Comments on: NEW ULM JOURNAL: HATCH COMPLAINT “AN EFFORT TO MUZZLE THE NEWSPAPER” http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/ Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:12:13 +0000 hourly 1 By: Brian Hanna http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/comment-page-1/#comment-8942 Brian Hanna Sun, 30 Jul 2006 21:52:47 +0000 http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/#comment-8942 If you have proof, bring it. If you have enough for a investigation, I encourage you to file a complaint. If you have proof, bring it.

If you have enough for a investigation, I encourage you to file a complaint.

]]> By: MINNESOTA VOTER http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/comment-page-1/#comment-8758 MINNESOTA VOTER Sat, 29 Jul 2006 02:29:36 +0000 http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/#comment-8758 Congratulations NEW ULM JOURNAL for having the courage to print what many Minnesota voters may be thinking – HATCH, AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, IS UNLAWFULLY SUPPRESSING THE FEDERALLY-PROTECTED FIRST AMENDMENT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. What does Hatch have to hide to go to such reprehensible extremes to silence the Press? Rather obviously, Hatch doesn’t want any “press” before the elections that might cause voters to recall the arrests of Hatch’s two adult daughters in Chicago for drunk and disorderly conduct, assaulting a police officer, and destroying public property by kicking out the window of a police car. Clearly, it strains credibility to believe a Chicago judge, in a city historically known for judicial corruption and bribery, simply found the Hatch daughters not guilty. The “Press” has yet to raise the hard question which voters may very well be asking – HOW MUCH DID HATCH PAY THE CHICAGO JUDGE TO FIND THE HATCH DAUGHTERS NOT GUILTY? Historically, in just one federal “sting” operation alone in Chicago, eleven (11) judges were convicted and sent to federal prison for bribery and public corruption, not to mention the thirty-eight (38) attorneys who were also convicted, along with a number of deputy court clerks. Now when the intoxicated Hatch daughters assaulted a Chicago police officer and kicked out a police car window – yet the “nice” Chicago judge decided the Hatch daughters are “not guilty” – just what does Hatch think the average voter in Minnesota is likely to think? BRIBERY BY THE MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL?!?! In the opinion of certain voters, this is not about privacy for the Hatch family and his seriously out-of-control daughters, this is about covering up possible criminal violations of the Federal Bribery Statute perpetrated by Attorney General Hatch. Congratulations NEW ULM JOURNAL for having the courage to print what many Minnesota voters may be thinking – HATCH, AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, IS UNLAWFULLY SUPPRESSING THE FEDERALLY-PROTECTED FIRST AMENDMENT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.

What does Hatch have to hide to go to such reprehensible extremes to silence the Press? Rather obviously, Hatch doesn’t want any “press” before the elections that might cause voters to recall the arrests of Hatch’s two adult daughters in Chicago for drunk and disorderly conduct, assaulting a police officer, and destroying public property by kicking out the window of a police car. Clearly, it strains credibility to believe a Chicago judge, in a city historically known for judicial corruption and bribery, simply found the Hatch daughters not guilty. The “Press” has yet to raise the hard question which voters may very well be asking – HOW MUCH DID HATCH PAY THE CHICAGO JUDGE TO FIND THE HATCH DAUGHTERS NOT GUILTY?

Historically, in just one federal “sting” operation alone in Chicago, eleven (11) judges were convicted and sent to federal prison for bribery and public corruption, not to mention the thirty-eight (38) attorneys who were also convicted, along with a number of deputy court clerks. Now when the intoxicated Hatch daughters assaulted a Chicago police officer and kicked out a police car window – yet the “nice” Chicago judge decided the Hatch daughters are “not guilty” – just what does Hatch think the average voter in Minnesota is likely to think? BRIBERY BY THE MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL?!?!

In the opinion of certain voters, this is not about privacy for the Hatch family and his seriously out-of-control daughters, this is about covering up possible criminal violations of the Federal Bribery Statute perpetrated by Attorney General Hatch.

]]> By: Brian Hanna http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/comment-page-1/#comment-8734 Brian Hanna Fri, 28 Jul 2006 23:58:34 +0000 http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/#comment-8734 It's amazing just how many times MB can post the same echo of the same old same old. When it gets old, he could always try red-baiting another candidate! :') It’s amazing just how many times MB can post the same echo of the same old same old.

When it gets old, he could always try red-baiting another candidate!

:’)

]]> By: Roving Reporter http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/comment-page-1/#comment-8673 Roving Reporter Fri, 28 Jul 2006 17:07:51 +0000 http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/#comment-8673 It is a nice theory you have, but have you found one democrat yet who has defended Mike Hatch for this action? We will defend his right to privacy. We will defend his right to answer whatever questions he sees fit to answer. I don't think anyone believes he should have the right to stop newspapers from asking questions. It is a nice theory you have, but have you found one democrat yet who has defended Mike Hatch for this action?

We will defend his right to privacy. We will defend his right to answer whatever questions he sees fit to answer.

I don’t think anyone believes he should have the right to stop newspapers from asking questions.

]]> By: jimj http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/comment-page-1/#comment-8652 jimj Fri, 28 Jul 2006 15:41:50 +0000 http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/07/28/new-ulm-journal-hatch-complaint-an-effort-to-muzzle-the-newspaper/#comment-8652 The NEW ULM JOURNAL has it absolutely right ! Isn't it a tragedy that such basic logic can be employed in a medium sized and growing town, while the METRO area is subjected to the fundamental stupidity and mean spirited Left Wing ranting of the Star tribune ? The NEW ULM JOURNAL has it absolutely right !
Isn’t it a tragedy that such basic logic can be
employed in a medium sized and growing town, while the METRO area is subjected to the fundamental stupidity and mean spirited Left Wing
ranting of the Star tribune ?

]]>