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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's claiming "judicial immunity."

Not sure that applies with obstruction of justice.

If it applies to Trump as president, then it applies to a judge in a court room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's claiming "judicial immunity."

Not sure that applies with obstruction of justice.

If it applies to Trump as president, then it applies to a judge in a court room.

I hope this isn’t the crux of her defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is a judge immune from an obstruction charge if there’s an articulable case to be made they were obstructing?

Or immune from ANY law, for that matter, by virtue of being a judge?

Could a judge be arrested for DUI? Or assault? Or tax evasion?

If yes, then aren’t those also authoritarianism, too?


Democrats are getting too far out over their skis here on this stuff.

Ok, so you are not getting it. She was arrested for adjudicating a case. Not hiding someone in her basement.

. She was arrested for helping an illegal alien avoid ICE. She will likely be censured by her supreme Court

I don't think she even adjudicated the case. Didn't she sneak him out first? Not very professional for a judge.

Wow, you’ve made a pretty big assumption. Were you there to witness this “sneaking,” and how did you come to the conclusion that she was “sneaking” him out?

Are these just some made up things that you are parroting from your Fox News thought bosses?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's claiming "judicial immunity."

Not sure that applies with obstruction of justice.

If it applies to Trump as president, then it applies to a judge in a court room.

I hope this isn’t the crux of her defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's claiming "judicial immunity."

Not sure that applies with obstruction of justice.

If it applies to Trump as president, then it applies to a judge in a court room.

I hope this isn’t the crux of her defense.

I think that she has an actual defense. This is just a motion to dismiss. If it’s dismissed, the there is no defense to present.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is a judge immune from an obstruction charge if there’s an articulable case to be made they were obstructing?

Or immune from ANY law, for that matter, by virtue of being a judge?

Could a judge be arrested for DUI? Or assault? Or tax evasion?

If yes, then aren’t those also authoritarianism, too?


Democrats are getting too far out over their skis here on this stuff.

Ok, so you are not getting it. She was arrested for adjudicating a case. Not hiding someone in her basement.

. She was arrested for helping an illegal alien avoid ICE. She will likely be censured by her supreme Court

I don't think she even adjudicated the case. Didn't she sneak him out first? Not very professional for a judge.

If I understand correctly, she didn’t adjudicate the entire case but she conferred with him and his counsel, ex parte, while the prosecutor was in the room but unaware of what was going on. That’s… unconventional. I know an attorney communicating ex parte with a judge is a huge no-no, probably sanctionable. Whether it’s a problem for a judge to do probably depends on the facts. Here, the prosecutor and witnesses were in the courtroom. Instead of calling up the case and including them, she and the guys attorney unilaterally decided to continue the case and picked the next court date. I’ve never seen that happen in 20 years of practicing. I certainly don’t think it’s worth a jail sentence… but yeah she was doing some improper things to help the guy out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Damn she’s hard on the eyes….. yeeesh.

Really? That’s your comment?

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Signed, sealed, delivered, ohhh yeahhh

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's claiming "judicial immunity."

Not sure that applies with obstruction of justice.

If it applies to Trump as president, then it applies to a judge in a court room.

She wasn’t in the courtroom. And helping an illegal alien evade arrest is not part of her official duties.

[Anonymous]

She’s not going to don her robe again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She’s not going to don her robe again.

I hope you’re right. That’s the least that should happen.

[Anonymous]

That video is hardly a smoking gun that some of you think it is.

The initial story made it sound like she helped him sneak out and evade through private access. That's not what was shown. That hallway and exit were public access. The judge had no detention orders for this person so she had no obligation to detain him or prevent him from leaving.

He wasn't running or even hurrying to flee in the hall. He and his lawyer were both walking very calmly. They even road the elevator down with agents without any issue. The running didn't start until he had exited the courthouse and the agents verbally identified themselves to detain him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That video is hardly a smoking gun that some of you think it is.

The initial story made it sound like she helped him sneak out and evade through private access. That's not what was shown. That hallway and exit were public access. The judge had no detention orders for this person so she had no obligation to detain him or prevent him from leaving.

He wasn't running or even hurrying to flee in the hall. He and his lawyer were both walking very calmly. They even road the elevator down with agents without any issue. The running didn't start until he had exited the courthouse and the agents verbally identified themselves to detain him.

The victims of this illegal alien were waiting in the courtroom. So she adjourned the hearing so the scumbag could get away. The video makes that clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That video is hardly a smoking gun that some of you think it is.

The initial story made it sound like she helped him sneak out and evade through private access. That's not what was shown. That hallway and exit were public access. The judge had no detention orders for this person so she had no obligation to detain him or prevent him from leaving.

He wasn't running or even hurrying to flee in the hall. He and his lawyer were both walking very calmly. They even road the elevator down with agents without any issue. The running didn't start until he had exited the courthouse and the agents verbally identified themselves to detain him.

Some parties are desperate to see the righting of this wrong. The problem is, the “wrong” in this case is a big old hurt feeling. When this case is finally dismissed, I would love to see an investigation of the judge that signed the arrest warrant