Wednesday, November 1, 2017

Michael Screnock - Supreme Thug

By Jeff Simpson 

While there is a Progressive candidate running for Supreme Court of Wisconsin in April(Tim Burns), there is also one not so progressive.    That is not enough for the Bradley Foundation and Club For Growth because they do not want anyone on the Supreme Court who might grow a conscious and actually follow the rule of law. 

The best way to make sure your extremist agenda does not get derailed, beyond partisan, unethical, gerrymandering, is to make sure that the Supreme Court will always do your bidding, no matter what. 

No Surprises. 

That is what they have now, and there is no amount of money that they can spare to make sure that keeps up.  One of the biggest tools, and least intelligent,  in the Court System in the US, is Mike Gableman.   With Gablemans imminent retirement, they could not take the chance that Rebecca Dallett is not right wing enough, or Heaven Forbid, a progressive gets on the court and makes waves.   
So they had to do what they have been very good at - find a stooge. 

Welcome Michael Screnock. 

Screnock has a history with Michael, Best and Friedrich,  the law firm that has pulled in millions of tax dollars defending the roughshod running over the law of our state to pass an agenda. 

Screnock has another history.  One of getting arrested blocking women from trying to enter an abortion clinic. 

In April 1989, Screnock and dozens of other protesters calling themselves “rescue workers” blocked access to the Bread and Roses Women’s Medical Center in Madison, which has since closed. Like many of the others, Screnock at first refused to give his name and had to be booked as John Doe until he identified himself.
In June 1989, Screnock and dozens of others again prevented people from getting into the abortion clinic. He was one of 42 people who was arrested that day.
Screnock was a University of Wisconsin-Madison student at the time. He was 19 when he was arrested the first time and 20 when he was arrested the second time.
The officer who arrested Screnock and two others in June wrote in a report that the three would not go with police once told they were being arrested.
“It was necessary for us to physically pick each of them up off the ground and place them in the portable chair provided by the Fire Department,” the officer wrote, referring to a wheelchair that police used to ferry protesters to police vehicles.
Screnock did not initially identify himself and like most of the other protesters did not have identification with him. At the police station, he told officers who he was and they were able to confirm his identity with the photo from his previous arrest, records show.
In both cases, Screnock was ticketed for trespassing and obstructing officers. Court records showing how the cases were resolved no longer exist, but Screnock said the obstructing citations were dismissed and he performed community service for the trespassing citations under a plea agreement.
Screnock said he understood at the time that he would likely have to pay a price for participating in the protests.
“You had a group of people who were seeking to exercise their First Amendment rights and when confronted with a violation of the law — in this case an ordinance violation — were willing to take the consequences,” he said. “And I think that’s true of all individuals who seek to engage in any manner of civil disobedience.”
Not only did Mr. Screnock decide that He would personally stop women from entering a clinic in a desperate time of their lives. but he also refused to cooperate with the police, lied to the police, he completely misunderstands what the first amendment says if he thinks it allows him the right to stop a fellow human being from seeking medical attention. 

Who knew that the big money special interests on the far right could find a candidate for the highest court in Wisconsin worse than Mike Gableman but they did. 


  1. If he gets in, he and Rebecca can reminisce about their formative years.

  2. How do you think they find these nutcases? There's a whole wingnut farm system for people like Screnock and Rebecca Bradley and Gableman and Sleazy-berg

    Having a clue about the law or having an ounce of ethics does not matter to the puppetmasters of these wingnut judges. In fact, shamelessness is openly encouraged, as shown in their legalizing of money-laundering in John Doe.

  3. I see that Jeff now regards age 19 as adulthood. When it was Tony T. Robinson Jr., also age 19, he was only a "child."

  4. where did I ever say Schrenock was an adult???

  5. Because you are publishing his name in a public forum, contrary to treatment of a juvenile. But then, both Schrenock and Tony T. were tried in adult court. Only the latter did you describe as a "child." Why?

  6. Dave, Let me be very clear here. The difference being Tony Robinson is now Dead and is not able to become a shill for Scott Walker.

    This might surprise you, but I do not advocate that the police should have shot Schrenock when he was resisting arrest.

    1. Can you,imagine going through life being as weak-minded and soulless as Dave WHAAAAAA-ska?

      Wingnut welfare cases like Screnock and WHAAAA-ska are much bigger drains on society today than Tony Robinson ever would have been.

  7. Jeff, did Screnock physically attack a police officer after having assaulted numerous other individuals, causing bodily harm? But your "explanation" defies credulity. One becomes a child after death? Or because of his political affiliation? That's not very clear -- or even rational.

  8. One more thing: I thought you guys normally believed in civil disobedience for a cause. You may wish that elective abortions were fully funded by Uncle Foolish. You are entitled to that belief. But a good many folks think it is murder. For what cause was Tony Terrell Robinson Jr. assaulting complete strangers, getting wasted on drugs, and attacking the police officer his roomies had summoned?

    1. The "cause" was repressing women, WHAAA-ska. But hey, it helped launch wingnut Screnock's career.

      They still pay you to write this dumb shit, Dave? Or are you just that needy?

  9. Dave, I LOVE this comment of one sentence your telling us your staunch pro life views then follow that up with a ceelbration of unarmed tony robinson getting shot.

    You cant make this stuff up

  10. On one side, innocent life; on the other side, a convicted felon and violence-prone chronic drug abuser who attacked a police officer. Can't make this stuff up.

  11. So you are a jury of Tony Robinsons peers who after a trial found him guilty and convicted him and the same with Schrenock>

  12. A jury of Tony Robinson's peers did find him guilty of armed robbery, a felony. Schrenock was a misdemeanor -- and he never physically attacked a police officer.