Barbara Dahlgren gave a presentation about Mass Surveillance in Milwaukee at the April Meeting. The talk will be available on our YouTube, and here is the link to the slides:
Democrat Party Shenanigans Again: DNC Operative Filed to Block Our Presidential Candidate
According to the Associated Press, David Strange, a DNC staffer located in Milwaukee filed a complaint Wednesday alleging that our presidential candidate will not have any electors, and therefore cannot be on the ballot this fall. He also filed a complaint against the West Campaign regarding some issue pertaining to proper notarization. Clearly, the Democrats are up to their old tricks without any self-awareness regarding their “democratic” branding. The Democrats are probably the least democratic of any party considering the amount of energy they spend ensuring the public has no decision-making power whatsoever.
As we watch the coronation of Kamala Harris, who has not received a single vote this year, it is clear the DNC does not even trust their own deep blue supporters with democratically electing a nominee. Of course, this was a lesson since the 2016 DNC fraud lawsuit exposed that the DNC need not consider voters at all in its candidate selection process, that they did not have to follow their own charter, or that any monies given to a candidate would necessarily go to support the candidate. Bernie Sanders supporters found out their $220 million dollars was squandered in the DNC scam. One main argument from the DNC lawyer, Bruce Spiva, which the court agreed with, is that “No one has any right to an expectation of a fair election.” (10:35).
The Democrats have been complaining, as they did in 2020 and 2016, that this is the most important election of our lifetimes, and we must all vote for their candidate “to save democracy.” And yet, their vision of America features a ballot without options, or no ballot at all for the American people. In 2020, they challenged Howie Hawkins’ petitions on the basis that Angela Walker’s address had changed. While the party’s candidate could have been swapped out completely due to the timing of the national conventions, the implication of their allegation was that the thousands of signatures Wisconsinites put forth were given on false pretenses based on the change of address for a candidate who did not have to live in any specific district to run. Of course, since the Wisconsin Election Commission is bipartisan, rather than the previous non-partisan commission prior to the Walker administration, the three Democrats on the WEC were in the position to keep the Green Party off the ballot leaving our all volunteer organization to look for an attorney in a sea of high-dollar bi-partisan attorneys to take the case.
The Democrats are desperate to keep Greens off of the ballot because they know their candidates cannot win on merit. Of course, this complaint is similarly free of merit. Strange was likely referring to 8.18 which is the process for the electoral college, the undemocratic holdover of our founding fathers who distrusted the general public to elect their president. Oddly enough, the electoral college, rather than the popular vote, has been how Presidents G.W. Bush and Trump were elected. It has been more of an obstacle to Democrat candidates than anyone. And yet, the DNC would rather keep this undemocratic structure and use it to refuse other parties access to the ballot.
They argue that since the Green Party has nobody they feel meet the qualifications under point 1 of 8.18, that we ought not have a presidential candidate on the ballot. Except, they are wrong on several counts.
- Chester Todd is a candidate who would qualify under the most narrow reading of that passage.
- Precedent is very important in election law, and precedent is on the Wisconsin Green Party’s side. The Wisconsin Green Party has mostly been established since the 1996 Nader election garnered more than 1% of the statewide vote for the Green Party. So since 2000, the Wisconsin Green Party has used the same process for each election we’ve had established status. While we lost that status in 2018, Sharyl McFarland, a leader for human rights and our Secretary of State candidate, won it back in 2022.
- The process is outlined in that same section 8.18 in which the Green Party simply sends a list of electors (one in each Congressional District) in its paperwork for the fall ballot. Greens vote for Coordinating Council leadership by district each Fall, so the leaders of those districts have served as our electors in past elections. This makes far more sense than Strange’s reading of the law because it would take away the right of citizens to run for president under a party if that party didn’t already have enough people running and elected, a catch 22. Past Wisconsin Elections Commissions and Ethics Boards would have to have told past Green Party leadership this process for electors, which has been acceptable for more than twenty years.
- For example, in 2016, Jill Stein similarly gained ballot access and put forth her electors in an acceptable manner through her ballot status garnered by Ron Hardy’s nearly 3% of the 2014 Treasurer election vote.
