“This is not normal.” Those words from Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., are undeniably true after the arrest of Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan. However, the reason it is not normal is far more debatable. Dugan is accused of becoming a lawbreaker in seeking to obstruct an effort to arrest a man wanted by federal authorities. If true, that is manifestly not “normal.”
As soon as the news of the arrest was reported, Democrats declared another constitutional crisis. Klobuchar added that the arrest “is a drastic move threatening the rule of law” and a “grave step and undermines our system of checks and balances.”
That is a curious claim unless Klobuchar believes that the officers are lying. If not, Klobuchar is suggesting that a judge should be allowed (or at least not held accountable) in actively shielding a wanted person and facilitating his evasion of law enforcement.
Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn., also condemned Dugan’s arrest, stating, “If [FBI Director] Kash Patel and Donald Trump don’t like a judge, they think they can arrest them. This is stunning — we must stand up to this blatant power grab. Republicans: How is this not a red line for you?”
Yet, what is the “red line” for judges if the allegations are true? This judge is accused of conduct that has resulted in charges for other citizens. The judicial robe is not some form of invisibility cloak that allows judges to engage in alleged criminal acts.
The Wisconsin media is reporting:
Sources have told the Journal Sentinel that ICE officials arrived in Dugan’s courtroom on the morning of April 18. When they went to the chief judge’s office, Dugan directed the defendant and his attorney to a side door in the courtroom, directed them down a private hallway and into the public area on the 6th floor.
If true, that would be an active effort to help the suspect elude police who were carrying out a lawful function.
According to the criminal complaint, Flores-Ruiz allegedly attacked three individuals after an altercation with his roommate about playing loud music. Flores-Ruiz allegedly struck his roommate approximately 30 times with a closed fist and then attacked his girlfriend and a third person. Some of the injuries required hospital treatment.
The evasion of police at the courthouse required officers to chase down Ruiz, which could have resulted in a more serious confrontation on the street.
This is not the first time that a judge has been accused of participating in or directing such obstruction.
I previously wrote about the case of Massachusetts judge Shelley M. Richmond Joseph who was charged with allegedly helping an illegal immigrant evade ICE agents in April 2018. Joseph and court officer Wesley MacGregor were charged with conspiracy to obstruct justice, obstruction of justice, aiding and abetting and obstruction of a federal proceeding.
I was critical of the handling of the case. While Joseph was suspended for three years, charges were dropped in 2022 during the Biden Administration.
The Dugan case occurred at the same time that a New Mexico judge was arrested for harboring an unlawful immigrant and an alleged TdA gang member.
Former Doña Ana County Magistrate Judge Joel Cano and his wife were arrested on Thursday. Notably, Cano reportedly admitted to officers that he smashed the phone of Cristhian Ortega-Lopez after the 23-year-old was arrested in a raid at the judge’s home.
As I said on Fox last night, I am perplexed by Democrats rushing to denounce the arrest of Dugan before we know whether these allegations are supported. If she escorted the suspect to a non-public door to facilitate his escape, that is conduct and would constitute a shocking abandonment of judicial ethics. She can certainly use her authority to address matters properly before her in the form of judicial orders, but actively assisting in an escape is well beyond the pale.
I have often criticized the reckless rhetoric directed against judges, including those who have ruled against the Trump Administration. We need to maintain our civility and respect as we work through these often difficult questions.
However, that works both ways. Judges have to reinforce respect for the judiciary in their own conduct. That includes showing restraint and respect in relation to the countervailing powers of the Executive Branch. It certainly includes avoiding actions that could be viewed as criminal or unethical in resisting this Administration.
That is also a “red line.”
Jonathan Turley is the author of best-selling book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Couldn’t help but wonder if you will ever release a post or write an article about the President’s Power Grab–but that’s expecting too much so that he may keep you in mind for a seat on the Supreme Court.
“Power grab” by President Trump? I hate to break it to you but being POTUS is a VERY powerful position (whether you agree with him or not). He is the only person elected by the people to the executive branch.
I am losing all faith that this country is salvageable
The Democrats had better hope this turns out to be false. If they are wrong, they leave themselves open to attack about both harboring illegals and now breaking the law. Regardless of where any judge stands on any given issue or law, they are required to uphold the law and not become law breakers themselves. If this judge actually did this very thing she is accused, she needs to go.
While I am not a lawyer, don’t lawyers have a oath of office statement they make when joining the bar in Wisconsin? When a lawyer becomes a judge in Wisconsin don’t they take an oath of office to support the legal system? Seems to me this judge not only has criminal problems, but also ethical ones.
..in case anyone missed it, Pam Bondi in her own words described the scenario re: the WI Judge’s blatant disregard of The Law on record: (synopsis) ..how, after screaming at the ICE agents out in the hallway & telling them to go talk to the Chief Judge, came back into the Courtroom, asked the defendant & defense Atty. to come to her Chambers, took them to a private exit door & told them to exit the building, leaving the State Prosecution & victims of the charged crimes still sitting in Court. The defendent had been deported in 2013 (under Obama), came back iinto the USA, illegally of course, and committed the ‘alleged’ crimes for which he was standing trial. It’s amazing that these radical folks bemoaning this arrest act like Biden et al ‘are’ still President.. and Trump, trying to enforce US Laws already on record, is some kind of political interloper…
You people don’t understand what is going on here.
This is nothing more than political theater to keep the MAGA mob agitated.
Bondi knows that this case is going nowhere.
In all probability the case will never even get to the merits.
