It’s Over

 It is Over

The GOP needs a better candidate

 

The former president’s legal problems continue to mount. There were three recent and significant developments in his various criminal cases that spell the end of his candidacy for President in 2024.

 

The judge in the D.C. criminal case brought by special counsel Jack Smith issued a protective order largely tracking what the prosecution requested that substantially limits the former president’s ability to try his case in the media or use the power of the pulpit to influence or intimidate those who might hear the case or testify against him. He can only comment on evidence already made public in other proceedings. He cannot share or keep copies of the documents the prosecutor shares with his defense team. He cannot make public statements about potential witnesses, the prosecution team members or court personnel. These are usual limits in federal criminal cases and violations will be dealt with promptly and harshly. The former occupant of the White House has a hard time keeping his mouth shut about those who cross him, and I expect he will see the inside of a jail cell if he violates the terms of the order. 

 

The next shoe to drop was the draft of a law review article written by two leading conservative Republican law professors, one of whom is a co-founder of the Federalist Society which recruits and trains conservative judges, promotes conservative judicial candidates and provides legal research that in used to promote conservative values and positions. The current “originalist” philosophy used by conservative jurists to interpret the Constitution only to determine what the founding fathers meant when drafting laws originated in the Federalist Society. All the former president’s judicial appointments to the Supreme Court are Federalist members, as are Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. 

 

The draft law review article traces the origins of Article Three of the Fourteenth Amendment which reads as follows:

 

“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

 

The authors conclude this provision is self-executing which means the former president does not have to be convicted of “insurrection” or giving aid to the enemies of the Republic to be declared ineligible to hold the office of president, even if elected. What this means is that state election officials can determine he is not eligible for a place on the ballot, even if he wins his party’s primary elections or is nominated to run at its convention. All they must conclude, based upon available evidence is that he “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” The burden would then switch to him to prove in a court of law that he did not do either of those things before he could appear on the ballot. Should enough states prevent him from appearing on their 2024 election ballots to preclude him being able to secure the necessary electoral votes, his candidacy would be over. Republicans in Congress do not have the numbers to remove this disability. For a party claiming legitimacy under the Constitution, this is a hard mountain to climb.

 

The final blow to the former president’s political life is the indictment issued by a grand jury in Georgia. This state court proceeding, unlike the federal cases in Washington, D.C. and Florida, is not subject to a presidential pardon or interference by the Federal Government. The indictment charges the former president and 18 of his lawyers and aides of illegally trying to change the results of the presidential election that Joe Biden won in Georgia. It uses a legal proceeding used to go after large scale criminal enterprises such as organized crime families and street gangs.

 

The Georgia indictment tracks much of the now familiar evidence of the former president and his legal team to get Georgia officials to change the result of Georgia’s election win for Biden. It alleges a broad conspiracy to send slates of fake electors from Georgia and other states to Congress and have then Vice-President Mike Pence recognize them instead of the legally constituted electors when certifying the Electoral College vote. It also charges perjury, voting machine tampering and other criminal acts. The indictment lists 161 specific acts the former president or his co-conspirators took to further their scheme to steal the presidential election in Georgia and elsewhere. 

 

These developments clearly lead rational observers on the right and left to conclude that the GOP needs to pick someone other than the former president to challenge President Biden next year. If only the hard right who control the GOP could see the light. 

 

Indictment Trouble

 The latest indictment spells trouble

Former President Donald Trump¹s second federal indictment for trying to overthrow our democracy, which dropped on Tuesday, is a “speaking indictment.” It spells out what the defendant allegedly did and why those acts are illegal in simple, easy-to-understand language. I encourage everyone to read it. 

The new charges center on several conspiracies to overturn the result of 2020 presidential election. The indictment contains four charges, a conspiracy to defraud the United States, a conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and an attempt to obstruct an official proceeding and a conspiracy to obstruct the right to vote. It covers the period leading up to the 2020 election through January 2021.

First, some definitions.

 
A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime. The criminal acts do not have to be successful or reach the desired outcome, there just must be an agreement and an actual criminal act or acts to try and achieve the desired result.

