Can a judge get arrested for upholding the law? Well, you know what, they can, and they have been in Milwaukee. And to fill this in, John Roda Bush is going to give us the story.
Well, uh, The summary from the article says, in a criminal complaints.
My fault because this is so you know, you're good for your intro. And then I'm just gonna I mean, in a second, I'm gonna.
Start three again. So they have a cute you need to do that.
I'm the one editing it.
You don't need, okay, because because I was told to do that back in the day. That was something that I was told to do.
So yeah, okay, yeah, I didn't mean to sound as snappy.
That everybody's got there. Everybody's got their process, man, and I just you know, that was the process. And if you want to change it, that's cool with me.
That's yeah.
I guess I can just toss it up. Now, I'll toss this up and then whenever you're ready, John, you can start talking and I will cut it. I'm going to make a note of the time anyway, Okay.
All right. The summary from the article in a criminal complaint the US Justice Department said Hannah Dugan, a Milwaukee County Circuit judge, hindered the immigration agents who showed up to arrest a man without a judicial warrant outside her courtroom on April eighteenth, and that she tried to help him evade arrest by allowing him to exit through a jewelry door. Agents arrested the man, Eduardo Flores Ruis, outside
the courthouse after he left with his lawyer. Interestingly, she was within her authority to not allow compliance with a non judicial warrant, which are invalid under the constitution. So was she just doing her job to protect somebody's rights? And what is happening to our institutions? Let's discuss this, Kelly.
Yeah, I think it is something worthy of discussion. There is this is you know, puts a lot of things into question. Jason, let's go to you. Does this case remind you of anything else? Yeah?
Man, Like my partner as a clinician, you know, and they work with homicidal suicidal populations, do intensive outpatient and patient stuff, and a lot of the patients they see are part of the LGBTQ community. Now, what my partner's brought up is, you know, we're here, We're here in Texas.
What my partner's brought up is, you know, all this crap going on right now with Paxton and Abbott and all the you know lawsuits against them by p FLAG for gender affirming care and supposed to give up information and not treat people. And my partner made a good point is that how can they ask me to not treat people whenever I took an oath to do no harm?
Right.
So, if we take this judge and it seems like this judge actually takes their job serious as opposed to being incentivized by capital gains or by you know, motives or political prowess or YadA YadA, seems like the judges you know, actually wants to do their job properly and follow law. I think this judge is completely in their right to just follow law. It makes no statement on their political affiliation. It makes no statement on if they even thought that guy was a decent per. That guy
could have been a piece of garbage human being. That's not the argument. The argument is are we following the law and are we doing and applying it across the board and following it or are we violating it whenever we see it? When it seems fitter we deem it to be. Hey, it's just yet convenient. So I backed the judge's decision to follow the law and do the
thing that she took an oath to do. I think anything otherwise would be morally corrupt and honorable, yeah, and dishonorable, and would be spitting in the face of the loose foundation that we have to uphold justice and freedom and liberties and our interesting nation. So that's kind of how I feel about it, man.
I think this judge really showed integrity, and I've alla he said that if I ever win the lottery, the first thing I'm going to buy is a judge, and this is the kind of judge I want to buy one.
That's good. Like the never mind, John, you can't.
Say that I made sure. This is difficult to talk about, you know, because of the amount of because it does stem from political sided just campaigns right now, right, Yeah.
The narrative is what they're trying to do with.
This related to a specific group.
ELI, what kind of legal team that does the judge have backing your up in this case?
That was kind of like the first thing I went to because I was like, my thought was like can you imagine being the prosecutor that has to try to convict somebody who is like, like the defendant is.
A judge, is a judge for a lawyer?