Comments by Patel and Bondi on Fox and social media are egregious violations of DOJ regulations regarding discussing the facts before trial. This is a gross violation of Dugan’s constitutional rights, and the charges will almost certainly be dismissed on that basis.
Trump tried this exact same stunt in 2019 with a judge in Massachusetts.
They eventually had to drop the charges.
They charged Judge Dugan using a Criminal Complaint, rather than take it to a Grand Jury. In cases like this it is unheard of to bypass a Grand Jury. They know a Grand Jury would never indict on this set of facts.
Even if the case gets to the merits, the DOJ is on very thin ice and they know it.
The ICE agents had an Administrative Warrant NOT a Judicial Warrant.
There is no obligation for anyone to cooperate with an administrative warrant. This includes judges.
An administrative warrant, unlike a judicial warrant, does not carry the same authority and does not require compliance. It’s an internal document issued by a federal agency, such as ICE, and does not compel cooperation by anyone under the Constitution. There are obvious separation of powers issues if a judge is obligated to cooperate or comply with an administrative warrant issued by the Executive branch.
The Criminal Complaint notes that the judge asked if the ICE agents had a warrant. They showed her the administrative warrant. She responded, “you need a judicial warrant”. At that point she knew that she was no longer obligated to interact with the agents in any way. She simply said, “go talk to the Chief Judge”.
The Complaint claims that the judge obstructed justice by allowing the defendant to exit using a different door. She is perfectly entitled to run her court as she sees fit. She knew that she was on solid legal grounds for this action.
This act cannot be construed as an obstruction of justice because the ICE agents did not have a judicial warrant. There was no judicial action that could be obstructed. The activity of the ICE agents pursuant to the ADMINISTRATIVE warrant was simply an administrative action of the Executive branch, not the Judicial branch.
This case is going nowhere.
It is pure political theater.
He was an illegal and re-entered the country after deportation. Then he engaged in an egregious and violent assault on three people. Does that carry any weight vis-a-vis protection for us beleaguered citizens?
Flores-Ruiz was on trial not for being in the country illegally, but for misdemeanor battery. Helping him evade ICE is a denial of due process for the alleged victims of battery who were in the courtroom.
Due process is a legal right that is due to the accused defendant, NOT to the victims of a crime.
Ruiz may have been on trial for battery, but the ICE agents had absolutely nothing to do with that charge. ICE had an administrative warrant to arrest him for violating immigration law.
Ruiz is obviously a nasty person who probably should be in prison and/or deported, but in this country we adhere to the rule of law.
This entire charade was planned by Bondi and Patel to intimidate the judiciary into submission to the lawless Trump administration.
The ICE agents knew that Ruiz would be at the courthouse at the appointed time. There was absolutely no need to make any contact whatsoever with the judge or any other court official. They could simply have put someone at every exit and grabbed him on the street as he left.
The fact that the ICE agents contacted the court at all indicates that their real plan was to set up the judge in a compromising situation in which they hoped she would do something that could be interpreted as a crime.
It was a setup
One slight correction. Per the affidavit, Judge Dugan asked if they had a judicial warrant. An agent replied they had an administrative warrant, and offered to show her. The affidavit does not indicate whether he *did* present the administrative warrant to Judge Dugan. My interpretation is she preempted presenting the warrant by telling them to go to Chief Judge Ashley.
“ There was absolutely no need to make any contact whatsoever with the judge or any other court official”. I believe that would be the courteous thing to do
Stupid comment.
The simplest approach would have been to simply grab him on the street as he left the courthouse.
There was no need to involve the judge or any other court official in any way.
ICE clearly wanted a completely unnecessary confrontation in order to “manufacture” some sort of basis for a criminal charge.
“ They charged Judge Dugan using a Criminal Complaint, rather than take it to a Grand Jury. In cases like this it is unheard of to bypass a Grand Jury. ” No it’s not. Criminal charges can be brought by complaint but, if a felony, the defendant must be indicted by a grand jury for the prosecution to go forward. It happens all of the time
Clown, still trying to get the last word in, when numerous people have corrected you.
Clearly you have zero knowledge of the law, but a PhD in Selective Liberal Outrage with a Minor in Beta Wimp Male Studies
Thanks for the information..
🙏🙏
The Bible prophesied 7-year Tribulation is at humanity’s doorstep & the time to escape is very short. To read more, pls visit https://bibleprophecyinaction.blogspot.com/
The law here is simple.
The agents had a lawful arrest warrant.
You obstruct / interfere w the agents you are breaking the law.
No one is above the law.
Now the judges in sympathy w her are demanding clarification.
Here’s the clarification.
In your court room. The judge rules supreme.
Outside the court room… they do not have any authority to stop or interfere w an arrest.
The ICE agents did notify the courts. And in doing so… the judges cannot feign ignorance and any act to interfere would be obstruction.
As an officer of the court. Any act would also be a violation of their judicial canons and they can be censured over it.
Yes, its that simple.
ICE won’t attempt an arrest in the courtroom and the judges can’t interfere w the arrest outside the courtroom.
-G
From the complaint:
“Despite having been advised of the administrative warrant for the arrest of Flores-Ruiz, Judge DUGAN then escorted Flores-Ruiz and his counsel out of the courtroom through the “jury door,” which leads to a nonpublic area of the courthouse.”
Also from the complaint:
” After leaving the Chief Judge’s vestibule and returning to the public hallway, DEA Agent A reported that Flores-Ruiz and his attorney were in the public hallway.”
