Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Wisconsin Democrats take the next step (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: Wisconsin Democrats take the next step
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Inspired by the Obama administration and its use of the IRS, Wisconsin democrats have figured out the next steps:
quote:
As Wisconsin Reporter first revealed, the investigation, launched in early 2012 by the Democrat-led Milwaukee County District Attorney’s office, aims to prove conservatives illegally coordinated activities in the historic recalls of Gov. Scott Walker and Republican state senators, multiple sources say.

One source with knowledge of the investigation has told Wisconsin Reporter the ultimate goal is to bring down Walker, the bane of Wisconsin liberals.

Contrast that with:
quote:
What is striking is that no liberal organizations appear to be targeted in the John Doe, particularly interesting in light of the tens of millions of dollars pumped into Wisconsin’s unprecedented spate of recalls in 2011 and 2012 by union and left-leaning groups.
So we've got a Democrat led DA looking at illegal coordination but ignoring Democrat activities that ran into the millions of dollars. Not a single liberal organization is being targeted by this investigation, it breaks down directly along political lines.

This is not the first time they went after Walker like this:
quote:
It appears the latest John Doe, billed as John Doe II or the “son of John Doe,” is at least in part connected to a previous secret investigation led by the Milwaukee County DA’s office. That John Doe probe spanned nearly three years, beginning in May 2010.

John Doe I was a meandering, court-administered dragnet that ended in the convictions of six people who were former aides or associates of Walker when he was Milwaukee County executive. The investigation closed without any charges of wrongdoing against Walker, and critics say prosecutors got little for the untold taxpayer money spent on pursuing the probe.

“It was all something other than what (prosecutors) were originally looking for, and it wasn’t very much for three years of looking,” a legal source connected to the current John Doe told Wisconsin Reporter.

They drug out everything and anything they could, threw it at the wall to see what stuck and essentially got nothing. Must be time to do it again!

quote:
The campaign was peppered with leaked information about the John Doe. Much of the information was wrong, including reports that Walker was due to be indicted for one reason or another at any moment. Liberal issue ads focused on the John Doe as if the secret investigation alone were an indictment of the governor.
Leaks from the investigation, issue ads focused on the investigation, no worries about illegally coordinated activities there! Can't be right? Not worth a single investigation.

It gets better:
quote:
“What’s even worse about this is the secrecy imposed by state law,” von Spakovsky told Wisconsin Reporter. “Political speech is one of the most fundamental things protected by the First Amendment. No kind of investigation like this should be secret. Any organization that receives a subpoena like this ought to be able to make it public and go to court.”

But speaking out could land a witness or a target in jail.

Wisconsin’s John Doe law comes with secrecy oaths, and violators risk contempt of court charges.

That's right kids, speak out and you go to the hoosegow. Let's make it better ... a out of control DA:
quote:
Multiple sources have told Wisconsin Reporter that Bruce Landgraf, a top prosecutor in the office of John Chisholm, Milwaukee County’s Democrat district attorney, has shown
himself ready to bully and even flout the law in pursuit of political targets.

In John Doe I, the prosecution and the presiding judge put two men in jail for refusing to be strong-armed into testifying.

“Except for the fact that he’s willing to break the law, (Landgraf is) something of an Inspector Javert,” said a source, referring to the ruthless policeman in Les Miserables.

What's a little law here and there? There's more important things going on! One of my favorite excuses for this, popularized on this forum recently, "what else are they supposed to do?" Seriously, you can hunt it up here.

How bad is it? This bad:
quote:
Landgraf is being sued by Rice Lake Harley-Davidson dealer Christopher Brekken, who alleges false imprisonment and abuse of process following a run-in with Landgraf in the fall of 2010, during the first John Doe.

The judge in that investigation issued a subpoena on the prosecution’s request and later ordered Brekken arrested and jailed because he would not turn over the credit card information of a man eventually convicted in the probe.

Ironically, submitting to the DA’s demand for credit card information from his motorcycle dealership would have exposed Brekken to prosecution under a separate Wisconsin law that prohibits retailers from revealing confidential credit card information.

