Wisconsin Supreme Court rejects Trump's election lawsuit

[disciple Clint]

In a separate, scorching dissent, Justice Rebecca Bradley maintained that leaving legal questions to the Elections Commission "deals a death blow to democracy."

"The majority's failure to act leaves an indelible stain on our most recent election," she wrote in a dissent that Roggensack and Ziegler joined.

Siding with Hagedorn in the majority were Justices Ann Walsh Bradley, Rebecca Dallet and Jill Karofsky.
Wisconsin Supreme Court rejects Trump's election lawsuit

 

[The Ant]

So, how many times have Trump suits been thrown out of court now?

 

[disciple Clint]

So, how many times have Trump suits been thrown out of court now?

no one will remember or care about how many times you try and fail, the only thing that matters is the time you succeed. This is not a 3 knockdown limit fight.

 

[Yttrium]

I find it a little disturbing that three of the judges were sympathetic to Trump's delusions. Wisconsonites should be wary of conspiracy theory fans in the judicial branch. That's never a good thing.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

no one will remember or care about how many times you try and fail, the only thing that matters is the time you succeed.

And when there is no success what will be remembered is this endless stream of laughable failures, crazy conspiracy theories, doomed cult following and death of of the Republican Party we once knew.

 

[Andrewn]

Why do you expect justices to side with their parties?

Judges should be apolitical voting their conscience according to the law.

 

[hedrick]

The article was from Dec 3. I think it is moot now.

 

[TLK Valentine]

So, how many times have Trump suits been thrown out of court now?

I've lost count, but it's well over 50 at this point.

I swear, if I have to toast Biden's victory one more time, I'm going to end up in Rehab.

 

[TLK Valentine]

no one will remember or care about how many times you try and fail, the only thing that matters is the time you succeed. This is not a 3 knockdown limit fight.

Except Donald is not going to succeed... these failures are his legacy -- the only thing about him the world will remember.

 

[Sparagmos]

no one will remember or care about how many times you try and fail, the only thing that matters is the time you succeed. This is not a 3 knockdown limit fight.

In legal matters it is absolutely relevant.

 

[disciple Clint]

Except Donald is not going to succeed... these failures are his legacy -- the only thing about him the world will remember.

I doubt that. Short term memory loss is associated with all things political.

 

[trunks2k]

Why do you expect justices to side with their parties?

Judges should be apolitical voting their conscience according to the law.

Should be, and generally are, but AFAIk, the Wisconsin State Supreme court is known for being particularly partisan.

 

[MIDutch]

no one will remember or care about how many times you try and fail, the only thing that matters is the time you succeed. This is not a 3 knockdown limit fight.

Actually, there are probably historians, investigative journalists, biographers, psychologists, law professors, etc. who will be documenting and writing about all of trumps election legal failures for years to come.

 

[MIDutch]

I doubt that. Short term memory loss is associated with all things political.

Yeah. Just think about how quickly the world has forgotten about Richard Nixon.

.
.
.

Oh. Wait ...

 

[TLK Valentine]

I doubt that. Short term memory loss is associated with all things political.

I'm not talking about political, I'm talking about historical.

20 years from now, 50 years, 100 years... when the history textbooks (or videos, or blogs, or cybernetic brain downloads; whatever) get to the section of "45th President," they will remember his tantrums, his attempts to overturn an elections... and his failures...

...and that's about it.

 

[disciple Clint]

I'm not talking about political, I'm talking about historical.

20 years from now, 50 years, 100 years... when the history textbooks (or videos, or blogs, or cybernetic brain downloads; whatever) get to the section of "45th President," they will remember his tantrums, his attempts to overturn an elections... and his failures...

...and that's about it.

As someone has said in the past "it depends on who writes the history books"

 

[TLK Valentine]

As someone has said in the past "it depends on who writes the history books"

Agreed -- And Donald doesn't have too many history authors in his corner.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Agreed -- And Donald doesn't have too many history authors in his corner.

Hey, he’s still got Dnesh Dsouza!

 

[SimplyMe]

Should be, and generally are, but AFAIk, the Wisconsin State Supreme court is known for being particularly partisan.

It tends to be a side effect of using elections to pick your justices. Kind of like how politicians are often seen as becoming beholden to their donors, the same can happen to judges.

 

[whatbogsends]

The article was from Dec 3. I think it is moot now.

Who needs chronology when rehashing something as if it were new seems like a good emotive attack on your political opponents?