Wisconsin recall elections today - huge turnout

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

You do realize the union bill was signed into law almost six months ago?

At least if the recall of Walker goes foward we'll be assured that those who cast a vote will actually be that person or at least have a valid ID proving such.

Are you referring to Kathy The Clerk trying to cheat again, and deliberately hold out votes until she sees how many are needed to ensure a win?

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Are you referring to Kathy The Clerk trying to cheat again, and deliberately hold out votes until she sees how many are needed to ensure a win?

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...ike-tate-says/

so nice that you stay consistent in judging people without knowing the facts

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by wiphan

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...ike-tate-says/

so nice that you stay consistent in judging people without knowing the facts

She should sue his "pants on fire" butt off!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...ike-tate-says/
so nice that you stay consistent in judging people without knowing the facts

That's not what I said or was referring to, rocket scientist.

I said: Are you referring to Kathy The Clerk trying to cheat again, and deliberately hold out votes until she sees how many are needed to ensure a win?

As I said, and as anybody who was paying half-assed attention to the election Tuesday night would realize, was
I was referring to when, Tuesday night, she announced she would not be releasing the rest of the vote totals until Wednesday morning in Darling's district. The cry was overwhelming, and she changed her mind.

That has nothing to do with what Tate said. I stand behind what I say. I should not need to defend myself from nonsensical pretend crap you make up in your imagination. So don't whine about my "facts" when you aren't even talking about the same thing.

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

That's not what I said or was referring to, rocket scientist.

I said: Are you referring to Kathy The Clerk trying to cheat again, and deliberately hold out votes until she sees how many are needed to ensure a win?

As I said, and as anybody who was paying half-assed attention to the election Tuesday night would realize, was
I was referring to when, Tuesday night, she announced she would not be releasing the rest of the vote totals until Wednesday morning in Darling's district. The cry was overwhelming, and she changed her mind.

That has nothing to do with what Tate said. I stand behind what I say. I should not need to defend myself from nonsensical pretend crap you make up in your imagination. So don't whine about my "facts" when you aren't even talking about the same thing.

you stated she deliberately was trying to hold out the votes (by the way she was on the news during the election talking about what was going on and what was posted and when) and you called her a cheat. I am sure you have made mistakes during your professional career would you want to be judged the way she has been by the liberals, the media etc. Yes she made a mistake in the Prosser election. People make mistakes. That doesn't mean she deliberately did it nor does it make her a cheat which both you have suggested. Kind of like your judgment of David Prosser

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

you stated she deliberately was trying to hold out the votes (by the way she was on the news during the election talking about what was going on and what was posted and when) and you called her a cheat.

Yes, I just quoted what I actually said. Which has nothing at all to do with the nonsensical crap you attempted to pretend I said. As I said, you don't whine about my "facts" when you aren't even talking about the same thing.

And as far as Judge David Prosser goes, I've seen him be a misogynistic j***azz, and a plain j***azz, on video. No "rush to judgment" there, just what he is for all to visibly see. He's also in deep trouble. Special prosecutor just requested. He's toast.

Ahead of WI Recall Elections Prosser Investigation Gets Special Prosecutor
August 3, 2011

After reviewing the Dane County Sheriff’s investigation into the alleged choking of a female Supreme Court Justice by Supreme Court Justice David Prosser, the Dane County DA is requesting a special prosecutor to review the incident. Due to the expense of a special prosecutor, this move suggests that the Sheriff’s report indicates that there may be validity to the charge that Prosser put Justice Ann Walsh Bradley into a chokehold on July 13, 2011.
....
The alleged choking incident occurred in Bradley’s office as the justices argued over the timing of the release of its ruling on an Open Meetings violation lawsuit soon after Justice Prosser won his seat back after an election fraught with accusations of fraud.

The actions and procedures of Republican county clerk Kathy Nickolaus during that election and the canvassing of it are being investigated (this is not her first go around with the law; she was granted immunity during an investigation into the Republican legislature when she worked for them as a computer data analyst).

However, before the logs were fully reviewed, Justice Prosser was declared the winner by the Government Accountability Board. His “win” maintained the conservative bent of the court, and as Prosser was billed as a “complement” to Governor Walker’s agenda, it was obvious (if disappointing due to the evidence) that if he won, the court would overturn the void on the union-killing bill.

http://www.politicususa.com/en/pross...ial-prosecutor

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, I just quoted what I actually said. Which has nothing at all to do with the nonsensical crap you attempted to pretend I said. As I said, you don't whine about my "facts" when you aren't even talking about the same thing.

And as far as Judge David Prosser goes, I've seen him be a misogynistic j***azz, and a plain j***azz, on video. No "rush to judgment" there, just what he is for all to visibly see. He's also in deep trouble. Special prosecutor just requested. He's toast.

Wanna wager on it? There will be no charges against prosser. Since you don't live here and don't really hear both sides of the story or think about the story yourself I have the following questions for you:
Why do you think DA Ozanne wants off the case? Is it because he doesn't want to tell his liberal friends that they have nothing? Are they looking for a scapegoat or someone willing to take the blame possibly someone that leans less democratic? Think about it. Stop reading liberal papers and use your own brain.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

Wanna wager on it?

You mean like you angrily wanted to wager me that a Democrat would be recalled before a Republican? Saved you that loss, you owe me

Two Republicans recalled, zero Democrats.

There will be no charges against prosser. Since you don't live here and don't really hear both sides of the story or think about the story yourself I have the following questions for you:

Why do you think DA Ozanne wants off the case? Is it because he doesn't want to tell his liberal friends that they have nothing? Are they looking for a scapegoat or someone willing to take the blame possibly someone that leans less democratic? Think about it. Stop reading liberal papers and use your own brain.

LOL - your hatred towards those evil "liberals" and your blind faith in Prosser is touching, but scary in it's naivety.

And it's repeatedly funny that you accuse me of predetermining Prosser's innocence or guilt, while you presume him innocent from day one but think that's okay. And angrily want to deny the alleged victim her day in court. Hypocrite much?

Use your brain:

Ozanne wants off the case, and requesting a special prosecutor, because charges are going to be filed against Prosser.

There were witnesses. The Sheriff could have determined there wasn't enough to go forward the day the incident happened.

Instead the Sheriff determined there was enough evidence, so he requested the DA to take over the investigation, so there would be no appearance of politics injecting itself into the investigation.

DA Ozanne could have determined there wasn't enough evidence to go forward with charges, but he has most obviously determined there is - thus he as requested a completely independent special prosecutor, so there will be no appearance of politics injecting itself into the trial.

And the special prosecutor is going to file charges against Prosser. He'll have his day in court. And if guilty, he's off the bench.