These two statements are contradictory.
Supposedly the defendant was directed to a private part of the courthouse, yet agents observed him in the PUBLIC hallway.
From UrbanMilwaukee:
” The primary issue in the government’s case against Dugan appears to be the fact that she allegedly directed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave her courtroom through a private entryway called the “jury door”, that leads out to the public hallway of the sixth floor of the courthouse, where agents had positioned themselves for the arrest”
Several attorneys familiar with the layout of the courthouse have posted on social media that the “jury door” does not lead to a private non-public area. It is simply a door reserved for use by the jury and court officials that opens to the PUBLIC hallway.
Supposedly, the obstructive act was directing the defendant to a private non-public area beyond the reach of the ICE agents.
However, the “jury door” simply opens to the PUBLIC hallway where ICE agents were waiting.
By their own statements, ICE agents observed the defendant in the PUBLIC hallway.
This completely undermines the claim that the judge obstructed ICE by directing the defendant to a private area.
That did not, and could not have happened because the “jury door” leads to the public hallway where the agents were waiting.
Facts matter in a court of law.
This was obviously a setup designed to entrap the judge.
Even when the agents observed the defendant in the hallway, they did not arrest him. They followed him into an elevator without attempting to arrest him.
They watched him leave the building without attempting to arrest him.
Only after he had left the building did they initiate a foot chase to “capture” him
Obviously this was all planned to make it look like the defendant had “escaped” the building with the assistance of the judge.
IT WAS A SETUP.
you clown. still trying to make your point, which no one is accepting. What you reference are two totally different moments during the entire incident. Any REAL criminal defense attorney would know this.
Thinking is not your strong suit. Both were true. They exited to the private jury area, then moved from the private jury area to the public halls to catch the public elevator .
Sorry chum, no set up.
The jury exit is not the normal exist.
The judge did attempt to obstruct their arrest which is against the law.
There is no two ways about it. SHE BROKE THE LAW.
Now for the fun part.
In her court room, she could tell ICE agents to get out. They can’t arrest him in the court room.
However outside the court room, they can arrest him and she can’t do anything.
They had a lawful arrest warrant.
LEARN THE FACTS.
LEARN THE LAW.
-G
“These two statements are contradictory.”
Nope.
Judge Dugan directed and accompanied Ruiz out the jury room, where he subsequently exited into a public corridor the leave the building.
Presumably Judge Dugan expected that ICE might have a non-uniformed officer at the courtroom doors – which they did, and she was trying to help Ruiz evade them – a crime.
“Supposedly the defendant was directed to a private part of the courthouse”
Correct,
“yet agents (later) observed him in the PUBLIC hallway.”
Correct.
“From UrbanMilwaukee:”
Why source a news outlet when you have the text of the complaint ?
” The primary issue in the government’s case against Dugan appears to be the fact that she allegedly directed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave her courtroom through a private entryway called the “jury door”, that leads out to the public hallway of the sixth floor of the courthouse, where agents had positioned themselves for the arrest””
This is INCORRECT. Judge Dugan committed a crime through a whole SERIES of actions intended to assist Ruiz in avoiding arrest by ICE.
Each of those acts is an independent crime. ONE of those is directing Ruiz to exit via the jury room.
It is irrelevant whether Ruiz then proceeded to a public exit. What is relevant is that the act is for the purposes of evading arrest.
The FACT that ICE/DEA/FBI had possibly 30 agents in various parts of the courthouse – some of which were not uniformed,
does not alter the FACT that Judge Dugan committed a crime.
If bank robbers get the address wrong and attempt to rob a police station – that does not change the fact that they committed a crime.
The fact that there were MANY non-uniformed officers that Judge Dugan was not aware of who could have subsequently made an arrest does not change the fact that Dugan committed a crime.
If there had been 12 ICE agents under cover as jurrors in the Jury room and they arrested Ruiz the moment he entered – Dugan would STILL have committed a crime.
If 50 ICE agents followed Ruiz for 100 miles and then arrested him would not change the fact that Judge Dugan committed a crime.
The fact that Ruiz could have been arrested earlier does not change the fact that Dugan committed a crime.
The FACT that unknown to Dugan ICE was fully prepared for this and there never was any danger of Ruiz escaping – does not change the fact that Dugan committed a crime.
“Several attorneys familiar with the layout of the courthouse have posted on social media that the “jury door” does not lead to a private non-public area. It is simply a door reserved for use by the jury and court officials that opens to the PUBLIC hallway.”
The layout of the court is irrelevant.
The FACT that Judge Dugan intentionally sought to evade Ruiz’s arrest by ICE is all that matters.
I would note that her actions PRIOR to letting Ruiz out the jury room door ALSO are a crime.
She acted to remove ICE from anywhere near her courtroom so that it would be possible for Ruiz to avoid arrest.
The FACT that ICE/FBI had non uniformed officers does not change Dugan’s efforts to interfere with Ruiz’s arrest.
You seem to think that you can change the purpose of Judge Dugan’s actions by changing the layout of the building.
The moment Ruiz directed Ruiz departure, she had TWO legal choices – directing Ruiz to where she KNEW ICE would take custody,
or directing the sheriffs in her court to take him into custody.
Any ACT by Dugan directed to get Ruiz out of the building without being in custody of the local or federal law enforcement would be obstruction of justice.
“Supposedly, the obstructive act was directing the defendant to a private non-public area beyond the reach of the ICE agents.
