It’s a done deal then. Protasiewicz should maybe just step down and save everyone the trouble.
2 Likes
I stand corrected on the numbers. But I still think with the margin of her win that this could bite some of them in the ass next election cycle.
1 Like
Oh I get the specifics here, and clearly the main engagement in WI for now is going to be fighting along the judiciary front, but I do also think it’s part of a larger game that anticipate starting to play out now that TFG had to do his perp walk yesterday. We’re already seeing Repubs across the country abandoning any pretense of supporting democracy and making clear they really did mean it all along when they argued “We’re Not a Democracy, We’re a Republic!” It’s “gloves off, smash the bottle on the table and start waving it around” time for the most rabid of them.
So maybe the first bogus charges won’t be filed in WI, but I currently can’t see how they can get through TFG’s third or fourth indictment without somebody with a Democratic Party label being charged - their cognitive dissonance just won’t allow it.
5 Likes
Myself I imagine they’ll make some claim that her campaign “promise” to preserve abortion rights will suffice when she casts her vote against the 1849 law.
Unless the Left starts waking up and showing up to protest like the Right does, guns and intimidation. Which they won’t, so, yeah, pretty much done deal.
1 Like
I’m starting to see a pattern here. 
Some guys just can’t handle rejection.
8 Likes
Can Dan Kelly pay Skanky Jr. to send out a tweet threatening the Wisconsin Secretary of State’s wife and family. I know Skanky Jr. sent out a threatening tweet with Judge Juan Merchan’s daughter. Skanky Jr. will do anything for money and drugs. I think Kimberly Gargoyle will distribute dick pics and give a 2-minute speech for less than $100,000 on the Capitol grounds. She was paid ~$60K for her speech during the January 6 Coup and Assassination Attempt on the Vice President.
Maybe conservatives like Gym Jordan, Kevin McCarthy and Marjorie Taylor, Mitt Romney, Mike Pence, and Jeb Bush can also threaten the Wisconsin Secretary of State, his wife and family on Dan Kelly’s behalf.
Our democracy is under threat from tyranny unless elections are rigged and sexual predators like Skanky can roam free.
5 Likes
Don’t you mean
(Butthead)
1 Like
I agree regarding pessimism, however, I spent a good few years starting around 2003 raising the alarm (including in print) about what the conservatives were up to. How that played out strongly informs my current attitude. People agree that it’s a terrible state of affairs, then say “It’s really a shame” and get back to whatever else they’re doing. So I’ve come to think we fight our own apathy and learned helplessness, and we also face the difficulty of countering a relentless, slow movement that’s taken decades to get so far. It’s demoralizing, and I don’t think it’s pessimism so much as realism to expect people to feel bad and do something small, but not sustain it. The left is just not as good at uniformity of purpose and rabid devotion. Living with ambiguity and with diversity of opinion is a superior state, but not one that easily counters stupidity and blind rage.
I’d love to have an optimistic view, and it heartens me every time I see that American opinion remains pretty far left on most things. That does seem to mean that once the infrastructure to support majority opinion is fixed, we’ll be okay. I think the shock of the last presidency might have supplied the fear we needed to get things moving at least a little more consistently. I sure hope so. That’s as much optimism as I can muster, but at least it’s not pure pessimism.
5 Likes
I was being sarcastic, of course. We should not cede the battlefield just as soon as we learn the enemy’s battle plan. This is reminiscent of that “red wave” that was supposed to happen last year, when the republican juggernaut was inevitably supposed to prevail.
I posted this earlier. There are glimpses of hesitation to do this.
2 Likes
ETA: Okay, @occamscoin and @castor_troy have set me free, I was skimming the doc too quickly - it’s a simple majority to impeach, then the now-supermajority to convict.
Pathetic, but “incoming” in 5, 4, 3…
Okay, I remember lots of folks missing the whole “Impeachment happens in the House, the conviction has to happen in the Senate” thing when the House was impeaching TFG a couple of times, but a lot of folks here seem to be saying that it’s a one shot & done thing for the Wisconsin Senate supermajority.
So I just did about five seconds of googling and found the following at the wisconsin.gov website:
REMOVAL BY ADDRESS
Removal of: Justices and Judges
Initiated by: The Legislature
Removal by address is a procedure that allows the Legislature to remove justices and judges from office based on a supermajority vote in each house. Before removing a justice or judge, the Legislature must serve the individual with a copy of the charges forming the grounds for address and provide an opportunity for the justice or judge to be heard and to present a defense. The Legislature may then vote on removing the justice or judge by a 2/3rds vote of all the elected members of the Assembly, as well as a 2/3rds vote by all elected members of the Senate. [Wis. Const. art. VII, s. 13, and s. 17.06, Stats.]
Source - Wisconsin Legislative Council:
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/misc/lc/information_memos/2014/im_2014_03
So, does “as well as” in the above mean “either” or "both? 
6 Likes
Goopers do not wish to reign, but to RULE. And if people don’t like what they are doing, tough toenails.
1 Like
You understand the margin of her win is about the same as the democratic margin of popular vote in the state legislature elections? All bow down and hail our lord and master the gerrymander.
But yes, it only takes one GOP state senator scared of election repercussions to blow up the impeachment/removal play. I don’t know if there are any vulnerable ones. Looking at WI-08’s borders as an example, they’ve mandered the fuck out of that state. Of course, yesterday’s winner of WI-08 might be such an example, his margin was only 1.8%. But if he’s not up for election for another six years, he doesn’t care. Six years is a century in politics.
5 Likes
BOTH! That phrase means “and”.
1 Like
Scroll in the document, separate set for impeachment.
2 Likes
Good lord, what a baby
3 Likes
Probably Ken Paxton (TX AG and professional court dodger). Though I’m not sure who’s available to go after. Colin Allred, who is a credible challenger to cancun cruz? But remember, a prosecutor still has to get an indictment past a grand jury, and ham sandwich anecdotes aside, sometimes the GJ nopes out, like John Durham’s did (three times on three different targets!).
2 Likes
They get better with practice.
2 Likes
Both. Wisconsin does have an impeachment process, which does function the same as US Congress. I have never heard of “removal by address”, but will take your word for it. However, anyone mentioning that they don’t have the 2/3s votes in the assembly to perform a removal by address, should say “removal by address” and not impeachment.
1 Like
What I’m getting is that Removal by Address is an impeachment without a Senate trial, putting a little more restraint on impeachment. Both proceedings require 2/3 vote in both houses.
2 Likes
NO THEY DON’T. That’s the point. Impeachment requires only a 50% majority in the assembly (house equivalent).
1 Like