 
An indictment is just an outline of why the government believes a crime has been committed. It is not proof of guilt or a conviction. Under our system of laws, one charged in an indictment is presumed not guilty until the government proves the defendant¹s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

 
An indictment is filed after the government presents actual evidence, testimony, and documents, to a grand jury made up of citizens like you and me which is sufficient to convince a majority of the grand jurors that crimes have probably been committed by the defendant.

 
The newest indictment is interesting for what it does and does not contain. It does not charge the defendant with treason or sedition. It specifically mentions that the defendant has a First Amendment right to tell lies about who won the election and to use legitimate means to challenge election results without crossing the line into criminal behavior. It alleges that the chairman of the Republican National Committee helped to further the criminal conspiracy involving the use of fake electors from several battleground states. It tells us that a co-conspirator was willing to use the military to suppress protests if their scheme was successful. The evidence outlined in the indictment showing the defendant¹s knowledge and acts comes exclusively from Republicans who were the defendant¹s close associates or employees. The indictment does not name or charge the other co-conspirators, but the words and actions attributed to them leads easily to their identities. They know who they are and now have the option of testifying for the government in exchange for reduced sentences or facing charges in this or a separate case and facing significantly more time behind bars.

 
The evidence outlined in the indictment shows that the defendant lost the 2020 election and knew that he lost that election. It says he falsely claimed that the battleground states where he lost, including Wisconsin, were the result of massive voter fraud to “create an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and erode public faith in the administration of the election.”After exhausting all legal means to challenge the election results, the defendant and his co-conspirators then allegedly agreed to use illegal means to obstruct the government from counting and certifying the election votes, to obstruct the congressional proceeding on January 6 to certify the election results and to deprive citizens of the right to vote and have those votes counted. 

The means used allegedly included the false claims of election fraud to try and get state legislatures to overturn their election results; the creation of slates of fake electors in those battleground states, including Wisconsin, which were to be forwarded to Congress and Vice President Mike Pence so that he could recognize them instead of the official electors sent by those states and throw the Electoral College vote in favor of the defendant; trying to convince Pence to change the result of the election in the certification proceeding on January 6; and inciting the crowd assembled at the Capitol on January 6 to riot and prevent Congress from certifying the election result and naming Joe Biden as the newly elected president. 

Those of us who watched the public hearings conducted by the House Oversight Committee investigating the insurrection on January 6 saw most of the evidence outlined in the indictment as many of the defendant¹s administration officials testified about the events they witnessed and his conversations they overheard.  

This case ultimately involves holding the defendant accountable for trying to overthrow American institutions which have insured the peaceful transfer of power between administrations since the inception of the republic. We have arrived at this moment, in part, due to the failure to hold similar attempts to overthrow our democracy to account. Those included failing to hold the ringleaders of the Confederacy responsible for the Civil War and Gerald Ford¹s pardon of Richard Nixon before he could be tried for Watergate and other misdeeds while in office. 

It is time for us to put this mad quest for power to rest and let those who would subvert our democracy know their efforts will not be tolerated. 

Book Bans

 Book Bans Never Work

Religious Beliefs do not Govern

 

It always amazes me when our local history repeats itself. Once again, local Christian fundamentalists seek to impose their views of public morality on the rest of us. This time it is ostensibly about the “bad books” being made available to the community’s children in West Bend public schools.

 

We have an impressive history of similar attempts of the few to try and regulate what the rest of the community finds important. The common theme is the agenda of imposing a form of governmental theocracy when it is constitutionally impossible. All the previous attempts have been soundly rejected.

 

Here’s a recap. 

 

In the 1980s, Christian evangelical pastors petitioned the West Bend School Board to add “scientific creationism” to the high school curriculum. After public outcry, the Board tabled the proposal and it later died. 

 

In the early 90s, a community group proposed adding “intelligent design,” a lightly concealed version of creationism, to the science curriculum in West Bend public schools. After more public input, the School Board rejected the proposal. 

 

In the early 2000s, a local Baptist pastor proposed the establishment of a fundamentalist based charter school in West Bend and sought the School Board’s approval. After public input, the proposal was rejected by the Board. 

