email at

Thursday, April 30, 2020

Masked RUSD election attendees

HOT Government in association with the Racine Taxpayers Association, Libertarian Party of Racine and a collective of individual donors has hired high profile attorney Vince Bobot to challenge the controversial declared win by RUSD.

From the date of declared victory, HOT Government and the other petitioners had only 5 days to appeal the declared win before the referendum became final.

HOT GOVERNMENT will be releasing a press statement today detailing their efforts to thwart the hotly contested RUSD referendum election results.

George Meyers and Dennis Montey spearheaded the efforts for HOT government in the oversight of the ballot counting process.

George Meyers

Dennis Montey

Hot Government had totaled over 300 hours of volunteer time to monitor the hotly contested election and contest the counts.

HOT Government's press statement later today will indicate their concerns of possible electioneering, ballot switching, rule swapping and numerous other voting irregularities noted by observers of the election.

In our eyes at RCC, any election won by the luck of the draw is not a valid election, nor does it reflect an accurate will of the people.

Folks, the petitioners need your help to continue this process of contesting this BILLION DOLLAR RUSD election to have this election being counted fairly and impartially.

Please consider hitting the DONATE button on the HOT Government and give generously. 


Read more about HOT Government here:

And here:


Tuesday, April 28, 2020

Sandy Weidner's attorney played it safe and filed a motion for judicial substitution

Racine County Circus Court
Sandra Weidner vs. City of Racine
# 17CV1644
Eugene Gagthebitch

This is the document that should 
have been filed.

(Blogger changed the formatting)


Sandra Weidner
                                                                     Case #2017CV001644
City of Racine

NOW COMES the Plaintiff Sandra Weidner to move to recuse Judge Eugene Gasiorkiewicz from the above entitled matter under the following authorities:
28 USCS Sec. 455, and Marshall v Jerrico Inc., 446 US 238, 242, 100 S.Ct. 1610, 64 L. Ed. 2d 182 (1980).  "The neutrality requirement helps to guarantee that life, liberty, or property will not be taken on the basis of an erroneous or distorted conception of the facts or the law." 
The above is applicable to this court by application of  Article VI of the United States Constitution and Stone v Powell, 428 US 465, 483 n. 35, 96 S. Ct. 3037, 49 L. Ed. 2d 1067 (1976).
"State courts, like federal courts, have a constitutional obligation to safeguard personal liberties and to uphold federal law."

The court’s record speaks for itself.
The court ruled in most bias and complicit ways, ruling against the Plaintiff’s right to amend her complaint within 6 months. Then came the court’s erroneous rulings of privileged documents and Gasiorkiewicz’s illegal, outrageous criminal acts of sealing the entire court record to create an illegal secret court. In doing so Judge Gasiorkiewicz has knowingly and willingly violated the following:
WIS. STAT. § 57.14,
 WIS. STAT. § 59.20(3),
WIS. STAT. § 802.09(1)
WIS. STAT. § 946.12(1),(2), (3),  (Felonies)  
First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Oath of Office
SCR 60.02
SCR 60.03
.Judge Gasiorkiewicz has a history of deliberately violating other litigant's personal liberties and/or has wantonly refused to provide due process and equal protection to all litigants before the court and/or has behaved in a manner inconsistent with that which is needed for full, fair, impartial hearings.
The United States Constitution guarantees an unbiased Judge who will always provide litigants with full protection of ALL RIGHTS.   Therefore, the Plaintiff respectfully demands Judge Gasiorkiewicz recuse himself in light of the evidence attached within this motion and Exhibits 1,2,3,4,5,6  detailing unethical/ illegal/criminal misconduct or conduct which gives the Plaintiff good reason to believe Judge Gasiorkiewicz cannot hear this case in a fair and impartial manner.


A criminal has no business being on the bench

In Wisconsin, a Circuit Court Judge is required to be a Wisconsin licensed attorney.  A Wisconsin attorney’s license requires the holder of the license to adhere to the rules of law, not act as a rogue attorney or judge as Gasiorkiewicz has done in this case. 

Gasiorkiewicz acting as judge compounded these offenses against both the Plaintiff and the Public as he trashed the rules of law and judicial conduct in this case in favor of his ego and undisclosed agenda(s).

Ethical and criminal complaints have been filed against judge Gasiorkiewicz into the Wisconsin Judicial Commission and the Wisconsin Attorney General’s office concerning this case.  The facts are indisputable and irrefutable that judge Gasiorkiewicz disregarded the rule of law and overstepped his assigned judicial boundaries, committed gross violations of the law, committed crimes and aggrieved both Plaintiff and Public in the process of conducting court.

As noted by the COA,  Judge Gasiorkiewicz wrongfully denied Plaintiff the right to amend her complaint, what the COA negligently failed to acknowledge is Gasiorkiewicz illegally sealed the entire court record creating an illegal secret court contrary to Wisconsin statutes and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, thus violating his oath of office and making Gasiorkiewicz a “Constitutional Infidel” and unfit for public service.

