Saturday, March 2, 2019

Interesting Discussion

Hi Timothy, 
Thank you for your e-mail. Speaker Vos always appreciates hearing from 
Wisconsinites about the issues that are important to them. 
As a state office, we do not engage in legal matters. The concerns 
that you have raised would be best handled by the Attorney General’s 
office. You can file a complaint with the AG’s office or you can 
contact the Office of Open Government, also housed in the Attorney 
General’s office with open meetings and open records request 
Thanks again for contacting Speaker Vos’ office. 
Best regards, 
Moriah Thiry 
Office of Assembly Speaker Robin Vos 
608-266-9171, 1-888-534-0063 
From: Rep.Vos <> 
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2019 9:46 PM 
To: Rep.Vos <> 
Subject: the form Contact Robin was submitted 
Dear State Rep Robin Vos - 
When will the State of Wisconsin investigate the criminal government 
which rules Racine County, prosecute the criminal State Actors, and 
restore Law and Order to Racine County? 
The more we know about efforts by officials in Racine to shield public 
records from public view, the more outrageous it seems. 
In late January, the office of Racine City Attorney Scott Letteney 
disclosed a summary of records it has fought tooth and nail to keep 
secret. It showed these to be ordinary email communications, mainly 
between Racine Ald. Sandra Weidner and her constituents. 
In one email, Weidner asked the city attorney’s office whether a given 
contract would need city council approval. Another attached a 
resolution regarding the creation of a redevelopment authority. There 
were also emails concerning a bar license and a constituent's claim 
for garage damages. 
These are the kinds of records routinely released by local governments 
throughout the state. 
Yet Letteney’s reaction suggests the emails contained vital national 
security secrets, perhaps the nuclear launch codes. He believes, 
apparently, that any communication from within city government that 
intersects with the work of his office is top secret. 
Racine County Circuit Judge Eugene Gasiorkiewicz showed bad judgment 
in keeping routine records from the public, writes Bill Lueders, 
president of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council. 
Letteney’s bad judgment was matched by that of Racine City Judge 
Eugene Gasiorkiewicz, who agreed to seal the entire file of Weidner’s 
lawsuit challenging the city attorney’s actions. Even the judge’s 
ruling, which found that some of these records should be public, was 
filed under seal. 
The public was literally denied the right to know about a lawsuit 
regarding its right to know. 
And when Weidner did the courageous thing and went public with 
information about the case, Letteney demanded and Gasiorkiewicz 
imposed a contempt of court charge against her. 
It gets even worse. 
A request from the Racine Journal Times for records showing how much 
city taxpayers were paying an outside law firm to go after Weidner was 
denied, on grounds that these were filed under seal. 
A state appeals court is now reviewing Weidner’s records suit and 
contempt conviction. News organizations including the Milwaukee 
Journal Sentinel, USA Today Network-Wisconsin, Wisconsin Broadcasters 
Association, Wisconsin Newspaper Association, and Wisconsin Freedom of 
Information Council (of which I am president) filed a motion to 
intervene, asking that the case and documents be unsealed. 
This led to a determination that the vast majority of case records 
must be made public, as they should have been all along. 
As the Journal Times reported, the released invoices show Racine 
taxpayers have shelled out nearly $18,000 to fund Letteney’s crusade 
against Weidner. This went to pay two attorneys $350 and $205 an hour, 
respectively, for about 68 hours of work. Weidner’s attorney, Terry 
Rose, deemed these fees “excessive in light of the issues involved,” 
noting that his defense of Weidner, at $300 an hour, came to less than 
Let us be clear about what has happened. City Attorney Letteney, with 
Judge Gasiorkiewicz’s help, has wasted many thousands of taxpayer 
dollars to embrace a shocking level of official secrecy. Weidner and 
media organizations have, at their own expense, pushed back against 
this, and thus far prevailed. 
But the wrong that has been done here has not yet been righted. There 
ought to be consequences for the bad judgment shown by Letteney and 
Gasiorkiewicz, as well as by Racine Mayor Cory Mason — who, as far as 
I can tell, has sat on his hands as this outrage has played out in his 
The violation of the public trust here has been severe. The 
repercussions should be also. 
I look forward to your reply. 
Tim & Cindy 
Reply | Reply to all | Forward | Print | Delete | Show original 
May I ask you this question - 
If I choose to be a Non-Voter - am I Sovereign? 
Speaker Vos was elected by Voters to Speak for them and enact 
Legislation and ensure it is enforced. 
If I do not Vote for a Representative Speaker - then I am not Subject 
to the Legislation proposed or approved by those Speakers. 
If, as a Non-Voter, I would be subject the Legislation of an Elected 
Speaker -  then does a State of War exist? 
Why should I be subject to the Legislation of someone who I did not 
Elect, or even participate in the Voting for - What if my best 
interest is not yours? Whose Will shall bend? Based upon what? A 
Non-Voter would have NO standing in a State Court - as he is 
Just a question. 
See also: 
The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no 
authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and 
man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between 
persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract 
between persons living eighty years ago. And it can be supposed to 
have been a contract then only between persons who had already come to 
years of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and 
obligatory contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a 
small portion even of the people then existing were consulted on the 
subject, or asked, or permitted to express either their consent or 
dissent in any formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give 
their consent formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead 
forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years. And the constitution, so far as 
it was their contract, died with them. They had no natural power or 
right to make it obligatory upon their children. It is not only 
plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that they could bind 
their posterity, but they did not even attempt to bind them. That is 
to say, the instrument does not purport to be an agreement between any 
body but “the people” then existing; nor does it, either expressly or 
impliedly, assert any right, power, or disposition, on their part, to 
bind anybody but themselves. Let us see. Its language is: 


TSE said...

As a Sovereign and Non-Voter, I must plead "NOT SUBJECT TO".

Your opinions and rulings mean nothing to me, since I did not contract with you - willingly.

TSE said...

Licenses were obtained "Under Duress".

All contracts entered "Under Duress" are null and void.

TSE said...

Apparently - a State of War between Sovereigns exists.

Vos says it is so.

Please - go your way - and I shall go mine.

No harm done.

No Treason.