 

In that same time-period, West Bend School Board member Monte Schmiege attempted to introduce religious theories into the school curriculum. Once again, public input caused the Board to reject his proposals. 

 

We cannot forget the efforts of Ginny Maziarka and Mary Weigand to impose their fundamentalist religious beliefs on the community when they sought to have the West Bend Community Memorial Library ban certain books that discussed LBGTQI issues that offended their homophobic beliefs. The Library Board heard their arguments and those expressed by community members opposed to the ban and unanimously rejected the proposed ban.

 

Mary Weigand, who ran for West Bend’s school board, tried to convince the Board that abstinence only sex education based upon her biblical beliefs was the only appropriate topic in human growth and development courses. That too was rejected. 

 

Mary’s husband, Dave Weigand, was a staunch hold out when the West Bend School Board voted to approve the Gay Straight Alliance’s application for official recognition after they sued the District in Federal court for initially denying the club recognition. Weigand’s opposition was clearly based upon his fundamentalist Christian beliefs openly stated during discussion during Board meetings. 

 

Fast forward to the present and once again we have a few vocal religious fundamentalists seeking to remove certain books from West Bend public school reading lists because they offend their views of public morality. Their public comments at meetings and the letters by their supporters published on these pages clearly reveal their religious underpinnings. 

 

I was glad to see that the public school committee charged with reviewing the book challenges unanimously rejected the complaints. They recognized that the books in question have value in today’s pluralistic society even though they contain words and discuss subjects that some find offensive. 

 

The debate on the Benders for Better Public Education Facebook page shows there are parents and other community members who understand what is happening and oppose the proposed bans.

 

Should the ban proponents appeal to the District Superintendent, school policy and public opposition to the bans should be the basis for affirming the committee’s decisions. If the Superintendent removes some or all the books, the issue then goes to the School Board for a final decision. 

The West Bend School Board would do well to remember the opposition to theocratic governance that has so richly favored our community over the decades. Hopefully, the Board would vote to keep the challenged books available for those who want to read them and have an appropriate classroom discussion about them. 

 

Parents who do not want their children to read those books or discuss the topics they contain are free to opt their children out. They can also home school or send their children to faith-based charter schools if they so choose. Contrary to the book banners’ claims, no one is forcing them or their children to participate. 

 

We live in a society that has chosen to erect a wall between church and state that is enshrined in our founding documents. We must remain vigilant and work to keep it that way, so we remain free to believe what we want and not have the beliefs of others forced down our throats. 

Una Chin Riley Matters

 Who is Una Chin-Riley? 

Why she matters.

 

I have been fascinated with science fiction since high school. I loved reading Arthur C. Clarke, Robert A. Heinlien, Frank Herbert, Isaac Asimov, Larry Nevin, and a host of others who saw futures not yet realized. 

 

With the advent of television, I became hooked on Star Trek and later, Star Wars, which reminded me of the serial western movies I went to as a kid on my bike. I love most current TV sci-fi like Picard, Discovery, Foundation, and Silo, all streaming serials of different futures.

 

One of the recurring themes in these are societies built upon ideals of equality. Equalities of race, gender, species, brought to life with universal translators, fully integrated populations, and prime directives.

 

The Star Trek franchise has seen several sequels and prequels. Most recently, streaming on Paramount Plus, is Star Trek – Strange New Worlds. It is supposed to be a prequel to the original Star Trek but comes with much more modern looking technology and a much clearer embrace of the equality theme compared to Captain Kirk’s time on the screen. 

 

In the prequel, the Enterprise Captain is named Pike. His first officer is an Illryian woman, Una Chin-Riley. She is the quintessential first officer, telling Pike when he is about to go too far and providing a compelling role model for the command staff and crew. She is a mentor to younger officers. She has an unblemished 20 plus year career in Starfleet. 

 

Even though she is of a different species, Chin-Riley looks all the world like the humans she serves with aboard the Enterprise. In a previous episode she is outed as an Illryian, a fact she failed to mention on her application to join Starfleet. It turns out that Illryian’s are genetically modified humans, and the utopian United Federation of Planets has barred members of that species from serving in Starfleet. 

