Saturday, April 27, 2024
spot_imgspot_img
Saturday, April 27, 2024

Milwaukee Press Club 'Excellence in Wisconsin Journalism' 2020 & 2021 Award Winners

George Soros’ Influence on Wisconsin Journalism Exposed

spot_img

We connect the dots between George Soros, Wisconsin’s flagship university and Wisconsin Watch.

Wisconsin Watch, a 501(c)(3) organization that disseminates news stories to many prominent media outlets statewide and is housed at the taxpayer-funded UW-Madison campus, has taken more than $1 million from an organization founded by George Soros over the years. Wisconsin Right Now discovered that the group is still prominently pushing out stories by a writer, Howard Hardee, who was dispatched to Wisconsin by a Soros-funded organization to work on “election integrity” stories and projects.

When major media outlets like WTM-TV and the Wisconsin State Journal run stories by Wisconsin Watch or Hardee, they fail to advise readers that he’s a fellow with a Soros-linked group. The group says that “hundreds” of news organizations have shared its stories over the years, giving them wide reach.

Several years ago, Republicans in the state Legislature tried to get the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, which runs Wisconsin Watch, kicked out of its taxpayer-supported campus offices because of its long Soros’ money trail and perceived liberal bias. That effort failed due to Scott Walker’s veto pen. By 2016, Wisconsin Watch was claiming it no longer takes Soros money. The center’s deal with UW-Madison also involves providing “educational services” and offering paid student internships.

However, the group lists Hardee on its staff listing and runs his stories prominently and pushes them out to news outlets all over the state; the group he’s a fellow with, First Draft, received money in 2020 from a Soros’ group and other liberal organizations.

First Draft and Hardee are also part of a big collaboration on election reporting with UW-Madison’s Center for Journalism Ethics and the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism that they’re calling an “Election Integrity Project.” Nowhere in their toolkit, which advises readers on how to avoid misinformation (one example it uses is from conservative talk radio host Vicki McKenna), do readers or taxpayers learn about the partisan slant of First Draft’s funders, including Soros, or the Election Integrity Project’s funder, Craig Newmark Philanthropies.

Hardee co-authored a Nov. 12 story that appeared to be trying to influence public opinion on the presidential election in Wisconsin and elsewhere by turning a factual story into a supposed conspiracy theory. That story misleadingly attempted to discredit factual reporting Wisconsin Right Now did on Milwaukee’s top elections official misplacing a key voting flash drive on election night. She did misplace it. She admitted it in a letter. The partisan spin attached to that story seemed obvious, so Wisconsin Right Now decided to look deeper into the funding sources of the groups.

The Nov. 12 story was written by “Howard Hardee (Wisconsin Watch) and Keenan Chen (First Draft).” It was the top story on Wisconsin Watch’s website for days. The story quotes a First Draft “writer and researcher” as saying “Readers should also be skeptical of a news source that isn’t completely transparent about how it’s funded.” (Wisconsin Right Now is completely self-funded.)

Wisconsin Right Now reached out to the Center for Journalism Ethics at UW-Madison and its School of Journalism & Mass Communication, and Meredith McGlone, the director of News & Media Relations for the University of Wisconsin-Madison, got back to us. “UW–Madison is committed to providing our journalism students with a top-notch education that supports the principles of objectivity and transparency,” she said.

“The Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan organization. In keeping with journalistic best practices, the Center publicly shares where its funding comes from and does not allow funders to influence editorial decisions. ”

She added, “UW–Madison provides office space to WCIJ in exchange for WCIJ providing educational services and paid internships to UW–Madison students.  Regarding the Election Integrity Project, we are dedicated to ensuring that this and all other university research is objective and evidence based. The university receives funding support from individuals and organizations across the political spectrum. We have policies in place to prevent funders from inappropriately influencing research. The Election Integrity Project is a non-partisan effort funded by a grant from the Craig Newmark Philanthropies. This funding is disclosed on project materials posted to the Center for Journalism Ethics website.”

But how non-partisan is all of this really? Decide for yourself:


Big Spending to ‘Beat Trump’?

Wisconsin watch

The materials touting the Election Integrity Project claim it’s a “nonpartisan initiative of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism and the Center for Journalism Ethics at UW–Madison in collaboration with First Draft and with the support of Craig Newmark Philanthropies.” A Wisconsin Newspaper Association article announcing the project says, “Howard Hardee, a former Wisconsin State Journal reporter and current local news fellow at First Draft News, will be the lead reporter on the project.” It also says it received $83,000 in funding from Craig Newmark Philanthropies.

