest, but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some
family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your
scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody.
So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'.
Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at >>>>> the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you >>>>> away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers... >>>>>
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter.
Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the
judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
So now you ARE saying she issued a ruling?
Make up your mind dude.
She either issued a formal ruling that the warrant was "improper"
OR
She made up her own interpretation without authority and then acted
illegally based on her unauthorized interpretation.
Which is it?
She (is saying) she believed the warrant invalid, not declaring it so.
Thus, she did what YOU would've done. Presumably.
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:01:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:22 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:28:27 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:30:29 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'. >>>>>> Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at >>>>>> the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you >>>>>> away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers... >>>>>>
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
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>*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
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:
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your >>>>>>>> wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming >>>>>>>> to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to show *her*
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest, but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some
family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your
scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody. >>>>>>
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. >>>>> Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the >>>>> judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal.
So now you ARE saying she issued a ruling?
Make up your mind dude.
She either issued a formal ruling that the warrant was "improper"
OR
She made up her own interpretation without authority and then acted
illegally based on her unauthorized interpretation.
Which is it?
She (is saying) she believed the warrant invalid, not declaring it so.
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You
think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant
based solely on her personal opinion of it.
No wonder court rulings are so screwed up these days.
Thus, she did what YOU would've done. Presumably.
Nope. I don't decide what is legal and not legal. That's for
legitimate courts are for.
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
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:Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
disregard law.
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.
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a >>>> ruling?
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant. >>>>
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some.
disregard law.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:01:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:22 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:28:27 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:So now you ARE saying she issued a ruling?
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:30:29 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'. >>>>>>> Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at >>>>>>> the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you >>>>>>> away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers... >>>>>>>
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to >>>>>>>> show *her*
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK >>>>>>>>>>>> and Gandhi both
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:*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. >>>>>>>>>> She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different >>>>>>>>>> than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street >>>>>>>>>> can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork >>>>>>>>>> and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can >>>>>>>>>> be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your
wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming
to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"? >>>>>>>>
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the >>>>>>>> arrest, but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some
family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your
scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody. >>>>>>>
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. >>>>>> Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the >>>>>> judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal. >>>>
Make up your mind dude.
She either issued a formal ruling that the warrant was "improper"
OR
She made up her own interpretation without authority and then acted
illegally based on her unauthorized interpretation.
Which is it?
She (is saying) she believed the warrant invalid, not declaring it so.
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You
think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant
based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of "personal opinion" but as one of fact.
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:01:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:22 AM, NoBody wrote:You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:28:27 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:So now you ARE saying she issued a ruling?
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:30:29 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'. >>>>>>>> Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to >>>>>>>>> show *her*
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK >>>>>>>>>>>>> and Gandhi both
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:*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
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 had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place.
She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different
than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street
can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork
and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can
be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your
wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming
to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"? >>>>>>>>>
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the >>>>>>>>> arrest, but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some
family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your
scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody. >>>>>>>>
the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you
away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers... >>>>>>>>
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. >>>>>>> Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the >>>>>>> judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal. >>>>>
Make up your mind dude.
She either issued a formal ruling that the warrant was "improper"
OR
She made up her own interpretation without authority and then acted >>>>> illegally based on her unauthorized interpretation.
Which is it?
She (is saying) she believed the warrant invalid, not declaring it so. >>>
think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant
based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of
"personal opinion" but as one of fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence than any other random person on the street. This wasn't occurring in her courtroom and was not within her jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the middle of an operation in their neighborhood and demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they showed it to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would make absolutely
no difference and have no relevance to ICE's actions. They'd just say "Okay, buddy, whatever. Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a federal ICE operation. Her status as a state court judge gives her no special authority or jurisdiction to declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow affect
what ICE is doing. They are free to completely ignore her, just as they would that guy I described above and if she takes further action to frustrate or impede their operation, she goes to jail.
