This Is What Should Matter

I interrupt the normally scheduled flypaper test in order to discuss something that should really matter to Americans.

By now, many of you know that my brother was illegally targeted by the city administrators of Dillon, Montana, leading to his arrest.  I don't use the word "illegally" in any glib manner at all.  What Malesich and Troedsson did was flat out illegal.  I'm researching it on my own right now, but I do know that at least one of my sometimes-readers already has access to the info, and would serve himself, my brother and the community of Montana to email me with it as well.   That way, I will risk or stake my own limited  reputation as to the facts of the case and law.  No one else need risk anything.

Allow me to get a tad personal here.  I had warned my brother against the evils of small town politics.  I knew his license was suspended, and strongly suspected that if anyone were to attack him, that would be the method.  Make no mistake, I warned Moorcat of these concerns.  Sure enough, small-town politics proved true to form.  Petty  little men performing petty little stunts to bolster their petty little egos. And aren't we all just goddamned proud  to call such our 'civic leaders'?   I haven't responded about this incident to my brother, or online, not because I don't care, but because I am just so disgusted at the predictable nature of the worst of humanity.  I knew that my brother would "do the right thing", stand tall before the man, and accept his punishment.  I've seen another brother do the same in the past.  That, in large part, is why I love and respect them both.  At no point do I call this justice, and that makes me physically ill.

There is a grander scale to this, though.  No, I'm not trying to paint a picture of the little hero against the monolithic evil of authority.  That's Moorcat's job, and damned if he doesn't have a pretty good palate to work with, a palate they gave him.  The grander scale is that we should all feel revulsion, and yet we seemingly don't.  This isn't just a matter of small-town politics and political bullying.  It's a larger mindset, one that I have accepted and feel shamed by.  Others should as well.  A local chief executive manipulates his power to obtain information against an opponent, and shares that with a sniveling toady (even Grima Wormtongue was more palatable than the slobbering man-whore Troedsson).  And he justifies his illegal actions as if it were concern for community.  Is that the community you live in?  Is that the community the Constitution told you that you live in?  Is that the community you choose to live in?

No, no and no.  This is the very crap that we went to war with England to get the fuck away from.  This is the very crap that Hollywood makes hero movies about.  That is what this is ... crap.  We all know it.  I'd offer a syllogism to prove it, but not everything can be boiled down to a syllogism, according to another person who won't say crap about this crap.  No, this is precisely the crap that we agreed to prostitute ourselves, Republicant and Democant alike, when we chose the Daddy state after 9/11.  This is precisely the crap we chose when we decided that turning a blind eye to the shrill was a good thing to do.  Ignore the signs, pay no heed to the pained.  We'll all be just fine if we pull the covers abit more over our heads.

Oh no, Wulfgar is overstating again?   Am I?  We're not talking about  national security, or great and weighty matters of state.  This time, people, we're talking about you.  That's right, you.  In Bozeman, I at least have the comfort that my mayor (though he and I have butted heads) understands the dangers of localized assholes using authority with dictatorial power.  He's ag'in it, and I applaud that.  In Missoula, their panties are in a knot over email.  THE HORROR!  And yet right here in this state, there is a city administration that will break the law to send a man to prison for disagreement.  Again, ain't we all real proud?  I'm not overstating jack-shit.

In a more simple,  better, more conservative time, we'd have run Malesich and Troedsson out of the state with the tar boiling and the feathers plucked.   I know, I know,  it's easy to say that wouldn't really have happened, and your probably right if you do.  BUT, what America, what Montana, do you live in? The one that says that it's okay to be the pawns of authority, or the one that tars and feathers them?

The answer is indicative of stature to me.  Matt Singer knows the dangers of petty rule.  Jay Stevens gets the point that authority cannot be given free hand to abuse and subjugate.  And from the so-called Dextra wing in Montana, we have ... crickets.  Make of that what you will; I know what I make of it.  Conservatism isn't about struggling against authority anymore, it's about bowing to it.  I still have my naive fantasies that we, Montanans,  would chase corrupt politicians to the border.  Apparently not.