Craig Newmark, the founder of Craig’s List, is a major Democratic donor, whose slew of donations to liberal campaigns include $100,000 in 2020 to the Biden Victory Fund. An August 2020 article in Forbes Magazine reported that Newmark, “the billionaire behind Craigslist is spending nearly $200 million to save journalism, beat President Trump and end information warfare.” Newmark makes his anti-Trump views obvious on social media.

McGlone insisted, “First Draft did not provide funding to the Election Integrity Project. First Draft is listed as a collaborator because it helped promote and distribute the project’s work.”

Hardee’s staff bio for the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism calls him, “the election integrity reporter at the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism and a local fellow with the international journalism nonprofit First Draft News. ”

In March 2020, First Draft announced that Hardee was one of five fellows in key battleground states who would “work across the US to monitor mis- and disinformation online and provide training on best strategies to counter it.” The article says they “have received training and developed plans tailored to their five states…Embedded in their communities, each is working with a local media organization or collaboration.”

Wisconsin watch
Materials from the election integrity project

Readers of the materials publicly presented by the Center for Journalism Ethics and Wisconsin Watch would not know that First Draft is funded by Soros unless they thought to drill down to First Draft’s own website funding page. Readers of Hardee’s Wisconsin Watch stories that are replicated by major news organizations all over the state face a similar lack of immediate transparency. Would any readers think to dig that far down? If you’re, say, a reader of WTMJ-TV’s story on its website, would you think to go to First Draft and find its funding page and then research the funders of the organizations listed? Would the average reader take that many steps or should the news organizations make the funding sources explicitly clear on their own websites? Again, you decide. Wisconsin Right Now did ask WTMJ-TV’s news director for comment and received none back.

Andy Hall, the co-founder of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, in an email response to Wisconsin Right Now’s questions, didn’t dispute any of the Soros’ funding, but he tried to explain it away by saying it didn’t influence coverage. “The Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism stands by its 12-year record of journalistic independence and financial transparency,” he told Wisconsin Right Now.

Another “major supporter” of the Wisconsin Watch is The Evjue Foundation, the charitable arm of The Capital Times in Madison, which is a liberal newspaper. It also received money from the Ford Foundation, described by Influence Watch as having “given a great deal of money to left-wing and center-left organizations since its founding.”


Who Funds First Draft? Its Soros Money Trail

Wisconsin watch
George soros

First Draft is funded in part by Soros’ “Open Society Foundations,” according to First Draft’s own website. The group received Open Society Foundations funding in 2020. Open Society Foundations lists Soros as “the founder and chair of the Open Society Foundations.”

The First Draft group also takes money from a foundation run by the parents of disgraced Democratic New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer; from Facebook and Google; and from other foundations known to donate to left-of-center causes, including Newmark’s. Influence Watch, which itself has been criticized for right-wing bias but is rated high on fact checking, says of one First Draft donor, Democracy Fund, “The organization contributes to center-left and left-wing media organizations, groups seeking to infringe on campaign speech rights, left-of-center voter registration organizations, and nominally non-aligned public policy organizations.” There are other examples like that on its donor list, such as the Media Democracy Fund, which Influence Watch describes as “a left-of-center activist organization” that is tied to left-wing “dark money” groups.

On its website, the group claims its mission as follows, “Today, we need access to the truth more than ever before. But in this polluted information environment, it’s never been harder to know what to trust, and never easier to be misled. Disinformation is targeting and damaging our communities, all around the world.”

Wisconsin Right Now asked Hall about this all too, and he responded, “First Draft’s funders are publicly available. Information about Mr. Hardee and the Center’s relationship with First Draft is published on our Staff and Funding pages. You may have also seen further information in our public announcement regarding our efforts to support election integrity and counteract efforts that could strip citizens of their power, and in these Election Integrity Project toolkits to help the public and journalists identify what’s credible and what’s not.”

He revealed that Wisconsin Watch stories are picked up by news organizations all over the state, writing, “Our journalism is nonpartisan and fact-checked. All of the stories published by Wisconsin Watch, the Center’s newsroom, are always available for free at WisconsinWatch.org. We make the materials available at no charge to news organizations, and hundreds of them have shared Wisconsin Watch’s reports with their audiences since we began operations in 2009. During that period, we have collaborated with dozens of news organizations. We always retain full journalistic independence.”

Indeed, this is a nationwide trend.  MRC reported that Soros has heavily funded non-profit “news” organizations, to the tune of at least $48 million. He’s also attempted to influence higher ed to combat what he sees as rising authoritarianism.


George Soros Backed Money to the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism – How Much?