On May 3, 2025 at 8:37:09 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a >>>>> ruling?
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant. >>>>>
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some.
disregard law.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
And we all have to pay the consequences when we do so and the order turns out to be legal after all, especially if we took other affirmative actions to frustrate the service of that order on a valid defendant.
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You
think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant >>>> based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of >>> "personal opinion" but as one of fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence than any other random >> person on the street. This wasn't occurring in her courtroom and was not
within her jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the middle of an operation
in their neighborhood and demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they
showed it to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would make
absolutely
no difference and have no relevance to ICE's actions. They'd just say "Okay,
buddy, whatever. Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a federal ICE operation. >> Her status as a state court judge gives her no special authority or
jurisdiction to declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect
what ICE is doing. They are free to completely ignore her, just as they
would
that guy I described above and if she takes further action to frustrate or >> impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no more legal authority than I would to yours. The (hypothetical) fact is that she *believed* the warrant invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would.
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You >>>>> think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant >>>>> based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of >>>> "personal opinion" but as one of fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence than any other random
person on the street. This wasn't occurring in her courtroom and was not >>> within her jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the middle of an operation
in their neighborhood and demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they >>> showed it to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would make
absolutely
no difference and have no relevance to ICE's actions. They'd just say "Okay,
buddy, whatever. Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and >>> interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a federal ICE operation.
Her status as a state court judge gives her no special authority or
jurisdiction to declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow >>> affect
what ICE is doing. They are free to completely ignore her, just as they >>> would
that guy I described above and if she takes further action to frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no more legal
authority than I would to yours. The (hypothetical) fact is that she
*believed* the warrant invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would.
Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I would no more take active measures to interfere in an ICE operation than I would litigate my case
on the side of the road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the validity of warrants
and whether I came to a complete stop or not are matters for a court to decide, not for me to take into my own hands at the scene.
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You >>>>>> think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant
based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of
"personal opinion" but as one of fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence than any other random
person on the street. This wasn't occurring in her courtroom and was not
within her jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the middle of an
operation
in their neighborhood and demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they
showed it to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would make >>>> absolutely
no difference and have no relevance to ICE's actions. They'd just say >>>> "Okay,
buddy, whatever. Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and >>>> interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a federal ICE
operation.
Her status as a state court judge gives her no special authority or >>>> jurisdiction to declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow >>>> affect
what ICE is doing. They are free to completely ignore her, just as they >>>> would
that guy I described above and if she takes further action to frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no more legal
authority than I would to yours. The (hypothetical) fact is that she
*believed* the warrant invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would.
Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I would no more take >> active measures to interfere in an ICE operation than I would litigate my >> case
on the side of the road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the validity of
warrants
and whether I came to a complete stop or not are matters for a court to
decide, not for me to take into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done by a successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in your cooperation.
On May 3, 2025 at 12:17:54 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You >>>>>>> think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant
based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of
"personal opinion" but as one of fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence than any other random
person on the street. This wasn't occurring in her courtroom and was not
within her jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the middle of an >>>>> operation
in their neighborhood and demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they
showed it to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would make >>>>> absolutely
no difference and have no relevance to ICE's actions. They'd just say >>>>> "Okay,
buddy, whatever. Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a federal ICE >>>>> operation.
Her status as a state court judge gives her no special authority or >>>>> jurisdiction to declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect
what ICE is doing. They are free to completely ignore her, just as they
would
that guy I described above and if she takes further action to frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no more legal >>>> authority than I would to yours. The (hypothetical) fact is that she >>>> *believed* the warrant invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would.
Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I would no more take
active measures to interfere in an ICE operation than I would litigate my >>> case
on the side of the road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the validity of
warrants
and whether I came to a complete stop or not are matters for a court to >>> decide, not for me to take into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done by a
successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in your cooperation.