However, the “jury door” simply opens to the PUBLIC hallway where ICE agents were waiting.”
Not relevant.
“By their own statements, ICE agents observed the defendant in the PUBLIC hallway.”
Correct, and not relevant.
The Fact that non-uniformed agents were able to observe Ruiz AFTER Dugan’s criminal actions,
does not change anything.
“This completely undermines the claim that the judge obstructed ICE by directing the defendant to a private area.”
Not in the slightest.
If someone robs a liquor store, and the police show up before he can get away and someone else in the liquor store helps him to go out the back way, and when he does there are police waiting at the back door – aiding the robbers escape is STILL a crime.
“That did not, and could not have happened because the “jury door” leads to the public hallway where the agents were waiting.”
Assuming you are correct – which is unwise, that changes NOTHING.
“Facts matter in a court of law.”
They do – and the FACT is that numerous acts by Judge Dugan were UNSUCCESSFULL efforts to thwart ICE’s efforts to arrest Ruiz.
That is all that matters. Not whether she succeeded. Not whether ICE did not subsequently Arrest Ruiz the first moment they were able to.
Not the fact that unknown to Judge Dugan ICE was prepared for her attempts to obstruct Ruiz’s arrest.
“This was obviously a setup designed to entrap the judge.”
With near certainty this was a setup.
But it was not even close to legal “entrapment” – ICE/DEA/FBI did NOT entice Judge Dugan into committing several crimes.
She did that own her own.
ALL they did was EXPECT that she was going to commit a crime and come prepared to deal with it.
There will be debates all the way through the supreme court as to whether those in state and local governments can PASSIVELY thwart ICE.
There is ZERO doubt that they can NOT ACTIVELY attempt to thwart a federal arrest.
Any ACTION that they take that is outside the norms that increases the probability that an arrest can not be effectuated, is a CRIME.
“Even when the agents observed the defendant in the hallway, they did not arrest him. They followed him into an elevator without attempting to arrest him.
They watched him leave the building without attempting to arrest him.”
There is no requirement that law enforcement arrest someone the instant a crime was committed.
Dugan was not immediately arrested either.
ICE could have followed Ruiz for 100miles and then arrested him – it would change nothing.
“Only after he had left the building did they initiate a foot chase to “capture” him”
Correct.
“Obviously this was all planned to make it look like the defendant had “escaped” the building with the assistance of the judge.”
Nope, it was not made to look like anything beyond what it was – Dugan assisting Ruiz in attempting to evade arrest.
“IT WAS A SETUP.”
Correct.
Law enforcement’s FORE KNOWLEDGE that someone may committ a crime, and being prepared before hand does not change that no one enticed Dugan to committ a crime.
Law Enforcements CHOICE to not instantly arrest someone at the very first oportunity
Does not change the fact that Dugan ACTED to attempt to thwart ICE.
It is highly likely she had done so in the past, and that ICE/FBI/DEA/DOJ expected her to do so again and was prepared even hoping that she would do so.
That changes nothing.
ICE is not there to prevent ordinary people (or judges) from chosing to commit crimes.
Bull💩 Democrat. Remember NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW even judges.
They were following protocol. He was definitely outside the confines of the courthouse. No setup involved..
Glenn Greenwald on Judge Dugan
s arrest
https://youtu.be/eifoAVDVR6M
Thank you – I just listened to Greenwald and as expected, he went as far as the facts allowed a cooler head to go — no knee jerk reacting whatsoever — and of course pointed out he’s been critical of Democrat politicians for quite some time because it dilutes the true seriousness of genuine civil rights violations when EVERYthing is a GOP threat to Democracy!!
I do not always agree with Greenwald. I do not think all of Trump’s actions in his second term are PERFECT.
But with very few exceptions they are all lawful and should have been upheld by the courts.
The due process that illegal immigrants are entitled to is what they get in Article II immigration courts.
They are being removed from the US and sent back to their HOMES.
Establishing that they are here illegally is sufficient to deport them.
And the standard of proof is by the preponderance of evidence – NOT beyond a reasonable doubt.
If a citzen or legal resident is accidentally deported – that is a bad thing. But the remedy is for them to find proof of citizenship or legal residence and re-enter the US. Further they can sue the federal government for any damages or costs.
Obama deported millions of illegal immigrants – I have no doubt that more than one error occured.
The standard is better that ten guilty go free than one innocent is punished.
Not better that ALL guilty go free.
Regardless, Greenwald is correct – If you start defending idiotic criminal conduct on the part of left wing judges – you severely undermine your ability to call out allegedly illegal conduct by your enemies.
This does MAJOR damage to the left.
This undermines their credibility on EVERYTHING.
It undermines the misconduct of federal judges like Boasberg and Xinis and Howell.
While that Conduct may not be criminal or atleast not easily prosecutable criminal conduct.
The willingness of democrat judges to ACT to prevent the deportation of illegals who are accused of agrevated assault in THEIR court rooms,.
makes it easier to question whether the actions of other democrat judges are partisan unethical and outside the law.
Judge Dugan acted appropriately, apparently to pre-empt a DHS sting in the middle of a case in-progress in her courtroom.
I suspect that the FBI acted inappropriately in arresting the judge on a federal criminal charge that involved a very disputed matter of state law regarding sanctuary cities. But I don’t know.