How much money has the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism/Wisconsin Watch taken from Soros backed organizations? Its website says:

“The Foundation to Promote Open Society, which works in cooperation with the Open Society Foundations in New York City, awarded the Center general support totaling $50,000 in 2009, $100,000 in 2010 (to be spread over two years), $35,000 in 2011, $350,000 in 2012 (to be spread over two years), $350,000 in 2014 (over two years) and $200,000 in 2016.”

That’s $1,085,000.

The website for the Open Society Foundations says, “The Open Society Foundations, founded by George Soros, are the world’s largest private funder of independent groups working for justice, democratic governance, and human rights.” What is the Foundation to Promote Open Society? According to Influence Watch, “The Foundation to Promote Open Society (FPOS) is one of two major grantmaking foundations funded by liberal financier and billionaire George Soros. It is closely affiliated with the Open Society Foundations (OSF; formerly Open Society Institute).”

In 2011, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that “some 30% of the (Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism’s) funding has come from Soros-funded entities.” At that time, a conservative writer had accused the Wisconsin center of skewing reporting on an altercation between liberal and conservative state Supreme Court justices in favor of the liberal’s perspective. Co-founder Andy Hall told the JS at that time that the Soros money came with no strings attached and other non-profit journalism orgs took it too.

“As you know from having read WCIJ’s Policy on Financial Support, it establishes and requires journalistic independence: ‘Like many news organizations, the Center maintains a firewall between news coverage decisions and its sources of revenue,'” Hall wrote Wisconsin Right Now. “WCIJ’s financial supporters shall have no voice in WCIJ’s editorial decisions. All donations, sponsorships and other forms of financial support are subject to compliance with the Policy on Financial Support, including provisions for transparency, the disclosure of donors’ identities, and the prohibition on donations from political parties, elected officials, or others whose contribution may affect public perception of WCIJ’s independence. Acceptance of financial support does not constitute implied or actual endorsement of the Center’s funders or their products, services or opinions.”

Hall responded, “In accord with that policy, WCIJ voluntarily makes public a complete list of donors — including the amounts of money provided by major contributors. We also publish our tax returns and audited financial statements.”

The Soros money has been controversial for some time. “Does anybody really believe this was not a George Soros operation from the get-go?” asked an opinion article in the Lakeland Times in 2011. That article continued:

After all, Charles Lewis, a board member from day one, has Soros connections way back to when he ran (and founded) the Soros-funded nonprofit Center for Public Integrity. WCIJ board chairman Brant Houston also has connections to Soros as chairman of the board of the Investigative News Network, another Soros-backed operation, and he’s cofounder of the global Investigative Journalism Network, which has received consistent support from the Open Society Institute, according to its website. So the Soros money was bound to cascade into the WCIJ from the very beginning. There’s nothing wrong with that so long as there’s full disclosure, but there wasn’t full disclosure at the start, just the opposite.

The article by Richard Moore alleged the Wisconsin Watch stories focus on “topics that careen leftward.”

Who is behind Wisconsin Watch? Wisconsin Watch’s managing editor and co-founder is Dee Hall, the former Madison newspaper reporter whose reporting on the state caucus scandal, which targeted Republican legislative leaders Scott Jensen and Mick Foti in part, but also Democratic leader Chuck Chvala, was widely criticized by conservatives as biased. Her husband, Andy Hall, helps run and co-founded the site.


The Misleading Wisconsin Watch Story on the Flash Drive

Wisconsin Watch wrote its revealingly misleading narrative on Wisconsin Right Now’s story, that factually reported the news that Milwaukee’s top election official had misplaced a key election flash drive. The official herself later admitted that what Wisconsin Right Now reported was true in a letter to the Wisconsin Election Commission.

That wasn’t good enough for Wisconsin Watch, which seems to be opining in its story that it isn’t news that Milwaukee’s top elections chief briefly couldn’t find a flash drive with voter information and later blamed it on the Legislature requiring her to stay up for 24 hours on election day.

They ignore completely the angle that police officers felt they were being intimidated to stay silent and make a big deal out of Wisconsin Right Now factually reporting that, at the time of the story, no one would comment. The angle that the Elections chief later claimed in a letter that the misplacement didn’t affect the election wasn’t known to our reporter at the time of publication… because she, the Police Department, and the mayor’s office wouldn’t comment. Wisconsin Right Now pointing out that key sources wouldn’t comment in a brick wall of silence is painted as somehow “conspiratorial” by Wisconsin Watch, even though it’s responsible journalism to let readers know who you tried to reach for comment. It all builds up to obvious spin that any election claims must be treated as instantly suspect or conspiratorial.