Right? Of course, she she's fully completely capable of whatever herself, but she decided to enlist some help, so she leading the team. This isn't the entirety of it, but she has former US Attorney Stephen Biscopic and former US Solicitor General Paul Clement. I'm not familiar with their careers at all, except that Judge Dugan got her law degree in nineteen eighty seven and was actually the president of the Milwaukee
Bar Association for a year starting in nineteen ninety nine. Yeah, and then so Biscupic has been practicing law since eighty nine, and Clement got his Juris Doctor from Harvard in nineteen ninety two. The prosecution team, on the other hand, I had the name of it, and I don't remember. I didn't write it down. I thought I did. I apologize. But the prosecutor that is leading the prosecution got his law degree in twenty nineteen, so this, of course, he
has six years of experience. That's more like I'm not disparaging his legal experience or knowledge, because I've of course been no place to do that. But he's going up against Appeal Team six here, and they just doesn't seem like now there's there is some more weight and a little bit more like experience on the prosecution team as well. Like I just didn't write those names down, unfortunately, I was focused on Judge Dougan. But I'm kind of I'm really actually interested like it, in so far as one
can be interested in court cases. I'm kind of interested in seeing how this goes.
Yeah, I am too this, Yeah, I definitely want to keep I hope we'd follow up on this in the future. On the on the show, John, what was Dugan's main reason for standing in the way of the federal agents? And you think number one it was legal and two moral.
Well, the main reason was that they did not have a warrant signed by a magistrate or judge listing specifically who they have to You know, on a warrant, you have to have the name of the person you're going to arrest. If you're looking for anything in their house or something that has to be listed specifically what you're there to get. You can't do anything other than what's
on the warrant. But these warrants are just warrants that Homeland Security made up, their imaginary they made them up, and they're just pieces of paper that they can show somebody saying, I have a warrant for your arrest. But it's not because it's not signed by judge about this, it's not done by a magistral warrant. It's just it's not an official warrant. It's and and so you know this.
Is I just want to break into this.
I just want to break in for one moment. Do you know when the last time they use these these non judicial warrants to round people up?
Oh? Yeah, that would be the Japanese Internment.
War, Yes, the Japanese Internment the World War Two. This is exactly what we're doing. One of the greatest embarrassments in human history, and we're repeating it. So I'm just sorry to cut you off, John, go ahead.
Oh no, I was going to bring that up anyway later on, but yeah, yeah, well, I'm glad. I just wanted to say that, you know, these these pseudo warrants are totally invalid. You can't use them. They can pretend to use them, and they're allowed to lie. All law enforcement officials are allowed to lie, to con you into things that you don't know that you don't want to do, you know. So, like they'll sit you down and interrogate
you for sixteen hours. They can't do that if you want to leave, you say, you know, am I under arrest. If you're under arrest, they have to give you food and water, you know, like that. If they don't have enough to arrest you, they can't keep you, you know. So it's like all these constitutional things have to go. But it didn't matter. In the Japanese FDR, the president at the time signed an executive order to round up all the Japanese citizens these are citizens of the United
States and put them in internment camps. They didn't even get a chance to settle their affairs. Some of them were really lucky. They had a neighbor, a white neighbor or something, who would run their farm for them while they're interred for the however long they were going to be interred, and they kept their farms. But people had mortgages and houses they were foreclosed on. They they lost their house, They lost everything they owned that was in it.
Everything was gone, and they did that because the narratives said, Japanese people are evil, so we got to get them so they won't be spies for the Empire of Japan. These were US citizens. They probably the US government than the American citizens. Do you know other exeriances do. But that's and that happened the whole war. They were they were stuck there. They couldn't make any money, they couldn't
run their businesses, they couldn't they couldn't do anything. Some of them were really lucky if they were well connected, somebody covered for them while they were gone. Most of those doing far between they had one. Yeah, but that's the same sort of thing they're doing now. And that's a mistake.
This is what I mean. This was something that we that we know was unlawful. The courts ruled that was unlawful afterwards, and we are now doing the same exact same thing, and and and just just like back then, there aren't a lot of people well back then, nobody
was standing up. But today there aren't a lot of people who are standing up to say something because because because in the current climate, I think people are afraid to say something in support of somebody like this judge lest they find themselves in an El Salvador in prison for the next ten years.
Well take me, I'm good, I protest. I'm sorry. I'm not gonna let this.
I don't know that much to lose, man, right, I mean, I know Thoms let alone ten years, so I'm not going to suffer too much.
But luckily to be overquick for you man.
Yeah right, probably me too.
That reality is reality, it is.
Yeah.
