Who Really is Defending Democracy

Recently the House passed, 220 to 208, the Safeguard American 

Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. This piece of legislation would require 

those who wish to register to vote to present proof of citizenship. 

Now, it is already illegal to, under federal law, to falsely claim to

be a U.S. citizen. This is just an extra layer of commonsense 

protection to make the U.S. Code more enforceable.

Many Americans agree; roughly two-thirds of likely U.S. voters 

preferred in an April survey by Rasmussen Reports favored the

SAVE Act. Just four House Democrats joined the Republicans

in voting for the bill, just enough votes altogether to pass it.

Your unperplexed Peasant would not have expected anything 

better from the Dems. The four were courageous standouts, and

they deserve our thanks and praise for their votes. The rest, well,

they voted in typical Democrat fashion. For a political party which 

professes to love and revere democracy so much they have done

nothing in this instance (or at any other time) to protect it. 

Hypocrisy uber ales with the Democrats.           

MEM

Fulfillment of a Desire and More!

At the end of June your grateful Peasant had been given

the wonderful opportunity to engage in something that I

have long wanted to do but didn't get the opportunity 

until now at 67 years; two-thirds of a century! Sometimes

something is better late than never.

What is this wonderful thing, you ask? The Peasant took 

part in a political debate. My first ever. Both it  --- and I --- 

were great! Three days before the event I received a call

from an old friend and fellow conservative activist who 

asked if I would like to be in a political debate. My response 

was "When and where?" After getting the details I made my

 arrangements to be there where I would be joined by my

conservative friend and two liberal friends, one of whom

was the organizer of the event and its host. He brought along

two hourglasses, one with a one-minute flow and the other

a two-minute instrument. We each chose a political topic and 

were given two minutes each to present our topics, after which

the others would have one minute to respond either in agree-

ment or in opposition. Then the presenter of the topic would 

get a minute to rebut the latter. We would go around the table 

to get everyone involved in the various roles in the proceedings,

then close and have refreshments together; we were at an ice

cream parlor in Wauwatosa and had fantastic ice cream and

cool beverages, which were an even bigger treat because we 

were at an outdoor table on an oppressively hot afternoon

complete with unrelenting sun.

My topic was "President Trump is Not a Fascist", in which I first

defined what fascism is, then gave examples of how our president 

has not governed as a fascist and is therefore not a fascist. 

My conservative chum gave a fine speech in corroboration while 

our liberal friends did their best to poke holes in my points but to

no avail. Amazingly, astonishingly, and almost shockingly, there 

were no angry words, no angry outbursts, no rancor at all. Even

though we all are good friends we walked through dangerous 

territory which could have resulted in the hardest feelings and

serious feuding. But with our strong bonds of friendship, and our

desire to have a debate without any negativity we accomplished 

what we intended. Furthermore, we have established a debate club

which will meet on a monthly basis and at various venues, be they

our homes or restaurants, pubs, parks, or indeed ice cream parlors.

We want to show that it is possible, desirable, and necessary to 

have discussions of the issues of the day while taking a calm,

measured approach and even a bit of collegiality to the activity.

With the divisiveness in our country in which even friends and 

families are acrimoniously divided, we could promote healing 

and, dare I say, friendship.

I am proud to be a charter member of such a fine group of people

with this shared purpose and these goals. I shall be sharing the 

related events as they unfold over time, among which I hope to 

include the club and its concept catching on. And boy, debating 

is a lot of fun!

MEM

Independence Day Thoughts and Wishes

249 years a nation, sovereign and proud. Our United States

of America is celebrating another birthday in two days, and 

we her people have a lot to celebrate in addition to her birth-

day.

We have Donald Trump back in the White House. Thanks to 

President Trump, we are having a reduction in the rate of infla-

tion. We have all but sealed the southern border, and far fewer

illegal entrants have gotten in; many of them, however, have 

been caught and deported --- not released, as was the procedure

in the Biden era. Countries with whom we trade with in the 

world marketplace are now treating us with respect and are 

no longer imposing stiff tariffs on our goods, blocking them

from being sold while we have very low, if any tariffs on 

theirs. 

We are cracking down on allowing males to compete against

female athletes in college sports, resulting in far fewer injuries

to the latter by the former as well as the latter winning events

on a level playing field. Enemy nations are now realizing once 

again that we are not to be trifled with and must be taken seriously

lest they become imperiled. And best of all, we have a head of state

who commands respect rather than draws scorn and ridicule.

