You're listening to Civic Media.
You can tune into any of our live shows on any radio station across the state with the Civic Media app.
Find us in your phone's app store and listen anytime, anywhere.
Welcome, welcome, welcome to Civic Media Mid-Mornings on the Civic Media Radio Network.
My name is Greg Bach.
I'm your host, your buddy, your pal and a gentleman.
who really believes in all things you.
I'm so happy you're here joining us today, sharing time.
If you want to be part of the conversation, 855-752-4842-855-757.
Leave a comment on the live stream.
We are currently on Facebook, YouTube and the platform that we still call Twitter.
Really, really good show for you today.
I feel like, Ed.
Sullivan right there really good show for you today.
We got a really good show He's here for a while today.
We got him here for pretty much an hour.
Mr. Jim Santel host of amicus a law review We'll be talking about all the major news coming out of the world of law including News on Judge Hannah Duggan's case.
There's more information to talk about there the Supreme Court is apparently going to allow California to do its thing at this moment.
They should I should say and
an DOJ employee, assistant US attorney has a thought on how their job is in this current department of justice.
Then Paul Noonan from the Acme packing company with sports.
There's an Olympic happening.
There's a Super Bowl happening.
And then there is, I guess the bucks had a really good victory last night.
So we'll talk more about that with Paul.
And then a handy tip from Greg to you.
to the world, but specifically for all of us.
We all want to take the advice.
I'm not saying I'm the greatest advice giver, but I'm just saying, you know, these tips are just about as much for me as they are for you.
But I want to start right here with a story that's coming out of the Wisconsin public radio website.
This is Josh.
I'm sorry.
Joe Schultz has the byline business groups are business groups sue to Blockport, Washington residents from interviewing, interfering with
Tids Tids are what's called a tax increment district.
It is what what's what local municipalities will approve things that will help businesses come in give them whether it's tax credits tax breaks things of that nature, but tax incremental increment districts They're most likely in your municipality as well.
There's usually commissions that head up each tid and the reason why
the Port Washington is being sued by business groups regarding this is because this spring there will be a measure on the ballot that possibly will give people a little more power in what comes into their town business wise.
So business groups are suing the city of Port Washington, challenging the legality of a proposed ordinance that would give residents more power over local development incentives.
the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce, along with six other groups filed lawsuits against Port Washington and its city clerk in Ozaki County last month.
The ordinance in question has been approved to be on the ballot this year, spring elections.
So this is happening in April for them after residents collected enough signatures on a petition to force the city council to take action.
Now, this is all sort of coming from the place of data centers.
We talked.
with no data centers to forest earlier this week.
We've been speaking to other folks about this topic.
We've been hearing stories of groups, individuals coming into their city council meetings and talking about these businesses, trying to build huge structures, which would, for some feel like it does damage on the environment, for other feels, it's going to do damage to their utility bill.
But we're seeing more folks waking up to the fact that these data centers are trying to come into almost all of our.
areas of the state and the country and the people of port Washington want to have more to say.
And the reason why is because we spoke about last year a plan to bring a data center in and after pretty much everything had gone through, the people stood up and said, wait a minute, this is not what we want.
And it was too late.
So in a measure from the people, they want to put something in place that says we have
the ability to speak more, have more of a voice on what kind of businesses have incentives coming into our community.
And because of this, they are being sued, not the people, the county and the city, they are all being sued by these business groups.
The proposal comes after Port Washington approved creating a TID for a massive 15 billion with a B data center campus that has drawn back
Strong pushback from local residents, data center opponents have even launched a recall effort against Port Washington's mayor.
One resident says, you slip the vantage data center project under our feet without giving us a voice, without giving us a vote, without respecting the will of the people you serve.
That comes from Tracy Finch at a December council meeting.
And the belief is that this goes against a state statute that dictates the process and approving tids.
This is stated by Dale Kojenga, who is the president of the Metro Milwaukee Association of Commerce.
He's also a former member of the state Senate.
He served from 2019 till 2023.
He served as a Republican.
He is now the president of the MMAC.