In contrast, Wisconsin Right Now has published stories debunking false election claims, and we’ve reported, without spin, facts readers deserve to know – such as on the misplaced flash drive.

Wisconsin Watch then censored author Jim Piwowarczyk’s full response after Howard Hardee asked for comment.

This is what Piwowarczyk wrote Hardee, but Hardee censored and refused to run:

Wisconsin Watch is revealing its political bias despite its 501(c)(3) status. You’re just editorializing now and subjectively reading things into our story that aren’t there to spin and shape your own political narrative. In contrast to Wisconsin Watch, our story is built on verified facts that not a single person, including you, has disputed. Nowhere in our story did we ever say the flash drive was “tampered with.” For you to read that subjective accusation into a paragraph that simply informs readers that the key players in the story refused to provide any information or comment is evidence of blatant bias on your part. We don’t have any further comment because it’s clear you’re just trying to spin a narrative here.

Wisconsin Right Now asked Hall about the ethics of censoring Piwowarczyk’s full response. “In a recent report, we quoted you accurately, summarizing your position,” he said. “We stand by the story.”

Interestingly, Wisconsin Watch takes election officials’ word for it that the flash drive situation didn’t affect vote totals. Although Wisconsin Right Now haven’t implied and aren’t saying otherwise, we would note that it’s interesting an “investigative journalism” site would simply take government officials’ word for it, especially the very official who misplaced it in the first place. Checking the rhetoric of government officials, rather than treating it as unquestioning gospel, is supposed to be a foundational principle of investigative journalism.

Indeed, the Wisconsin Election Commission spokesman, who is quoted by Wisconsin Watch on the misplaced flash drive, is also a financial donor to Wisconsin Watch. Hardee didn’t disclose this information in the story. Wisconsin Watch posts its tax returns on its site, but stopped with 2018.

For days, the media ignored the misplaced flash drive story until the election chief finally wrote a letter admitting that everything we wrote was true – she misplaced the drive. This wasn’t good enough for Wisconsin Watch, which subjectively opined that WRN “implied” the misplaced flash drive equated to voter fraud. We did no such thing. Our story reported non-disputed facts.

Which is news and which is opinion, in that context?


Wisconsin Watch Past Biased Coverage?

https://twitter.com/Howard_Hardee/status/1326968531297169409

Wisconsin Watch claims on its website that it maintains a “firewall” between its funding sources and news coverage, insisting, “funders exercise no control over the Center’s editorial decision,” but others have detected bias in its coverage.

In 2018, Badger Institute pointed out that readers of news sites that run Wisconsin Watch’s stories wouldn’t know that it has received so much money from Soros over the years. Badger Institute’s story reported that Soros’ funded groups have given money to other non-profit journalism ventures throughout the United States.

“Despite receiving much of their funding from left-leaning individuals and organizations, most nonprofit journalism operations, such as WCIJ (Wisconsin Watch) and ProPublica, say they are independent and not influenced by donors. Yet over and over, their articles are closely aligned with causes and political viewpoints of its donors, including those of Soros,” the site wrote, noting that Wisconsin Watch stopped taking Soros money in 2016.

One project on Wisconsin Watch’s website about Scott Walker was described by it as, “a collection of the Center’s coverage of Walker’s time as governor, from his attack on public sector unions to his record on the environment.”

Concluded Badger Institute, which has received heavy funding from the Bradley Foundation, “WCIJ is a 501(c)(3) organization, which means it cannot directly engage in campaigning or electioneering. However, the group is legally allowed to have a perspective, and its stories reflect that… Coverage has been decidedly critical of Walker’s administration.”

Wisconsin Watch has collaborated with the liberal Huffington Post on a reporting project. It has run headlines that say things like this:

October 2018 story headlined, “As Trump Disparages Immigrants, Midwest Dairy Farmers Build Bridges to Mexico.”

October 2017 story headlined, “Secret corporate cash funded posh convention hideaway for Paul Ryan, GOP lawmakers.”

Those are just a couple of examples.

They also ran a guest column from a writer who opined, “we must continue to be vigilant in the face of Trump’s tendency, first as a candidate and now as president, to engage in bombast and exaggeration.”

Wisconsin Right Now asked Hall about bias claims, and he responded, “We invite the public to read, listen to and watch our news coverage, and to hold us accountable if they perceive a story to be inaccurate or unfair.”

You be the judge.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Redistricting Hearing Wisconsin should soon have an answer about ballot drop boxes and just who can return absentee ballots. wisconsin supreme court

Wisconsin Pro-life Groups Tell Supreme Court There’s No Right to Abortion

(The Center Square) – Wisconsin’s pro-life groups are unified in telling the Wisconsin Supreme Court it is not the court’s job to create a right to abortion.

