The Judicial Accountability 10 Question Challenge

Under the prior post, I had an anonymous commenter bring up a point for the 3rd or 4th time. Aside from bringing up new information about a Judicial Accountability weblog, for a third or fourth time, it's crap.
There is already a blog dedicated to amendment e check out AND ONCE AGAIN I will say.... This is about AMENDMENT E, NOT bill Stegmeier. You guys look like a bunch of kids scrambling around to discredit the neighborhood kid who is gonna tell your parents about something you did. Why not be constructive? Why not offer an actual debate instead of all this Bill Bashing. Remember there are 46,800 south Dakotans who think this law is needed, so stop and think about who you are also bashing...AND GROW UP!!
As noted, there is a weblog which was created on the heels of the new one that was created to oppose the measure. Progressive on the Prairie and I even get a plug on it, although they left off the links. From the only post on the blog so far:
These procedures slap the face of the people who respect and count on HONEST AND OPEN government. Which includes EVERYONE!! Bloggers like South dakota war college and Progressive on the Prairie have come out of the wood work to SLAM Amendment E. Their efforts are mostly focused on the man who funded the effort but they ignore the 46,800 people who have signed their name to put the issue up for public vote. This Blog is intended for ALL to post their opinions.
(And your little dog too!) It might be easier to take this blog with any degree of seriousness if the author wasn't anonymous, and it's other posts weren't posts back to the first post.

But back to Anonymous' comments about the criticism being about Bill Stegmeier. If "anon" hasn't noticed, many of the posts that I and others have written on have been about the measure itself.

The fact that Bill has such radical views such as the IRS being illegal and that the US Government blew up the trade towers on 9/11 is an added bonus to writing about a measure that advocates throwing out a form of government which has served our nation for over 200 years.

But am I being a little bit harsh? It could be I'm just crabby after my weekend commute.

Just because I try to be unequivocably fair, I'll give the JAILers their opportunity at the South Dakota War College. In an effort to clear the air, I'll extend an olive branch and offer the opportunity for Bill to explain his views on government and the Judicial Accountability movement.

If the JAILers will agree to it, I'll offer one of my 10 questions with... to Bill Stegmeier.

What does he have to do to get the opportunity to be featured at the SDWC with no editorial comment from myself (excepting the slander of others). It's simple. I'll send him ten questions. And he sends me the answers to those questions.

And that's all ten of them. Unlike the legislative hearing, he can't refuse to answer the ones he doesn't like. But, pursuant to the request he had of legislators, the questions will be in writing.

What will the topics be? I'm going to ask Bill about the JAIL measure and his views on government. Same format as I've done for others. Everything he's written or has been written about himself and JAIL is fair game.

If he wants to accept the challenge, all he needs to do is to drop me a note, and give me a day or so to compose them. And then he can have a week to get them back to me.

If he can stand the light of day being shined upon the Judicial Accountability movement in South Dakota, that is.


Anonymous said…
As to the statement, "Remember there are 46,800 South Dakotans who think this law is needed," referring to those who signed the petition, I am one of those 46,800 SD'ans who signed the thing without first doing research on the issue. And I speak for myself and I am sure many other signers when I say I am NOT (get it, NOT) in favor of this law. Their argument using these statistics is flat out flawed.
Let me correct what was said. There are 46,800 South Dakotans who feel this issue should be voted upon. Also let me pose this one question for anyone to answer. Why should judges be above the law? Anyone?
Anonymous said…
I know a number of people who signed that petition because they were misled about what it would do.

Judges aren't above the law. We have processes in place to police them and their decisions. Is the system perfect? Of course not. But I still don't feel that judges should have the threat of legal harassment by crazy people hanging over them every time they make a decision.
Look, we here at the campaign realize the concerns expressed but, you are actually saying something about South Dakotan's ability to filter out the bad suits by "crazys". As a South Dakotan I think we all take great pride in our common sense and integrity. The special grand jury that would be created by Amendment E is nothing but South Dakotans. I think that anything like a "Crazy person" filing a frivilous suit would be thrown out by this special grand jury. Each and everyone of us that is not a lawyer, judge, or police officer could sit on that jury and use our common sense to filter out the bad suits. So to think that judges would be sued or charged with a criminal violation by every crazy person and their mother is just false and quite simply an insult to ALL potential jurrors(maybe ever YOU)
PP said…
Nonnie and KCW, HOW can you be against it when an underwhelming minority of 7.7% know "some guy" who might have gotten a raw deal from a judge..

Anonymous said…
First of all Amendment E Campaign, who are you? Are you Bill Stegmeier? Bonnie Russell? Ron Branson?

Second, keep in mind that judges will have to pay OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS every time a complaint is filed.


Meanwhile, you don't have to pay ANYTHING to file the suit with the Special Grand Jury.

Cute, huh?

Meaning that even if the suit is eventually dismissed as frivolous, the judges will have to pay and pay.

And given the fact that Branson has vowed to get his JAILers to drive to SD to start lots of lawsuits in order to shut down the SD courts, it won't take much before judges simply quit. No one will want to be a judge if Branson and Stegmeier and their California friends come to SD to file their lawsuits because they think the IRS is a hoax or the NWO is out to get them or whatever.
Anonymous said…
One more thing about the frivolous lawsuits that Stegmeier's good friend and leader Branson has vowed to file in SD. (And don't think Stegmeier's not still taking his orders from Branson, just read and read what Branson's saying, not what Stegmeier wants the SD public and media to read).

Read the Amendment: the complaints filed with the Special Grand Jury are to be WEIGHED IN FAVOR OF THE COMPLAINER!

In other words, even if it IS frivolous, the Special Grand Jury cannot dismiss it because "All allegations in the complaint shall be liberally construed in favor of the complainant."

Gee, amendment e campaign, for someone who is supposedly in charge or speaks for the campaign, you haven't even read your own material, have you?
Anonymous said…
Say PP. Since Stegmeier's not taken you up on the challenge, have you thought of emailing Stegmeier directly? Or J.A.I.L./Amendment E spokesperson and Californian Bonnie Russell? Or author of J.A.I.L./Amendment E Californian Ron Branson?
PP said…
Actually, he has, and I'm composing the questions as we speak.

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: Frederick not in SDGOP Chair Race

A strategic move by Sutton. Good for him, bad for Dems.