Target Of Leftist Lawfare Seeks To Remove Judge For ‘Judicial Misconduct’
Jim Troupis, Wisconsin attorney for the Trump campaign following the rigged 2020 election, is fighting a politically-driven prosecution.
The Wisconsin judge presiding over a politically-motivated case against attorneys who represented President Donald Trump in 2020 should be removed from the case on grounds of “judicial misconduct,” alleges a motion filed late Monday afternoon.
Exactly what Dane County Circuit Court Judge John Hyland did is not clear from the succinct motion, but something sure stinks in the leftist hive that is the Dane County Court. Jim Troupis, a former conservative judge in that hive and the target of far-left Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul’s political prosecution, filed the motion via his attorney.
Apparently Hyland’s conduct was so atrocious that Troupis is looking to clear the bench.
“Because of the misconduct outlined in the Brief and the documents in the attached Appendix, this case must proceed before a judge from a neighboring county with a different staff to avoid the appearance of bias or impropriety,” a court filing argues.
Troupis also moved to vacate Hyland’s acidic decision to deny Troupis’ earlier motion to dismiss the felony charges against him in Kaul’s phony “fake electors” case that the 21st century Javert just can’t seem to quit.
“That decision was the byproduct of misconduct,” a separate motion to postpone the preliminary hearing before Hyland scheduled for next week.
Attorney Kenneth Chesebro, Troupis’ co-counsel in Wisconsin, and Trump campaign aide Michael Roman also asked that the hearing be continued in light of the shocking revelations.
Troupis declined further comment on the motions.
His attorney also filed a motion to seal the Omnibus Brief and the accompanying appendix apparently containing the damning evidence, according to the court file. While Troupis “believes that there’s a strong argument for making all filings public,” as a former judge he recognizes the risk of “public humiliation” for Hyland, the motion states.
Troupis’ Madison attorney Joe Bugni argues that the allegation rises to that level.
“Accordingly, this Court should decide, in the first instance, whether that standard is met,” the attorney wrote. He noted that Kaul’s office had no objection to the request.
‘The Political Scalp’
It’s been a year-and-a-half since Kaul stood on the state Capitol steps for a press conference to announce a forgery-related charge against Troupis and his co-defendants. The complaints — and the made-for-corporate-media announcement — are part of the leftist lawfare campaign targeting the attorneys for their efforts to enlist 10 Republican volunteers to serve as alternate — or contingent — electors to protect Trump’s electoral votes should he succeed in his post-election legal challenges. As The Federalist has extensively reported, Kaul massaged the meaning of a state forgery-uttering law to accuse the defendants of knowingly promoting a false slate of electors as authentic, or at least uttering as much. --->READ MORE HERE
Documents: Wisconsin Judge In Trump Electors Case Didn’t Write His Own Ruling:
Unsealed documents accuse retired Dane County Judge Frank Remington of ghostwriting Judge John Hyland’s order rejecting a dismissal motion.
Explosive new court documents unsealed Tuesday detail the alleged judicial misconduct of the Wisconsin judge presiding over a politically-driven criminal case targeting the attorneys who represented the 2020 Trump campaign in the battleground Badger State. Dane County Circuit Court Judge John Hyland had outside help from a former judge with a “grudge,” according to the court filings.
Hyland, in so many words, told defendants to go pound sand. He will not remove himself from the case and the march to a perfectly-timed election-year trial will go on. To the people who feel more than ever that it will be impossible to get a fair trial in far-left Dane County, the judge effectively said, Trust me.
Earlier this week, attorneys for Jim Troupis, President Donald Trump’s Wisconsin recount counselor following the rigged 2020 presidential election, filed several motions not only asking Hyland and his staff to step aside, but to vacate the judge’s August order rejecting the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case. The omnibus motion and an appendix spelling out the allegations were sealed — that is until Hyland opened them Tuesday afternoon.
‘Not a Fan of My Client’
Troupis, attorney Kenneth Chesebro, and Trump campaign aide Michael Roman face multiple counts on trumped-up forgery and fraud charges stemming from their efforts to file a slate of alternate — or contingent — electors to protect Trump’s electoral votes while the president contested the results of the 2020 election. Democrat Joe Biden claimed the critical swing state’s 10 electoral votes, but Trump sued in the wake of myriad voting irregularities and legal questions in the Covid-plagued presidential election.
The defendants face decades in prison on the piled-on charges filed by Democrat state Attorney General Josh Kaul nearly four years after the election.
Hyland, according to the unsealed filings, had the help of a former fellow judge in putting together the August opinion. The omnibus motion alleges that retired Dane County Judge Frank Remington wrote much of the order denying the dismissal motion, which, the motion argues, would be a clear breach of judicial ethics and Wisconsin law. It would also present a personal conflict.
Troupis, a former Dane County judge and an extremely rare conservative one at that, was “not everyone’s cup of tea,” the defendant’s attorney Joe Bugni wrote. “This apparently included the retired Judge, who the defense believes wrote the August 22 Order.”
“Judge Remington was (to put it mildly) not a fan of my client when they were in practice or when they were colleagues on the bench,” Bugni alleges. “Moreover, Judge Remington retired from the bench on May 3, before the motions were ripe — we filed our reply on May 12.”
‘Same Flavor’
How does Troupis’ legal team know that Remington wrote the order? They enlisted the services of Georgetown professor Natalie Schilling, an internationally-recognized forensic linguistics expert who has logged a lot of hours on cases involving authorship attribution. And Schilling, according to the affidavit she signed, found Hyland’s “sardonic” order brimming with Remington’s “distinct style.” She compared several court documents written by Remington to the Hyland order and discovered that style was “parroted throughout.” --->READ MORE HERE
If you like what you see, please "Like" and/or Follow us on FACEBOOK
here, GETTR
here, and TWITTER
here.
No comments:
Post a Comment