"They're not censoring me.... Uh, they're censoring Amendment E. Yes, yes, that's it. That rotten judge is censoring Amendment E"

Got a series of comments under posts on the No-on-E web log that Tim Gebhart and I contribute to that appeared in one of my e-mail boxes. And they were kind of odd:
Is that why a State Judge issued an order censoring a website for amendment E?
The site is all court documents that are damaging to him and his star chamber.
order in part at bottom of page
Well, I knew it was spam, but just in case, I bit on it and gave it a shot. I knew the website from prior South Dakota related web surfing, but in case there was actually something related to Amendment E, I wanted to check it out. Here's what the comment author is referring to:

Oh yeah, "that guy." Interfering with the publicity of Amendment E? No. Interfering with a years long campaign of harassment? Yes.

It's not very difficult to see that the only thing Judge Rusch spanked Michael Wagner on is his single minded pursuit of the continual harassment of his ex-wife. In fact, if you go to the website at http://southdakotagov.info/index.html, it's pretty apparent that it has nothing to do with Amendment E, except for the small blurb on page 4.

I would encourage you to go review the website. Because in my opinion, this is the kind of person that supports Amendment E. Someone who intends to use Amendment E to twist the legal system and try to force the use of the judiciary as something to beat his enemies over the head with. In this case, his enemy is his ex-wife.

Now imagine a hundred 'Michaels' or 'Michelles' all saying that the juducuary is ignoring the evidence that they think should be heard. Regardless of it's applicability or legality. Validity won't matter, just emotion. And that's a scary future for South Dakotans.

That's what we'll face if Amendment E passes.

Actually, I would also point out that Michael Wagner and the Amendment E people clearly have a few things in common aside from his support of them. Things such as not wanting to follow the rules.

Like Bill Stegmeier's outstanding sales tax, and Amendment E's continued lack of a proper filing with the Secretary of State's office, Michael Wagner also has yet to comply with the request of the judge.

The judge's order says "Respondent shall not place any information about petitioner on any internet websites, and he shall immediately remove all information pertaining to petitioner from any existing website." And despite the judge's protection order, it hasn't happened yet, and Mr. Wagner's campaign of harassment continues.

Although, in this case I don't think that the judge will need the prodding of an Amendment E to make sure the law is obeyed. At least we hope not for the sake of the ex-Mrs Wagner.


Anonymous said…
Wow... that guy is obsessed. I can see why there's a protection order against him. If you can make it through his fragmented harangue, check out the letters from the Judicial Qualifications Commission dismissing his complaints and the Supreme Court Order listing the documents he filed and calling them "incomprehensible, illegible, frivolous and wholly without merit." Those tell the story...

Popular posts from this blog

Why should we be surprised?

That didn't take long