At home we are regaining our constitutional rights, i.e. freedom of 

expression; high tech firms are less willing to block or censor us

on their public media sites because of our expressing certain political

beliefs. Freedom of worship without being placed on any political or

governmental organizations' list of alleged extremist groups, such as

the Southern Christian Leadership Council drawing up such a list and

placing pre-Vatican II Catholics and conservative activist groups such

as Moms for Liberty. I could go on, quite easily, but you get the gist.

Our country is embracing once again what it was meant to be, created 

to be, and is once again deemed by her people to be; a free, sovereign

republic ruled by its people and not by a self-proclaimed elite behaving

like gods on high, treating the people like peasants or children. And 

in light of the events of recent years it's none to soon.

Happy Independence Day!

MEM

Update re: the Judge Dugan Case

The Peasant just learned that Judge Hannah C. Dugan's 

federal court case has been postponed until a future date.

No clear reason was given, and no new date was given

to resume proceedings. All I can tell you, my wonderful

readers, is that when your dependable Peasant finds out 

anything new, you all shall know all the relevant details.

Stay close!

MEM

The Fall of a Respected Legal Figure

One would think that after 52 years one would know someone

extremely well. But then, something happens where you see a 

side of that person that you never even thought was there. 

Your astonished Peasant learned in April of a friend and class-

mate since our high school days had become that person in my

life. Judge Hannah C. Dugan, of late a Milwaukee County Circuit

Judge, was always interested in politics and law; she was on our 

All Student Council. After Catholic Memorial High School 

Dugan went on to earn her degree in law, then became an attorney

specializing in providing legal aid for low-income people

through Catholic Charities. In 2016 liberal Dugan was elected 

to her current judicial position, and became a respected barrister

with praise from both liberals and conservatives --- including

members on the Wisconsin Supreme Court; I myself voted for

her as well. 

And here in 2025 I am trying to make sense out of what transpired

recently in Judge Dugan's courtroom that has confounded me and

so many people like me who held the judge in the highest esteem.

On April 18, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

agents were in the courthouse to find and arrest Eduardo Flores-

Ruiz on the grounds of being in the country illegally.

Flores-Ruiz happened to be in Dugan's court as the defendant in

a trial in which he was being tried on assault charges, having 

severely beaten three people. Two of the victims were in Dugan's

court when she concealed and aided in the escape from her court

and the courthouse the defendant, Flores-Ruiz, and ICE agents

came to arrest him on the charge of being an illegal immigrant.

Judge Dugan had Flores-Ruiz go to the Jury Room and wait for

further instructions. Now, no one goes into that room but the 

jury members in a case, the bailiff, and the judge; your layman

Peasant is not certain of this being so because of a law, or if

it is a in-court proscribed procedure. From that room, Flores-Ruiz,

who was accompanied by his attorney, was instructed to go out

through a door at the back of the room which led to the public 

hallway. From there, Flores-Ruiz and his attorney made their 

way to an elevator which they rode to the main exit from the 

courthouse and exited the building. When Flores-Ruiz began

to leave the grounds, he was chased and apprehended. But what

about the two victims of this thug, who also happened to hear Judge

Judge Dugan's instructions to their attacker? They seemed to be 

flipped the middle finger in all this. 

The FBI got involved, subsequently beginning an investigation 

into whether the judge helped an illegal immigrant avoid arrest. 

She was arrested by the FBI and charged with two felony counts

of obstruction and concealment of an individual, and was jailed.

Judge Dugan was later released on her own recognizance after

a few hours. FBI Director Kash Patel and U.S. Attorney General

Pam Bondi both publicly spoke in support of the arrest of Dugan.

Judge Dugan hired two attorneys to represent her, interestingly

enough both being prominent Republicans: former U.S. Attorney

Stephen M. Biskupic and former U.S. Solicitor General Paul 

Clement. One would think that she would have hired some 

heavyweight Democrat attorneys, perhaps someone high up in

the hierarchy of the ACLU, as she has strong left-wing political

leanings. That, and most Republicans in government support 

Dugan's arrest with some of them calling for her disbarment 

while many Democrats oppose her arrest and hail her as a 

heroine, a modern day Joan of Arc.

AG Bondi made it clear that judiciary members opposing the 

Trump administration's immigration policies would face 

prosecution; "If you are harboring a fugitive, we don't care who

you are; we will come after you and we will prosecute you."

Democrat members of Congress and liberals in the judiciary

said that Judge Dugan's arrest was an attempt to intimidate the 

courts in order to get them to acquiesce with President Trump's

immigration policies, that this was something they'd expect from

Third World countries, that it defies the Constitution, that this 

is a threat to the independence of the judiciary, and a plethora of 

similar moanings, groanings, hootings and hollerings one would

expect from lefties. 