 

The basis for this discrimination goes back millennia to the Eugenics Wars that almost tore human civilization asunder as genetically modified humans tried to change human evolution by breeding out “undesirable” human characteristics through genetic manipulation enhanced by artificial intelligence. It does not escape to recognize the parallels to Hitler’s Master Race programs.

 

In the most recent episode I watched, Chin-Riley chooses to go to trial on the charges against her rather than accept a plea bargain that would keep her out of prison. Captain Pike hires an Illryian civil rights lawyer to defend his first officer. Starfleet prosecutors add additional charges that threaten to sweep in others on the Enterprise who might have known about her deception and failed to disclose it. 

 

The trial is a masterpiece, reminiscent of To Kill a Mockingbird and Inherit the Wind, that puts the clearly discriminatory basis for Chin-Riley’s prosecution on trial. 

 

In the end, the Illryian lawyer finds a Starfleet regulation that provided Una Chin-Riley and those who knew of her deception, a complete defense. By exposing the hardships and life-threatening experiences Chin-Riley had growing up and her desire to find a safe space in the Starfleet family set the stage for her self-disclosure of her species identity so she could finally live her life as she truly is, an Illryian. That completed the requirements of an asylum request that the Starfleet regulation required Captain Pike to grant.

 

After watching this simple yet complex television program, I marveled at how the writers and actors captured many of today’s conflicts about race, gender, sexual orientation, artificial intelligence, immigration status, and species while offering a simple solution. 

 

As a society built upon justice and equality, how can we not grant asylum and equal status to all on these shores asking to be part of the grand experiment in democracy our founders started centuries ago? Those who have lived oppression borne out of ignorance or bigotry, like our founders, deserve asylum just as those early immigrants did. We just celebrated our founding with a four-day holiday complete with fireworks, parades, family gatherings and fun. That celebration recognizes we are all equal in spirit and should reignite our national passion to make it so in reality. Star Trek just helped that process along by reminding us of our founders’ aspirations for us in their future generations. That is the way.

 

Waring Fincke is a retired attorney and guardian who lives in the Village of Kewaskum.

Indictments Matter

They Don’t Get It

Indictments Matter

 

Why won’t the GOP look seriously at the most recent indictment of the former president which clearly points out how he retained classified documents involving national security and refused to return them when required to by a subpoena? Why don’t they acknowledge that he endangered our national security?

 

To date, most of the GOP presidential hopefuls have either risen to the former president’s defense or remained silent about his most recent legal problems. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy defended the former president while Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnel has stayed remarkably quiet. Members of the House Freedom Caucus have jumped on the “Biden has weaponized the Justice Department” conspiracy bandwagon.

 

Some GOP outliers have offered critical comments. Former Attorney General Bill Barr told reporters that if half of the allegations in the indictment are true, “he’s toast.” Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie offered the most damning reflections on the indictment hoping to boost his own presidential ambitions. 

 

Make no mistake, the indictment of the former president is a big deal. Complete with pictures of boxes filled with documents stored in Mar a Lago bathrooms and ballrooms near a high-speed copier and the clear trail of lies and distractions, the indictment shows those charged knew what they were doing and that it was against the law. 

 

The former president’s public comments after the FBI searched Mar a Lago under the authority of a judicially issued search warrant and the investigation was going on clearly cut off many of his potential defenses at the knees. His lawyers, while trying to think about defenses, found their client hamstringing their best efforts. The smart ones bailed out once the grand jury approved the indictment. 

 

The alt-right base continues to support the grifter in chief seeing him as their best hope for white nationalist supremacy led by an authoritarian strong man who will continue to enable their reckless dismantling of American Democracy. Those Republicans still in the seats of power and those who aspire to follow in their footsteps have no choice but to follow along if they have any hope of remaining in office or getting there. GOP leaders do not see any other path forward. 

 

The alt-right lurch we have experienced since the 1980s has reached its zenith. There is no place left to go. A majority of the electorate is finally waking up and seeing that GOP politics has nothing to offer that will help everyday folks live better lives. Divide and conquer politics does not work in the long run as all those groups divided out finally come together to form a more progressive, inclusive, and tolerant majority that rejects theocratic governance. 

