Yearly Archives: 2024
Milwaukee City Leaders Eying 15% Pay Hike & 3% Annually for Themselves
(The Center Square) – Less than two weeks after Milwaukee’s new sales tax took effect, city leaders are looking to spend some of that money on pay raises for themselves.
A city council committee approved a 15% pay raise for the mayor, city council members and top city workers like Milwaukee’s police and fire chiefs.
"The approval of these recommendations helps us move past being a stepping stone for other opportunities and instead a choice destination," Milwaukee Employee Relations Director Harper Donahue IV told city council members.
The pay raises would bump Milwaukee Mayor Cavalier Johnson’s salary to more than $169,000 a year. The raises would also increase the base pay for city council members to more than $84,000 a year.
Milwaukee’s police and fire chiefs would see their salaries jump to a little less than $200,000 a year, while the city’s public works boss would make more than $208,000.
The city estimates the raises will cost $1.8 million for the rest of 2024, and at least $2.8 million each year going forward. There is a provision in the pay raise proposal that would guarantee elected officials a 3% raise each year, starting next year, unless frontline city workers get a smaller raise.
Alderman Michael Murphy said city leaders have been making the same salary for the past 15 years.
“I do believe there should be an increase for elected officials. I don’t believe the number 15 is appropriate,” he said.
Alderman Scott Spiker said Milwaukee’s mayor didn’t mention anything about the pay raises when he pitched a new 2% sales tax for the city.
“You just asked for a sales tax and now you’re going to increase salaries for not just electeds but the folks who are most well compensated," Spiker added.
A spokesman for Milwaukee’s mayor said he supports the raises, as does city council President Jose Perez.
"I want the city to be competitive, I don't want to lose talent to other municipalities and even to the private sector, but with any increase I think it's only natural, it's pertinent for us to also increase accountability and fix the systems that are in place that prohibit the best service for our constituents," he said.
The pay raise proposal now goes to the full city council for a vote.
Hey, Media: The Handful of ‘Robin Vos’ Recall Clowns Are NOT a ‘Movement’
‘Supreme’ Irony: WEC Letter Indicates Fringe Vos Recall Effort May Be Dead in Its Tracks
Gaylor: The New York Times’ Creepy Attack on Taylor Swift
Lloyd Austin, Spending & Biden’s Idea of the ‘American Dream’ [Up Against the Wall]
Hispanic, Black Support for Trump Push Him to Lead Over Biden in New Poll
Former President Donald Trump holds a lead over President Joe Biden heading into this presidential election year, the latest poll shows.
The Center Square Voters' Voice Poll, conducted Jan. 2-4, found that among likely voters, Trump holds 45% support compared to Biden’s 41% in a head-to-head faceoff, a lead that's outside of the poll's 2% margin for error with the Iowa Caucuses scheduled for Monday (Jan. 15).
The remaining 14% who responded they were “not sure” could swing the election in favor of either candidate.
The latest poll flips the script on the previous The Center Square Voters' Voice Poll conducted in October, when Biden held a 48% to 44% advantage over Trump. Other recent polls also show Trump with a significant lead over Biden in key swing states.
Trump’s lead is due in large part to his growing support among Hispanic and Black voters, which is higher than Republican presidential candidates have received in the past.
Trump has 10% support among Black voters compared to Biden’s 74%. While 10% is far lower than Biden’s support, it is actually much higher than Republican presidential candidates normally garner.
One portion of the survey allowed Republican voters to share why they prefer Trump over his primary competitors, such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, over whom he holds a wide lead.
A Black Trump supporter wrote, “he is really a man of his words and doesn’t have a lot of lobbyists telling him what to do or say.”
Among Hispanics, Trump has 45% support compared to Biden’s 38% support.
One Hispanic Trump supporter wrote, “I love that he isn’t afraid to be who he is.”
Another Hispanic Trump supporter wrote, “the stuff he has been saying and doing really makes me believe he can make an impact on the world nowadays. I mean look at gas prices. They went up 300% ever since Joe Biden got here as President.”