And he says, a measure of this nature would not only conflict with state law, it would be devastating for economic development in Port Washington and would set a dangerous precedent with long lasting economic impacts across the region and throughout the state.
Other groups that joined the lawsuit, along with MMAC, was the Associated General Contractors of Greater Milwaukee, building advantage of the Commercial Association of Realtors, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Realtors Association.
I'm gonna read that again, Calvin.
The Commercial Association of Realtors Wisconsin.
That's one group.
And then the other group, Wisconsin Realtors Association and the N-A-I-O-P Wisconsin and Sid Sealants LLC at the end there.
They're saying that the state already dictates how tids are created and that's fine.
This can then go to court.
This can then maybe just be decided by...
Appeals be decided by the Woodsconson State Supreme Court.
I don't know where this is going to go.
And if the argument's being made that it bucks against state statutes, then that is something that needs to be handled.
It is on the ballot though, regardless.
And also, if state statute dictates, change the statute then.
I don't feel like the people shouldn't have a say in what's going on here.
I feel like more transparency is better for the community, better for the leaders, better for everybody.
And
coming at it from the point of view of this is going to be devastating for, what is it says here?
It says, this will be devastating for the process, irreparably harm employees, employers, taxpayers, and economic development interests in the city of Port Washington and throughout the region.
I get that language, I understand that, but if you're asking me to choose between whether or not the businesses have
All of the tax incentives, $15 billion tid created and the people don't know about it.
Then I'm going to side with the people and say maybe the statute needs to change.
Maybe there needs to be more public comment.
Maybe there needs to be a better way of informing everyone because we're seeing more and more individuals waking up to the fact that these.
businesses are coming in.
And in some instances, striking sweetheart deals for tax incentives, but also making individual sign NDA so they can't tell anyone either.
And the first time people find out about it is when they're voting on it.
So if this is all to open up the lanes of transparency for the people to understand who's coming into their town to set up businesses and reaping benefits from it, as well as things that could include
Hiking up your tax bill.
I'm not your tax.
I'm sorry your utility bill then I think it's I think it's worth the discussion I think it's worth talking about and I think it's worth Empowering folks to have a greater say in what happens in the in their backyard.
It's for their kids for their communities for their future
Alicia on the live stream says tids cause utility and property taxes to increase and hurt fire and police departments as well as every other offering from your municipality.
I mean, that's the thing is.
Do I think tids should go away?
I'm not going to speak to that because you know, I would rather have an expert come in and talk about the pros and the cons.
But if we are talking about how it benefits the people in creating a tid, how does it benefit the community?
Something that.
Tricia from No Data Center DeForest said about Port Washington and the data center is going in now and saying, all right, you want to come in and you want to reap these rewards, you want these, you want all these tax breaks, all these incentives, all of these, all these abilities to use our land, then what are you going to do for us?
How are you going to incentivize the people?
Are you going to build, help build parks, revitalize buildings, give job opportunities?
Because as we know, data centers don't exactly provide
tens of thousands of jobs per building either.
And the question that we've asked for a while, and I've heard other people say is, you know, where data centers are right now, the size and the need, it's always about shrinking it, making it smaller, making sure you can run it as robotically as possible.
So you build a huge data center campus in Port Washington in 10 to 15 years.
Is that system still necessary?
Or they say, well,
We can actually do it for one third the size.
And this municipality won't make us do the things because the people don't know.
That is the question as well.
That is the conversation as well.
And people standing up and saying, we want a voice, we want to say, I think that's important.
I think that's very, very, that is a good part of the process.
And businesses saying,
Well, this is going to hurt us.
It will hurt you.
I don't know if it'll hurt the community.
The business might not come into town, but maybe you tell the people, Hey, here's our plan.
And they say we're on board.
It's about discussion, process, transparency, and involving anyone, not just the business leaders and the politicians, but the people whose land you are going to be possessing for the next, how many decades?
Gene from Eau Claire is on the live, is on the phone right now.
Gene, how are you doing this morning?
What say you?
Hey, doing great.
Thank you so much for this information because this is really significantly important.
We lived in a town where a lot of this was going on.
A lot of those tips didn't pan out.