 

President Biden once again has shown his mastery of the political discourse. He has stayed out of the former president’s legal morass, refusing to comment. He knows, as many of us do as well, that the former president’s legal problems will just continue to mount. Investigations into secret documents being shared at his New Jersey golf resort, the January 6^th insurrection, attempts to create votes that did not exist in Georgia and the pending hush money case in New York will combine shortly making the GOP presidential primary a free for all jousting tournament.

 

All President Biden needs to do to win a second term in stay the course already set. Building the economy, fixing the roads, building strong international alliances, keeping people employed, defending and supporting the marginalized, and maintaining Social Security and Medicare will get it done. The GOP has nothing to offer but culture wars which are just feeble attempts to dismantle our democracy and keep white supremacists in power.

 

We still need to stand against the fascists and bigots the current GOP has enabled. We need to ensure fair universal voting, restore all women with the right to reproductive healthcare, and continue work towards a more inclusive and diverse democracy where all have a seat at the table. 

America Pays it Debts

 The Middle Won

America pays its debts.

 

We recently witnessed another nail in the coffin of the alt-right MAGA wing of the GOP. 

 

Pressured by the so-called Freedom Caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives, Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) took the American economy hostage by refusing to pass a bill lifting the debt ceiling without major concessions from President Biden on future spending. After months of threats and negotiations, McCarthy was forced to accept a deal that lifted the debt ceiling in exchange for only minor brakes on future spending. The resulting bill was passed by both houses of Congress with bi-partisan support and signed into law by President Biden over the past weekend. 

 

The Freedom Caucus and many on the far right were outraged that McCarthy caved on their demands and agreed to a pittance of what they initially demanded. Some on the far left were similarly disgusted that Biden gave in on his demand for a bill lifting the debt ceiling without any conditions at all. Those Representatives and Senators in the middle recognized that default on the Nation’s debts was not an option and came together to pass the agreed legislation in record time. 

 

The MAGA wing of the GOP hung its hat on the debt ceiling post hoping to show its power to control the national dialog on spending and taxes. In the end, they did not have the votes to make their pipe dream a reality. Their failure to produce anything close to what they wanted shows their power and influence in Congress is quickly waning.

 

In the aftermath of the debt ceiling being lifted, some thought the Freedom Caucus would use the changes in House rules allowing just one member to force a new vote on the Speakership. It was not even mentioned in their most recent meeting this week. McCarthy won increased powers by tacking towards the middle and trying to govern by compromise which usually works in the end. 

 

The Progressive Caucuses in both the House and Senate also lost some of their influence going forward as those in the more moderate middle came together, crossed the partisan divide, and got the Nation’s bills paid. 

 

President Biden showed his legislative negotiating chops, learned during his decades in Congress, by steering the process from the sidelines and only coming into the room to close the deal. No president in recent memory has a better sense of how Congress works when the need is dire than Biden. He gave away just enough to put the mess behind him and realign the power in both houses of Congress. 

 

Much can be said about Biden’s string of positive accomplishments during his first term in the Oval Office. His infrastructure bills, significant job growth, and other economic achievements will be felt for decades to come as the American economy roars back. His crowning victory to date must be saving the country from defaulting on its debts and maintaining America’s position as the rock of the world economy. 

 

As we come into the upcoming presidential election cycle, none of the Republican hopefuls will be able to meaningfully attack Biden’s record on building a robust economy at home and abroad. As those candidates on the far right continue their culture wars, demonizing those they do not understand, Biden’s determined support for those in the margins along with his economic successes will easily carry the day and give him a second term in the White House. 

 

The MAGA wing of the GOP will take a further beating as the former president’s legal woes intensify and they continue to lose their culture wars in federal courts that understand the First Amendment protects drag performers and the Fourteenth Amendment protects equality for those in the minority. Their insistence upon criminalizing women’s reproductive healthcare will send them further into the dustbin of American history.