Trump has 49% support among white voters, compared to Biden’s 35% support.
Trump also does better than Biden with male voters, beating Biden 50% to 34%, according to the survey. Biden, though, does better with female voters, beating Trump with 45% support compared to Trump’s 39%.
Trump performs better than Biden across every age demographic except seniors age 65 and older. For that group, Trump and Biden are tied with 42% support. Each age demographic has a large percentage responding they remained “not sure,” ranging between 15% and 20%.
Elevated inflation, a crisis at the southern border, and ongoing overseas conflicts have chipped away at Biden’s support. Millions of illegal immigrants have poured into the U.S. since Biden took office, leading even Democratic mayors to raise the alarm. The chaotic and deadly withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan marked a downward turning point for Biden’s approval numbers, from which he has not recovered. Concerns over the U.S.’ role in Ukraine and the potential for the Israel-Gaza war to escalate are also a factor.
Inflation has slowed since spiking during Biden’s first two years as president, but prices still remain nearly 20% higher than when he took office. Mortgage rates peaked over 8%, making it much more difficult for many Americans to afford to buy a home.
Citing some of those concerns, The Center Square Voter’s Voice poll also found that 67% of Americans say the country is headed in the wrong direction, a tough statistic to overcome for the incumbent president. The poll also found the majority of Americans disapprove of Biden’s handling of the economy, which is consistently a top issue for voters of both parties.
The poll was conducted in conjunction with Noble Predictive Insights and surveyed 2,573 Americans from Jan. 2-4, roughly even number of Republicans and Democrats as well as 266 “true independents,” which are independents who indicated they do not lean toward either party. The poll has a margin of error of about 2%.
Badger Institute Acknowledges ‘Real Facts’ Researcher’s Pro Marijuana Legalization Bias
Federal Court Strikes Down California’s Broad Restrictions on Concealed Carry
A panel of the 9th Circuit Court court struck down California’s ban on concealed carry permit users bringing their guns to many places outside the home, following an earlier federal district court’s injunction in December against the ban, then another 9th Circuit judge’s overturning of the injunction.
2023 bill SB 2 took effect on January 1 and banned concealed carry permit holders from bringing their certified firearms to most public places — even privately-owned commercial establishments open to the public unless its operator “clearly and conspicuously posts a sign” indicating license holders may carry their firearms on the property.
California concealed carry applicants undergo thorough background checks that include interviews, fingerprinting, reviews through multiple government databases, and pass a state-certified full-day handgun training program designed for concealed carry permit holders.
“Extremist judges have overturned CA's gun law and are insisting that guns be allowed at our playgrounds, libraries, and hospitals,” said California governor Newsom in a public statement. “This is exactly why we need to pass a US Constitutional Amendment that will put in place common sense reforms like: universal background checks, a ban on assault weapons, [and] raising the age to purchase a gun to 21.”
An injunction against the law was first issued in December by a district court judge who ruled “SB2 turns nearly every public place in California into a 'sensitive place,' effectively abolishing the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding and exceptionally qualified citizens to be armed and to defend themselves in public.”
Notably, the lawsuit against SB 2 did not challenge and the injunction did not block “sensitive place” designations regarding school zones, preschools, state or local public buildings, airports, or legislative offices.
California attorney general Rob Bonta appealed against the injunction, first seeking an administrative stay against the district court’s injunction through the 9th Circuit Court, which was granted. An administrative stay typically serves as a “judicial pause” while a court takes time to consider the merits of a case in a more long-term ruling.
As successfully argued by the lawyers representing the concealed carry permit users in their stay appeal, administrative stays are typically used to “preserve the status quo pending a determination of the action on the merits” by serving as a judicial pause, and that the court’s stay was a departure from this legal precedent. With the dissolving of the administrative stay, SB 2’s challenged limitations on concealed carry are no longer in effect.
The 9th Circuit is set to hear arguments for the case in April.