What happened to my brother is a direct threat to the liberties of all who exist under the corrupt local juntas in this state.  This should be on every blog, and in newspapers that aren't weekly.  While he campaigns, someone should at least ask McGrath about this so he can blow the usual smoke of "I'm looking into it!".  Maybe then, he will.  As dysfunctional as my family is, we will deal with the immediacy of Moorcat's problems.  But you folks have got a problem on your plate as well.  Dick-taters in Montana?  Yeah, that ought to matter.

Comments

[GeeGuy]

With all due respect, Wulfgar, we all have our petty fish to fry. I certainly sympathize with Moorcat, but my reading of his blog indicates he has the situation pretty well under control.

Turning chickensh*t, small-town politics into a post-9/11 Bush issue, or a left/right issue is simply inaccurate. I thought you read my blog once in a while. I mean, come on, the fact that I (and others) haven't chosen to write about Moorcat's struggles implies we believe "authority [can] be given free hand to abuse and subjugate," that we believe in "bowing" to authority? That's pretty unfair.

Does Moorcat need help? I think the problem here is that, while what the officials did is small, petty bullsh*t, Moorcat admits he is guilty. Doesn't he?

[moorcat]

As I explained on my blog, GeeGuy, this isn't an issue of whether I was driving on a suspended license. As you have so elequently pointed out, I admitted to that. The problem here is one of abuse of power and an outright violaton of law on the part of Malesich and Slugger Troedsson.

As I am sure you are aware (you are a lawyer, afterall), there are certain conditions that have to be met before an "anonamous tip" meets the standards of probable cause. As I am also sure you are aware this arrest was predicated by actions that do NOT meet those requirements.

Further, the actions of Malesich questionably meet the requirements of Misconduct and the actions of Troedsson certainly meet the requirements of Misconduct.

As to the rest of Wulfgar's post, all I can say is that I am damn lucky to have a brother like him...

Moorcat

[Wulfgar]

With all due respect, Wulfgar, we all have our petty fish to fry. I certainly sympathize with Moorcat, but my reading of his blog indicates he has the situation pretty well under control.

??? Not without help, he doesn't. You did notice that big orange button, right?

Turning chickensh*t, small-town politics into a post-9/11 Bush issue, or a left/right issue is simply inaccurate.

Is it? You have a small town admin violating law and appealing to public safety. Yeah, that's real 9/10 thinking, isn't it? And you seem to have missed where I state quite explicitly that I *don't* think this a left or right issue. You are correct, I do read you. And that's one of the reasons why I marvel that you would put up such a weak defense of the indefensible. Are we beholden to petty dictators or not? If not, why remain silent about abuses of power? It's really a very simple question.

Does Moorcat need help? I think the problem here is that, while what the officials did is small, petty bullsh*t, Moorcat admits he is guilty. Doesn't he?

No he doesn't. I say as much. But you do need help, if you refuse to stand against the law breakers who call themselves your community leaders. You, of all who read this, should know exactly what I refer to. An yet you dismiss the obvious. Yeah, I do wonder why. What motivates you to dismiss tyranny when its so readily apparent? Do you feel safer hrumphing your 'pshaws'? What do you expect us to do when the 'civic leaders' of Great Falls have finely had enough of you? Do you actually expect the law to stand for you, when you seem incapable of standing for the law? Good luck with that.

[jhwygirl]

GeeGuy obviously can't think two steps in front of himself, not does he seem to want to actually absorb those words which he reads.

Several bloggers have explained quite succinctly - what has happened to Moorecat is an affront to civil liberties - to the Constitution, to rights of privacy.

Unless, of course, you would be happy to live in a fascist police state.

If you aren't outraged about his arrest, you don't deserve to write about politics. And you shouldn't bother to read about them either.

Go back to the NASCAR website and look at the pretty pictures.

[dew-r-lite]

Call me tonight, I'm standing by.

[dew-r-lite]

Look up Montana Code Annotated, Title 61 chapter 11, The Montana Driver Privacy Protection Act".

Seems pretty straightforward.