Wisconsin Right to Life, Wisconsin Family Action and Pro-Life Wisconsin all filed a joint brief with the court that argues there is no right to abortion and add that if there is to be one, that decision is up to lawmakers.

“The Supreme Court is not the proper venue to create health and safety law nor the proper mechanism to add a constitutional amendment. The legislature is the proper body to weigh the policy considerations and create law, not the court,” Wisconsin Family Action president Christine File said.

“Finding a right to abortion in our state constitution, where there clearly is none, would be the most extreme form of legislating from the bench,” Dan Miller, state director at Pro-Life Wisconsin, said. “The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled in Dobbs that there is no federal constitutional right to abortion. Nothing in Wisconsin’s constitution or the history of our state would remotely suggest such a right. We implore the Wisconsin Supreme Court to reject Planned Parenthood’s radical and self-serving plans.”

Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin in February asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to decide if there is a right to abortion in the state.

The Supreme Court has accepted the case, and the filing from Wisconsin’s pro-life groups is in response to that case.

The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty also filed a brief in the case.

“There is no right to an abortion in Wisconsin’s Constitution. No judge, justice, or lawyer should be creating policy for Wisconsinites out of thin air. Reversing Roe v. Wade through the Dobbs decision rightfully placed the abortion issue back where it should have been all along – in the halls of state legislatures,” WILL Deputy Counsel Luke Berg said. “That’s where the debate and conversation must remain.”

The court is expecting responses from everyone involved in the case by today. The court has not said when it expects to hear oral arguments.

trump waukesha

President Trump Will Hold Rally in Waukesha on May 1; How to Get Tickets

President Donald J. Trump will travel to Waukesha, Wisconsin, on May 1 "to contrast the...
barry braatz

Washington County DA Candidate Barry Braatz Promises to ‘Hold Criminals Accountable,’ Gets Big Endorsement

"I will work side-by-side with law enforcement to hold criminals accountable" - Barry Braatz. Barry Braatz,...
Evers Vetoes

Senator Dan Knodl: Evers Vetoes Cast Shadow Over End of Tax Season

For taxpayers, it has been a symbolically momentous week. Tax Day arrived as usual on...
Trump Holds Cash Special Counsel Jack Smith Iowa Victory for Trump Remove Trump From Primary Ballot

Prosecutors Begin Laying Out Case Against Trump to Jury

Federal prosecutors on Monday began laying out what they say is election fraud in 2016 by former President Donald Trump.

Trump, 77, is the first former U.S. president to be charged with a felony. Prosecutors and defense attorneys presented their opening statements to the jury of five women and seven men.

Prosecutors said Trump corrupted the 2016 election, The Hill reported on Monday.

"This case is about a criminal conspiracy and a cover-up," Manhattan prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said. "The defendant, Donald Trump, orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 election, then covered it up."

Trump will spend four days a week in court in New York for the next six to eight weeks on state charges that he disguised hush money payments to two women as legal expenses during the 2016 election. Judge Juan Merchan has not scheduled trial days on Wednesdays.

On Monday, his defense attorneys said he had done nothing wrong.

"President Trump is innocent," Trump attorney Todd Blanche told the jury. "He did not commit any crimes. The Manhattan district attorney's office should never have brought this case."

Trump pleaded not guilty in April 2023 to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

Merchan's gag order remains in place, ordered last month before the trial began. Trump, the nation's 45th president, is prohibited from making or directing others to make public statements about witnesses concerning their potential participation or about counsel in the case or about court staff, district attorney staff or family members of staff.

Prosecutors said Trump's $130,000 payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels was falsely covered up as a business expense, that the money was to help keep her quiet. Prosecutors say they had a sexual encounter.

Prosecutors also said Trump paid Karen McDougal, a Playboy magazine "Playmate," and reimbursed then attorney and fixer Michael Cohen to cover it up.

"This was a planned, coordinated, long-running conspiracy to influence the 2016 election, to help Donald Trump get elected through illegal expenditures to silence people who had something bad to say about his behavior," Colangelo said. "It was election fraud, pure and simple."

Reuters reported that Blanche countered that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg should have never brought the case to trial.

"There's nothing wrong with trying to influence an election" Blanche said. "It's called democracy. They put something sinister on this idea, as if it's a crime."