ICE went through all proper channels by informing the Court of its presence and purpose, then agreeing to wait until the matter before Judge Dugan was concluded before affecting the arrest. Dugan provided the means and opportunity for the defendant to evade arrest. She deserves impeachment from office, disbarment, arrest and prosecution in federal court. This is not the first time judges and petty magistrates have sought to nullify federal laws by extra-legal acts; you may recall the first Civil War, sparked by elected and appointed officials in the south defying federal law.
She is not a federal judge – she does not have to be impeached. Being convicted will likely bar her from being a lawyer as well as a judge.
Correct me if I’m way off here but isn’t immigration a federal issue? State and local sanctuary laws are nonsense. Deportation of illegals: first the worst, next the rest. All of them.
Federalism is serious business. Dugan was hearing a case regarding state law. She was under no obligation to submit to DHS’s procedures regarding arrests of the federal government’s deportees. She upheld the state law requiring a trial for the accused.
LOL what a f idiot. See how that “defense” plays in federal court, genius.
No, there is this thing called Federal Primacy. It’s about time that the Feds start arresting people for disobeying Federal laws instead of coddling them like the Democrats want.
Wow.
No she did not.
She ended the hearing early knowing that they were there w a valid arrest warrant.
She clearly obstructed the arrest.
She will be disbarred over this.
She will be tossed from the bench.
Her legal career is over.
Sucks to be her.
-G
No, it sucks for those legal, law-abiding citizens who have to live with the consequences of the Judge’s actions and rulings. Our lives will be greatly improved with her removal.
What DHS “sting” ?
Judge Dugan acted illegally.
DHS likely expected that illegal conduct and was incredibly well prepared for it.
If the FBI gets a tip that a bankrobbery is likely at noon at First national bank.
Making sure that an ARMY of law enforcement is ready to deal with the bank robbery once it occurs
is their JOB, not a sting.
Even allowing the bank robber to get away from the bank before making the arrest – is fully withing their discretion.
Amy K., Tina S., and other Democrat politicians, whose knee jerk reaction has become as predictable as the moon’s tides, carries a valuable lesson for the drowning Democrat party —
Don’t!
Michael Smerconish interviewed General McCraven on his Saturday show and the General has written several books, the latest of which speak to how to handle a ‘crisis’ – crisis management.
And though the General wasn’t speaking to these knee jerk Democrats, he might just as well have been — assess the situation when it first arises (Judge Dugan’s actions), but wait until you have all the facts before drawing conclusions — Amy and Tina are looking silly but their words could ‘incite’ others with less self control to consider violence –
As Joe Manchin and others have said in the past, the Democrat party left ME!
We must free to free our sacred, esteemed, and holy Political Prisoners: Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan, Maryland Illegal Alien Kilmar Abrego Garcia, Health Insurance Adjuster Luigi Mangione, and Hamas Humanitarian Mahmoud Khalil!!!
They are being held captive by the Trump Gestapo!!!
Justice for Dugan, Garcia, Mangione, and Khalil!!! Only THEY can save America for Fascism!!!
Wait, I am so confused. The free speech advocate trump wants to shut down Wikipedia? But I thought only Democrats banned books. Oops, wrong analogy, Its republicans that ban books. But certainly JT will agree that widkipedia should be allowed to have free speech? Right JT
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ed-martin-trump-threathens-wikipedia_n_680d17bbe4b06b5c9fc8d713
Baby Trump – this is a DC prosecutor, and he is going after Wikimedia for allowing foreign actors to alter accurate information.
Those of you on the left told us that it was illegal for Russian groups to post false information during the 2016 election on Facebook.
How is this different ?
If anything it is WORSE,
There is a serious difference between posting your OWN speech and removing – CENSORING the speech of others.
Doe you actually beleive that the first amendment requires the US government to allow anyone in the world to speak freely in the US,
but actually allows them to REMOVE content (censor) content by anericans about americans ?
You are turning the first amendment on its head and converting it into a right of foreign actors – ever foreign governments to take total control including censoring the speech of americans.
“The free speech advocate trump wants to shut down Wikipedia?”
That is a lie.
The letter from US Attorney Martin is very clear: The investigation pertains to Wikipedia’s tax-exempt status. The allegation is that Wikipedia is not operating as an educational institution, but rather that it is engaged in political advocacy and propaganda. (The entry on Martin, for example, drips with editorializing and bias.)
That Wiki spreads propaganda, under the guise of “education,” is not a new allegation. Co-founder Larry Sanger, among others, has been ringing that bell for years.
If Wiki wants to promote its politics and spread propaganda, that is its right. But then it has no right to be tax-exempt.
This is yet another case of the Left trying to eat its cake and have it, too.
Anyone who uses (WIKI) is a fool.
Huffpost is as credible as a raving ‘the end is nigh’ wacko on the street corner.
There are no books at issue.
The question is whether 501C3 corporations can allow foreign actors to engage in blatantly political activity that advocates for or against specific candidates.
That has been illegal for a long time.
I would further note that DOJ is seeking to STOP Wikipedia from aloowing FOREIGN censorship content on pages about americans.
I am not surprised. Someone had to be the first. She Fooled Around and Found Out.
They have no common sense solutions. They are morally bankrupt and all they stand for is to do the opposite of this administration.
They act like a spoiled three year old throwing a tantrum in the grocery store. They are for open borders, free flow of fentanyl, nanny state tyranny, suppression of free speech, reckless spending, endless wars, loss of manufacturing, week defense and they embrace wife beaters, drunk drivers, men in girl’s sports, meddling in the politics of other nations, and protecting terrorists.