Ranked-Choice Voting in Wisconsin is a Trojan Horse [WRN Voices]
Badger Institute Is Pushing Pro Legalization Advocate’s ‘Facts’ on Marijuana Reform
Unborn Baby Initially Saved in Milwaukee Reckless Driving Crash Dies
Dane County Absentee Ballot Ruling Chips Away at Wisconsin Election Laws [WRN Voices]
BREAKING: Reckless Driver Kills 32-year-old Pregnant Woman; Baby Saved, in Horrific Milwaukee Crash
U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Trump’s Appeal of Colorado Ballot Case in February
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear an appeal from former President Donald Trump next month on whether a Colorado Supreme Court ruling could keep him from appearing on the March Republican presidential primary ballot.
After a regularly scheduled conference on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court said it's granting a writ of certiorari from Trump’s legal team and scheduled oral arguments for February 8. The Colorado Republican Party also filed a request for the court to hear an appeal of the Colorado Supreme Court decision.
“Coloradans, and the American people, deserve clarity on whether someone who engaged in insurrection may run for the country's highest office,” Democratic Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold said in a statement after the U.S. Supreme Court's announcement. “I urge the Court to prioritize this case and issue a ruling as soon as possible.”
Other states have attempted to remove Trump from the presidential primary ballot, stating his role in events on Jan. 6, 2021, should disqualify him under the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution. However, Colorado was the only state to have a case make it to its state Supreme Court and have a ruling against Trump. Last week, Democratic Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows stopped Trump from appearing on the state’s presidential primary ballot. Trump then filed a lawsuit against Bellows’ action.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s action triggers a stipulation in the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling that automatically places Trump on the ballot for the Republican presidential primary. Friday was the deadline for Griswold to certify the names and party affiliations for candidates on the 2024 presidential primary ballot.
“Colorado’s 2024 Presidential primary ballot is certified,” Griswold said. “The United States Supreme Court has accepted the case, and Donald Trump will appear on the ballot as a result.”
Colorado’s ballots are scheduled to be sent to military and overseas voters on Jan. 20 and ballots are scheduled to be mailed to the state’s active registered voters on Feb. 12, according to Griswold’s office.
This story is developing and may be update.
Iowa Caucuses Could Seal The Deal For 2024 Race
The Iowa Caucuses are scheduled for Jan. 15, leaving just over a week of breakneck campaigning before what could be a decisive day in the Republican primary.
The Iowa Caucuses provide an opportunity for underestimated candidates to nab a key win by focusing their time and money on the early state. A victory there can help build steam and boost fundraising before the following primary later this month: New Hampshire.
A poor performance in Iowa, though, can end an already struggling presidential campaign or at least raise doubts about its viability.
“We’re moving away from persuasion and into the expectation-setting phase of the campaign,” Colin Reed, a Republican strategist, former campaign manager for U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., and co-founder of South and Hill Strategies, told The Center Square. “Voters in the early states have been getting hammered for months with candidate events, town halls, ads, meet and greets. There’s less and less new information likely to change their minds.”
Goals vary for each candidate, Reed said. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former South Carolina Governor and U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley appear to be duking it out for second place.
“For Trump, he needs to show a result that’s consistent with his lead in the polls or risk losing the veneer of inevitability,” Reed continued. “For DeSantis, he needs a decisive second place showing or loses a credible rationale to continue on. Nikki Haley placed more of her chips in New Hampshire so she has the least to lose and most to gain. Either way, the events in Iowa have the potential to re-shuffle the deck in the eight days between the caucuses and New Hampshire primary.”
The last Republican debate before Iowa voters weigh in is scheduled for Jan. 10 to be hosted by CNN, which announced that only DeSantis and Haley will participate. Trump will again skip this debate, opting for a Fox News Town Hall the same night.
Notably, billionaire Vivek Ramaswamy will be absent from the debate after CNN said he did not qualify. Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie did not qualify either.
Ramaswamy made headlines for his recent endorsement from Steve King, a long-time Iowa congressman who was primaried out of his seat amid controversy over his comments about white supremacy.
