9 Burst results for "Rebecca Bradley"
"rebecca bradley" Discussed on The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
"The Wisconsin Supreme Court outlawed ballot mail in drop boxes. Not just in the 2022 and 2024 elections, but also said that they were illegal in 2020. And the case, I want to go into the case a little bit because it's really fascinating. First of all, it shows you how these things are fought out. It shows you how their reasoned out to come to a conclusion. So the case is two Wisconsin citizens, Richard Teigen and Richard Tom are suing who, the Wisconsin elections commission, which is supposed to be the neutral administrator of the elections, but also the democratic senatorial campaign committee intervening on behalf of the Wisconsin election commission and the Wisconsin faith voices for justice. Look how these left wing groups, they are in it with the Wisconsin election commission and finally the league of women voters of Wisconsin. So this is, this is the left. And notice that the left is a joined here with the people running the elections in Wisconsin. Now, the citizens basically say we have been injured because of these illegal ballot drop boxes that are not allowed under Wisconsin state law. Now, reading through the decision by justice Rebecca Bradley, by the way, an exquisitely composed opinion that is that goes through the counter arguments that are made by the Wisconsin election commission. And by the Democrats. So let's look at how they function here, because instead of fighting the merits of the case, the first thing that the Wisconsin Democrats do and the election commission is they say that these Wisconsin voters lack standing. In other words, the two of these two guys were not affected by the election outcome. They have no right to sue. Seems kind of crazy. They're voters in Wisconsin. How can they not be affected? But I think what the Democrats are saying and the Wisconsin election commission is that how could these could dare to vote, even if they were right and in their case their votes were somehow mishandled, it wouldn't change the outcome. In other words, the margin in Wisconsin was more than two votes. It's obviously a fraudulent and kind of a specious argument. But nevertheless, they try to block the case on the basis of standing. And so the judge goes through and says, no, these are the rules of standing. These voters have every right to claim that their votes were discounted and they're speaking, not only for themselves, but for voters in general. The issue of trust in the election. Now, the second point made by the Democrats and by the Wisconsin election commission is the fact that these two voters should not have gone to court at all, they should have filed a complaint with the WEC, the Wisconsin election commission. In other words, you didn't come to us first. You went straight to court. And justice Rebecca Bradley goes, well, when you look at it, they did follow the rules and they have every right to go to court. And so the judge begins by knocking out these procedural objections that are made by the Democrats to prevent the case itself from being considered on the merits. And then justice Bradley turns to the statute, which is really clear. It basically says, Wisconsin statue says that the ballots shall be mailed by the elector or delivered in person to the municipal clerk issuing the ballot or ballots. So the statute is really clear. When you get your ballot, you can mail it back to the election office or you can go in person and give it to the municipal clerk issuing the ballot or ballots. Now, let's think of what the law doesn't say. Number one, it doesn't say that you can install all these drop boxes. And it doesn't say that you can give you a ballot to somebody else and tell them to go drop it off. It doesn't say either of those things. And so just as Bradley goes, drop boxes are a novel creation of executive branch officials, not the legislature. There's nothing in the law that allows for them. Now basically the Wisconsin election commission tried to say, well, there's nothing that allows for them, but there's nothing that prohibits them either. And the judge goes, that's not how it works. The law is telling you how the election should be done. You have to do that. You can invent new ways to conduct the election and just decide on your own that those are appropriate. So sorry, no Dropbox is a number two. Where does it say in the law that you can give you a ballot to other people? So this whole idea of ballot harvesting the again, justice Bradley goes that the statutes that identifies the site at which in person absentee voting may be accomplished either the office of the municipal clerk or the elector can mail the absentee ballot or deliver it in person. So you have two options. You can mail it or you can deliver it. But a it has to be you? And two, you can't use these mail in drop boxes because they're not provided for in the law. Now again, the court is not saying that the Wisconsin legislature can't pass a law and say, we're going to have mail in drop boxes. But you have to go through the legislative process to do that. Notice here how the court, which by the way, the left often presents as undermining democracy, the court is non democratic institution. And maybe an undemocratic institution, but what the court is doing here is respecting the democratic process. The rules of election are made at the state level. That's Wisconsin. And number two, they are made by the branch of government known as the legislature. They're not made by the executive branch. If you come back to a sort of civics one O one or a government class one O one, our government is divided into three branches. The legislature makes laws, including election laws. The executive carries them out. So the executive function is merely one of administration. Now, true, there's sometimes some administrative discretion, but the administrative discretion the court is saying does not extend to, coming up with novel schemes of voting. Any more than you can say by administrative discretion, we're going to have voting for four years. You can vote for the 2024 presidential election in Wisconsin right now. And even though it doesn't say anything like that in the law, we're just deciding based upon our discretionary authority that that's going to be allowed. No, who gave you the power to do that. Certainly not the legislature, so if your power doesn't come from the Wisconsin state constitution and it doesn't come from the legislature, let's just say it comes from nowhere, which is to say you don't have that kind of a power. And then in the kind of beautiful concluding peroration, justice Bradley basically goes if the right to vote is to have any meaning at all, elections must be conducted according to law, and then in a section that's freaking the left out. She basically shows talking about how Saddam Hussein was fraudulently elected and the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un was elected with 100% of the vote, so she basically is saying we're becoming a third world country or a totalitarian country in using a masquerade of democracy, but not following actual democratic rules. This almost mirrors something I said at the very end of 2000 meals, and it's just, for me, delightful to read this opinion in its details and see justice Rebecca Bradley basically saying
Wisconsin Supreme Court Bans Drop Boxes -- What Now?