People have their lives invested in their communities, their money, their jobs.
their families, their schools.
They need a voice, period.
They should be brought up in votes.
The people should get the information.
This is
Look at Foxconn.
Look at all the different places that have been conned with the people, and they lose out.
They lose their homes.
They lose a lot of different things.
They need to have a voice.
And that's my opinion.
Stick it to it.
And thank you very much, Greg.
This is so important.
Thank you.
Bye.
Bye, Gene.
Thank you so much for calling in.
I always appreciate hearing from you, my friend.
And look, man, I really love to hear from people who disagree with me because I feel like they're out there.
I feel like they're yelling at their radios or their apps.
Get the Civic Media app, by the way.
Put it on your phone or device.
Listen to us anywhere.
Even if you disagree with us.
I'm not saying...
At all, I will never say get rid of tids, get rid of business, get rid of all these things.
What I will always say and advocate for and always move towards first is saying if you bring more people into the discussion, if you bring more people into the process, you create transparency and you create a plan that not only benefits your company, which you should benefit, you should be paid, you should make money.
That's why you get into business.
But also if you can help the community, I don't understand why that's bad.
I don't understand why people will say to my face, you don't believe in capitalism, you don't believe in this and that.
I guess I just believe enough money is enough.
If a company is coming in and they're going to make billions of dollars, they can throw a billion dollars towards the community.
I'm sorry, but you can say over the next 10 to 15 years, we're going to invest $1.5 billion into the community so we can do these things.
So we can build a real partnership.
Again, this is all I'm talking about is partnerships here.
Transparency partnerships, growth for everyone, whether it's the family on Main Street or the business.
the business in the middle of the field that's processing our data.
I don't think that's a lot to ask.
I don't think that's a crazy idea.
I don't think I'm anti-American for saying it out loud.
But good on you, Port Washington, for raising your voice.
We'll find out what happens in April.
We'll find out what happens if it passes, if it goes deeper into the courts.
and see where this ends up.
Maybe restructuring the state statute on how businesses get put together here in the state of Wisconsin, but gotta stick around, gotta stay tuned, stay informed on Civic Media mid mornings.
My name is Greg Bach.
When we come back, more news on Wisconsin Eye and a future solid plan to make sure we can see what our lawmakers are talking about.
Stay close, stay tuned.
You're listening to Civic Media.
Stay up to date on the latest news and information for your local community and Wisconsin by signing up for our free email newsletter.
Visit civicmedia.us slash email to get
started.
75 civically the comment on that live stream.
We are streaming on Facebook, YouTube and the platform.
We still call Twitter still ahead after the 9 30 news.
We have Jim Santel here talking to us about all of the news coming out of the world of law, including an update on judge Hannah Dugan, former judge Hannah Dugan, as well as a one DOJ employees, Frank.
Thoughts on their job right now in 2026 and then of course Paul Newton was sports He's from the Acme packing company and then a handy tip from Greg to round it all out And then I'll let you go on your Thursday, but don't go anywhere.
We got lots of great stuff happening I Mentioned this before we went to the commercial we've kept
Calvin, I was going to say we've kept our eye on this, but I don't want to say that because the story is about Wisconsin Eye.
For those who don't know, Wisconsin Eye is essentially Wisconsin C-SPAN where it allows folks, groups, whomever wants to watch meetings and votes happening online to make sure we can stay.
Up to speed with what's going on in Madison It's an organization that's a nonprofit news organization that livestreams and archives government meetings and legislative sessions and it resumed coverage this month after being off the air for nearly I believe seven weeks because it could not afford to keep the the lights on essentially Earlier this month by earlier, I mean like early this week the
Joint Committee on Legislative Organization infused the group about $50,000 cash.
They currently have a GoFundMe campaign.
I think they've raised a little over $50,000, but there has been a move towards financing it with a trust.
And the story goes like this is what happened is the state said, we will give you 10.
When you read it on paper now, you're like, this seems ridiculous for a small organization, but
They were going to be given ten million dollars as an endowment from the state if They could match the dollars up to ten million dollars.