So anyway, so you know, I am involved in doing some protesting. So that's and I can't tell anybody else to do they you use your own conscience. But yeah, I swore an oath to the Constitution myself, so I take that seriously, even if they don't.
Eli, do you think I was putting policy over people in this case?
Yeah, obviously. And is that so it's it's because of the directives they've received, right, And it's far from the worst example, but it is. It is just another example of them doing that exact thing. I think it's pretty clear that the focus the interest of these directives is that we demonstrate that they are working, not that they work. It doesn't matter whether they are like effective and achieving. What is actually like a coherent and valid and productive
immigration policy. It matters that X number of people get deported, because if X number of people get deported, then wow, this new immigration plan did so much to affect illegal immigration,
whether that's really the case or not. So what actually does concern me though about this particular case is that even if, like we said before, even if the judge and her and her team are her defense team are perfectly capable of defending her, if if the prosecution is not able to prove beyond a doubt that there was that she broke any actual law, rather than or Ron Swanson, like I have a permit, you know, written on a piece of paper in a public park, like then that
may not necessarily matter, like it should absolutely, but like I have concerns about like what's going to be decided anyway? Will she just be made an example of? And uh, I think that that's that's the scary part that we need to know that we need to watch for, not whether or not she is successful in her case, but whether she should have been.
Well, yeah, that's one thing, but also you know, whatever, she didn't break any laws. There's no law that says you have to cooperate with an ice agent, you know. So it's like and she had a reason to chew them away, right.
I'm sure she has like as far as making like legally sound decisions, she has more information to integrate than than I do, of course.
Yeah. But that's what I'm saying is that the whole idea that this is a sound bite, right, This is just a message to the judicial system saying you're at risk too. This is totalitarian, authoritarian usurption of the judicial branch.
Yep.
And there was somebody said recently that there have been administrative threats made even to the Supreme Court. So it's like, at this point we are in a major constitutional crisis, and that's what they wanted to engineer.
That's, you know, strangely enough, John, in my notes for this segment, I wrote that what I thought was the biggest red flag in this whole story, And I don't know if anybody else noticed it, but it was the actual actual constitution bending statement to show you that the leader of the Justice Department currently is either incredibly evil or just plane fucking stupid. And what she said was no one, least of all a judge should obstruct law
enforcement operations. Now, if a law a law enforcement operation isn't legal. That's exactly what a judge's job is. That is literally the judgment.
That's what they do. They go to a judge just sign it all, you know, They go to a judge assigned the order for a warrant. They never know. Their job is to either allow or obstruct and inhibit. That is what the judge for.
And this is the leader of the Justice Department saying judges stay out of my way.
Fucking fuck man. Now, this is fascism. That's all this is. And I've never and I don't ever use that word because I feel like people use it in a really hyperbolic way. And I don't want to sound just like some looney fascist nazi blah blah blah. No, but that is fascism. That's having laws on the books and just be like, eh, eh, I said it. That's a that's silly, that's silly. How aren't we past that? You know, it's like fucking.
We really have to give to these people, right, So, I mean, you know, come on, that's just ridiculous.
It's it's the point where you stop pretending that public servants are public servants. Is basically like that's I think I think it's yeah, where it becomes fascism.
I don't understand it because it's like I've been screaming about this shit on stage with fucking punk rock and oil bands for for fucking twenty five years. Man, It's like we've we've been talking about it going on. I think I think punk rock more or less started because
of fucking Reagan. You know what I'm saying, It's it's all American, like hardcore is like was like a response to that shit, man, I mean, and all we're seeing is like very similar policies from you know, the early like late seventies, early eighties that even the same terminology, the same catchphrases, things like that being proliferated now but to an extreme that is so blatant and in your face and so obvious. But yet people are just drinking
it up like mother's milk. Man, It's fucking insane. It blows my mind to watch this happening. I feel like I'm in a twilight zone or something. I don't know what's happening.