[TMM]

I sympathize with your frustration and anger, and also with Moorcat's situation. I can't speak for the anyone else on the dextra side of things, but just because I don't write about something does not mean that I deem it an unimportant issue. This is probably an outgrowth of my belief that my writing has exactly zero influence. Further, I don't think this type of situation is a new phenomenon; garbage like this has been occurring for ages, long before 9/11, and it's as widespread as it's always been. I could provide my own little stories, but they're irrelevant to the issue at hand.

Am I bowing to authority when I say, yea it sucks, but there's jack I can do about it? Only those with intimate knowledge of the situation can accomplish that. Waxing eloquent on my blog may make the victim feel better, but it won't stop anything. I could put out a call for donations, but I assure you those few who read my little site are already aware of the situation, and what they do or do not choose to do is their responsibility, not mine.

Yea, I wish for Moorcat, Montana, and America, that those with common sense could take the idiots among us for a ride on a rail, but that's not the world we live in, ever have lived in, or ever will live in. No bloviations on my part will change that.

[Wulfgar]

There actually is something you can do about it, TMM, just as there is something that GeeGuy can do about it. Post the issue. Hold McGrath's feet to the fire. He's running for Chief Justice of the Montana Supreme Court. It's about time he acted like he deserves it, wouldn't you agree?

[Steve]

Whoa, just got taken to task for a problem that I didn't even know existed. That being said, it is forming the impetus for a posting on "Montana's war against the Poor" that I have been mulling over.
As to your solutions, it ain't going to work. McGrath is too much the politician to cave in to the original reason for this statute: Dead beat dads must be made to pay, and if they don't the only tool available is the suspension of a DL which carries a mandatory 2 days in jail, unless you can convince the judge of a specific exemption (which has since been repealed).
Yes, this law has nothing to do with Bush, Big Brother or 9-11. It has to do with the organizing groups that want dads to pay for their kids. Another good example of well meaning intentions screwing people over. You are going to lose that one.
The only possible remedy that Moorcat has is that the information is considered Confidential Criminal Justice Information, which means that its dissemination is supposed to be restricted to law enforcement. So, obviously, someone broke that law.
The problem is, that if someone is known to be suspended, that is all of the evidence necessary to make a stop and request to see the validity of their license. Driving while suspended is a strict liability crime, meaning: 1. Were you driving?; 2. Were you suspended? If the answer to both is yes, you are guilty.
Methinks that there may be a 1983 action, but it won't be for abuse of authority (authority which most people in Montana are willing to cede to petty tyrants), but for the release of the confidential information.
I will have to finish these thoughts on my own blog.

[Wulfgar]

Steve, I think you tend to know when I take *you* to task. This wasn't that time.

No one, absolutely no one, is arguing that Moorcat should be exonerated or held unaccountable for his heinous crime. That isn't your problem, nor should it be. But there is a rouge administration out there, a power structure that is the antithesis of everything American.

You know the law. I look forward to your thoughts on the topic. But please don't pretend that anyone is attempting to 'get Moorcat off the hook'. What we want is a country free of fascists. The real kind, not Dave Budge's weird fantasy of progressive drones. We want a country free of local admins who use their power to attack 'enemies'. You can help with that ... or not. Your choice. Personally, I'd like to think that you'll make the right one. But I've been wrong before.

[moorcat]

In Steve's defense, he has written a pretty good post on Rabid Sanity relating to the idiocy of the Support Enforcement system. I do recommend reading it. He got some of the information wrong, but it was honest mistakes that most people make about the system. Regardless of the difficulty many people have had with Steve in the past, on this issue, he actually contributed good informaton on his own blog. It won't change the views of those people that LOVE to use the phrase "Dead beat dad", but it does gives some insight into the world behind support enforcement.

Moorcat

[Wulfgar]

Moorcat, I don't give one salient damn about the "support enforcement system". That's your issue, your bailiwick, your thing. What I do give a damn about is government overreach. Look at the vast silence of those who whine about government overreach and can't even recognize it when it happens.