So this group Which was seeking to just live stream our legislative sessions It says well you allocated ten million dollars to Wisconsin I if you could raise ten million will give you the matching dollars up to ten million dollars that is
I was next, I mean, it wasn't impossible, but it was very, very difficult.
And that was said by Marco Connell, who's the chair of Wisconsin, Iowa's board of directors.
It just became a thing of impossibility to make those matching funds under an assembly proposal.
And this makes me very happy.
because this is not only, this looks like it's moving forward, but it's bipartisan between the minority and the majority leader, the assembly speaker, I should say, Robin Voss and Greta Neubauer last month to eliminate the matching fund aspect and give them the $10 million endowment so Wisconsin, I can still be on the air.
And we can see our leaders at work.
We can, and again, this goes back to what we were talking about earlier with Port Washington.
about the tids, about the vote.
This is all about transparency.
The people have the right to see their leaders work.
And after Wisconsin and I went dark, elected officials made it very difficult for folks to record these sessions because there was no other method.
There are rules in place right now, Madison, that say unless you are an elected official or part of certain groups, you cannot record these proceedings.
So
Because of all that, because of the consternation, because of the outcry, and people actually realizing what Wisconsin I was and found out too, by the way, one of the biggest groups that uses this are the lobby groups.
They watch Wisconsin I all the time because they want to see what people are voting for.
Maybe some of their people, what they're voting for.
But this is all good to me.
I think this is fantastic.
I think this is important.
And we're at a proposal right now.
It's moved through.
We'll see where it goes next.
But I will say this wholeheartedly, thank you Minority Leader Greta Neubauer.
She is a Democrat from Racine, and we all know Assembly Speaker Robin Voss from right here in this area in Racine County, Rochester, Republican Democrat coming together to get this taken care of, not just with a $50,000 infusion, that's great.
They can do what they need to do over the time being, but if they can get the $10 million, that would cover them for about a decade.
And maybe between now and 2036,
There is a more sustainable plan put together in perpetuity that always makes sure Wisconsinize never on the chopping block and never has to go dark because when we can't see what our leaders are doing, that is bad for democracy.
We are seeing that all the time now.
So this is to me a matter of saying kudos to Robin Voss and Greta Neubauer.
Thank you for getting this done.
I hope it goes all the way through before you go on your.
Very long vacation this year again short work year for the leaders up in Madison They're almost done Like nine months off fully paid benefits podium But in this time that they're working they're getting things done and they're doing it together and they're doing that for us And I hope that this goes all the way through Going back to what we were talking about earlier at least so left another comment on the live stream regarding
Whether or not tids are good, bad, or should be gotten rid of, she says, I agree.
Don't get rid of tids completely, but they must be beneficial for the community.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
It's just about process.
I'm not asking a lot.
I think it's kind of like with Wisconsinite.
Hey, we need to be able to see what our leaders are doing.
We need to be able to see what was being said in these meetings regarding massive,
benefits plans for these companies whether it's tax breaks, tax incentives, things like that, we should know.
The people should know.
They should have every chance to be a part of this and it shouldn't just be at the last minute.
So we'll keep an eye on Port Washington.
We'll keep an eye on this piece of legislation, this proposal.
We'll see if it goes through, but these are all good moments for transparency and democracy and the people.
I just think that's great.
So I'm going to celebrate that.
I'm going to celebrate so much, I want to have a guest on to celebrate it.
And my guest is going to be Jim Santel.
We're going to be talking about all the things coming out of the world of law on the other side of the news.
So don't go anywhere, grab some snacks, grab a water, come on back.
You're listening to Civic Media, mid mornings.
My name is Greg Bach.
Stay tuned and stay close.
Welcome.
Welcome back to Civic Media, mid mornings here on the Civic Media radio network.
My name is Greg Bach.
I'm your host, your buddy, your pal, your.
co-conspirator and all things resting, relaxing, taking care of you.
That's what I'm about, about that in your life.
You are here today.
You are sharing time with us.
If you want to be part of the conversation, always call text.
That's the same number.
No matter what you do, 855-752-4842-855-75 civic.
Leave a comment on the live stream.