Which is not what we're talking about here. This judge wasn't asked for her cooperation and she wasn't arrested because she refused to give it. She took proactive measures to obstruct and interfere. That's what put her in handcuffs.
On 5/3/2025 3:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 12:17:54 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Which is not what we're talking about here. This judge wasn't asked for her >> cooperation and she wasn't arrested because she refused to give it. She took
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I would no more take
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You
think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant
based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of
"personal opinion" but as one of fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence than any other >>>>>> random
person on the street. This wasn't occurring in her courtroom and was not
within her jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the middle of an >>>>>> operation
in their neighborhood and demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they
showed it to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would make >>>>>> absolutely
no difference and have no relevance to ICE's actions. They'd just say
"Okay,
buddy, whatever. Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a federal ICE >>>>>> operation.
Her status as a state court judge gives her no special authority or >>>>>> jurisdiction to declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect
what ICE is doing. They are free to completely ignore her, just as they
would
that guy I described above and if she takes further action to >>>>>> frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no more legal >>>>> authority than I would to yours. The (hypothetical) fact is that she >>>>> *believed* the warrant invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would. >>>>
active measures to interfere in an ICE operation than I would litigate my
case
on the side of the road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the validity of >>>> warrants
and whether I came to a complete stop or not are matters for a court to >>>> decide, not for me to take into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done by a
successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in your cooperation. >>
proactive measures to obstruct and interfere. That's what put her in
handcuffs.
She sent them out a "side door", which wasn't illegal, per se. Now, you
may contend that her *purpose* was obstructive, but afaics that's not sufficient to convict her.
On May 3, 2025 at 1:16:04 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 3:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 12:17:54 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Which is not what we're talking about here. This judge wasn't asked for her
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I would no more take
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You
think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant
based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of
"personal opinion" but as one of fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence than any other
random
person on the street. This wasn't occurring in her courtroom and was not
within her jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the middle of an
operation
in their neighborhood and demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they
showed it to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would make
absolutely
no difference and have no relevance to ICE's actions. They'd just say
"Okay,
buddy, whatever. Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a federal ICE >>>>>>> operation.
Her status as a state court judge gives her no special authority or
jurisdiction to declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect
what ICE is doing. They are free to completely ignore her, just as they
would
that guy I described above and if she takes further action to >>>>>>> frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no more legal
authority than I would to yours. The (hypothetical) fact is that she >>>>>> *believed* the warrant invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would. >>>>>
active measures to interfere in an ICE operation than I would litigate my
case
on the side of the road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the validity of >>>>> warrants
and whether I came to a complete stop or not are matters for a court to
decide, not for me to take into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done by a
successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in your cooperation. >>>
cooperation and she wasn't arrested because she refused to give it. She took
proactive measures to obstruct and interfere. That's what put her in
handcuffs.
She sent them out a "side door", which wasn't illegal, per se. Now, you
may contend that her *purpose* was obstructive, but afaics that's not
sufficient to convict her.
LOL! Whatever, man. Continue to deny reality.
On May 3, 2025 at 1:16:04 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 3:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 12:17:54 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Which is not what we're talking about here. This judge wasn't asked for her
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I would no more take
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You
think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant
based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of
"personal opinion" but as one of fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence than any other
random
person on the street. This wasn't occurring in her courtroom and was not
within her jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the middle of an
operation
in their neighborhood and demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they
showed it to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would make
absolutely
no difference and have no relevance to ICE's actions. They'd just say
"Okay,
buddy, whatever. Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a federal ICE >>>>>>> operation.
Her status as a state court judge gives her no special authority or
jurisdiction to declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect
what ICE is doing. They are free to completely ignore her, just as they
would
that guy I described above and if she takes further action to >>>>>>> frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no more legal
authority than I would to yours. The (hypothetical) fact is that she >>>>>> *believed* the warrant invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would. >>>>>
active measures to interfere in an ICE operation than I would litigate my
case
on the side of the road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the validity of >>>>> warrants
and whether I came to a complete stop or not are matters for a court to
decide, not for me to take into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done by a
successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in your cooperation. >>>
cooperation and she wasn't arrested because she refused to give it. She took
proactive measures to obstruct and interfere. That's what put her in
handcuffs.