Finally, because all of this rigging by the Democrats is really about calling the Green Party spoilers in their horse race, we in the Green Party continue to affirm that we are not Democrats and will not be voting for the Democrats whether or not our candidate is on the ballot. In fact, the Democrats continuing to claim our votes while being a party that values a foreign policy of war and a domestic policy of austerity is insulting and ridiculous.
While it would not be surprising if the Democrats’ complaint to withhold ballot options from citizens were satisfied, such an action would continue to chip at the illusion that the United States government is by the people, of the people, and for the people. The U.S. founding occurred because the founders said they were being taxed without their interests having representation as a British colony. With hundreds of billions of our tax dollars going out the door unquestioned to proxy-wars, bombing Palestinian children, and even giving Israel universal healthcare while Americans are denied such a service at home, it is quite clear that neither Republicans or Democrats represent ordinary Americans. Yet, they would like to continue to remain in power controlling hundreds of billions of our tax dollars to enrich themselves and wealthy corporations while ordinary people have lead in the water, millions are struggling with homelessness, thousands can’t afford to go to the doctor and even die from treatable medical issues, students are drowning in school debts, and more. This is completely unacceptable, and the Greater Milwaukee Green Party is committed to fighting for the needs of Wisconsinites and for a truly democratic and just system.
Assange Extradition Hearing Wrapup
Intro
I’ve been following Assange and wikileaks for years — both the supportive and critical coverage.
Assange’s collateral murder Iraq slaughter video engaged me.
The Ecuador president-change from Rafael Correa to Lenín Moreno in Ecuador lead to the brutal British emprisonment of Assange; this disturbs me — is morally wrong, and a threat to journalists and freedom of the press worldwide — the Hawkins campaign agrees..
This post was triggered by a Milwaukee researcher,a retired academic who covers the Assange situation daily.
I’m familiar with all the sources (except for Charles Glass). The content was finalized by me, but largely written by this researcher.
I introduce you to high integrity, writers and websites that counter the legacy media propaganda.
Assange hearing Coverage | good sources
https://shadowproof.com/2020/09/21/guide-to-journalists-assange-trial-upset-by-media-blackout/
- Kevin Gosztola
-
https://shadowproof.com/author/kgosztola/
Shadowproof managing editor Kevin Gosztola woke up every morning for four weeks in September to report on WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s extradition trial at the Old Bailey Criminal Courthouse in London.
- Craig Murray
-
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Craig_Murray#_ba6793509f3a9343b276e0446f18acd3
- Nils Melzer
-
https://www.gla.ac.uk/schools/law/staff/nilsmelzer/
UN Special Rapporteur on Torture; Human Rights Chair, Geneva Academy; Professor of International Law, University of Glasgow; Vice-President IIHL, Sanremo
https://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/torture/srtorture/pages/nilsmelzer.aspx
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Nils_Melzer
In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution I have never seen a group of democratic States ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law.
Swedish legal issues
Assange was accused of sexual misconduct by the Swedish authorities by two women — in fact there have been no charges, and there is evidence of a “setup” to smear him. Nils Melzer, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on torture, walks us through a detailed timeline:
https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange
A made-up rape allegation and fabricated evidence in Sweden, pressure from the UK not to drop the case, a biased judge, detention in a maximum security prison, psychological torture – and soon extradition to the U.S., where he could face up to 175 years in prison for exposing war crimes. For the first time, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, speaks in detail about the explosive findings of his investigation into the case of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.
cruel and unique punishment | illegal privacy violations should invalidate the hearing
Daniel Ellsburg’s case was thrown out for illegal privacy violations; Assange’s treatment
is similar. Listen to Charles Glass interview by Scott Horton:
https://dissentradio.com/radio/20_10_09_glass.mp3
Ellsberg interviewed by Kristina Borjesson | his case vs Assange’s
https://mcdn.podbean.com/mf/web/6hxhbk/WB_101620.mp3
Assange hearing summary
In the above @DEAcampaign video, Assange’s father, John Shipton; Assange’s friend and former U.K. Ambassador Craig Murray; Assange’s lawyer, Jen Robinson, current WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson: and WikiLeaks ambassador Joseph F. discuss the trial just after the end of the 4 weeks of witness testimony. This 40-minute video is worth the time spent to review key aspects of the testimony presented and key moments in the trial.