But the plain and simple truth is, at the end of the day, Judge Hannah

C. Dugan violated the law. While it is true that a judge has authority

over his or her courtroom, the judge is still not allowed to undertake 

some certain measures which are outside the bounds of the law --- 

among which is the concealment of a defendant from law enforcement

and assisting a defendant in fleeing to avoid arrest. My old friend had

done both. Apparently Her Honor shares the opinion of many on her  

side of the political spectrum, thinking President Trump is not only 

wrong but tyrannical in wanting to round up as many people illegally 

here in our country as possible. Moreover, many of these like-minded

sorts have protested outside of the Federal Courthouse in Milwaukee

where news of Judge Dugan's arrest was made public. While many of

these people may not have much, if any, knack for understanding the 

relevant parts of the law (and don't care), Judge Dugan should, and 

should also respect the law and its bounds, as the law is what covers 

each and every one of us. Judges interpret the law as it applies to each

situation which is at the heart of each case that comes into court. 

Sometimes the judge cites the law in telling the plaintiff or defendant 

no, you can't do that. But what credibility would a judge have if he

or she violated the law as it is applied to how that judge manages

his or her court?

It's a sad situation that Judge Dugan has gotten caught up in. On one 

hand, I feel badly for her. She made a huge mistake in judgement, no

pun intended. On the other hand, your sorrowful Peasant opines that

she must face the lawful consequences of her huge mistake, whatever 

they may be. Maybe she'll be fined. Maybe she'll be imprisoned. 

Maybe she'll have to give up her judgeship. Maybe she'll have to give 

up her license to practice law. Whatever sentence is meted out, Judge

Dugan must face it squarely and accept her just desserts. For our  

nation is a nation of laws, not a nation of people who make the laws, 

having their political stripes dictate what laws they would write and 

what they would mean, and how they would be interpreted, never mind

the Constitution or any court in the judiciary.

Judge Dugan returns to Federal court in July. My guess is that her case

will be decided by November. The next five months will prove telling

for the judge and what her future from that point forward will look like.

MEM

John "Paddy" Hemingway, R.I.P.

The last of the fighter pilots who fought in the Battle of Britain,

John "Paddy" Hemingway joined the Royal Air Force as a

teenager, and came home one heck of a man. Having participated

in the three-month battle in British skies, "Paddy" helped secure

his country from the threat of invasion by Nazi Germany. 

During the war he was shot down four times and was awarded 

the Distinguished Flying Cross, through it all becoming a 

Group Captain. 

When Winston Churchill said "Never in the field of human conflict

was there so much owed by so many to so few," of the courageous

men who fought this battle to keep Britain free, he was talking about

men like Paddy Hemingway.

Paddy went to the Ultimate Glory at 105. Rest in Peace. 

You are a truly Great Briton.

MEM

Meanwhile Back at the Ivy League ...

Very recently, masked activists (thugs, really) burst into Columbia

University's main library, ejected students, physically attacked 

dissenters, committed vandalism, and engaged in general mayhem.

At least 78 of these hoodlums were arrested, 65 students received

interim suspensions, and another 33 individuals, how many of which

were students was unclear, were barred from the campus.

Columbia's acting president, Claire Shipman, called the police; 

something liberal college and university presidents at liberal

schools haven't been known to do when confronted by such 

situations. After viewing the carnage, Shipman stated "I saw

it defaced and damaged in disturbing ways and with disturbing 

slogans." Congratulations are to be given to Acting President 

Shipman for her exhibiting such resolve. Let's hope that her

courage catches on with other heads of institutions of higher learning. 

Harvard will be rocky soil upon which the seeds of this courage 

displayed at Columbia will fall. Harvard has deep-running anti-

Israel and Jewish bias; an internal investigation, no less, discovered

as much. Its activist enclave does not regard Israel so much as a 

sovereign state but as a boil on the skin of the earth which must be 

lanced. Israeli and American Jewish students are routinely harassed,

often to the point of these students not being able to attend class.

Harvard's administration has done almost nothing to help them.

These pro-Palestinian students and others have dominated classrooms

and classes, clubs and other extracurriculars, and campus public spaces

with "discussions" about the Palestinian cause. Harvard's bowing and

scraping at the altar of "inclusivity" backs this to the hilt, the safety

and emotional well-being of Jewish students and Jewish faculty

members be damned. 

The war for academic freedom will be fought in many universities,

fought on a campus-to-campus basis from without and from within.

Some colleges and universities will stand up to and ultimately defeat 

these ratbags, while other institutions will cower and knuckle under

to them. It's too early in the game to assess the score and how it will 

end, so we must wait and see who will prevail.

MEM