Well, Like and like what Pam Bondi said about the you know, not obstructing law enforcement operations like that reminds me of I was actually thinking about it earlier today, Like unrelated to this episode, people view police as synonymous with like legally correct right and the same way that God is synonymous with morally good in most Christian views. So for that reason, not only is it acceptable for God to take your life, but it is morally good
for God to take your life because God doing it. Yeah, it is moreally virtuous. So when you have a group of people that you define as legal, like as synonymous with legal, uh good. Already they are synonymous with the law. Nothing they do can be wrong. So they have more of a right to defend themselves than I do. They have a more of a right to kill me than I do.
I think, Yeah, I'm sorry, sorry, I'm sorry. You may think of something, please finish.
That's right. But yeah, it's basically just that it's it's you have this group of people and it's not super difficult to like be qualified to be a police officer, Like are there are some physical demands? Yes, I'm not thinking, but like like I went through Marine Corps boot camp, Like if I can make it through Marine Corps boot camp at that's like the way that I looked when I went in. There's no reason that anybody can't you know,
make it. Sorry that's hyperbolic, but like fit people can make it through the police academy and and it's it's
not like it's you need know the huge qualification. So when you have this, this group of people that the majority of the population is a subset or it is a subset of the majority of the population, then you just have person after person after person that like just has more rights than me and can defend themselves and has more of a right to live because if they kill me, then all they just have to say that they felt they were in danger or that I was
a danger to someone, and they're going to be believed. I agree with you.
I think it's pathetic, especially especially as somebody who you know has currently has professional well lined up until the car drops, but professional fighting has been doing that shit for twenty years. It's insane to me that these guys who are supposed to serve and protect like can barely get in and out of their cruiser. And that's not shaming anybody for body size or weight or struggles or anything,
but like you, as a marine, you have prerequisites. You have to do certain things in order to be trusted to do certain things. If you're driving around all day with a gun on your fucking hip and a taser and the right to just an immunity and to kill fucking people, but you can't, like you can't do ten push.
Ups, you don't have like you don't know how to actually.
Hand to hand. We have guys coming to the gym. I was offered a position training HPD here in town by sergeant one of the hiring officers. It didn't work out, but it was. It was there because the concern that they're having these recruits. My bud, good friend of mine, who as a sergeant in the HBD, said, these guys are coming out they've never been in a fistfight in their lives. They've never been in a violent altercation. They're coming out of community college now months later, they have
a gun. They've never been in a violent confrontation in their lives. They're coming from like upper middle class families. They just probably didn't do very well in school, and they're gonna do cop stuff or whatever, and it's it's just kind of the thing they're doing. And then they show up and they get a gun. They can shoot somebody fucking insane, but they don't even do hand hand combat. I got twenty years of jiu jitsu, you know, I don't need to carry a fucking gun.
And everybody thinks they handle themselves with that gun. And it's a scary person. That is one thing that I have absolutely freaked out when I've experienced that. How many people think that, oh, they're highly trained guys. It was like, you know what, the military is highly trained guys, and twenty guys in a battlefield can keep their head. Yeah, about five percent, one is twenty.
It's crazy, Kelly. If there's one thing I know, I grew up in very violent environment. We've all talked about it. I was getting into fist fights every day. I mean, I grew up in gang stuff. I know violence. I know public violence, I know group violence, I know riots. I feel very comfortable in a violence situation. Most people freeze. Plus I do professional violence. I love it. It's fun. I'm really good at it. But I recognize that ninety nine point nine to nine percent of people don't want
to do violence. And when you have somebody who can't even handle themselves in violence with their bare hands, the first thing they're gonna do is kill somebody, and they're going to harm somebody, and they're gonna just they're gonna shoot a poor African American kid in the back, or it's gonna be somebody who's in it because they're going to tackle an Asian man and break his skull. You
know what I'm saying, old Asian man and braver. You know all the things we've been seeing lately in the past two months, just fucking murdering people and getting away with it because they're they're given this, like they're primed by by churches to say, all authority is put in the place a fucking by God. And since this cop is your quote authority, him shooting your fucking neighbor was
the best thing and God wanted it. That's the assumption, and that's the insinuation, and that's what you're forced to fucking suck down. And I think it's bullshit. You're just scared fucking people hiding behind a corrupt structure. Good point.
And you know what, speaking of authority, I'm going to give everybody the authority to check out more nonprofits