Judges, both individually and collectively must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust.  Judges must strive to maintain the trust and confidence of the legal system. The effectiveness of the judiciary rests ultimately on the trust and confidence that the people confer upon judges.

Judge Gasiorkiewicz while conducting court engaged in war upon the Plaintiff’s rights and that of the Public.  The judge gagged the Plaintiff with his illegal secret court and placed her in a most dark situation as Gasiorkiewicz kept hidden from the Public his criminal acts.

Judge Gasiorkiewicz trashed the public confidence and trust of our court system and became a national embarrassment to anybody affiliated to the Wisconsin Courts.
Gasiorkiewicz knowingly and willingly violated his judicial trust by violating the rules of law as stated in this motion.

Judge Gasiorkiewicz belongs in prison, not on the bench, is unfit for public service and therefore for all of the above must recuse himself from this case and ALL cases.

Dated this 27th Day of April, 2020

Sandra Weidner - Pro se
123 Any Street
Racine, Wi. 53405
PH: 555-555-5555

CC. Scott Letteney

Exhibit 1.  COA verdict and remand of Gagthebitch denying statutory right to Plaintiff to amend complaint within 6months.
Exhibit 2.  Judge Gasiorkiewicz illegally sealing the complete court record, committing crimes during the process of conducting court and creating and maintaining an illegal “secret” court.
Exhibit 3. Judge Gasiorkiewicz wrongfully ruling on “privileged” records.
Exhibit 4.  Verified Ethics/Criminal Complaint filed to the Wisconsin Judicial Commission
Exhibit 5. Verified Criminal Complaint filed to the Wisconsin Attorney General’s Office.
Exhibit 6.  Judge Gasiorkiewicz negligently and wrongfully ignoring/denying Defendant James McClain substitution of judicial assignment. Case #19CV1357
Exhibit 7.   ????

Wisconsin Statutes and Anontations:
 WIS. STAT. § 757.14   “The sittings of every court shall be public and every citizen may freely attend the same……” 

Citizens are directly empowered by statute 757.14 
to observe court proceedings.

WIS. STAT. § 59.20(3), The court shall:
" open to the examination of any person all books and papers required to be kept in his or her office and permit any person so examining to take notes and copies of such books, records, papers or minutes ...."

Citizens are directly empowered by statute 59.20(3) to the opening of Court records for public examination.

WIS. STAT. § 802.09  Amended and supplemental pleadings.
(1)  Amendments. A party may amend the party's pleading once as a matter of course at any time within 6 months after the summons and complaint are filed or within the time set in a scheduling order under s. 802.10. Otherwise a party may amend the pleading only by leave of court or by written consent of the adverse party; and leave shall be freely given at any stage of the action when justice so requires. A party shall plead in response to an amended pleading within 20 days after service of the amended pleading unless: a) the court otherwise orders; or b) no responsive pleading is required or permitted under s. 802.01 (1). If a defendant in the action is an insurance company, if any cause of action raised in the original pleading, cross-claim, or counterclaim is founded in tort, or if the party pleading in response is the state or an officer, agent, employee, or agency of the state, the 20-day time period under this subsection is increased to 45 days.

Felony Misconduct
WIS. STAT. §  946.12 and its subsections:

946.12 Misconduct in public office. 
Any public officer or public employee who does any of the following is guilty of a Class I felony:
(1) Intentionally fails or refuses to perform a known mandatory, nondiscretionary, ministerial duty of the officer's or employee's office or employment within the time or in the manner required by law; or
(2) In the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee, does an act which the officer or employee knows is in excess of the officer's or employee's lawful authority or which the officer or employee knows the officer or employee is forbidden by law to do in the officer's or employee's official capacity; or
(3) Whether by act of commission or omission, in the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee exercises a discretionary power in a manner inconsistent with the duties of the officer's or employee's office or employment or the rights of others and with intent to obtain a dishonest advantage for the officer or employee or another;

First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution:
The First Amendment guarantees that American court proceedings are presumptively open to the public. The U.S. Supreme court has explained the public's presumptive rights of access to court proceedings are rooted in both logic and history.

SCR 60.02 A judge shall uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary. An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society.
SCR 60.03 A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of the judge's activities. (1) A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
SCR 60.04 and its subsections 
A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially and diligently. The judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the judge's other activities. The judge's judicial duties include all the duties of the judge's office prescribed by law.

Other Citations,  
Removal on Remand
Hurles v. Ryan, 752 F.3d 768 (9th Cir. 2011)
As a matter of due process, a judge who fails the “appearance of impartiality” test may not sit as the judge in the case. In this case, when a pretrial ruling concerning the appointment of additional counsel was appealed, the judge appeared as a nominal party in the appellate court but actually filed a pleading, urging that the ruling was proper and that the simplicity of the case (implying that the evidence of guilt was overwhelming) justified the decision to deny the appointment of two lawyers in this death penalty case. That pleading also questioned the ability of the lawyer who was representing the defendant. The Ninth Circuit held that the state trial judge’s participation in the appeal may have rendered her too biased to participate in the death penalty proceedings that ensued in the trial court. A remand for a full evidentiary hearing on the state judge’s impartiality was required.
United States v. Torkington, 874 F.2d 1441 (11th Cir. 1989)
Because of the trial judge’s actions during the trial, upon remand from the Eleventh Circuit, it would be appropriate for the case to be assigned to a different judge.


