On Friday in Racine, WI, Judge Robert Repischak shut down the Wisconsin Department of Justice’s attempts to deny Harry Wait’s right to choose his own defense attorney.
Harry Wait, an election integrity activist with the group Hot Government, exposed an active loophole in the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s (WEC) MyVoteWI.com website, which allows anyone to order anyone else’s absentee ballot with only a name and a birthdate.
In July, Wait, with the permission of several friends, successfully ordered their ballots to be delivered to his home.
He also ordered Wisconsin Republican Robin Vos, Speaker of the State Assembly, and Democrat Mayor of Racine, Corey Mason’s ballots successfully without their consent.
Wait notified the WEC, the offices of Vos and Mason and the Racine County Sheriff’s department among others, the same night he ordered the ballots, informing them of his ability to successfully do so. Vos apparently took action to prevent his ballot from being mailed, however, Wait still received Mayor Mason’s ballot!
Rather than thank Harry Wait for his efforts to alert WEC of the open and active loophole in their system and ensure Wisconsin voters’ absentee ballots were secure, the WEC made a complaint to the Wisconsin Department of Justice, who subsequently indicted Wait, charging him with 2 counts of voter fraud and 2 counts of identity theft.
Wait initially intended to represent himself in the criminal proceedings, however eventually received council and representation from former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman. You may be familiar with Gableman who was previously hired by Robin Vos on behalf of the State Assembly to investigate voter fraud in the 2020 Elections.
Vos received a serious primary challenge in 2022 after failing to do anything meaningful with findings from Gableman’s investigation. Instead, after fending off that challenge, Vos fired Gableman and shut down his investigation the day after the primary election.
After appearing to represent Wait at a preliminary hearing this fall, it was unclear if Gableman would continue to represent him, when Democrat Attorney General Josh Kaul’s prosecutors claimed Gableman may have a conflict of interest.
The prosecutors claimed that because Gableman, who was hired by Vos in his capacity as Assembly Speaker, to lead an investigation for the the State Assembly, Vos may have had confidential conversations with Gableman that could create a conflict or violation of attorney client privilege if Gableman were to represent Wait.
Keep in mind, during that investigation Vos was not a “client” of Gableman and in the prosecution against Harry Wait, Vos is a witness, not a plaintiff.
Wait’s attorney Dan Hartman argued Wait has a 6th Amendment Constitutional right to choose his own attorney and due to the nature of Gableman’s engagement with the General Assembly, not Robin Vos personally, there was no possible conflict of interest or possible risk of Gableman exposing anything Robin Vos may have told him, because Vos could not have told him anything that would be required to remain confidential in that scenario.
The 6th Amendment:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Hartman stated that Gableman’s council is crucial to their defense and will make the case that Wait’s actions to expose the obvious loophole in the ballot ordering system, were protected free speech, not criminal intent to commit voter fraud or identity theft.
The prosecutors, assistant attorneys general, Robert Kaiser and David Mass were visibly enraged during the arguments. At one point, Judge Repishack stated his need to let Kaiser speak, before his [Kaiser’s] “head explodes.”
Despite the prosecutors’ passionately hostile argument that they have a right choose who should not represent whom they are prosecuting, Judge Repishack agreed with defense attorney Hartman. Repishack upheld Wait’s 6th Amendment rights and will allow Justice Gableman represent Harry Wait.
“Today was a good day in court,” Wait told Gateway Pundit, “the state attempted to block me from using the council of my choice, Michael Gableman, who brings a lot to the case….a lot of experience, and the 6th Amendment prevailed.”