“If you want someone who is going to take on the deep state and speak truth to power, then vote for someone who is going to speak the truth to YOU,” King, 74, said in a statement.
DeSantis, who has been campaigning hard in the Hawkeye State, has repeatedly touted his support from the state’s governor, Kim Reynolds.
A coveted endorsement, Reynolds praised DeSantis in her November endorsement remarks, calling him "someone who calls out our moral decline for what it is, who looks to the future and not the past, someone who most importantly, can win.”
The Trump campaign, though, has run ads featuring Reynolds’ past positive comments about Trump, something Reynolds has called “misleading.”
The latest polling, though, is on Trump’s side. While Trump dominates national polling, his opponents perform better in Iowa. Trump also faces nearly 100 criminal charges across several states as well as ongoing efforts to remove him from the ballot for his role in the Jan. 6 protests at the U.S. Capitol. Translated, those challenges mean Trump’s campaign could be upended later this year and make second place in the GOP primary more important than ever.
The latest polling aggregation and analysis from FiveThirtyEight, a top polling firm, has Trump with 50% support in Iowa. DeSantis follows with 18.4% support, Haley at 15.4% and Ramaswamy at 6%. Christie has 3.7% support.
Nationally, Trump polls better with about 62% support in the Republican primary, more than all his challengers combined. DeSantis and Haley are roughly tied for second with about 12% and 11% support, respectively.
Being Born at the Right Time [Up Against the Wall]
Yes, Virginia, there IS a War on Christmas! [WRN Voices]
Cities Across America React to Buses Carrying Migrants to Their Doorstep
From the small towns of Woodstock, Illinois, and Secaucus, New Jersey, to the metropolises of Denver, New York and Chicago, municipalities are starting to take action against the infusion of migrants from Texas.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's 16-month policy of exporting the border crisis to sanctuary cities by busing migrants out of Texas has exasperated big city leaders and sounded alarms in nearby towns.
Denver Mayor Mike Johnston told the City Council members this week that the infusion of migrants being bused from Texas to their city would cost $180 million in 2024 and is not sustainable.
In nearby Aurora, about 15 miles east of Denver, City Council Member Danielle Jurinsky said that the Denver mayor was renting hotel rooms in Aurora and putting up migrants without the approval of the Denver City Council. Jurinsky stated at the Dec. 4 city council meeting that Aurora residents at extended-stay hotels were put out on the street because the migrants were taking all the available hotel rooms.
According to a video of the meeting, Jurinsky said "this is Denver Mayor Mike Johnston busing migrants into the city of Aurora, taking up our hotels, and throwing out American citizens, Aurora residents onto the streets."
New York City filed a lawsuit Jan. 4 against the 17 charter bus and transportation companies from Texas that are bringing migrants to the city asking for $708 million in costs.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams issued an executive order that required buses carrying migrants to provide 32 hours notice before dropping off people at a designated location in Manhattan only during specified hours. The drop off times are limited to the hours of 8:30 a.m. and noon. Violators are subject to fines and the impounding of their bus.
Secaucus, New Jersey, is about nine miles northwest of New York City.
That city reported on Jan. 3 that a total of 23 buses carrying 1,107 migrants arrived at New Jersey train stations. In what officials believe is an effort to get around the New York City restrictions, the buses dropped off the migrants at the train stations and the migrants than took trains into the Big Apple.
“It seems quite clear the bus operators are finding a way to thwart the requirements of the Executive Order by dropping migrants at the train station in Secaucus and having them continue to their final destination”, Secaucus Mayor Michael Gonnelli said in a statement. "Perhaps the requirements Mayor Adams put in place are too stringent and are resulting in unexpected consequences as it seems the bus operators have figured out a loophole in the system in order to ensure the migrants reach their final destination, which is New York City."
Gonnelli hinted that New Jersey may also take action in response to migrants being bused to his state.
"In a recent call with State officials, they stressed that plans are in place in the event migrants decide to remain in the State," Gonnelli said in a statement. "I made it very clear to those on the call that the Town of Secaucus would not be in a position to shoulder the burden of this situation and stressed the importance of open communication and cooperation with our County and State partners.”