"Wisconsin Supreme Court outlawed ballot mail in drop boxes. Not just in the 2022 and 2024 elections, but also said that they were illegal in 2020. And the case, I want to go into the case a little bit because it's really fascinating. First of all, it shows you how these things are fought out. It shows you how their reasoned out to come to a conclusion. So the case is two Wisconsin citizens, Richard Teigen and Richard Tom are suing who, the Wisconsin elections commission, which is supposed to be the neutral administrator of the elections, but also the democratic senatorial campaign committee intervening on behalf of the Wisconsin election commission and the Wisconsin faith voices for justice. Look how these left wing groups, they are in it with the Wisconsin election commission and finally the league of women voters of Wisconsin. So this is, this is the left. And notice that the left is a joined here with the people running the elections in Wisconsin. Now, the citizens basically say we have been injured because of these illegal ballot drop boxes that are not allowed under Wisconsin state law. Now, reading through the decision by justice Rebecca Bradley, by the way, an exquisitely composed opinion that is that goes through the counter arguments that are made by the Wisconsin election commission. And by the Democrats. So let's look at how they function here, because instead of fighting the merits of the case, the first thing that the Wisconsin Democrats do and the election commission is they say that these Wisconsin voters lack standing. In other words, the two of these two guys were not affected by the election outcome. They have no right to sue. Seems kind of crazy. They're voters in Wisconsin. How can they not be
"rebecca bradley" Discussed on The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
"Are running aimlessly around in Wisconsin because now they don't seem to have a place to go to. Let's remember that just as deer and other animals go to watering holes, mules go to drop boxes. They need to go to dropboxes to do what mules do, which is insert fraudulent and illegal ballots. But now the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a decision written by justice Rebecca Bradley has shot down has mixed these mail in drop boxes. What I find remarkable about the decision is that not only does it say that drop boxes can not be used in the future. They can't be used in 2022. They can't be used in 2024. But they say that they will illegal in 2020. They were illegal in 2020. Now think about the implications of that. And if you take the justices are not aware of those implications, I refer you to a startling line in justice Bradley's opinion. Here's what she writes. And I'm going to read it really slowly. If elections are conducted outside of the law, the people have not conferred their consent on the government. Such elections are unlawful and their results are illegitimate. So to those who say things like, well, the election's over, let's just move on. Justice Bradley saying, well, not exactly. Yes, it is true that popular consent establishes the legitimacy of a government. But when the rules are violated in such a way that this popular consent is thwarted. Toward it by some kind of illegal setup that gives an advantage to one side or the other. In this case, it's the Wisconsin Democrats working through obliging Wisconsin officials and Wisconsin lower courts. And setting up a system that gave the Democrats an advantage, which they took advantage of in all kinds of ways. But even if they weren't any mules, the drop boxes would still be illegal. Why? Because they're not allowed, no Wisconsin legislature has authorized them. It's not in the Wisconsin constitution. This is not how they do elections in Wisconsin. And so quite honestly, since elections are, according to the constitution, the U.S. Constitution decided at the state level, there is no basis for doing this. That's really what the court has concluded. Now, the Wisconsin election commission is dead silent after the ruling. In fact, this runs toward everything they've been doing. This is, by the way, kind of a corrupt operation that has been trying to dismiss any allegations of fraud as not really looked into the matter as not taken seriously. And now here is a massive slap down from the highest court in Wisconsin. And by the way, a court from which there is really no appeal. You can't go above the Wisconsin Supreme Court. So as long as elections are decided at the level of the state, there's no one to appeal to this ruling is coming. You may say, from the very top. You can't even really take it to the Supreme Court because the Supreme Court has said, this is something for Wisconsin to decide. Now, admittedly, Wisconsin legislators can get together and decide, we want to have drop boxes. We're going to make a law that authorizes dropboxes, but that's not likely to happen. And short of that happening we're not going to have drop boxes in elections going forward in Wisconsin. So I hope this provides a certain kind of model for some of the other states to look at. The left of course is shrieking and they're shrinking with all kinds of absurd. This is typical to the sort of, you know, don't overturn roe versus wade, what about people who have ectopic pregnancies, probably most left us never even heard of an ectopic pregnancy, but they picked this up off of MSNBC. Similarly here, here's an article in which they quote this guy going. He goes, this is very alarming for advocates of the disabled, because for the point being that if you don't have these mail and dropboxes, the disabled will apparently not be able to vote. Why not? Why not? You can certainly vote at a mailbox. You can go to a normal U.S. post office box and put your ballot in there. Why do you need a mail in Dropbox? Of course, the