She sent them out a "side door", which wasn't illegal, per se. Now, you
may contend that her *purpose* was obstructive, but afaics that's not
sufficient to convict her.
LOL! Whatever, man. Continue to deny reality.
On May 3, 2025 at 2:10:17 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
As we seem to be letting this drop for a while, I'll just add that what
I especially liked about shawn's video was its explicit mention of what
*I've* thought was always a major aggravating factor beyond all the
wife-beating, border-flouting nonsense ...and that's the territorial
outrage of these ICE fuckers invading her turf. It seems likely to
figure in heavily if her adjudicators identify with it.
Yes, they're 'fuckers' for enforcing the duly enacted and constitutionally tested laws of the United States.
As we seem to be letting this drop for a while, I'll just add that what
I especially liked about shawn's video was its explicit mention of what *I've* thought was always a major aggravating factor beyond all the wife-beating, border-flouting nonsense ...and that's the territorial
outrage of these ICE fuckers invading her turf. It seems likely to
figure in heavily if her adjudicators identify with it.
On 5/3/2025 1:05 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:37:09 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a >>>>>> ruling?
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant. >>>>>>
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some. >>>>>
disregard law.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
And we all have to pay the consequences when we do so and the order turns out
to be legal after all, especially if we took other affirmative actions to
frustrate the service of that order on a valid defendant.
Indeed, that's as may be. But I assume her adjudicators will also take
into account (among many other things) her actual state of mind.
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a >>>> ruling?
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:Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some.
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.
On Sat, 3 May 2025 14:01:42 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:05 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:37:09 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
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. >>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
And we all have to pay the consequences when we do so and the order turns out
to be legal after all, especially if we took other affirmative actions to >>> frustrate the service of that order on a valid defendant.
Indeed, that's as may be. But I assume her adjudicators will also take
into account (among many other things) her actual state of mind.
Laughter.
On 5/3/2025 3:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 12:17:54 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I would no more take
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You
think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant
based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of
"personal opinion" but as one of fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence than any other random
person on the street. This wasn't occurring in her courtroom and was not
within her jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the middle of an >>>>>> operation
in their neighborhood and demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they
showed it to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would make >>>>>> absolutely
no difference and have no relevance to ICE's actions. They'd just say
"Okay,
buddy, whatever. Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a federal ICE >>>>>> operation.
Her status as a state court judge gives her no special authority or >>>>>> jurisdiction to declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect
what ICE is doing. They are free to completely ignore her, just as they
would
that guy I described above and if she takes further action to frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no more legal >>>>> authority than I would to yours. The (hypothetical) fact is that she >>>>> *believed* the warrant invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would. >>>>
active measures to interfere in an ICE operation than I would litigate my
case
on the side of the road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the validity of >>>> warrants
and whether I came to a complete stop or not are matters for a court to >>>> decide, not for me to take into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done by a
successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in your cooperation.
Which is not what we're talking about here. This judge wasn't asked for her >> cooperation and she wasn't arrested because she refused to give it. She took >> proactive measures to obstruct and interfere. That's what put her in
handcuffs.
She sent them out a "side door", which wasn't illegal, per se.
may contend that her *purpose* was obstructive, but afaics that's not >sufficient to convict her. Moreover, there's a broad continuum of ways
you might similarly contend were meant to impede the agents. E.g., she
might have dithered while answering questions, or dropped her gavel...
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You >>>>>> think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant >>>>>> based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of >>>>> "personal opinion" but as one of fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence than any other random
person on the street. This wasn't occurring in her courtroom and was not >>>> within her jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the middle of an operation
in their neighborhood and demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they >>>> showed it to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would make
absolutely
no difference and have no relevance to ICE's actions. They'd just say "Okay,
buddy, whatever. Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and >>>> interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a federal ICE operation.