We have two criminals on the Bench.

Lisa Neubauer and Eugene Gasiorkiewicz

The COA (Court of Appeals) whitewashed this case.

 Read the verified criminal complaints filed

 against Gasiorkiewicz and Neubauer here:

Friday, April 24, 2020


In a display of total disregard of ethics and the rule of  law, valid votes are being discarded due to errors, acts and omissions by election officials.

Valid votes are being removed from authenticated ballots and discarded due to accounting irregularities.   In an unheard of move to balance the voter counts, a draw down was ordered on previously counted ballots to balance election count numbers, in essence,  valid counted ballots are being discarded randomly.

Should a Billion Dollar tax referendum be decided by the luck of the draw ? 

We don't think so !
and neither should you.

As the recount continues............
and in the interest of voter integrity

RCC calls for the RUSD referendum to be declared 
null and void do to electioneering, accounting irregularities
 and ballot tampering.

Honest Open Transparent

Thursday, April 23, 2020


The Racine Unified School District 
billion dollar referendum which initially passed 
by five votes is now in jeopardy of being rejected.

Several challengers filed for a recount 
alleging voter irregularities.
George Meyers

George Meyers, a founding member of HOT Government, along with other HOT Government volunteers took lead stage providing over 300 hours of volunteer oversight of the recount, including hiring a security and private investigator to monitor and assess the recount process.

The Racine Journal Times reporting has been largely
AWOL during this recount.

See the following news link for more info:

Honest  - Open  - Transparent

Hot government is a collective based movement acting on the behalf of citizen and community interest.  We are motivated volunteers actively encouraging and promoting local governments to operate in transparency and open to public scrutiny.


Monday, April 20, 2020

Last Man Standing

Tonight history was made !

Councilwoman Sandy Weidner was the lone Alderman at city hall proudly performing her elected duties for the last time as the rest of the council, mayor, city attorney and city clerk cowered at home and participated in the common council meeting on the 
internet via Facebook.

For twenty years Sandy has been a voice of reason, often being the lone voice in opposing special interest and white elephant projects 

Tonight was also Sandy Weidner's last council meeting being an alderman as she sat alone in empty City Hall Chambers conducting common council business

See how the City of Racine has shut down for the month of April

What is more telling is if you search all departments to see committee meetings, you will determine that virtually no council business has been conducted.  Mayor Mason has declared himself King and does it all as the majority of the bobble heads in the common council blindly approve without staff or citizen input. 

Fans dress up like life-sized Chase Utley Bobbleheads, traumatize ...

Ironically, the last man standing is a woman.
But if you know Sandy, that should come as no surprise

When it comes to rating elected officials in Racine County, 
none stand as strong, wise or classy as City of Racine 
Alderman Sandy Weidner.

Thank you for your 20 years of exemplary public service !
We salute you Sandy Weidner 

Friday, April 17, 2020

Plato's Warning

 If You Don't Vote, You Will Be Governed by Idiots ...... 
for refusing to participate in politics, is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.

What Plato didn't warn you about is if you vote for idiots, criminals or pimps, you will be governed by such.


Judge Lisa Neubauer

Judge Lisa Neubauer was reelected to the Wisconsin Court of Appeals in the hotly contested 2020 April elections.

Neubauer was reelected despite her committing ethical and felony criminal violations of court misconduct in the case of 
Sandy Weidner vs. City of Racine. 

 Neubauer should be in prison, but because of derelict and feckless oversight agencies like the Wisconsin Judicial Commission and the Attorney General's office, Neubauer remains chief judge of all the Court of Appeals districts within Wisconsin.

After the election, Neubauer reached out on social media with the following message:
It has been, and now will remain, the greatest privilege and pleasure of my professional life to serve as a judge on the Wisconsin Court of Appeals ,  I care so deeply about, and we have fought so hard for, the rule of law and the critical role that fair, impartial, independent, and competent courts play in preserving and protecting our liberties and our democracy.”
Neubauer talks about the rule of law as if she really gives a shit about it. 
Facts are she is a constitutional infidel.
 Neubauer is not fair, nor impartial, nor independent, nor competent.
Neubauer has the audacity to note the importance our courts play preserving and protecting our liberties and our democracy as she trashed the rights of 5.7 million Wisconsin residence as she conducted illegal secret court.
Think about this, when you stand before a judge, 
chances are that judge is a criminal.
We have criminals conducting court in Wisconsin because of feckless governmental agencies !
Help us clean the trash out of government.
Support HOT Government.