The DA wanted this guy to break the law and when he refused, they put him in jail. Had he complied with the DA request and broken the law, I'm guessing he would have faced legal action there too. Nice.
quote:
Then there was the case of Andrew P. Jensen, the commercial real estate broker locked up for refusing to cooperate with the first Doe. Jensen was quietly exonerated several months later.

Landgraf, because of the secrecy order, has declined to comment on the John Doe investigations. So have the other prosecutors and the judges involved.

Landgraf did comment on the Rice Lake retailer and his lawsuit, telling Wisconsin Reporter Brekken got what was coming to him and that the investigation ultimately got its man.

“What difference does it make?” Landgraf shrugged. “We ultimately got the information and the details we needed.”

Yes, what difference does it make? Seriously, anybody buy that? Altogether now, "what else are they supposed to do?" Apparently, they are supposed to conduct secret investigation, jail innocent people and intimidate people ... well, only conservative people.

There's a word for using the apparatus of the state against your political enemies and it starts with an 'F'. Welcome to the new world order citizens.

Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Anyone who thinks that Wisconsin Democrats are in a position to use the "apparatus of the state" against Scott Walker, please line up behind G3. Your dunce caps have been ordered and will be delivered shortly. [Smile]

And, of course, if you believe that the first investigation "found nothing," or are unaware that Walker's people have repeatedly, across several elections, been found guilty of wrongdoing here, and that the Wisconsin GOP in general is so well-known for this that they've taken to arguing against the statute itself instead of pretending that they don't routinely break it, then you should probably do some reading from someone who isn't quite as partisan as our favorite little G.

People complain about the "Chicago Machine," but that ain't got a patch on the Wisconsin GOP for sheer chutzpah.

[ December 13, 2013, 01:15 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
In other words, you can't refute the points made so you have to make it about me. Logical fallacies, you gots them.
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*sigh* No, I can refute them. But you didn't bother to do any research on this one, and can post lies and misinformation faster than I can point people to the relevant articles. In this particular article, someone has a hard-on for Bruce Landgraf, a single prosecutor in the Milwaukee DA's office, and is using Landgraf's behavior to argue that there's some statewide, purely partisan witchhunt against Walker -- instead of legitimate, well-founded questions about the way Walker has funded and organized (and continues to fund and organize) his campaigns (and award positions to donors, flunkies, and relatives; his nepotism is becoming legendary.) Note that even "top" prosecutors working for the Milwaukee DA are not exactly high-ranking state officials, or ranking party apparatchiks. Note, too, that there are plenty of DA offices controlled by Republicans that have, on their own, completely failed to come up with grounds for investigation against Wisconsin Democrats; it's not like there aren't a bunch of cities and counties in Wisconsin that are running their own Republican-led "witch hunts." It's just that the Democrats in Wisconsin are a little more ethical, and thus the "hunts" don't manage to actually dredge up much. (IIRC, Republicans spent $1.2m investigating recall fraud, and were able to produce two non-criminal cases -- neither of which were operated by organized labor or Wisconsin Democratic leaders.)

But anyway, feel free to flap around trying to build up some FUD around Walker. Dude's going to run for president someday, and God knows he'll need your help.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Also: Wisconsinites have been investigating Walker (and GOP campaign wrongdoing in general) for long, long before the IRS started investigating Tea Party groups. [Smile] I know you didn't actually intend for your statement to be, y'know, factual, but you probably didn't mean for it to be ridiculous.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So you can refute them but you won't. You'd rather just continue to focus it all on me. I understand. I think everyone does.
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
G3, it's not all about you. [Smile] It's about your partisan sources and their biases.
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I certainly hope they do, and moreover understand why.

Note, by the way, that I haven't focused anything on you. I have just pointed out that you're wrong. Your particulars are wrong. Your speculations are ridiculous. And your facts -- where they are actual facts -- are removed from context and do not imply what you would have them imply. These are criticisms of you, yes, because you do this all the time. But they are more specifically substantive criticisms of the actual story you've cut and pasted here. If you'd like evidence that, for example, Democrats were investigating Walker before the IRS started investigating the Tea Party, you can look it up. I have faith in your ability to find things on the Internet.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Also: please, please, please stop using the phrase "logical fallacy" when you still don't know what it means. It really doesn't make you look clever.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The thinking goes more like: If A and B, then C. The wrinkle is that C implies A and if A, why not B? Ergo, C! Hence logical, fallacy.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Also: please, please, please stop using the phrase "logical fallacy" when you still don't know what it means. It really doesn't make you look clever.