Her status as a state court judge gives her no special authority or
jurisdiction to declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow >>>> affect
what ICE is doing. They are free to completely ignore her, just as they >>>> would
that guy I described above and if she takes further action to frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no more legal
authority than I would to yours. The (hypothetical) fact is that she
*believed* the warrant invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would.
Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I would no more take >> active measures to interfere in an ICE operation than I would litigate my case
on the side of the road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the validity of warrants
and whether I came to a complete stop or not are matters for a court to
decide, not for me to take into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done by a >successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in your cooperation.
On May 3, 2025 at 2:10:17 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
As we seem to be letting this drop for a while, I'll just add that what
I especially liked about shawn's video was its explicit mention of what
*I've* thought was always a major aggravating factor beyond all the
wife-beating, border-flouting nonsense ...and that's the territorial
outrage of these ICE fuckers invading her turf. It seems likely to
figure in heavily if her adjudicators identify with it.
Yes, they're 'fuckers' for enforcing the duly enacted and constitutionally >tested laws of the United States.
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a >>>>> ruling?
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>Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some.
disregard law.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> 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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the
matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the
bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:01:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:22 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:28:27 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:30:29 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 5:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 2:16:24 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:So, "at some point" would seem to mean 'whenever we feel like it'. >>>>>>> Thus, if some random guys show up claiming to have a warrant ("back at >>>>>>> the station") for your arrest, you'd better simply let them spirit you >>>>>>> away while try to assure yourself they're not actually kidnappers... >>>>>>>
On 4/30/2025 3:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 11:37:37 AM PDT, "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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
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>*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
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:
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She had *no business* checking the warrant in the first place. She has no
jurisdiction over federal immigration law. She's no different than any other
citizen with regard to the ICE arrest. John Doe on the street can't walk up
to
an ongoing ICE operation and start demanding to see paperwork and neither
can
a state court judge. And if either one of them do so, they can be arrested
and
charged with obstruction.
How does that work, then? Can you be having dinner at home with your >>>>>>>>> wife and, when a knock at the door turns out to be a stranger claiming
to have a warrant to take her away, you can't say "Show me"?
You can ask it, but they don't have to show you. They will have to show *her*
and her attorney (and the court) at some point to validate the arrest, but you
don't have any legal standing to demand it.
And this is just a state court judge in the lobby of a courthouse, not some
family member in their own home, so whatever standing the husband in your
scenario may have, it certainly wouldn't apply to Judge Busybody. >>>>>>>
She's a judge. She should know she has no authority in this matter. >>>>>> Ridiculous how you continue to defend an obviously illegal act on the >>>>>> judge's part.
She's saying the warrant was improper, and her act thus not illegal. >>>>>
So now you ARE saying she issued a ruling?
Make up your mind dude.
She either issued a formal ruling that the warrant was "improper"
OR
She made up her own interpretation without authority and then acted
illegally based on her unauthorized interpretation.
Which is it?
She (is saying) she believed the warrant invalid, not declaring it so.
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no difference. You
think that, because she's a judge, she can disregard a legal warrant
based solely on her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid, not as a matter of >"personal opinion" but as one of fact. Nothing to do with her being a
judge, except insofar as that belief was reinforced by her background.
No wonder court rulings are so screwed up these days.
Thus, she did what YOU would've done. Presumably.
Nope. I don't decide what is legal and not legal. That's for
legitimate courts are for.
You cross a street when you believe it's legal. Daily.
On Sat, 3 May 2025 16:16:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 3:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 12:17:54 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no
difference. You think that, because she's a judge,
she can disregard a legal warrant based solely on
her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid,
not as a matter of "personal opinion" but as one of
fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence
than any other random person on the street. This wasn't
occurring in her courtroom and was not within her
jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the
middle of an operation in their neighborhood and
demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they showed it
to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would
make absolutely no difference and have no relevance to
ICE's actions. They'd just say "Okay, buddy, whatever.
Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a
federal ICE operation. Her status as a state court judge
gives her no special authority or jurisdiction to
declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect what ICE is doing. They are free to completely
ignore her, just as they would that guy I described
above and if she takes further action to frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no
more legal authority than I would to yours. The
(hypothetical) fact is that she *believed* the warrant
invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would.
Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I
would no more take active measures to interfere in an ICE
operation than I would litigate my case on the side of the
road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the
validity of warrants and whether I came to a complete stop
or not are matters for a court to decide, not for me to take
into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done
by a successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in
your cooperation.
Which is not what we're talking about here. This judge wasn't
asked for her cooperation and she wasn't arrested because she
refused to give it. She took proactive measures to obstruct and
interfere. That's what put her in handcuffs.
She sent them out a "side door", which wasn't illegal, per se.
Uh yeah it is.
Wow.
Now, you
may contend that her *purpose* was obstructive, but afaics that's
not sufficient to convict her. Moreover, there's a broad
continuum of ways you might similarly contend were meant to impede
the agents. E.g., she might have dithered while answering
questions, or dropped her gavel...
It was 100% illegal.
On 5/4/2025 11:14 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 14:01:42 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:05 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:37:09 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
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. >>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
And we all have to pay the consequences when we do so and the order turns out
to be legal after all, especially if we took other affirmative actions to >>>> frustrate the service of that order on a valid defendant.
Indeed, that's as may be. But I assume her adjudicators will also take
into account (among many other things) her actual state of mind.
Laughter.
Go with your strength...
On 5/4/2025 11:20 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 16:16:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 3:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 12:17:54 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no
difference. You think that, because she's a judge,
she can disregard a legal warrant based solely on
her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid,
not as a matter of "personal opinion" but as one of
fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence
than any other random person on the street. This wasn't
occurring in her courtroom and was not within her
jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the
middle of an operation in their neighborhood and
demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they showed it
to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would
make absolutely no difference and have no relevance to
ICE's actions. They'd just say "Okay, buddy, whatever.
Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a
federal ICE operation. Her status as a state court judge
gives her no special authority or jurisdiction to
declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect what ICE is doing. They are free to completely
ignore her, just as they would that guy I described
above and if she takes further action to frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no
more legal authority than I would to yours. The
(hypothetical) fact is that she *believed* the warrant
invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would.
Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I
would no more take active measures to interfere in an ICE
operation than I would litigate my case on the side of the
road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the
validity of warrants and whether I came to a complete stop
or not are matters for a court to decide, not for me to take
into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done
by a successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in
your cooperation.
Which is not what we're talking about here. This judge wasn't
asked for her cooperation and she wasn't arrested because she
refused to give it. She took proactive measures to obstruct and
interfere. That's what put her in handcuffs.
She sent them out a "side door", which wasn't illegal, per se.
Uh yeah it is.
Uh, there's a *law* that says she can't send someone out that door?
Please show sentience by citing it...
Wow.
Now, you
may contend that her *purpose* was obstructive, but afaics that's
not sufficient to convict her. Moreover, there's a broad
continuum of ways you might similarly contend were meant to impede
the agents. E.g., she might have dithered while answering
questions, or dropped her gavel...
It was 100% illegal.
Uh, there's a *law* that says she can't send someone out that door?
Please show sentience by citing it...
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a >>>>>> ruling?
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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her >>>>>>>>> disobedience would be inadvertent.