Gonnelli added: "I plan to do everything I can to be prepared to do what is best for our community."
In Chicago, the city reported it impounded and towed a bus on Dec. 13 that was transporting 49 passengers coming from Eagle Pass, Texas, for attempting to drop off individuals without a permit. The City Council has passed a "bus safety ordinance" that same day that empowered it to impound any bus that didn't follow what the city called "safety protocols."
But nearby Chicago communities are discovering they are also being affected by the arrival of migrants.
Woodstock, Illinois, is about 67 miles northwest of Chicago with a population of 25,600 and a police force of less than 45 employees.
On Jan. 2, the Woodstock City Council called a special meeting to pass an ordinance that requires buses carrying migrants to file for application that must be filed five days prior to arrival. It requires the transportation company give a "detailed plan" identifying how the migrants will be cared for including housing and food and a list of each person with contact information who will be responsible for the care of the migrants. A city official can deny the application if "a satisfactory plan has not been presented related to the ability of the applicant to care for, house and feed such individuals."
The city of Joliet, Illinois, passed a similar ordinance on Jan. 2. Other suburban cities have also followed suit.
Abbott has not backed down.
On Dec. 20, Abbott's press secretary Andrew Mahaleris announced on X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter, how the state would respond to Chicago's crack down on buses.
"Because Mayor Johnson is failing to live up to his city's 'Welcoming City' ordinance by targeting migrant buses from Texas, we are expanding our operation to include flights to Chicago," Mahaleris stated Dec. 20 on X. "Texas’ first flight departed El Paso yesterday with over 120 passengers."
"Sanctuary cities like NYC & Chicago have seen only a FRACTION of what overwhelmed Texas border towns face daily," Abbott posted Jan. 2 on social media. "We will continue our transportation mission until Biden reverses course on his open border policies."
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine Bans Transgender Surgeries on Minors in Ohio
Ohio Republican Gov. Mike DeWine banned transgender transition surgeries on minors with an executive order Friday.
The move comes a week after he vetoed House Bill 68, which banned the practice and required single-sex sports teams to be established at schools, colleges and universities throughout the state.
“A week has gone by, and I still feel as firmly about that as I did that day,” DeWine said. “I believe parents rather than government should be making those important medical decisions.”
DeWine’s order and subsequent rules proposed for transgender health care for adults and children were the only issues addressed by DeWine on Friday.
“This is something that the entire time when I talked to families, not once did they mention they want to have surgery on their minor child. That was never mentioned,” DeWine said. “This just assures everybody that that will never happen.”
The rules up for public comment with the Ohio Department of Health and the Ohio Department of Mental Health and Addiction include protections for adults and children receiving transgender care in the state hospitals that would stop what DeWine called “fly-by-night” providers or clinics giving out medications without quality care.
The rules would also require multi-disciplinary teams at hospitals to provide support care, including psychiatrists and a comprehensive plan of the risks associated with the treatment and required mental health counseling.
"I’m doing it because it’s important that we do it,” DeWine said. “When I really started looking at this, these were some holes that need to be filled. One, we needed data. We don’t have data on this. Whatever the Legislature does, we’re going through with this. I spent time looking at this and talking to people, and it’s clear the most important thing with this is mental health counseling. It needs to be lengthy, and it needs to be comprehensive.”
The bill DeWine vetoed would prohibit gender-affirming care, such as hormone blockers, hormone replacement therapy and surgery for transgender youth.
It would also require K-12 schools, state colleges and universities and private colleges and universities to have separate single-sex teams for each sex. It also creates legal remedies for violations.
Republicans in the House and Senate have enough control in each chamber to override DeWine’s veto. They have until the session ends at the end of this year to do it.
Earlier this week, neither the House nor the Senate had sessions planned until later in the month. However, the House changed Wednesday’s “if needed” session date to an actual scheduled session.