We are currently streaming on Facebook, YouTube and the platform that we still call Twitter.
Still ahead, we have Paul Noonan from the Acme Packing Company talking all things bucks, talking all things Super Bowl and all things Olympic.
So don't go anywhere.
Lots of that coming forth.
And then a handy tip from Greg.
And today I'm talking to a gubernatorial candidate in Florida on how you can find new voters.
And this method is not what you think it is.
Now, before we get moving on, just want to remind everybody, sorry, I took a long pause there.
I want to do dramatic pause.
That's dram dramatics.
Grandma get the civic media app on your device whether it's your phone or your Tablet you can call text you can leave a comment or you can leave a voice note
be a part of the conversation, find out your news, customize it to where you live, but the Civic Media app is great and it's absolutely free.
Take us with you wherever you go, including all over the world, so get that Civic Media app, put it on your device and join us, be part of the conversation.
Now, it's Thursday, it's 9 30 something, and we have the host of Amicus Law Review, former U.S.
Attorney, current practicing attorney, Mr. Jim Santel on the show.
Good morning, Jim.
How are you today on this blustery February morning?
Yeah, we're going to start.
We have more news coming out of the Hannah Dugan case now, just as a really quick version.
Hannah Dugan was arrested last year on
charges of obstruction because she led a human being out of a room into another room where that human being was arrested.
She was then suspended.
She has been convicted.
She has resigned her position as a county district judge.
And now we are at this point where what is the news coming out of this case or this story?
Sure, we know for a number of weeks, actually ever since the conviction late last year that her attorneys appropriately defending her as they should aggressively and thoughtfully and file a number of motions.
They renewed a number of things that they raised.
Pre-trial matters related to things like the 10th Amendment and other matters.
Most recently, they have identified this issue.
My guess is they're basing a lot of their subpoenas happening in Minneapolis and they're saying that ICE did not have the authority.
to arrest the defendant, not Judge Dugan, but the individual who was appearing in front of her on an administrative warrant.
Remember this issue?
They were there in an administrative warrant, not a judicial warrant.
She actually said it was part of the trial.
You need to have a judicial warrant, not administrative warrant.
Well, her attorneys, among the many post-conviction motions they have raised, have now raised this issue and said the officials there, the ICE folks, did not have the authority in the first place to come in, to arrest,
And therefore everything that flowed from that is subject to not only review but plainly would trigger the dismissal of the count of the allegations or perhaps at a minimum a new trial.
Remember too that this is also part of other attacks as I mentioned already the 10th amendment.
And the one that I think is perhaps got the most legs if you will is this notion that the split verdict, your listeners remember this that she was acquitted on the misdemeanor but not on the
the felony that she was convicted on that, based principally upon a jury instruction given by Judge Edelman.
And they've also attacked that in some previous motions.
That's the one that I think does have at least some colorable merit.
None of these is frivolous.
Judge Lynn Edelman will now at some point have to resolve all of these.
post-conviction motions, unlikely he will grant any of them.
But what's going on here is it's setting up the appeal.
So presumably Judge Edelman will deny them.
He will then move to a sentencing proceeding, maybe sometime in the spring or summer of this year, he will impose a sentence highly unlikely.
It will be any jail time.
And then, and only then will she have the right to appeal to the Southern Circuit Court of Appeals, where you can identify all of these issues again.
You
made, allegedly made by the lower court and you can seek reversal.
I think there are some bases upon which the Seventh Circuit might look with great interest in this case, including these constitutional issues, including this instruction issue with respect that the two counts judge gave a different instruction for the two of them and resulted in a different result by the jury.
And if in fact either one of those instructions was wrong, it could be that the case could be returned for a new trial.
So lots of things not yet
resolved but again recent motions having to do with the authority of ICE agents to execute warrants based upon administrative authority as opposed to judicial authority.
I'm gonna take it off in a moment here take it off the the course for a second and I think I felt like I saw a story that said there was some sort of approval or some sort of
statement by whether it was DHS or the White House saying that they no longer even need warrants.
They can just do what they want.
And because the question was always administrative versus judicial, what you need to do your job.