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>Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some.
disregard law.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> 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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the
matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the
bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
On Sun, 4 May 2025 13:59:43 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:20 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 16:16:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 3:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 12:17:54 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no
difference. You think that, because she's a judge,
she can disregard a legal warrant based solely on
her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid,
not as a matter of "personal opinion" but as one of
fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence
than any other random person on the street. This wasn't
occurring in her courtroom and was not within her
jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the
middle of an operation in their neighborhood and
demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they showed it
to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would
make absolutely no difference and have no relevance to
ICE's actions. They'd just say "Okay, buddy, whatever.
Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a
federal ICE operation. Her status as a state court judge
gives her no special authority or jurisdiction to
declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect what ICE is doing. They are free to completely
ignore her, just as they would that guy I described
above and if she takes further action to frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no
more legal authority than I would to yours. The
(hypothetical) fact is that she *believed* the warrant
invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would.
Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I
would no more take active measures to interfere in an ICE
operation than I would litigate my case on the side of the
road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the
validity of warrants and whether I came to a complete stop
or not are matters for a court to decide, not for me to take
into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done
by a successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in
your cooperation.
Which is not what we're talking about here. This judge wasn't
asked for her cooperation and she wasn't arrested because she
refused to give it. She took proactive measures to obstruct and
interfere. That's what put her in handcuffs.
She sent them out a "side door", which wasn't illegal, per se.
Uh yeah it is.
Uh, there's a *law* that says she can't send someone out that door?
Please show sentience by citing it...
Tell us what she was arrested for. You already know the answer. Your continuing evasion of reality is humorous at best.
Wow.
Now, you
may contend that her *purpose* was obstructive, but afaics that's
not sufficient to convict her. Moreover, there's a broad
continuum of ways you might similarly contend were meant to impede
the agents. E.g., she might have dithered while answering
questions, or dropped her gavel...
It was 100% illegal.
Uh, there's a *law* that says she can't send someone out that door?
Please show sentience by citing it...> So you're saying her arrest was illegal?
What weird version of reality are you living in?
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:18:48 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:14 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 14:01:42 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:05 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:37:09 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
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. >>>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
And we all have to pay the consequences when we do so and the order turns out
to be legal after all, especially if we took other affirmative actions to >>>>> frustrate the service of that order on a valid defendant.
Indeed, that's as may be. But I assume her adjudicators will also take >>>> into account (among many other things) her actual state of mind.
Laughter.
Go with your strength...
I have. The facts are on my side.
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a >>>>>>> ruling?
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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her >>>>>>>>>> disobedience would be inadvertent.
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>Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some. >>>>>>
disregard law.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> 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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the
matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the
bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
On 5/5/2025 7:32 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 13:59:43 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:20 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 16:16:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 3:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 12:17:54 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no
difference. You think that, because she's a judge,
she can disregard a legal warrant based solely on
her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid,
not as a matter of "personal opinion" but as one of
fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence
than any other random person on the street. This wasn't
occurring in her courtroom and was not within her
jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the
middle of an operation in their neighborhood and
demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they showed it
to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would
make absolutely no difference and have no relevance to
ICE's actions. They'd just say "Okay, buddy, whatever.
Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a
federal ICE operation. Her status as a state court judge
gives her no special authority or jurisdiction to
declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect what ICE is doing. They are free to completely
ignore her, just as they would that guy I described
above and if she takes further action to frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no
more legal authority than I would to yours. The
(hypothetical) fact is that she *believed* the warrant
invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would.
Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I
would no more take active measures to interfere in an ICE
operation than I would litigate my case on the side of the
road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the
validity of warrants and whether I came to a complete stop
or not are matters for a court to decide, not for me to take
into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done
by a successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in
your cooperation.
Which is not what we're talking about here. This judge wasn't
asked for her cooperation and she wasn't arrested because she
refused to give it. She took proactive measures to obstruct and
interfere. That's what put her in handcuffs.
She sent them out a "side door", which wasn't illegal, per se.
Uh yeah it is.
Uh, there's a *law* that says she can't send someone out that door?
Please show sentience by citing it...