Trump’s Access to Illinois’ Ballot Challenged
With former President Donald Trump’s access to Illinois’ primary ballot being challenged, it’s possible his name could appear on the Republican ticket but with a condition.
Nominating petitions for presidential electors are being filed this week to the Illinois State Board of Elections. Elections board spokesman Matt Dietrich said the board can’t discuss the nature of objections.
“Because we do not release anything related to objections until they are in the hands of a hearing officer,” Dietrich told The Center Square. “That’s not going to happen until Jan. 17.”
The Chicago Sun-Times reports that objectors, using the 14th Amendment, claim that Trump is barred for encouraging protestors to storm the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Trump has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court similar moves from Colorado and Maine.
“It’s time to put a STOP to all of these vicious attempts to REMOVE my name from the ballot,” Trump said in a fundraising email. “That’s why my attorneys have officially APPEALED to the SUPREME COURT to keep my name on the 2024 ballot once and for all.”
Dietrich said Illinois' objections will be given to a hearing officer, with a recommendation eventually to be made to the bipartisan elections board.
“So you cannot have … one party unilaterally making any decisions,” Dietrich said. “It takes at least five votes to make a board order effective.”
Dietrich said it’s likely Trump’s name will be certified for the ballot Jan. 30, but with a note that an objection is pending. Whatever the outcome of the elections board, it’s expected the case could be taken to the Illinois courts.
“And that can wind its way all the way up to the Illinois Supreme Court if necessary,” he said. “So it’s possible that’s what could happen with this case.”
The Illinois GOP said it doesn’t take sides in primaries.
“We believe the people, not activist courts, should choose who represents them in the White House,” Illinois GOP Chairman Don Tracy said in a statement to The Center Square. “This attempt to remove President Trump from the ballot without due process is an anti-democracy attempt to limit the voting rights of Illinois citizens and should be dismissed outright.”
The primary in Illinois is March 19. The General Election is Nov. 5.
Kevin Bessler contributed to this report.
Milwaukee Mayor Cavalier Johnson Insults Suburbanites, Thinks They All Eat at Cracker Barrel
Police Officers Shot in the Line of Duty Hit New High in 2023
A new report shows the number of police officers shot on the job hit a new high in 2023.
The National Fraternal Order of Police, a national police group with nearly 400,000 members, released the report, which showed 378 officers were shot in the line of duty in 2023, up 14% from the previous year, when 330 were shot.
Of the 378 shot this year, 46 died from their injuries.
A graphic from the report shows the significant increase in recent years as well as the breakdown by state.
The report goes on to say that there were 115 "ambush-style" attacks on officers in 2023, leading to 20 fatally shot officers.
Patrick Yoes, National President of the Fraternal Order of Police, blasted the "Defund the Police" movement, saying it led to a spike in shootings that has not decreased. That movement took off after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis and the ensuing Black Lives Matter riots around the country.
"With the COVID-19 pandemic behind us and after so many Americans have seen the tragic consequences of the defund the police movement, it was our hope that these numbers would be a high-water mark," Yoes said. "We were wrong.
"Thankfully, because of dramatic improvements in medical trauma science and anti-ballistic technology, the lethality of these attacks has been reduced and only 46 of the officers shot in the line of duty were killed," he added.
Yoes has advocated for Congress to pass the Protect and Serve Act, which creates federal criminal penalties for those who target police officers.
"Truthfully, the violence against those sworn to protect and serve is beyond unacceptable; it's a stain on our society, and it must end," he said. "It is incumbent upon our elected officials and community leaders to stand up, support our heroes, and speak out against the violence against law enforcement officers."
Trump’s Legal Team Says Prosecutors are Harassing Ex-President to Help Biden
Former President Donald Trump's legal team alleged Thursday that federal prosecutors have deliberately violated a stay order in his Washington D.C. case to thwart his presidential bid.
In the defense's clearest attack yet, they alleged special counsel Jack Smith and his team were trying to interfere with the 2024 presidential election.