Now they are whining like cry babies again. They have gone off the deep end.
E.M: Time marches on. But maybe not you with it.
Good luck.
@E.M.
That the DNC appears to be seriously considering running AOC for president should have every sane person everywhere furious and asking questions. These judges are the wee tip of the iceberg.
AOC FOR PREZ?! LUV ❤️ THAT. HADN’ HEARD. MAGATS MUST BE THROWING FITS.
Ummm not really. Getting used to irrationality. People just turn it off.
Would love to see her in a debate.
What a mess that woman is.
James,
I read that article. I dont think anyone is furious. More like, “Democrats, that is the best you could come up with? The most useless Congress person in Congress? And that is who is leading in the polls? HA!!”
Yeah, run with that. Right up there with Democrats campaign slogan, “We are ABOVE the law!!! Illegal criminals first!”
#. Dugan had 2 other occurrences or more? Most likely the people she works with all met for cheers that evening.
Administrative warrants are looking at corruption, too. Maybe Ruiz was an FBI agent as were the victims. Garcia was an FBI informant etc. Maybe not…
So what have we learned from this case?
E.M.
Well said. The Democrat party has become the face of evil. They are evil.
“Anonymous” has falsely misrepresented what the Complaint against Judge Dugan says. He/she/they lifted a few paragraphs to create the impression that the Complaint is dependent upon the recollection of one agent. Totally false.
Here it is. Read it first, then read the comments.
Turley must get tired of all these anonymous persons trying to hack this site and present false impressions or false information
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2025/04/complaintuscourtswied11162910.pdf
#. Thank you, anon. The document clears it up. It is striking that so many law enforcement officers were needed to arrest 1 person. A total of 6?
Courts aren’t agents of social reform or social justice per se. Requirements to cooperate with ICE easily should be in place for the safety of all.
What will happen with the domestic violence criminal case? There are various charges of obstruction of justice perhaps. She should be disbarred. Judge Cano resigned.
Anon at 8:58pm
The Criminal Complaint was sworn by Lindsay Schloemer, an FBI agent.
He was not present at the Courthouse or at the arrest of the defendant.
In the complaint this FBI agent swears as follows:
“I base this affidavit upon personal knowledge and upon information reported to me by other federal law enforcement officers during and as part of their official duties, all of whom I believe to be truthful and reliable. In this affidavit, “case agents” refers to me and other FBI Special Agents who directly have participated with me in this investigation. I also base this affidavit upon information provided by citizen witnesses and other information as described below.”
The complaint was not based on the recollections of Schloemer.
He was not there.
He states that the information he is providing is based on information reported by other federal agents who he believes to be truthful.
Until those other federal agents are sworn, the report provided by Schloemer is hearsay.
A cursory reading of the complaint reveals an absurd sequence of events, in which the ICE agents say they observed the defendant walking down a public hallway, but they failed to arrest him.
One of the agents followed the defendant into an elevator, without arresting him.
This agent rode the elevator to the street level without attempting to arrest him.
The agent then watched the defendant leave the building, without attempting to arrest him.
The agents then claim they had to scramble to chase him down the street.
This sequence of events makes absolutely no sense.
The statement in the Complaint that the Judge allowed the defendant to leave by the jury door to a non-public hallway is based on an interview of a court deputy who was in the courtroom.
Until sworn, this is hearsay.
The statement that the defendant was allowed to leave through a non-public hallway is suspect.
Other attorneys who are familiar with the layout of the court say that the “jury door”, simply leads to the public hallway at a different point.
The Complaint says that two ICE agents were waiting in the PUBLIC hallway, and observed the defendant exit the courtroom and walk down the PUBLIC hallway towards the elevator.
The statements of the ICE agents would seem to confirm that the “jury door”, simply leads to the public hallway at a different point.
Thus, the statements in the Complaint are self-contradictory.
The Complaint claims that the defendant exited through the “jury door” to a non-public hallway, and simultaneously claims that he was observed walking down the PUBLIC hallway to the elevator.
One of these statements is false.
Any competent defense attorney would completely eviscerate this testimony.
This Complaint is very sloppy.
It will not hold up.
The charges will be summarily dismissed with prejudice.
#. Reread it.
If you were a REAL competent defense attorney, you would be willing to admit that all allegations in a Complaint or supporting affidavit thereto are presumed to be true, and a Court will proceed as such until contrary allegations are filed in Response thereof and then later proved. So your argument is a little sloppy and premature, and must be summarily dismissed by anyone reading it and smelling the partisanship.
And by the way, not only are allegations presumed as true at this stage, but under WIsconsin law, this will go to a Grand Jury first and I suspect the named witnesses will appear as needed.. So you reallllllllly are premature to come to your conclusions.
Hearsay from reliable sources is permitted in Warrant applications.
Judge Dugan will get to require that the FBI provide a slightly stronger case at a preliminary hearing.
Thought he standard of proof there is not much higher than required for a warrant.
“A cursory reading of the complaint”
Or you could actually read the real complaint that many of us have linked to and discover your narrative is wrong.
“reveals an absurd sequence of events,”
Nothing absurd about it.
“in which the ICE agents say they observed the defendant walking down a public hallway, but they failed to arrest him.”
Correct, there is no obligation for law enforcement to make an arest at their earliest possible opportunity.
Law enforcement is free to ealuate the totality of circumstances as they change dynamically and decide when they will arrest.
That does not change the FACT that anyone ACTIVELY attempting – even unsuccessfully to make that arrest more difficult has committed a crime.