And now it sounds like they just want to say, don't worry about words at all.
Just go.
You're fine.
You don't need that piece of paper.
It's meaningless.
I think you're talking, Greg, appropriately about this stunning memorandum issued by somebody inside of Homeland Security, number of months ago, and plainly a part of the training, such as it has been, if there's been any of these folks indicating, yeah, just the fourth amendment, it's an amendment to this number four.
So don't regard it-
And way down the list, Jim, way down the list.
So when it comes to private homes, you want to go in, it's not quite this flip, but it's pretty darn close.
Yeah.
Basically giving-
authorizations that are not consistent with the law.
The home is the privacy place at the top of the list.
You need a judicial ward.
A determination by a judge says there's probable cause to believe there's criminal evidence in that location.
And you've got this memorandum that, again, I think everybody on all sides has condemned this as not being an accurate statement of law.
But if you're an ICE agent and you're given this memorandum and told by your superiors or bosses who are doing whatever legal training, practical training you're getting, that you can go in and you don't need to regard the Fourth Amendment and you can do these things without a warrant, that's what you do.
And that is why we're seeing some of this, again, continuing.
absolutely catastrophic illegal inhumane conduct going on in Minneapolis.
If you're just joining us on civic media mid mornings, we are talking to Jim Santel.
He's a former U.S.
attorney, current practice attorney and a host of amicus, a law review right here on the network Saturdays at nine to 11.
And really, you know, that talk about this maybe another time about the warrants itself.
It just it feels like when you say there's no warrants needed, you're just
asking it to go to court because I feel like you are violating the most American history 101 class teachings ever.
Like a young person in high school or middle school can say, I've always been told you need a warrant.
Why don't we need one?
It just seems ridiculous on its face that they would even say, nah, like they're trying to seriously rewrite the constitution in real time without talking to the...
People of America saying, hey, should we re-amend this amendment?
No, don't worry about it.
You don't need warrants.
Fourth Amendment's fine.
Just focus on the Second Amendment.
You're good.
Fourth Amendment.
What's even that about?
And even recently, of course, as the president and Kristi Noem and others have gotten themselves in a certain amount of political, if not legal, trouble about the Second Amendment, okay.
The president says, gosh, I wish these folks, in particular, the recent victim of shooting there did not have a gun.
Well what side of this do you want to be on then right the Supreme Court has said that yes indeed You have a right to carry a gun that was in the heller case and mr. President and others What what position are you taking with respect to second amendment?
And it seems as if to your point Greg it is very situational right if it suits your particular Description of how things have got to go then you embrace it if not
then you go in an opposite direction.
Everybody knows.
This is James Madison stuff.
Everybody knows.
We're free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
What does that word unreasonable mean?
Even if you don't understand what number it is, although I think we all do, basically it means that you need a warrant to go in.
And the fundamental stuff, whether it's on television or movies or this fine broadcast to others, everybody knows that apparently our government, again, just in these raw exercises of power, says,
We don't care.
And we're going to do what we want.
We're going to instruct people as we want.
That has been the mode.
And that's the reason why, as you and I have discussed for many, many months, we are in the constitutional crisis we are in.
When one branch of government simply says, we don't need to follow that, we don't need to do what federal judges are telling us to do, which is the other big story because coming out of Minneapolis, they've got all these judges quite literally pulling their metaphorical hair out because the government is not following what they're doing.
That just continues.
You have a government.
This is the constitutional crisis we're talking about.
That's basically saying to federal judges, no.
And we're sending, we sent to Minneapolis, Tom Holman, the fellow who months ago very notoriously said, federal judges, huh?
What power do they
I mean, it's surprising.
He was even allowed to walk it back.
And he's any such, I mean, that's, that's not what they do.
And a couple of things too is one, he's brought into quote.
I mean, this was, was, was the headline when he was brought in after Greg Bonjino, Bonvino, Bonvino, cause Bonjino is Dan Greg Bonvino was taken out, which is he's there to soften the message.
I'm like, he's not any softer and 700 ice agent still leaves 2000 in the street, still leaves a lot of questions.
And you brought up Heller.