Or at least mix it up with a QED every now and then.
Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Agreed. QEDs are real classy. [Smile]
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Also: please, please, please stop using the phrase "logical fallacy" when you still don't know what it means. It really doesn't make you look clever.

I'm not trying to look clever. I am merely exposing the logical fallacy so many here engage in so routinely. I know it frustrates you and I'm sorry about that but if you want me to stop pointing it out then you must stop doing it ... assuming you can. It may be so ingrained you no longer have the ability to think in any other manner. I hope you can, for once, prove me wrong here but I won't hold my breath.

You may want to start by noticing that you address me directly in every one of your posts. What you're doing is a subdivision of the ad hominem logical fallacy known as shooting the messenger.

Quod erat faciendum (look it up)

Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Except he's not attacking your arguments by attacking you, which could be fallacious; he's attacking you by attacking your arguments, which is rude and uncharitable.

i.e. His argument isn't "G3 meets the requirements for a dunce cap, therefore G3 is wrong;" it's "believing the same thing as G3 is evidence of meeting the requirements for a dunce cap." Note the difference. Both cases involve G3 in a pointy hat, but the path is different.

Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*facepalm* No, I'm not shooting the messenger. If you'll read carefully over what I wrote, you'll notice that at no point did I suggest that your incorrect statements and foolish conclusions were incorrect or foolish because you said them.

"You continue to say stupid things" -- or even "you are stupid because you constantly say stupid things" -- is not the same argument as "the things you say are stupid because you're stupid." The latter is an ad hominem of sorts; the two former examples are not.

[ December 13, 2013, 05:04 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hey, if that's all you got, go with it. If you can't talk to the points made, it's all cool. My advice, stop talking about it if you can't do anything other than what you've been doing. That ain't working for you.
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
G3, I think that was all Tom was asking - talk to the points instead of saying "logical fallacy" so reflexively because, as demonstrated, you don't have a firm grasp on the concept (or are intentionally abusing it).
Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mynnion
Member
Member # 5287

 - posted      Profile for Mynnion   Email Mynnion   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Tom-With G(s) history I wonder if this tread was not posted specifically for you [Eek!]
Posts: 1271 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Every G3 thread is intended to provoke.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't think it was aimed directly at me. Walker and Ryan are both desperately trying to salvage their reputations in advance of presidential runs, and so they're throwing a lot of narratives into the conservative blogosphere in hopes that one of them will stick and rehabilitate them a bit. They're both playing the "we're willing to work with people across the aisle" card at the moment, too, which is more than a little hilarious to voters who've known them for a while.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mynnion:
Tom-With G(s) history I wonder if this tread was not posted specifically for you [Eek!]

If it happens in Wisconsin it must be intended to provoke Tom? Riiiiight.

Wisconsin democrats are conducting secret investigations, intimidating people to try to break laws, putting them in jail when they refuse, and it targets only conservatives. I am not surprised at the support this receives here more am I surprised at the tactic used to avoid talking about it. History is full of people who refused to acknowledge what was happening, it's no different here.

Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
History is also full of people who who make up paranoid fantasies
Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mynnion
Member
Member # 5287

 - posted      Profile for Mynnion   Email Mynnion   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
G3-
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Mynnion:
Tom-With G(s) history I wonder if this tread was not posted specifically for you [Eek!]
If it happens in Wisconsin it must be intended to provoke Tom? Riiiiight.

You know you enjoy in provocative posts. Considering that Walker and his ilk in Madison have been guilty of much worse and you hadn't called them on it I figured you were just hoping to get a rise out of Tom.
Posts: 1271 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Wisconsin democrats are conducting secret investigations, intimidating people to try to break laws, putting them in jail when they refuse, and it targets only conservatives.
I just want to point out that every single clause in this sentence is at best a distortion of the truth.