Dugan committed several.
“One of the agents followed the defendant into an elevator, without arresting him.”
So ?
“This agent rode the elevator to the street level without attempting to arrest him.”
So ?
“The agent then watched the defendant leave the building, without attempting to arrest him.”
So ?
“The agents then claim they had to scramble to chase him down the street.”
Correct.
In every other instance you cited there was a single agent and members of the public in the immediate vacinity.
When ICE had to chase him down they were outside the courthouse Ruis had been separated fromt he rest of the public,
and a numbr of agents were there to arrest him.
“This sequence of events makes absolutely no sense.”
No the sequence of events does not match your oppinions of how the arrest should have taken place.
ICE could have let Ruis go completely,
it would not have changed the fact that Dugan committed a crime.
“The statement in the Complaint that the Judge allowed the defendant to leave by the jury door to a non-public hallway is based on an interview of a court deputy who was in the courtroom.
Until sworn, this is hearsay.”
Correct, and perfectly acceptable to get a warrant.
“The statement that the defendant was allowed to leave through a non-public hallway is suspect.”
Not true and not relevant. He left through the juryroom door, not the normal public exict to the courtroom.
and he left that way at the direction of Dugan.
“Other attorneys who are familiar with the layout of the court say that the “jury door”, simply leads to the public hallway at a different point.”
Doesn;t change anything.
“The Complaint says that two ICE agents were waiting in the PUBLIC hallway, and observed the defendant exit the courtroom and walk down the PUBLIC hallway towards the elevator.”
So ?
“The statements of the ICE agents would seem to confirm that the “jury door”, simply leads to the public hallway at a different point.”
Not relevant. also likely incorrect.
“Thus, the statements in the Complaint are self-contradictory.”
False and not relevant.
“The Complaint claims that the defendant exited through the “jury door” to a non-public hallway, and simultaneously claims that he was observed walking down the PUBLIC hallway to the elevator.”
It makes both claims. It does not claim that they occured siimulateaosly
“One of these statements is false.”
No you are making assumptions.
“Any competent defense attorney would completely eviscerate this testimony.”
At a trial and possibly preliminary hearing, there will be dozens of witnesses with multiple witnesses to each step in the process.
^^^#. Addition. Agent Shloemer, FBI is also a CPA. She works in cases of kick backs , corruption. Dea agents were present and ICE. Judges are suspect for reasons and and Dugan failed miserably.
The target was Dugan and Ruiz the medium, perhaps. Social justice is a two way street.
Interesting theory. I wonder if Dugan has publicly made her views known about sanctuary cities? Or deporting illegals? If she has, you may be on to something.
Also, she allegedly secretly adjourned the case without advising the prosecutor. How can that happen? On TV there is a clerk or stenographer or someone who accurately records the events of the trial for appeal purposes. So how can she adjourn a case without the prosecutor’s knowledge? Does that violate some sort of code of conduct guiding proper behavior of judges?
Oh wait, but you’re also forgetting to get a statement from the prosecutor along w the couple who were battered and present at this time.
And then there’s the security videos.
Sucks to be her.
-G
#. Sheesh..courtrooms have restricted private areas. The defendant used restricted areas after being released privately by judge. The well is restricted. The courtroom is open to the public. ICE did not arrest the defendant in any private area. They apprehended him on the street.
The judges error even if she has internal procedures for immigration arrests still leads to an obstruction of ICE by allowing the defendant to use private areas. Did this defendents attorney accompany him through private spaces?
It’s obstruction but ICE had front and back covered while another officer was seeing another judge.
Yeah, she’s a dope.
There is absolutely no rational or legal reason that a judge should halt an assualt proceeding, remove the accured from the public courtroom to a private area and then allow them to leave the courthouse from that private area.
Dugan not only obstructed ICE – she obstructed the assault proceding in her own court room.
Judges do not have exparte communications with criminal defendants in private parts of the courthouse.
They are not ever supposed to encounte efendants outside the public areas of the courthouse.
Absolutely the judges have private spaces in the courthouse,
Further there are private portions in which criminal defendents are moved. Those are typically independent.
Criminal defendants do NOT enter the judges chambers.
Criminal defendants do NOT leave the public portion of the courtroom, unhandcuffed – unless they are aquitted.
There is no innocent explanation for the judges conduct.
But as always – those of you on the left will manufacture a rationalization from thin air.
John Say
The judge did not remove the defendant to a private non-public area.
This is evident from the statements in the Criminal Complaint itself.
The Complaint claims that the defendant exited through the “jury door” to a non-public hallway.
This was based on an interview of a court deputy who was in the courtroom.
None of the agents were in the courtroom and could not have witnessed this.
The Complaint also says that two ICE agents were waiting in the PUBLIC hallway, and observed the defendant exit the courtroom and walk down the PUBLIC hallway towards the elevator.
These statements are self-contradictory.
The Complaint further states that one of the agents followed the defendant down the PUBLIC hallway into an elevator, without arresting him.
This agent rode the elevator to the street level without attempting to arrest him.
The agent then watched the defendant leave the building, without attempting to arrest him.
The agents then claim they had to scramble to chase him down the street.
These statements show that the defendant did not exit by a private non-public hallway, because the agents themselves say they observed him in the PUBLIC hallway and followed him, without arresting him.
The Complaint is extremely sloppy and contains many obvious inconsistencies.
Any competent defense attorney could completely discredit the FBI account of what happened.
The charges will be summarily dismissed with prejudice.