Prosecutors say Trump falsified internal records kept by his company, hiding the true nature of payments that involve Daniels ($130,000), McDougal ($150,000), and Trump's former personal lawyer Michael Cohen ($420,000). Prosecutors say the money was logged as legal expenses, not reimbursements. In a reversal of past close relationships now pivotal to the prosecution against him, both Cohen and Daniels are expected to testify.

Under New York state law, falsifying business records in the first degree is a Class E felony that carries a maximum sentence of four years in prison.

Even if convicted and sentenced to jail, Trump could continue his campaign to return to the White House. He's facing the Democratic incumbent who ousted him in 2020, 81-year-old President Joe Biden.

Trump faces 88 felony charges spread across four cases in Florida, Georgia, New York and Washington.Trump has said the criminal and civil trials he faces are designed to keep him from winning the 2024 rematch versus Biden.

Waukesha County DA Declines Charges in Brandtjen Campaign Finance Case

(The Center Square) – Another local prosecutor declined to bring charges against a Republican state lawmaker in a campaign funding raising case.

Waukesha County’s District Attorney Sue Opper said she would not file charges against state Rep. Janel Brandtjen. But Opper said she is not clearing Brandtjen in the case.

“I am simply concluding that I cannot prove charges against her. While the intercepted communications, such as audio recordings may be compelling in the court of public opinion, they are not in a court of law,” Opper said.

Wisconsin’s Ethics Commission suggested charges against Brandtjen and a handful of others in a case that investigators say saw them move money around to allegedly skirt Wisconsin’s limits on campaign donations.

Opper said the Ethics Commission investigation was based on “reasonable suspicion and then probable cause.” But she added that those “burdens are substantially lower than proof beyond a reasonable doubt which is necessary for a criminal conviction.”

Opper said the Ethic Commission could pursue a civil case against Brandtjen and the others. She also opened the door to other investigations.

“This decision does not clear Rep. Brandtjen of any wrongdoing, there is just not enough evidence to move forward to let a factfinder decide,” Opper said.

She’s the fourth local prosecutor in the state to decide against filing charges.

Jack Smith Enticing Illegal Immigration Overturns Gov Evers Legislative Maps Arizona Elections Cases

Some Good News Out of Court Lately [Up Against the Wall]

Finally, a few correct court decisions. It’s about time. First, out of the U.S. Supreme Court,...
Speaker Johnson

As Threat to Remove Speaker Johnson Looms, Cooler Heads Should Prevail [WRN VOICES]

Trump gets it. We all need to get it. We currently find ourselves in the...
Brad Schimel

Brad Schimel Says He Won’t Repeat Mistakes of Last Supreme Court Race

(The Center Square) – Judge Brad Schmiel says he’s not going to repeat the mistakes of the last supreme court race in Wisconsin.

Schimel told News Talk 1130 WISN’s Jay Weber he isn’t going to politicize the race like liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz, and he’s not going to ignore his campaign like former conservative Justice Dan Kelly.

Schimel said he can run for the court next year without injecting Republican politics into the court.

“I've had plenty of people on our side that suggested ‘Brad, you just got to do the same.’ No. I cannot do that,” Schimel said. “We still have to respect the rule of law. We still have to respect the Constitution. We still have to respect judicial ethics. I'm not going to go out and promise people what I'm going to do. But I will promise people that they can look at my record, and they know that I've done the right thing. That I have put the law above politics. I put the law above my own personal opinions.”

Republicans roundly criticized Protasiewicz for her comments about abortion and Wisconsin’s state legislative maps during the 2023 campaign.

Republicans also roundly criticized former Justice Dan Kelly, who lost to Protasiewicz, for his perceived lack of campaigning.

“We couldn’t have put a brighter, more reliable conservative on the Wisconsin Supreme Court than Dan Kelly,” Schmiel added. “But, with the campaign there were some mistakes that were made.”

Chief among them, Schimel said, was Kelly’s decision to reject money from the Wisconsin Republican Party that could have gone toward TV ads.

Schimel said that left Kelly at a huge disadvantage.

“Janet Protasiewicz took almost $10 million from the state [Democratic] Party. Dan took the money too late. He realized ‘Oh my gosh, I'm going to get burned on this.’ By the time he took it the best ad buys were gone, and he wasn't able to spend the money effectively,” Schimel said. “He spent $585,000 on TV. That was what his campaign spent. Janet Protasiewicz’s campaign spent $10.5 million. When you are out-spent 20-to-one on TV, you better just start writing your concession speech.”

Schmiel vowed not to be outspent this time around.

“I have made it clear. I will take all legal, ethical contributions to my campaign because we have to win,” Schimel said. “Because we have to stop standing on this hill of principle that we end up dying on.”