1) "Wisconsin democrats" in this case is one guy in Milwaukee.
2) There are no "secret" investigations being carried out.
3) No one was being intimidated to break a law; rather, they claim they were being intimidated into complying with a request that, had they complied, might have led to accusations that they had broken another law. Note that the request was in fact a subpoena, and the law against revealing credit card information does not generally apply to scenarios in which that information has been subpoenaed.
4) The people who have been arrested in this latest investigation were arrested for, variously, contempt of court, refusal to comply with a subpoena, and refusal to appear before the court.
5) Not every current investigation (or every investigation over the last six years) into misuse of public resources during political campaigns is in fact targeted against conservatives. The only ones to actually find any wrongdoing, however, have all been. Either this is because Republicans are actually committing wrongdoing and Democrats are not, or Democrats -- despite being a tiny minority in state government -- are much better at it.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Thankfully, upon learning of these heinous crimes, our Legislators sprang to action. Representative Jim Steineke, (R-Kaukauna) writes, “now that we fully understand the abhorrent ways that Wisconsin’s John Doe statues have been blatantly abused by a few politically motivated prosecutors, there’s no time to waste in doing our job to correct this wrong. Unlike some might lead you to believe, our job as legislators isn’t to make it easier for prosecutors to investigate people in secret, it’s to protect the rights of its citizens against these few abusive prosecutors.”

Assembly Bill 68, drafted by Representative Dave Craig, serves to correct the ability for blood thirsty prosecutors to wield the John Doe law as a sword to cut down their enemies and strengthens citizens’ constitutional protections while increasing transparency. This should be encouraged by every politician, regardless of party affiliation, if it were a non-partisian issue, that is.

Even Steineke was left stunned after the votes were tallied: “As much as I hate to admit it, every member of the Democrat party in the WI Assembly voted against these reforms that would protect their constituencies from unwarranted searches and abuse from their government.”

Every single democrat supported the raids. If you haven't seen what happened there, you should take a look at it.
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let's count. How many times does Tom quote specific facts and sources in his argument?

How many times does he employ the emperor's new clothes fallacy? If-you-don't-believe-me-you-are-a-since, etc?

It takes some effort to make G3 sound like the reasonable one. Is he right? I have no idea. But I certainly know nothing more about the topic than before reading Tom's rebuthole.


quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Anyone who thinks that Wisconsin Democrats are in a position to use the "apparatus of the state" against Scott Walker, please line up behind G3. Your dunce caps have been ordered and will be delivered shortly. [Smile]

And, of course, if you believe that the first investigation "found nothing," or are unaware that Walker's people have repeatedly, across several elections, been found guilty of wrongdoing here, and that the Wisconsin GOP in general is so well-known for this that they've taken to arguing against the statute itself instead of pretending that they don't routinely break it, then you should probably do some reading from someone who isn't quite as partisan as our favorite little G.

People complain about the "Chicago Machine," but that ain't got a patch on the Wisconsin GOP for sheer chutzpah.


Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow. You resurrected this thread just to be an ******* proud of his ignorance? Dude, if you're going to not know anything about something two years old, either keep quiet or learn something.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
...Tom's rebuthole.

[LOL] Google Cindy Archer. It will shock you the extent to which the Democrats in Wisoconsi will go and you'll have a hard time believing this actually happens in America - it sounds more like the worst of a totalitarian state. Secret investigations, pre dawn home invasions, threats about talking, terrorizing children. It's some awful stuff and it was 100% political retribution.

[ October 25, 2015, 09:32 AM: Message edited by: Rafi ]

Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I know Cindy Archer personally. She's a lying asshat, and absolutely none of what she describes actually happened to her. As you'd know if you'd bothered to do any research beyond, say, the Blaze. The "pre-dawn invasion" you're talking about was a computer confiscation; ask anyone who's ever been doxxed how those go.

She's welcome to whine about the fact that she got caught doing illegal crap, but I'm personally of the opinion that having the friggin' state Supreme Court reinterpret law just so you personally don't go to jail is probably ample compensation for her very limited trouble.