Tell us what she was arrested for. You already know the answer. Your
continuing evasion of reality is humorous at best.
Wow.
Now, you
may contend that her *purpose* was obstructive, but afaics that's
not sufficient to convict her. Moreover, there's a broad
continuum of ways you might similarly contend were meant to impede
the agents. E.g., she might have dithered while answering
questions, or dropped her gavel...
It was 100% illegal.
Uh, there's a *law* that says she can't send someone out that door?
Please show sentience by citing it...> So you're saying her arrest was illegal?
No, *I'm* saying that using the side door, per se, is obviously legal.
*You're" saying it isn't ...somehow.
What weird version of reality are you living in?
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a >>>>>>>> ruling?
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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her >>>>>>>>>>> disobedience would be inadvertent.
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:*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
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>Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some. >>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> 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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the
matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the
bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>> disregard law.
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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
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:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> 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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the
bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
You wrote that for yourself dude.
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>>> disregard law.
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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
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:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> 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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the
bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
You wrote that for yourself dude.
I can't make sense of that.
On Tue, 6 May 2025 11:43:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>>>> disregard law.
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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
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:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
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:...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
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, 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> 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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
You wrote that for yourself dude.
I can't make sense of that.
Of course you can't. You don't want to.
On 5/8/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2025 11:43:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>>>>> disregard law.
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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
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:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
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:...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
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, 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> 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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
No, especially as it's that easy, *you* back up your claim. And
remember to Keep it short and exact.
You wrote that for yourself dude.
I can't make sense of that.
Of course you can't. You don't want to.
No, Kreskin. If I didn't "want to", I'd have ignored it...
On Thu, 8 May 2025 12:02:30 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/8/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2025 11:43:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
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:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>>>>>> disregard law.
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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
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:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
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:...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
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, 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> 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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>>>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions. >>>>>>>>
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
No, especially as it's that easy, *you* back up your claim. And
remember to Keep it short and exact.
You're so cute when you stomp your feet.
Laughter.
Let's try a simple question: do you believe any judge has a LEGAL
right to ignore a warrant and help an illegal to escape custody?
On 5/9/2025 7:42 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Thu, 8 May 2025 12:02:30 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/8/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2025 11:43:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>>>>>>> disregard law.
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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
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:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
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:...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
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, 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>>>>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions. >>>>>>>>>
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
No, especially as it's that easy, *you* back up your claim. And
remember to Keep it short and exact.
You're so cute when you stomp your feet.
Laughter.
Let's try a simple question: do you believe any judge has a LEGAL
right to ignore a warrant and help an illegal to escape custody?
Still waiting to hear what I was "wrong" about.
Remember, short and exact...
On Fri, 9 May 2025 11:40:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/9/2025 7:42 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Thu, 8 May 2025 12:02:30 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/8/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2025 11:43:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
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:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
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:...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
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, 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the
matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions. >>>>>>>>>>
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
No, especially as it's that easy, *you* back up your claim. And
remember to Keep it short and exact.
You're so cute when you stomp your feet.
Laughter.
Let's try a simple question: do you believe any judge has a LEGAL
right to ignore a warrant and help an illegal to escape custody?
Still waiting to hear what I was "wrong" about.
Remember, short and exact...
Can't answer a short and exact question I see. It goes directly to
what you are wrong about.
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2025 7:42 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/8/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
"moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
"moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "moviePig" nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion toBut if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, herWell, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
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.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the
matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions. >>>>>>>>>>
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
No, especially as it's that easy, *you* back up your claim. And
remember to Keep it short and exact.
You're so cute when you stomp your feet.
Laughter.
Let's try a simple question: do you believe any judge has a LEGAL
right to ignore a warrant and help an illegal to escape custody?
Still waiting to hear what I was "wrong" about.
Remember, short and exact...
Can't answer a short and exact question I see. It goes directly to
what you are wrong about.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 19:48:27 |
| Calls: | 10,390 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,964 |