What color were his eyes and what was he wearing? Reread
“John Say
The judge did not remove the defendant to a private non-public area.”
False
Read the Text of the complaint:
“Judge DUGAN escorts Flores-Ruiz through a “jury door” to avoid his arrest.”
The entire text of the complaint is here.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/read-the-full-criminal-complaint-against-a-milwaukee-judge-accused-of-helping-man-evade-immigration-authorities
“This is evident from the statements in the Criminal Complaint itself.”
False – the actual complaint is linked above.
“The Complaint claims that the defendant exited through the “jury door” to a non-public hallway.”
No the complaint alleges that multiple witnesses saw Judge Dugn Direct the defendant to exit throught the jury room door.
“This was based on an interview of a court deputy who was in the courtroom.”
It was based on interfiews of a deputy AND multiple other witnesses and it SPECIFICALLY alleges tohat Judge Dugen Directed te defendant to leave through the Jury door. That she escorted him through the jury door and that she directed him to exit through the jury door.
“None of the agents were in the courtroom and could not have witnessed this.”
I am not sure that is correct – as there were several FBI agents present at the time that had NOT identified themselves to the court.
These agents were in the public spaces of the courthouse and the public spaces include the courtroom.
REGARDLESS are you saying that the FBI can not charge someone with a crime unless an FBI agent witnesses that crime ?
You are making ludicrously stupid arguments.
I would note that Judge Dugan would arguably be guilty if she merely ALLOWED the defendent to leave through non-public hallways by extraordinary process.
A judge directing that different procedures are followed for the purpose of evading the service of an arrest warrant has engaged in obstruction of justice.
Further the court room is under the presumptive control of the judge. The movement of people in and out of the courtroom, particularly of criminal defendants is under the control of the judge. The Jury room is not accessible to criminal defendants. The fact that this defendant was able to access it – without committing a crime to do so is alone evidence that Judge Dugan actively allowed it – and therefore committed a crime.
But the actual evidence in the complaint that you clearly have not read describes far more active involvement that just allowing for an unusual exit and then turning a blind eye.
There are NUMEROUS actions of Dugan that each independently constitute obstruction.
“The Complaint also says that two ICE agents were waiting in the PUBLIC hallway, and observed the defendant exit the courtroom and walk down the PUBLIC hallway towards the elevator.”
Correct.
“These statements are self-contradictory.”
Nope – read the actual complaint.
“The Complaint further states that one of the agents followed the defendant down the PUBLIC hallway into an elevator, without arresting him.
This agent rode the elevator to the street level without attempting to arrest him.
The agent then watched the defendant leave the building, without attempting to arrest him.
The agents then claim they had to scramble to chase him down the street.”
Missing alot of detail but otherwise correct.
Single agents alone among many people do not typically arrest someone. Particularly when doing so might require the use of FORCE.
and possibly firearms.
Whether you like it or not, If ICE sent 10 agents to arrest the defendant and Dugan acted to preclude 5 of those from being able to participate – she obstructed justice.
You do not avoid responsibility for your own criminal actions because they were only PARTLY effective.
“These statements show that the defendant did not exit by a private non-public hallway, because the agents themselves say they observed him in the PUBLIC hallway and followed him, without arresting him.”
Non-sequitur.
Please read the actual complaint.
“The Complaint is extremely sloppy and contains many obvious inconsistencies.
Any competent defense attorney could completely discredit the FBI account of what happened.
The charges will be summarily dismissed with prejudice.”
Incorrect and irrelevant.
Contra your claim the complaint is not full of inconsistancies. YOu have mentally constructed inconsistancies
Nor is a criminal complaint required to be perfectly free of inconsistancies.
The complain merely has to meed the probably cause standard necescary to make an arrest.
There will later be an arraignment, where charges will be read and bail set.
The first opportunity to dismiss will be a preliminary hearing.
At the preliminary hearing the prosecution must make enough of a case to proceed to trial.
Prosecuors typically try to put on ONLY the minimum necescary to get the defendant held over for trail.
Regardless the prosecutor can present as much or as little of their case as they wish and the defense attorney’s get their first oportunity to both examine and challenge the prosecutions case. Dismissal at a preliminary hearing over the objections of the prosecution is extremely rare.
The normal defense strategy for a preliminary hearing is to force the prosecutor to put on as much of their case as possible so that they have that on the record for trial.
Absolutely REAL inconsistancies matter – but inconcistancies are questions of fact and they are the domain of the jury not the judges.
And there are no consequential inconsistancies hear
Blonde shouldn’t be yapping about the case on Faux News. This constitutes professional misconduct.
DOJ including the AG frequently publicly comment on cases.
Those of you on the left sat idly as prosecutors and AG ranted about Trump over and over before any verdict.
You have no legs to claim misconduct
There has been misconduct on both sides, John. That is apparent.
I call ’em like I see ’em.
In an interview Bondi ONCE briefly committed “alleged” where it was required in a public statement and then immediately corrected herself.
That is NOT misconduct.
I would be happy for rules that barred prosecutors and police from discussing cases in public at all.
But that is not our law.
Oddly we are more likely to gag defendants and defense attorney’s where there is clearly a constitutional right to free speech.
But the FACT that I do not beleive that our existing standards of due process are correct or constitutional does not mean that those adhereing to those standards are engaged in misconduct.
Did the judge take any pics for the press maybe with a thumbs up?
Funny how Bragg, Willis and James all spent more time on tv than in the courtroom