The FBI has *ARRESTED* a sitting judge in Milwaukee, over allegations it obstructed immigration enforcement.

[Anonymous]

If this judge is not corrupt, then there is no such thing as a corrupt judge. And I’m pretty sure corrupt judges are a whole thing in this country. Until recently they have been a protected class of criminal, kind of like illegal aliens. The party is over and we dodged a bullet, probably a lot of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
BTW, getting arrested in the court house is not unusual. If a suspect has an appointment with the court, a lawyer, you know he might be there. I knew a friend whose ex husband had her arrested (detained actually, not fully arrested) in front of the court house for violating a civil protective order. During her divorce. They had probably 5 million in assets together. They released her shortly thereafter. But it was messy. The more you know the less crazy these things sound!

What we are actually witnessing is policing. Policing everywhere.

The judge was shady and will now have a hearing. I doubt they held her long. It’s rough, but the feds are making her an example by charging her. People are shocked bc they never see policing in their tender neighborhoods. These police actions are actually helping low income people who suffer the most from criminal actions in their neighborhoods. Ask the neighbors how they feel. The rich people are sad when they read about it in their sunlit kitchens. Just another angle. Wealthy people don’t usually feel the impact of crime or resource pressures bc their kids go to private school and their neighborhoods are isolated.

He is not doing this for his mega donors

In a COURT HOUSE, not a COURT ROOM. That is the difference. She didn't want the circus in HER COURT ROOM.

So what? Her courtroom is a public place where agents can lawfully make an arrest without a judicial warrant. Her desire to avoid “a circus” has nothing to do with anything.

Nope. A judge has full jurisdiction over the four corners of the courtroom. If you cede that to ICE, then it is another piece of lawlessness that is normalized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If this judge is not corrupt, then there is no such thing as a corrupt judge. And I’m pretty sure corrupt judges are a whole thing in this country. Until recently they have been a protected class of criminal, kind of like illegal aliens. The party is over and we dodged a bullet, probably a lot of them.

If a judge is harboring a fugitive in their home as is alleged in New Mexico, that would be illegal. A judge keeping jurisdiction over their own courtroom, is not a violation of the law. Have some common sense, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Charging and arresting a judge on charges that won’t stick is the circus.

Do people here realize that this has happened before during the first Trump administration? These are real charges and the results of her trial will be unpleasant. She won’t go to jail most likely but she’ll pay a price.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/25/hannah-dugan-shelley-joseph-immigration-00311183

[Anonymous]

This administration - run by a convicted felon - which has pardoned the January 6 attackers and refuses to follow the constitution or even obey the Supreme Court, does not have the moral high ground here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
BTW, getting arrested in the court house is not unusual. If a suspect has an appointment with the court, a lawyer, you know he might be there. I knew a friend whose ex husband had her arrested (detained actually, not fully arrested) in front of the court house for violating a civil protective order. During her divorce. They had probably 5 million in assets together. They released her shortly thereafter. But it was messy. The more you know the less crazy these things sound!

What we are actually witnessing is policing. Policing everywhere.

The judge was shady and will now have a hearing. I doubt they held her long. It’s rough, but the feds are making her an example by charging her. People are shocked bc they never see policing in their tender neighborhoods. These police actions are actually helping low income people who suffer the most from criminal actions in their neighborhoods. Ask the neighbors how they feel. The rich people are sad when they read about it in their sunlit kitchens. Just another angle. Wealthy people don’t usually feel the impact of crime or resource pressures bc their kids go to private school and their neighborhoods are isolated.

He is not doing this for his mega donors

In a COURT HOUSE, not a COURT ROOM. That is the difference. She didn't want the circus in HER COURT ROOM.

So what? Her courtroom is a public place where agents can lawfully make an arrest without a judicial warrant. Her desire to avoid “a circus” has nothing to do with anything.

Nope. A judge has full jurisdiction over the four corners of the courtroom. If you cede that to ICE, then it is another piece of lawlessness that is normalized.

Not true and irrelevant anyway. As documented in the court filings, the ICE agents were not in her courtroom. They were seated outside in the public hallway of the courthouse where they had every legal right to make an arrest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This administration - run by a convicted felon - which has pardoned the January 6 attackers and refuses to follow the constitution or even obey the Supreme Court, does not have the moral high ground here.

Of course they do. The judge was wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this judge is not corrupt, then there is no such thing as a corrupt judge. And I’m pretty sure corrupt judges are a whole thing in this country. Until recently they have been a protected class of criminal, kind of like illegal aliens. The party is over and we dodged a bullet, probably a lot of them.

If a judge is harboring a fugitive in their home as is alleged in New Mexico, that would be illegal. A judge keeping jurisdiction over their own courtroom, is not a violation of the law. Have some common sense, please.

Yes do have common sense. She is not charged with “keeping jurisdiction.” She is charged with obstruction of a proceeding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Logic.

I’m sorry but “logic” doesn’t suffice when you make a claim like that here. As has been stated hundreds of times across other topics you need to back up your claim with a link to proof.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a COURT HOUSE, not a COURT ROOM. That is the difference. She didn't want the circus in HER COURT ROOM.

Could you please post a link that can prove your assertion that the federal agents planned to effect the arrest in the court room?

Logic. They were in the courtroom. She sent him out the side door that led to the same hallway as the "public" door. And they didn't arrest him, PER THEIR FILING when the encountered him in the hallway and in the freaking elevator. The whole thing was a set up. Read the filing.

Every report says they waited outside the courtroom but inside the courthouse. The courthouse is a public space.

What do you suspect this was a setup for? Who is being set up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you direct the target of a federal warrant to an escape route that allows them to evade capture you have committed a crime.

too much common sense for the DCUM pro immigration crowd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This administration - run by a convicted felon - which has pardoned the January 6 attackers and refuses to follow the constitution or even obey the Supreme Court, does not have the moral high ground here.

Of course they do. The judge was wrong.

No, they don't. Because they are not following the law. They are also "wrong". They are exponentially more "wrong"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This administration - run by a convicted felon - which has pardoned the January 6 attackers and refuses to follow the constitution or even obey the Supreme Court, does not have the moral high ground here.

Of course they do. The judge was wrong.

No, they don't. Because they are not following the law. They are also "wrong". They are exponentially more "wrong"

It’s illegal to obstruct a lawful arrest. That’s a federal crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This administration - run by a convicted felon - which has pardoned the January 6 attackers and refuses to follow the constitution or even obey the Supreme Court, does not have the moral high ground here.

Check out ArtII.S1.C5.1 of the Constitution:

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Being a felon isn’t disqualifying.

ArtII.S2.C1.3.1 of the Constitution addresses the broad pardon power of a president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This administration - run by a convicted felon - which has pardoned the January 6 attackers and refuses to follow the constitution or even obey the Supreme Court, does not have the moral high ground here.

Of course they do. The judge was wrong.

No, they don't. Because they are not following the law. They are also "wrong". They are exponentially more "wrong"

What law did they break? Apparently there were two other arrests in that courthouse recently. Were those illegal?