I knew this shit stain was familiar.
Milwaukee prosecutors are conducting an internal review into their own office’s decision to make an “inappropriately low” bail recommendation for Darrell Brooks Jr., the person of interest in nearby Waukesha after an SUV plowed through a Christmas parade.
……Brooks has multiple pending cases in Milwaukee County – including a 2020 case involving two counts of second-degree recklessly endangering and being a felon in possession of a firearm, according to a spokesperson for Milwaukee District Attorney John Chisholm. Bail was originally set at $10,000 and later reduced to $7,500, the district attorney’s office said.
Between 2010 and 2012, John Chisholm, a Democrat from the office of the Milwaukee district attorney, turned an investigation of embezzlement into a full blown blitzkrieg involving home invasions against American citizens guilty of nothing more than exercising their First Amendment rights to support Act 10 and other conservative causes in Wisconsin.
This is what they did:
Cindy Archer, one of the lead architects of Wisconsin’s Act 10 — also called the “Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill,” it limited public-employee benefits and altered collective-bargaining rules for public-employee unions — was jolted awake by yelling, loud pounding at the door, and her dogs’ frantic barking. The entire house — the windows and walls — was shaking.
She looked outside to see up to a dozen police officers, yelling to open the door. They were carrying a battering ram. She wasn’t dressed, but she started to run toward the door, her body in full view of the police. Some yelled at her to grab some clothes, others yelled for her to open the door. “I was so afraid,” she says. “I did not know what to do.” She grabbed some clothes, opened the door, and dressed right in front of the police. The dogs were still frantic.
“I begged and begged, ‘Please don’t shoot my dogs, please don’t shoot my dogs, just don’t shoot my dogs.’ I couldn’t get them to stop barking, and I couldn’t get them outside quick enough. I saw a gun and barking dogs. I was scared and knew this was a bad mix.” She got the dogs safely out of the house, just as multiple armed agents rushed inside. Some even barged into the bathroom, where her partner was in the shower. The officer or agent in charge demanded that Cindy sit on the couch, but she wanted to get up and get a cup of coffee. “I told him this was my house and I could do what I wanted.” Wrong thing to say. “This made the agent in charge furious. He towered over me with his finger in my face and yelled like a drill sergeant that I either do it his way or he would handcuff me.” They wouldn’t let her speak to a lawyer. She looked outside and saw a person who appeared to be a reporter. Someone had tipped him off. The neighbors started to come outside, curious at the commotion, and all the while the police searched her house, making a mess, and — according to Cindy — leaving her “dead mother’s belongings strewn across the basement floor in a most disrespectful way.”
Then they left, carrying with them only a cellphone and a laptop.
Walker’s supporters led by Eric O’Keefe and the Wisconsin Club for Growth, took a lawsuit against Chisholm and his gang of thugs all the way to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The decision did not go well for Chisholm.
……Having reached our conclusion about the scope of conduct regulated by Chapter 11, we now turn to the special prosecutor’s theories of coordination and whether the alleged conduct is regulated under Wisconsin law. The special prosecutor has disregarded the vital principle that in our nation and our state political speech is a fundamental right and is afforded the highest level of protection. The special prosecutor’s theories, rather than “assur[ing] [the] unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people,” Roth, 354 U.S. at 484, instead would assure that such political speech will be investigated with paramilitary-style home invasions conducted in the pre-dawn hours and then prosecuted and punished. In short, the special prosecutor completely ignores the command that, when seeking to regulate issue advocacy groups, such regulation must be done with “narrow specificity.” Barland II, 751 F.3d at 811 (quotations omitted).
¶69 The limiting construction that we apply makes clear that the special prosecutor’s theories are unsupportable in law given that the theories rely on overbroad and vague statutes. By limiting the definition of “political purposes” to express advocacy and its functional equivalent, political speech continues to be protected as a fundamental First Amendment right.
¶133 Our lengthy discussion of these three cases can be distilled into a few simple, but important, points. It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing. In other words, the special prosecutor was the instigator of a “perfect storm” of wrongs that was visited upon the innocent Unnamed Movants and those who dared to associate with them. It is fortunate, indeed, for every other citizen of this great State who is interested in the protection of fundamental liberties that the special prosecutor chose as his targets innocent citizens who had both the will and the means to fight the unlimited resources of an unjust prosecution. Further, these brave individuals played a crucial role in presenting this court with an opportunity to re-endorse its commitment to upholding the fundamental right of each and every citizen to engage in lawful political activity and to do so free from the fear of the tyrannical retribution of arbitrary or capricious governmental prosecution. Let one point be clear: our conclusion today ends this unconstitutional John Doe investigation.
This is Chisholm’s attitude toward “bail reform”:
“Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into a treatment program, who is going to go out and kill somebody?” “You bet. Guaranteed. It’s guaranteed to happen. It does not invalidate the overall approach.”
Oh, and surprise: Chisholm has ties to George Soros.
What happened in Wisconsin is similar to Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. A cabal of Dem storm troopers literally trampled the Constitutional rights of citizens and broke the law in the process. Wisconsin is a veritable cesspool of union thugs and Proglodytes hellbent on squashing anyone who stands in the way of their corruption. Chisholm and his cronies should have been charged with abuse of office and unlawful intimidation and frog marched off to jail.