[ October 25, 2015, 10:34 AM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You know Archer .... Right. Are you personal friends with all the others targeted by these raids? Are they all lying, it's a conspiracy? I'm looking at multiple newspapers, media outlets and press releases. You're relying on personal attacks and, let's call it embellishment. They ransacked people's homes in predawn raids, threatened them if they talked, terrorized children. How anyone is okay with that is shocking and explains a lot about the way guys like Stalin and Pol Pot got away with what they did.
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I never said Archer was my friend. In fact, I called her a lying asshat.

quote:
I'm looking at multiple newspapers, media outlets and press releases. You're relying on personal attacks and, let's call it embellishment.
Nope. I am telling you to actually check sources. Look at the details on the "terrorized children" claim, just for an example.

I have no time or patience to waste with your typical disingenuous, dishonest bullcrap when it actually matters, G#. I know you're not interested in honest dialogue here, and I don't have the energy to tell the Peanut Gallery everything they might possibly need to know to understand how full of crap you and your "sources" are. So I'm happy just telling the Peanut Gallery that you're full of crap and letting them Google their own info, where they'll quickly realize that your information is coming from notorious sources of s**t.

Let me just point out that it is bulls**t like this that was used to "justify" and ram through a three-pronged attack on honest government here in Wisconsin that was passed after midnight, without debate, on purely partisan lines. In fact, it's not even bull LIKE this; it is PRECISELY THIS BULL that was used.

So, yeah, I'm angry at these pieces of crap. But neither do I believe for a moment that the truth matters, or that any of the ******** out there ranting about this give a s**t about the truth.

[ October 25, 2015, 12:32 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I never said she was your friend either but you said you know her. Do you know her or not? How about the other victims involved, you know them? And when you say "know", what's does that mean? You read their name on a website or what?

Reducing 15 year old girls to tears and threatening them if they talk, that happened. I call that terrorizing children.

Court affidavits are also part of my sources. Those "full of crap" too? Look, you can call people names, go on mouth foaming rants and behave the ass all you want but the facts are out there and easily available.

Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rafi:

Reducing 15 year old girls to tears and threatening them if they talk, that happened. I call that terrorizing children.

But arresting 14 year-old boys is just caution.
Posts: 2635 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Do you know her or not?
Yes, I know her. I also know one other person who was targeted by the investigation.

quote:
Reducing 15 year old girls to tears and threatening them if they talk, that happened. I call that terrorizing children.
*laugh* You may want to look into the details a bit more. If we're going to call it "terrorism" when we raid someone's house and their child cries as a consequence, I really need to introduce you to reality. (While we're at it, consider what "threatening" constitutes, here, given the legal requirements of the search.) It's also worth noting that almost all of the "unreasonable" things Archer complained happened to her during the raid were retracted -- by her -- once they were contradicted by recordings.

Regarding "affadavits:" the Wisconsin Supreme Court is not to be trusted in this matter, by the way. Literally a third of the court should have recused itself from this case.

[ October 26, 2015, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
quote:
Originally posted by Rafi:

Reducing 15 year old girls to tears and threatening them if they talk, that happened. I call that terrorizing children.

But arresting 14 year-old boys is just caution.
The 14 year old boy had a suspicious device in his possession. The girl was sleeping in her bed and not suspected of anything. Do you truly think there is an equivalence there? [Roll Eyes]
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Supreme Court cannot be trusted to be honest. You're just a hair away from spouting about jet contrails and lizard men ruling humanity, you know that right?
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You realize that I'm talking about a court that recently saw its newest member choke another member, but was so incredibly partisan that it couldn't decide how to punish him? The Wisconsin Supremes are a total embarrassment, to the point that I'm not surprised that out-of-staters find it hard to believe how bad they are.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I used to be able to distinguish TomD's posts from G3 without looking at the name on the left ... Is the merger of their styles an effect of subversion-containment?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh dear. Is Tom tossing around homophobic epithet again? I thought we cured him of that. Tom, I don't know what context you met Archer in that he would know she practices cranial fishing, but that's hardly relevant to her political performance. Please stop reducing female leaders to crass sexual terms ...That's so 20th Century.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What homophobic epithet? Do you, the king of vulgar sexual comments on this thread, consider "asshat" to be a sexual term?
Posts: 2635 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1