Defund NPR

Multiple Bills Introduced in Congress to Defund NPR

Several U.S. House Republicans introduced multiple pieces of legislation to defund National Public Radio following new allegations of “leftist propaganda” from the taxpayer-funded news source.

House Freedom Caucus Chair Bob Good, R-Va., Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., and Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., introduced similar legislation to prohibit federal funding for NPR, including barring local public radio stations from utilizing money from federal grants to “purchase content or pay dues to NPR.”

Over the years, Republicans have made multiple attempts to defund NPR, citing similar complaints. The latest outrage follows an editorial from former NPR Editor Uri Berliner, who criticized the news source claiming it had "lost America's trust."

Berliner criticized NPR’s coverage of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, the COVID-19 lab leak theory and of Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop as examples of the outlet’s left-leaning bias. He described “the most damaging development at NPR: the absence of viewpoint diversity.”

Banks took aim at NPR’s new Chief Executive Officer Katherine Maher, who has expressed criticism of the First Amendment in efforts to combat “misinformation.”

“NPR’s new CEO is a radical, left-wing activist who doesn’t believe in free speech or objective journalism. Hoosiers shouldn’t be writing her paychecks. Katherine Maher isn’t qualified to teach an introductory journalism class, much less capable of responsibly spending millions of American tax dollars,” said Banks.

The Indiana congressman continued by describing the news outlet as a “liberal looney bin” under prior leadership, drawing attention to a systemic problem.

“It’s time to pull the plug on this national embarrassment. Congress must stop spending other people’s hard-earned money on low grade propaganda,” Banks lamented.

Good was a bit more reserved in his take-down of the news outlet.

“It is bad enough that so many media outlets push their slanted views instead of reporting the news, but it is even more egregious for hardworking taxpayers to be forced to pay for it. National Public Radio has a track record of promoting anti-American narratives on the taxpayer dime,” Good said in a news release. “My legislation would ensure no taxpayer dollars are used to fund the woke, leftist propaganda of National Public Radio.”

Tenney, a former newspaper owner and publisher, accused NPR of using taxpayer funds to “manipulate” and promote a political agenda controlled by “left-wing activists.”

"I understand the importance of non-partisan, balanced media coverage, and have seen first-hand the left-wing bias in our news media. These disturbing reports out of NPR confirm what many have known for a long time: NPR is using American taxpayer dollars to manipulate the news and lie to the American people on behalf of a political agenda. It’s past time the American people stop footing the bill for NPR, and the partisan, left-wing activists that control it," Tenney said in a news release.

The lawmakers cited the political make-up of the NPR’s D.C. news team, which they say includes 87 registered Democrats and no registered Republicans.

The Center Square uncovered records showing that Maher exclusively donated to Democratic political candidates before her role at NPR. Her largest donation of $1,500 was given to Virginia Congressman Tom Perriello in 2017, and most frequently donated to Virginia state Sen. Jennifer Carroll Foy, in the amounts of $25 over nine times.

Good underscored the original purpose for the publicly funded news outlet, which he says was “created to be an educational news source and to ‘speak with many voices.’” He added that NPR has now become “a primary outlet for advancing biased and radical media coverage of political and social issues.”

Eric Hovde TIES Wisconsin Senate Race Against Sen. Tammy Baldwin With Likely Voters

It all adds up to one thing: Tammy Baldwin and Joe Biden are in trouble...

Fond du Lac County DA Eric Toney Endorses Jim Piwowarczyk for Assembly

Former Republican Attorney General Candidate and Fond du Lac County DA Eric Toney has endorsed...

Senator Ron Johnson to Speak at Concordia University [Canceled]

Update: This event has been canceled. Ron Johnson was held up in Washington DC. The Young...

Israel & Iran – The War Escalates | Up Against the Wall

Well, like I said, the war would escalate so long as Biden shows a lack...
trump, derrick van orden

We Asked a Wisconsin U.S. Rep., ‘What Is Donald Trump Really Like?’ The Answer Will Make You Tear Up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9g0YE9DQNL8 "What is Donald Trump really like?" we asked Wisconsin Congressman Derrick Van Orden, a Republican...
derrick van orden

Wisconsin U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden: FISA Amendment Would Have Given Protections to 9/11 Terrorists

https://youtu.be/bzqQ7sgQLec?si=96g0cUP5vc64jCQX Wisconsin Congressman Derrick Van Orden, a Republican who served as a Navy SEAL, says he...

The COVID Generation: Let’s Stop Scaring Our Kids [WRN Voices]

As a local school board member, I have witnessed firsthand many of the issues of...