[Shane C. Mason]

Gee Guy has made the classic statement here that has allowed things like illegal warrant-less wiretapping, illegal detention facilities and illegal inhumane torture to continue:

I think the problem here is that, while what the officials did is small, petty bullsh*t, Moorcat admits he is guilty. Doesn't he?

This is a big part of the problem.

[Craig]

I just found out about this whole thing night before last. As of late, I've been having a heck of a time keeping up with myself, much less everyone else.

Lame excuse, maybe, but there it is.

Personally, I am outraged by the incident, but to ascribe some kind of motivation because folks aren't writing about it isn't going to help anyone's cause.

I can barely put 15 minutes together to sit down and breathe, much less do any writing.

[GeeGuy]

Wulfgar, Moorcat: I simply don't have the time or the energy to engage in a protracted back and forth on this so I will simply say that I did a poor job of expressing my feelings on this post.

I apologize.

I think I took Wulfgar's initial remarks in a manner unintended, and I became defenisve.

[Steve]

Wulfgar - open up your mind. This is not unique. This is all about the pernicious use of the law to keep people down, just so that we can feel good about ourselves. While the mayor should not have gotten the information, it was not a crime for him to pass it on to the councilman, nor was it a crime for the councilman to report that Moorcat was driving. The only illegal activity was by the law enforcement officer who passed the information to the mayor.
The only remedy is at the ballot box. Trouble is, too many people support this kind of activity against "law breakers" to actually effect any change.
It's always been here, and it always will. This is not about blogs or Mike McGrath. This is about our fellow citizens who support the petty tyrants like the mayor.

[dew-r-lite]

"The only illegal activity was by the law enforcement officer who passed the information to the mayor."

I do think the illegal activity was obtaining the DOJ record and I get that from my years when I controlled the access. However, what I don't know, Steve, and I wish you'd address, is the conspiracy factor.

[Britt]

Um, Steve, actually the passing Moorcat's information on to the Councilman WAS breaking the law. The laws for requesting and disemminating information on a person's driving record are very clear and specific.
See MCA 61-11-508 and MCA 61-11-509. And the biggie being MCA 61-11-515.

[Steve]

Britt - read the statute, it says the "Department." The mayor is not part of the "Department." Again, it is the authorized person to receive the info (law enforcement) who released it to the mayor that is in trouble here.
The applicable statute is: 61-11-506. Disclosure of personal information from motor vehicle record prohibited. The department may not disclose personal information from a motor vehicle record unless the disclosure is permitted or required, as provided in 61-11-507, 61-11-508, or 61-11-509.
As to the "Biggie" that only applies to the sale of information.
The trick, is to sue the officer, and force him or her to reveal that the mayor coerced them into running a records check for an improper purpose. Of course, that will take about three years.

[Britt]

No need to force the officer to say anything. The Mayor openly admitted to asking the Police Dept to run the query in the newspaper. He did so with no personal knowledge, but based upon hearsay.

While I have my personal questions with the legality of the police performing the check requested by the mayor, I cannot fault the arresting officer in this case. As Moorcat has said to me time and again, it is not within the perview of the police to determine question of law. They received a report/complaint of "criminal activity" and as officers of the law, they are required to act upon that.

I agree with Moorcat that our local police dept is in an ugly position. They were used to further the Mayor's personal agenda and they are taking quite a bit of flak for it.

[Wulfgar]

Personally, I am outraged by the incident, but to ascribe some kind of motivation because folks aren't writing about it isn't going to help anyone's cause.

Okay, Craig, we've had a day to review. And what do we see? Hypocrisy, which was exactly the point I was trying to make. I don't have to ascribe motivations, I just have to watch. They on the other hand seem doggedly determined to ascribe motivations to me, most usually partisanship. Really.

With one collective sigh, the usual suspects dismiss the issue because it was me who posted about it, and it always happens, shucks whatya gonna do, and Steve said no law was broken and he's the authority, and its just the ineternet which I yawn at and yada fucking yada. Hypocrites, everyone of them. That's why I poked the Chihuahua nest with a stick. Because I knew they'd bark and bark sour.