 

Hopefully, this next election cycle will continue to take us into a more just and inclusive period in our history with continued economic prosperity for all and not just the few. 

 

End Prohibition

 End Prohibition

Legalize Marijuana

 

The time has come for the GOP controlled state legislature to legalize both medical and recreational marijuana.

 

A 2019 Marquette University Law School poll found that 83% of Wisconsin residents favored legalizing medical marijuana. A 2022 Marquette poll shows that 61% of Wisconsin residents favor legalization of recreational marijuana with majorities from both pollical party respondents polled favoring legalization. 

 

Governor Evers proposed both measures in his most recent state budget proposal only to have them axed by a single vote in the GOP controlled Joint Finance Committee on May 2^nd.

 

Wisconsin is surrounded by states seeing the benefits of legalized marijuana. Illinois legalized both and saw increased tax revenues and decreased crime rates. Cannabis dispensaries close to our border have drained millions from Wisconsin pocketbooks as state residents flock to Mundelein and South Beloit to buy marijuana products. Michigan also legalized, and one does not have to drive far into the UP to find a dispensary. Michigan tax revenues have also jumped from regulated sales. Minnesota just passed its legalization bill which awaits Governor Walz’ already promised signature. One can expect cannabis dispensaries along the Minnesota side of the Mississippi River will soon follow. 

 

Meanwhile, our GOP controlled legislature continues to wage the already lost War on Drugs and continues the myth that marijuana is a gateway drug to harmful drugs like heroin, meth, and cocaine. They also appear willing to forego the tax revenues other states gladly receive from our citizens daily. Projections of potential tax revenue from legalized marijuana sales could raise enough money for Wisconsin to fully fund its obligation to our public-school systems among other needed priorities.

 

It is not like our legislature doesn’t know what to pass. The new Minnesota law is a great place to start the copy and paste. It provides that adults, 21 and over, can possess up to two pounds of marijuana. Minnesotans will be able to cultivate up to eight plants on their property as soon as August 1. Over the next year a new Office of Cannabis Management will put together regulations governing the sale of recreational pot which will be taxed at 10% of recreational sales. Edibles containing THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, are already available at CBD stores there.  Twenty percent of the tax revenues collected will go to cities and counties across the state. 

 

The Minnesota plan also contains provisions expunging misdemeanor marijuana convictions and for reviewing more serious cannabis convictions. It also contains measures aimed at correcting problems created during the century of prohibition where communities of color were disproportionally targeted by drug law enforcement actions.

 

Many have long realized that the marijuana prohibition has done more harm than good. I was Assistant Legal Counsel for the Pennsylvania chapter of NORML, the National Organization of Marijuana Laws, and testified before that state’s legislature in support of legalized medical marijuana and limited recreational use in 1978. My criminal defense legal practice often challenged draconian marijuana laws with expert medical testimony on its safety and efficacy for certain medical conditions. The effort to legalize is certainly not a new one.

 

Federal law still classifies marijuana in the same category as heroin and other far more serious drugs creating a complete disconnect in those states which have legalized marijuana. Yes, the Feds can still bust you for cannabis in states where it is legal under state laws. The Federal and state prohibitions date back to the 1920s when Harry Anslinger first convinced Congress that marijuana was the devil incarnate, leading to perversion of our youth from jazz music, free sex, and overall licentiousness. Our legislators still must think these outmoded notions hold true. Thankfully, the U.S. Department of Justice has toned down marijuana enforcement activities and the Drug Enforcement Agency is starting to look at reclassifying marijuana to reduce applicable penalties. 

 

I was recently reminded of a story told to me by a grower friend in the 1970s. He wanted to plant a marijuana patch on his parents’ ranch in Texas. When my friend visited his folks to ask permission, his father asked, “it that stuff is as good as they say it is?” My friend replied by offering his dad a joint. After smoking it, his father retired to their front porch and sat in his favorite rocker as the sun set. My friend joined his dad on the porch where they sat in silence watching the sun go down. The father’s first comment was, “plant it.”

 

It is long past time for Wisconsin to join the rest of the states that have legalized, regulated, and taxed recreational marijuana sales and decriminalized possession and sales.