Don't forget – Daniel Willard on the hot seat next week.

Lest anyone forget, next week – the 17th to be specific – Daniel “Robocall” Willard gets his day in court with the next phase in his criminal trial for violation of campaign finance laws as this chairman of the South Dakota Young Republicans & the Secretary of the South Dakota Liberty Caucus pursued his vendetta this last year against Republican office holders.

The word I’m getting behind the scenes is that this should be quite the interesting hearing, where the state is going to make it’s case against Mr. Willard, and as I understand, we may hear of other names involved in his whole scheme.

Remember, this wasn’t a legitimate political effort where people stood up for their beliefs. This was an anonymous and allegedly illegal political campaign where they purposefully attempted to avoid being accountable for their words in the harsh light of day.  I mean, If they were so damned noble, why did they have to hide?

If there are others like Willard who serves (or at least formerly served) as the chair of the SD Young Republicans, or any County Party officeholders who were involved in this, they need to be relieved of their jobs, and stripped of their titles.  Period.

If there others involved in all of this – and I suspect there were – names should be named, and people should be shamed.

13 Replies to “Don't forget – Daniel Willard on the hot seat next week.”

  1. caheidelberger

    Again, we witness the absurdity of this blog, which was kept on life support by an anonymous author for a year and a half, which thrives on scurrilous anonymous comments, lambasting other political speakers for acting anonymously.

    (Cory, Bill was only anonymous in your mind. He’s a friend of mine, and still posts under comments on occasion. -P)

    1. Steve Sibson

      I have to agree with Cory on this one. I thought both he and Pat argued in support of anonymous speech in regard to Hamiel’s so-called Blogger Control Act.

      And Pat, since you are in the mood for naming names, how about disclosing the SDBWM and the author of Sobby Online? Or is it OK to anonymously attack conservatives and not be held accountable?

      How popular would this web site be if anonymous comments were deemed illegal?

      1. PP at the SDWC

        Steve, the difference is that what Willard did was paid political speech subject to South Dakota campaign finance laws.

        1. Steve Sibson

          Calling a family a bunch of hillbillies who practice incest is legal political speech?

          But disagreeing with how legislators vote is some how, out of bounds?

  2. Exodus

    Why is this still being pursued? I think Willard learned his lesson. Why do we need to damage a good portion of his life?

    1. Anonymous

      Because Willard decided to fight it, instead of just admitting his error, and paying a nominal fine. It’s his dog & pony show.

      1. The law matters

        Its being pursued because a law was broken. No one is trying to ruin his life. This would be a much different matter if Willard had tried to comply with the law but failed as a result of not understanding them or could show some type of proof of attempting to comply.

        We don’t have there here. What we have is an attempt to do an end run around the laws. It’s clear evasion as opposed to an honest attempt to comply and failing to do so.

        Also, he could have went to court if he thought it was unconstitutional and asked for a declaratory judgment. He didn’t. Instead he wanted to challenge the law by breaking it, and then going to court.

        1. Anonymous

          So you say he is guilty with no proof or trial by a jury. So who made you judge, jury and executioner? In this country a person is innocent until proven guilty which has not happened yet. So you fascists might want to move to someplace like Sierra Leone or Iran a country more to your power hungry anti-civil rights liking. I hear Pat already has a time-share in Iran so he can be a tyrant at least part of the year.

  3. Anonymous

    Do you consider the anonymity of all you “spies” that you seem to get info from noble? If people are handing/leaking personal emails and government goings on to you, in a noble manner, why not include their names and properly attribute the information to its source from whence it was attained?

    1. Anonymous

      Blogging does not make you a reporter and there is plenty of federal lawsuits to back that up. In fact courts seem to not care for sleazy bloggers very much at all.