Steve, right in these comments, posts that it it is very possible that laws were broken by government agents. And yet he claims elsewhere that they weren't, and others even more dim than Steve claim it as fact. These are the very same people who thump their chests (though Dave probably bruises his breasts more than Carol does) about government overreach, and the dangers of uncontrolled power ... power they excuse at any opportunity unless there is a 'gotcha' moment for them. City council emails? Hypocricy, fascism, progressives bad nom, nom. Sharing privileged information with cronies? Pshaw, what ya gonna do? It's no issue 'cause Wulfgar brought it up.

Yup, I am partisan. As ridiculous, weak, silly and annoying as I find Democrats, I know this: every time they get put to the test Republicants will prove themselves loathsome. Government oversight shouldn't be a partisan issue. It is part and parcel of what makes us American. But as you've said before ... some people just can't let go.

If you need any further proof, ask yourself why I'm the bad guy for pointing out that these Patriots were silent. I mentioned no one by name, and yet they all post in their own way about it, and damned near everyone of them take *me* to task because I slighted them with these trivialities ... personally. Hypocrites. Every fucking one of them.

[Steve]

Wulf- Run out of your meds? Believe it or not, you aren't the center of my universe.
Your brother has a better perspective on this than you do. All of the people that I usually read are in agreement that this type of petty tyranny is corrosive to democracy. The fact that they aren't foaming at the mouth like you are does not mean they aren't as concerned.
And just because someone thinks that the mayor broke the law doesn't mean that he did. He seems to have taken advantage of another's law breaking. In order to bring a cause of action against him, he had to violate a duty to Moorcat. What was that duty? Honest and fair dealing? Maybe, but if that is the standard, every civil official can be sued (not such a bad idea, but it won't be allowed).
You're just upset because I told you that McGrath (another politician) is not going to go to the mat on this. Don't think that I am in any way in favor of McGrath (look at what he did to Barry Beach). My point throughout this is that your brother is not the only one who is abused by these pissant power holders.
That's why I am not foaming at the mouth mad. It happens all of the time. The first time, I was probably as upset about it as you are. But I have seen it too much to blow up ala you.
But, if you want to rely on the law's interpretation that the Mayor is guilty - go for it. And when you are done, I will help Moorcat find a good lawyer to sue them.

[Wulfgar]

Wait a second here, kitten. You just admitted that a wrong doesn't faze you anymore because poor-you has seen too much ... and you accuse me of needing medication? You're a lawyer, admittedly not a very good one, but still. You work for the government in a legal capacity and strive to excuse the illegal actions of government officials ... and I'm supposed to give a shit that your excuse for their behavior is that *you're tired*?

My point throughout this is that your brother is not the only one who is abused by these pissant power holders.

That isn't a point at all. The point, is that your sitting on your hands excusing yourself because to call for action is "foaming at the mouth". Nice move.

And you are even such a night-crawler as to say that 'you'll help' the situation after I'm done with ... what? This isn't about me, and never has been. But making it about me absolves you from any obligation to do what's right. Nice morals you got there.

I didn't ask you to foam at the mouth, or anyone else. I asked you not to be a hypocrite, government man. You fail.

[Mark Tokarski]

Lesson: Never put yourself in a position where a person you hate can screw you. Moorcat may be a victim, but it looks to me as if he has been legally screwed. Legally. There's nothing illegal going on here. Just a guy who was pissed off and saw an opportunity and did something dishonest and really stuck it to someone he didn't like. I put the onus on Moorcat. He lost at poker.

[moorcat]

Mark,

I think it is FAR too early to declare a "winner" or "loser". More to the point, let's just say that the Fat Lady hasn't had her solo yet.

I know a number of people have posted legal statements about this situation. While I cannot (and would not) discuss what is going on involving any legal action I may or may not take, understand that if you don't have access to all the facts, it is hard to make an informed legal analysis. I will state catagorically that noone discussing this now has all the facts.

I do want to express my thanks to everyone who has been supportive in this situation. It has meant a lot to me...

Moorcat