Joe Lauria | Editor Consortium News
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and Rebecca Vincent
Reporters without Borders (RSF) was the ONLY journalistic and humanitarian agency that monitored the trial.
After monitoring four weeks of evidence in the US extradition proceedings against Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange, Reporters Without Borders (RSF.org) reiterates concern regarding the targeting of Assange for his contributions to journalism, and calls again for his release. Expert testimony highlighted the political nature of the case against Assange, the US government’s lack of evidence for alleged harm caused, and urgent humanitarian concerns related to Assange’s physical and mental health. RSF also documented extensive barriers to open justice, which marred proceedings. The extradition decision is expected on 4 January 2021.”
Daily Hearing Updates
Reporter access to the hearings was unreasonably difficult — too few in-person slots; burdensome remote access hoops; poor technical implementation.
Craig Murray – Daily Summaries
Craig Murray (@CraigMurrayOrg) – former U.K. Ambassador to Uzbekistan – provided the most literate, informative daily summary by far with his blog posts that start with “Your Man in the Public Gallery.” To see this series of posts search his site for Assange Hearing — searching directly in the search box on his site is also good. Craig was in the courtroom each day along with Julian’s father from 10 am to 4 pm. He went home each day, ate, slept at 7 pm, awoke at 11 – midnight, reviewed his 30 or so pages of notes each day, researched as needed, and then showered dressed and wrote his summary that he posted at 9:30 am each day before walking to the courtroom, up 132 steps. His summaries are magnificent. Here is testimony from “Day 21” by Craig, which is Day 17 or 18 for others (Craig covered the trial in February and just kept counting.) Notice that the URLs are predictable, as in https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/10/your-man-in-the-public-gallery-assange-hearing-day-20.
assange-hearing-day-21 | Oct 1
twenty minutes sufficed for the reading of the “gist” of the astonishing testimony of two witnesses, their identity protected as their lives may be in danger, who stated that the CIA, operating through Sheldon Adelson, planned to kidnap or poison Assange […]
assangedefense.org
AssangeDefense.org or
@DefenseAssange
provided detailed, daily blow-by-blow descriptions of the case they were observing and tweeting out remotely in real time (Select one of the days to open the detailed description.)
I found them to be the most complete. But I would encourage one to read reports from multiple “observers.” — Ann B.
screenshot from https://assangedefense.org/live-blog/
The blog is a “Guide to Testimony in Julian Assange’s Extradition Hearing”.
Here we recap the major arguments and revelations from expert witnesses who testified in Julian Assange’s extradition — and why they matter legally. Topics range from the dangerous threat Assange’s indictment poses to journalism, to the abusive conditions Assange would face in the United States’ prison system, to the politicized nature of the Trump administration’s prosecution.
Green Party | Margaret Flowers commentary on Assange Hearing | Oct 5
https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/clearingthefogradioshow/CtF_Show_10_5_20.mp3?dest-id=122538
My notes from her 10min talk: hearing is: unfair to Assange; no privacy; atty-client talks snooped on; no crime; 175 year sentence; political case; will not release his sources; Assange spied on 24/7 for months. His rights have been violated / not enough time or resources to prepare.
UN Torture Report On Assange Is An Indictment Of Our Entire Society
“The evidence is overwhelming and clear,” Melzer said. “Mr. Assange has been deliberately exposed, for a period of several years, to progressively severe forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the cumulative effects of which can only be described as psychological torture.”
This mistreatment took it’s toll on Assange. I’ve heard several reporters talk about a “rubber head” torture effect. I think he has recovered somewhat, but I understand at one point he was having trouble speaking — even his own name.
Daniel Ellsberg testifies at Assange extradition hearing
Marc Steiner and Kevin Gosztola: