Walker hides behind nonsensical lawsuit to “escape from the electorate”

[midnight]

“What is happening in this lawsuit, is the governor is frantically trying to escape from the electorate.” So says Jeremy Levinson, attorney for the recall committees, and I’m inclined to agree, especially after witnessing the Friends of Scott Walker vs Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB) lawsuit hearing this morning in Waukesha. And I don’t know how Kevin Kennedy, the lawyers, and the judge were able to keep a straight face, because this lawsuit seems utterly comical.

When asked why they’ve brought forth this lawsuit in the first place, here’s what the Friends of Scott Walker had to say: “We have the right of recall in the state of WI… but with the right of recall comes the equal right to not participate in the recall process, to not be a signatory. So if you are someone who chooses not to sign, you can only do that once. If you are someone who intentionally chooses to sign multiple times with the hope that your signature is counted multiple times, that’s ineffective.”

Say what?

Also part of their rationale for this lawsuit is that they want the established “criteria to be followed” by the GAB. When asked if the GAB is not planning to follow proper procedure, the Friends of Scott Walker responded,““Based on statements that the GAB has made…we believe that they are not going to strike some signatures."

This part is the newest twist in the lawsuite....

"But it looks like the voices of those who do want to sign the recall petitions won’t be heard in this case. Judge J. M. Davis denied the motion to intervene put forth by the recall committees, meaning they can’t be part of this lawsuit; the judge cited his concern over “fruitless, unending lawsuits” and “a free-for-all” as part of his rationale. Levinson’s argument that the recall committees have “just as much a direct interest in this lawsuit as the plaintiffs” failed to convince Judge Davis."
.http://bloggingblue.com/2011/12/29/walker-hides-behind-nonsensical-lawsuit-to-escape-from-the-electorate/

[Kalidurga]

1. Darn, my Republican to English translator is broken...

I can't quite make out what they are saying. Are they saying that the rights of people that don't want to sign are supposed to be greater than those that do want a recall election?

[midnight]

2. I think so... But that reasoning didn't seem to matter when Scott Walker launched his own recall to

remove Tom Ament from Milwaukee County Executive position and take over....

Look at this ..

&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fbloggingblue.com%2F2011%2F12%2F29%2Fyet-another-example-of-walker-supporters-behaving-badly-and-still-more-silence-from-dpw%2F&feature=player_embedded

[MakingSense]

9. What they are saying

is that because of how easy it would be to cheat the system thus giving over representation to the signees by signing multiple times that in the interest of the rights of those who choose not to sign that the petitions must be closely inspected and each signiture verified both for legitimacy and uniqueness. It sounds like what they are looking to do is to ensure a strict standard is defined. In that regard I have to agree with them there should be a strict standard defined and adhered to. What I suspect the plan here is that they hope that once a rigid standard is defined that they can use that to disqualify enough signitures. It's the whole hanging chad thing all over again.

I don't see where this should be a big issue though. It just means that the recall crowd keep getting more signitures and make sure they have more than enough. I would say getting at least double the required amount. If for no other reason, this is basicly campaign time for them as well as signiture gathering. They are going to need a lot more voters than they need signitures anyway. So I am not sure how this is a major issue.

[Downwinder]

3. Well, Wisconsin IS home to the Circus World Museum.

[midnight]

7. True... However the guy in the video reminds me more of the cowardly lion.

[dragonlady]

4. The GAB will strike invalid signatures

just as soon as the Walker side files an affidavit to challenge them. That's what happened during the summer recalls and it will happen for Walker. The GAB has never said otherwise. The Walker side just wants the taxpayers to foot the bill for the GAB to find the duplicates and "Adolf Hitler" signatures (the ones their own supporters signed) rather than spend some of the gazillions that Scott is running around the country collecting.

[midnight]

10. Tax payer always pays more when Walker is doing business....

[KharmaTrain]

5. This Is All About Appeals in a Friendlier Court...

Snotty's best defense against the recall is having it declared illegal...finding some goofy technicality that they hope a partisan, friendly judge will agree with. This does two things. Takes the momentum out of the recall effort as everything is static until the case works its way up to the state Supreme court (and the rushpulicans have a majority there) and delay if not kabosh the whole thing. Thus if he loses this case, expect an appeal and up the chain it will go until there's a friendly judge who I suspect will do Snotty and the Koch Brothers bidding. Stay tuned...

[Laelth]

6. k&r for exposure. This is significant. n/t

-Laelth

[Stuart G]

8. correct, k and r ..nt