"Unstated, but obvious, is the prosecutors' desperate effort to harass President Trump and prevent his likely victory in the 2024 Presidential Election," Trump's defense attorneys wrote in the latest court filing. "A significant part of this strategy, which the prosecutors have employed from the outset, is to use this case as a platform to advance the Biden Campaign’s dishonest political talking points, including, for example, echoing the false and defamatory claims that President Trump spreads 'disinformation.'"
The defense motion comes in response to request last month from Smith's team, which filed a 20-page motion seeking to block Trump from bringing politics into the jury room.
Trump's defense team also asked the judge to consider civil contempt actions against the prosecutors and order them to pay for part of Trump's defense.
"Namely, the prosecutors should reimburse President Trump for all reasonable attorneys; fees and other expenses that he has incurred responding to the prosecutor's improper productions and filings," they wrote.
Smith's team of federal prosecutors charged Trump with four federal counts related to contesting the 2020 election and the storming of the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021. The charges include conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction, and conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one's vote counted, according to the indictment. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Wisconsin Lawmakers Look to Make AI-generated Child Porn Illegal
(The Center Square) – As the technology behind porn changes, so do Wisconsin’s laws.
That's the explanation behind the new legislation that would make artificial intelligence-generated child pornography a crime.
The Senate Committee on Judiciary held a hearing on Senate Bill 314, which would treat sexually explicit, computer generated pictures or videos of children and underage teenagers exactly the same as traditional child porn.
“The creation and possession of AI generated child sex images is not currently a crime in our state. We have no accountability for those who engage in pedophilic desires and fantasies with computer generated content,” Sen. Jesse James, R-Altoona, told lawmakers.
The new legislation came from The Speaker’s AI Task Force, and James said by working with the state’’s Department of Justice.
Rep. Calvin Callahan, R-Tomahawk, said that even though AI child porn is created by computer software, there are real victims somewhere.
“You could be saying to yourself ‘Well if it's artificial, then where is the harm in the person using that? There isn't a victim is there?’” Callahan said. “The truth of the matter is that the data used to create these fake images has to come from somewhere, those being real victims.”
Callahan said AI porn is more than just images depicting young children having sex with adults.
He said there are countless stories of people using AI technology to create revenge porn or to sextort people.
“I've been told about a high school student in Wisconsin who uses AI to create nude photos of his classmates. He uses the AI software to add underage classmates faces’ to nude bodies. This is the creation of child pornography, and this in Wisconsin today is sadly legal,” Callahan said.
Callahan said creating the new AI porn law would help investigators by eliminating their need to “sift through” the AI images to see which ones were created from a specific real image.
The plan would be a Class D felony and include a mandatory minimum three-year prison sentence for anyone more than 18 years old, or anyone two years older than their victim.
Fond du Lac DA Eric Toney Urges Public to Monitor Heart Health, Cites Dennis Krueger’s ‘Unexpected Passing’
Former President Bill Clinton Named in Unsealed Epstein Court Documents
Former President Bill Clinton is among several high-profile names identified in nearly 1,000 pages of unsealed court documents stemming from a defamation lawsuit related to Jeffrey Epstein.
The documents released out of the Southern District Court of New York Wednesday evening, were filed by Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre against Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s close associate and partner. The documents reveal a damning relationship between Clinton and Epstein.
In a shocking deposition, Johanna Sjoberg, recruited to work as a “massage therapist” for the accused pedophile, said Epstein claimed, “Clinton likes them young, referring to girls.”
In the documents, Maxwell denied Clinton ever visited Epstein’s private Caribbean Island while confirming the former president dined on Epstein’s private jet while traveling around the world.
“The allegation that Clinton had a meal on Jeffrey’s Island is 100 percent false,” Maxwell testified. She could not indicate how many times Clinton flew on the “Lolita Express,” a nickname for Epstein’s jet.
In a 2019 statement from Clinton spokesman Angel Urena, the former president claimed to have been unaware of Epstein’s crimes.
“President Clinton knows nothing about the terrible crimes Jeffrey Epstein pleaded guilty to in Florida some years ago, or those with which he has been recently charged in New York,” the statement said.