I thought that was very interesting too.
Heller was a case that, that the gun lobby, like all of those folks who wanted to get rid of that restriction, they were salivating over that going through and getting passed and we're getting decided on there, but on there in their favor.
And now they're speaking directly, I guess against it in a way to say, well, you know, maybe they shouldn't have those guns.
Like it's so confusing.
The things that are coming out of this situation.
And the worst thing is we've lost two people's lives because of it.
And so, yeah, we're going to be talking more about this in the coming weeks because this isn't going to go anywhere.
And especially the fact that, you know, they're right next door and who knows where it will go next.
I do feel like they are starting to feel the heat a little bit.
And I, while 700 troops, I keep on calling them troops, 700 ice agents.
it's not enough, but that's for me to talk about another time.
You don't have to get into that matter, but we're going to talk more about that, more about some other news stories coming out of the world law with Jim Santel, including a news from the Supreme court on this measure coming out of California to create five new congressional seats, which was, you know, indirect.
response to another state, but we'll talk more about that in a little bit, kind of widen out what the perspective is on.
And the fact that we've got a lot going on in the Supreme court, a lot of interesting decisions that are coming on our way this summer, but more with that on civic media, mid-morning with Jim Santel.
He is the host of amicus a law review and you can always catch him here on Thursdays.
We're very happy to have you part of the show.
If you have any questions or comments, call 855-752-4842 855-757.
You can leave a comment on the live stream.
We are on Facebook, YouTube, and the platform.
We still call Twitter, but still much more ahead with our guest, Jim Santel.
Don't go anywhere.
You're
listening to us.
Stay tuned and stay close.
Welcome.
Welcome back to civic media.
Mid mornings.
You are listening to us, me, Calvin, sweet Cal B. You know, Calvin, I feel like I'm always not like good morning, Calvin.
How are you today?
He's getting his stuff on.
I'm doing well, Greg.
There it is.
You know,
it's Thursday.
We're almost to the end of the week.
It's true.
Hopefully the weather abates
soon.
Whoa.
The weather abates soon.
I love it.
That's
That's very good.
I like that.
I like that.
Well, he is on the ones and twos.
He is with us.
You are with us.
We appreciate you.
Appreciate you sharing your time this morning.
If you want to be part of the conversation, eight, five, five, seven, five, two, four, eight, four, two, eight, five, five, seven, five, civic leave a comment on the live stream.
We currently are streaming on Facebook, YouTube and the platform.
We still call Twitter still ahead.
We have Paul Noonan with sports talking all things super bowls and Olympic and I think curling and bucks.
That it's we're in that weird place.
We're just, you know, if we didn't have the Olympics and the Super Bowl, we wouldn't talk about anything except for the bucks.
I don't even know if they're good, but a couple of things coming through here on the text line.
Sue from Franklin says, she's listening on WA UK said, are you still posting your shows?
Yes, we are Sue.
If you go to civicmedia.us slash shows, click that link and then scroll down and look for like the, you know, the.
Aaron to red son.
It says civic media mid morning.
That's us nine to 11.
You can find episodes there.
Uh, and I believe he want to listen back even further.
You can actually Google civic media matinee around here.
It'll take you to that show page as well.
So you can go back and listen to the episodes.
You can do that.
If
For anyone who might be missing, missing us live, you can go back and listen to episodes from anything about two months back and get yourself caught up.
You can always subscribe to the shows and not subscribe, but like just go there and get all the episodes from all the shows that are out there.
But that's the way you do it.
Civic media.us slash shows to get caught up.
We are talking to Jim Santel.
He is the host of amicus, a law review.
He's also a former U S attorney, current practicing attorney.
Oh, you can also watch the shows on the YouTube channel.
Thank you, Jenny.
She always lets me know.
Yes, the YouTube channel.
You can catch up on the actual program that we are recording that you can watch.
So you can see the awesome T shirt and the very professional suit that Jim is wearing.
But, uh, we are talking about all the biggest stories coming out of the world of law right now.
We were discussing the updates in the Hannah Duggan case.
We have some calls on the line right now.
Cindy from Appleton is on the line.
