Shouldn’t we imprison anyone who dares criticize the conduct of abusive public officials?
Panic not. You haven’t slipped through a portal into another dimension.
This is still Common Sense. I’m still Paul Jacob.
Interpret the initial interrogative, above, as my sardonic paraphrase of somebody else’s sentiment — that of a power-abusing official who bemoans any chastisement of his lousy actions. Who even threatens to prosecute persons voicing such criticism.
The man is John Chisholm, a Milwaukee D.A. who intimates that Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker should be investigated for blasting Chisholm’s churlish tactics against political opponents. These tactics include late-night raids motivated solely by political animus. (I’ve reported on these doings.)
Scott Walker told Iowans that “if the government can do that against people of one political persuasion, they can do it against anybody. . . . [I]t was really about people trying to intimidate people . . . [A] political witch hunt.”
Responding, Chisholm suggested, with blunderbuss subtlety, that “the Iowa criminal code, like Wisconsin’s, has provisions for intentionally making false statements intended to harm the reputation of others.”
Chisholm, you bum. You knave. You vile excrescence. Not even you dispute that your office’s raids directed against people like my colleague Eric O’Keefe occurred. Thus, you’ve no hint of a basis for a slander claim. You did the dirty deeds we’re deriding. Cheer and hug you for it, should we? (Eric has sued to block Chisholm’s secretive “John Doe” raids.)
All this does sound like the Twilight Zone. Unfortunately, it’s part of a new normal. Not one we need accept, however.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
2 replies on “J’accuse, Chisholm”
Intelligent Men have long known such evil creeps as John Chisholm have been part and parcel of the interface between the vast RICO-racketeering organised-criminal hoards that trade as the “Democratic” potty and civilized society — and Wise Men have for-as-long sought to counter them and their activities. But these past six and a half years have seen such creeps crawl out from under their rocks as display an arrogance that makes such criminals as Jamie Gorelick, Lois Lerner, Franklin Delano Raines and Barney’s Frank seem almost angelic in comparison!
So basically, Paul, if John Chisholm can prove he’s not “vile excrescence,” then you’ve made a false claim intended to harm Chisholm’s sterling reputation, therefore you should be subject to a lawsuit.
Fortunately for you, I suspect even Perry Mason would have a hard time convincing a jury Chisholm isn’t vile.