The statement confirmed Clinton traveled on board Epstein’s plane on four trips, claiming they were connected to work with the Clinton Foundation, denying visiting Epstein’s private island, his New Mexico ranch, or his Florida residence.
Maxwell was pressed on her relationship with Clinton's aide, Doug Band. When asked if she ever had a relationship with Band, she replied, “We are talking about adult consensual relationships, it's off the record.” It was revealed that Band was present during encounters between the former president and Epstein, including a 2002 African trip onboard Epstein’s jet.
Photos from the trip show Clinton receiving a massage from Epstein accuser and flight attendant Chauntae Davies during a stopover.
In addition to Epstein’s relationship with the former president, the documents reveal a cadre of who’s who of the rich and powerful identified as Epstein’s associates, including Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Hyatt Chief Executive Office Thomas Pritzker, scientist Stephen Hawkings, famed magician David Copperfield, among others.
The Pro-Life Casualties are Piling Up
How to Help Milwaukee Police Officer Dan Morrell, Who Was Shot in the Line of Duty
Dear Tim Ramthun, We ALL Have a Role to Play [WRN Voices]
Trump Appeals Colorado Supreme Court’s Removal From Ballot to U.S. Supreme Court
Former President Donald Trump fulfilled a promise made last month to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court after the Colorado Supreme Court ruled he wasn’t constitutionally eligible for the state’s Republican presidential primary ballot in March.
Trump’s legal team filed their appeal to the nation’s highest court on Wednesday after Colorado’s highest court ruled in a 4-3 decision his actions on Jan. 6, 2021, violated the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
"The questions presented in this Petition are of the utmost importance," the request states. "President Trump is the leading candidate for the nomination for President of the United States of one of two major political parties. In 2020, President Trump received more than 74 million votes nationally, and more than 1.3 million votes in Colorado alone to be reelected as President of the United States. Thus, the Colorado Supreme Court decision would unconstitutionally disenfranchise millions of voters in Colorado and likely be used as a template to disenfranchise tens of millions of voters nationwide."
After six Republicans filed a lawsuit to remove Trump from the ballot last September, a district court ruled in favor of Trump. District Court Judge Sarah Wallace said the 14th Amendment doesn’t provide for the removal of Trump from the ballot. She said Trump “incited imminent lawless violence" but didn’t meet the definition of “engagement” found in the 14th Amendment.
The case was then appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court. Last week, the Colorado Republican Party appealed Trump’s case to the U.S. Supreme Court. That appeal automatically placed Trump on the March 5, 2024, primary ballot due to a stipulation in the Colorado Supreme Court ruling.
"The United States Supreme Court now has two appeals to consider in determining whether Donald Trump is eligible to appear on Colorado's Presidential Primary ballot," Colorado Democrat Secretary of State Jena Griswold said in a statement on Wednesday. "I urge the Court to consider this case as quickly as possible. Coloradans — and the American people — deserve clarity on whether someone who engaged in insurrection may run for the country's highest office."
Griswold’s office stated Trump will appear on the state’s 2024 presidential primary ballot when it is certified on Friday. However, if the U.S. Supreme Court declines to take the case or otherwise affirms the Colorado Supreme Court ruling, Trump would be removed from the ballot. A conference day for the Supreme Court was previously scheduled for Friday, Jan. 5.
The appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court also states disputed questions of qualifications for president are reserved for congress to resolve. It also states Section Three of the 14th Amendment cannot apply to Trump as it doesn't list the presidency.
""This reading defies common sense and is not correct," the document says of the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling.
The request also argues there wasn't an "insurrection" on Jan. 6, 2021, as it's defined in the constitution.
"By contrast, the United States has a long history of political protests that have turned violent," the document states. "In the summer of 2020 alone, violent protestors targeted the federal courthouse in Portland, Oregon, for over 50 days, repeatedly assaulted federal officers and set fire to the courthouse, all in support of a purported political agenda opposed to the authority of the United States."