Cindy, good morning.
What's going on?
Hello, Jim.
Well, first of all, what's going on in this country is an abomination.
It's an actual insult to us.
It's an insult to our laws, an insult to our Constitution.
And I am wondering that if we can get rid of the orange man, maybe with the no more November elections, would he eventually be able to be prosecuted along with his administration like the German people did when Hitler was part of their regime?
Would they be able to be prosecuted like a lot of those officials of Hitler?
And the answer, of course, from me always is complicated, right?
There are at least two of them.
One is a general notion that when you think about the criminal law, typically federal and state cases have a five-year statute of limitations.
And so if you have agents out there who are engaging in what could be described as murder by a state,
prosecutor, federal litigation prosecution less likely right now.
You've got five years to do it.
And so you and I can both count and you can obviously identify the notion that you could bring these lawsuits and the criminal prosecutions and civil lawsuits plainly, which are not subject to those same kinds of restrictions long after this administration is done.
The other piece of this Cindy that your question raises, however, is what John Roberts and the Supreme Court did to our nation.
changing the Constitution on July 1 of 2024, telling us what?
Telling us that a sitting president for acts committed in an official capacity that are criminal in nature.
are not subject to criminal prosecution.
So a little bit more specific than that.
But that as we have said repeatedly for the past, coming up now on at least two years, is not only a dramatic change in what the law has been in America.
But answer is your question.
As to Donald Trump himself, the Supreme Court has said there's a huge amount of protection here.
And you can anticipate that even if after his administration, there is another federal
or even a state attempt to prosecute, he will raise this issue.
It's United States versus Trump.
in which your Supreme Court said by a majority that, yes, indeed, there's one person in America who is indeed above the law.
And that happens to be the president of the United States of America.
That is a catastrophic decision remains so.
And it answers, at least in part, speculative though it is what could happen down the road.
That's not a happy answer.
Everybody should be subject to the laws.
But that's another reason why Cindy, as you started Calamity in America,
Calamity coming from the Supreme Court as well, as you appreciate fully.
And that's one aspect of this.
And I want to tag on something with, you know, Jim is here to give the purview from the point of view of law.
This is where we have to hold our leaders accountable.
Those who come into office during this midterms, those who come into office post midterms, those who want to run whether they are Republican, Democrat, independent.
looking towards people who want to seek justice, they might have a hard hill to fight upon because of the Supreme Court ruling, but it doesn't mean it's impossible and it doesn't mean they are excused from pursuing this fight to hold those who have done the most damage accountable, whether it's the president, whether it's people from the cabinet, his high advisors, people in local state,
election, local state roles.
It's about having leaders who actually want to lead and seek justice for this country and its people.
So that is the thing we have to, as the electorate,
That is a responsibility for us to make sure that those people who want to run for those jobs say when they're running, I want to seek justice.
I will not back down.
I will not write a strongly worded letter or have a really good conversation in an office.
I will seek to the letter of the law with the best of my ability to find justice for the damage they've caused this country.
That is the non-legal thing.
That's me just spouting my opinion, but I think it's very, very important because we have a lot of quote leaders who are like, well, we can talk it out.
We can find out.
No.
No.
We want results.
We want answers.
We want justice.
That's what we want.
We want more.
from you.
Dale, I see you on the phone.
Don't go anywhere.
If you can stick around, I'll take you at the other side after the news break.
I want to talk to you about what you want to discuss regarding the save act with Jim Santel, who is the host of amicus, a law review.
He has our guest this morning for another few segments talking about all things from the world of law.
You can be part of the conversation 855-752-4842-855-75 civic.
Leave a comment on that live stream, Facebook, YouTube platform.
We still call Twitter, but more coming up after the news break.
Don't go anywhere.
Stay tuned.
Stay close.
The national news cycle never stops, but it can be hard to find news about your local community.
Civic Media is dedicated to providing quality local and state news coverage across Wisconsin.
With the Civic Media app, you can get notifications about local stories that matter to you and your community.
Find the free Civic Media app in your phone's app store and choose notifications from the menu to tell us what kind of news you want to hear about.