Rep. Janel Brandtjen: Threats to WEC Chief Don’t Help

(The Center Square) – One of the biggest critics of Wisconsin’s election administrator says no one should be threatening her and says threats don’t help fix election integrity issues.

State Rep. Janel Brandtjen, R-Menomonee Falls, on Tuesday offered her thoughts after the Wisconsin Elections Commission confirmed elections administrator Meagan Wolfe is receiving extra security protection.

"Threatening Administrator Meagan Wolfe, or any election official, is unacceptable and counterproductive. Venting frustrations on individuals like Wolfe, clerks, or poll workers is not only illegal but also harmful to rebuilding trust in our elections,” Brandtjen said. “Threats only undermine our republic and empower the courts and media. It's essential to address any concerns about election processes through legal channels. Threats have no place in our democracy.”

Brandtjen has been one of Wisconsin’s loudest critics of Wolfe. She led hearings as far back as 2021 into Wolfe’s role in the 2020 election. Brandtjen also led the push to get Wolfe removed from the Elections Commission.

“Wolfe’s term has indeed expired, and according to Wisconsin Statutes 15.61(1)(b)1, she should be removed, but Republicans are too worried about the press or too compromised to follow existing law.” Brandtjen said.

The Wisconsin Elections Commission on Monday clarified that Wolfe is receiving extra security but refused to offer any details.

“The Wisconsin Elections Commission has had productive conversations about safety and security with state leadership, including the governor’s office, which is tasked with approving security measures for state government officials,” WEC spokesperson Riley Vetterkind said in a statement. “Those conversations have resulted in additional security measures being approved for Administrator Wolfe and the WEC when the need arises.”

Brandtjen on Tuesday blamed Wisconsin Republicans, and once again blamed Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, for Wolfe’s continued time on the Elections Commission.

“It's disappointing that Sen. Dan Knodl and Rep. Scott Krug, chairs of the election committees, have not exercised their investigative and subpoena powers. This inaction has allowed the neglect of essential laws, such as providing ballots to individuals declared incompetent, lack of checks in military ballot requests, an insecure online system, and improper guidance on voting for homeless individuals without proper documentation,” she said. “The Legislature, particularly Speaker Vos' control, is responsible for the frustration caused by election irregularities due to their inaction.”

Wisconsin’s local election managers have reported an uptick in threats and angry rhetoric since the 2020 election, and some local election offices have taken extra precautions. But there haven’t been any cases in Wisconsin where someone has acted on an election threat.

Wisconsin’s Largest Business Group Sues Over Evers’ 400-year School Funding Veto

(The Center Square) – There is now a legal challenge to Gov. Tony Evers’ 400-year school funding veto.

The WMC Litigation Center on Monday asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to take up their challenge to the governor’s summer veto that increased per-pupil funding for the next four centuries.

“At issue is Gov. Evers’ use of the so-called ‘Vanna White’ or ‘pick-a-letter’ veto,” the group said in a statement. “The governor creatively eliminated specific numbers in a portion of the budget bill that was meant to increase the property tax levy limit for school districts in the 2023-24 and 2024-25 fiscal years. By striking individual digits, the levy limit would instead be increased from the years 2023 to 2425 – or four centuries into the future.”

The WMC Litigation Center is an affiliate of Wisconsin Manufactures & Commerce (WMC), the combined state chamber and manufacturers’ association.

Litigation Center Executive Director Scott Rosenow said while Wisconsin’s governor has an incredibly powerful veto pen, there are limits.

“No Wisconsin governor has the authority to strike individual letters or digits to form a new word or number, except when reducing appropriations,” Rosenow said. “This action is not only unconstitutional on its face, but it is undemocratic because this specific partial veto allows school districts to raise property taxes for the next 400 years without voter approval.”

Wisconsin lawmakers and voters approved a constitutional amendment in 1990 that put limits on the governor’s veto power.

Rosenow and the WMC Litigation Center say the governor’s veto goes beyond those limits.

The legal challenge also raises the constitutional issue that all state spending has to originate with, and be approved by, the legislature.

“In no uncertain terms, 402 years is not less than or part of the two-year duration approved by the Legislature – it is far more,” concluded Rosenow. “The governor overstepped his authority with this partial veto, at the expense of taxpayers, and we believe oversight by the Court is necessary.”

The WMC Litigation Center is asking the Wisconsin Supreme Court to take the case as quickly as possible.

Let’s Thank Rep. August, Sen. Wimberger, & WI Voters For Ending Zuckerbucks

Remember when Elon Musk challenged Mark Zuckerberg to a cage match? That fight between Twitter/Threads billionaires...