second issue here is the issue of using ballot harvest and giving you a balance to other people. And this was the other part of the Wisconsin decision, the Supreme Court said you can't do that either. Quote, no person may receive a ballot from or give a ballot to a person other than the election official in charge. If you're going to hand over your ballot to an individual, it needs to be to an election official. None of this church is collecting ballots, mules collecting ballots, all of this is not allowed. So I am now waiting for all the people who say that this was the most secure election in history. You know, Liz Cheney to come out and basically say, the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision, which is decided that drop boxes are illegal, not just in the future, but also in 2020 has been debunked. This is their favorite word, debunked. And what does it really mean? Discredited? No, you can't discredit a Supreme Court decision. In fact, this is a 120 page decision. I'm slowly making my way through it. Carefully reasoned drawing on what the Wisconsin constitution and what Wisconsin statutes actually say, it's not debugged, but debunked in this case just means this is an outcome that seriously undermines our narrative. When Liz Cheney says 2000 mules has been debunked, she means 2000 meals is basically a movie that seriously undermines our narrative. So it's not so much that the movie itself or the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision is discredited. It's rather that this is something that they wish was not the case. But in that sense, reality can't be so easily shunted to the side. Tired
Drop Boxes Are Illegal in Wisconsin, State's High Court Rules
"The mules are running aimlessly around in Wisconsin because now they don't seem to have a place to go to. Let's remember that just as deer and other animals go to watering holes, mules go to drop boxes. They need to go to dropboxes to do what mules do, which is insert fraudulent and illegal ballots. But now the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a decision written by justice Rebecca Bradley has shot down has mixed these mail in drop boxes. What I find remarkable about the decision is that not only does it say that drop boxes can not be used in the future. They can't be used in 2022. They can't be used in 2024. But they say that they will illegal in 2020. They were illegal in 2020. Now think about the implications of that. And if you take the justices are not aware of those implications, I refer you to a startling line in justice Bradley's opinion. Here's what she writes. And I'm going to read it really slowly. If elections are conducted outside of the law, the people have not conferred their consent on the government. Such elections are unlawful and their results are
"rebecca bradley" Discussed on 77WABC Radio
"Who is Deborah messing mister producer what does she what shows was she in? Well and grace, so she's so yesterday. She claimed that the sheikah Biden elected. Messing. What's her first name again? Debra messing. She claims she got by an elected. It must be true. I mean, she's well-known throughout the country. I'm sure, particularly in our cities across America, everybody said I'm voting for Biden because of Debra messing. She got by an elected. She's another obsessed, radical left wing kook, low IQ, abortion supporter. So she's a one issue voter. Democrat Democrat Democrat Democrat. That's all they do. Deborah messing. Nice name. Deborah. Ballot drop boxes, not allowed in Wisconsin state Supreme Court rules will obviously filled with white supremacists and racists. Madison, Wisconsin, from the Washington compost, a divided Wisconsin Supreme Court barred the use of most ballot drop boxes. And ruled voters could not give their completed absentee ballots to others to reach on their behalf. A practice some conservatives disparages ballot harvesting. Yes, you know, it's not actually ballot harvesting. It's what conservatives disparage as ballot harvesting rights Patrick Marley. Patty Marley. Of the famous patty Marley pub house in anyway, so a divided supreme Wisconsin Supreme Court. It's a rolling feared by voting rights. I'm a voting right proponent, mister producer. You see how proud it works, folks. You see how they create devil terms for us. An angel terms for them. Voting rights proponents. Disparaging this as ballot harvesting. Oh. They're rolling fear by voting rights proponents who set ahead of time such a decision and make it harder for voters, particularly those with disabilities. To return their absentee ballots I wouldn't. Why? Have we had drop boxes throughout our history? Many Republicans hope for a ruling that they said would help prevent someone from casting a ballot in the name of someone else. Is it that important? The fourth three ruling came a month before the state's August 9 primer is when voters will narrow the fields of governor and U.S. Senate for years ballot drop boxes were used without controversy across Wisconsin. Okay. Was there any increase in the use of ballot drop boxes during the coronavirus? Patty? Election clerks greatly expanded their use. In 2020, during the coronavirus pandemic is absentee voting hit unprecedented levels. Was that authorized by the state legislature patty? By the time of the presidential election, more than 500 ballot drop boxes were in place across Wisconsin, some Republicans balked at their use pointing to a state law that says an absolute ballot must be quote mailed by the elector delivered in person to the municipal clerk issuing the ballot or ballots. Oh. So patty, the first paragraph of a literate article and a truthful article would have read. That the state Supreme Court of Wisconsin upheld. The state law in Wisconsin has passed by the state legislature. You see, that's the first sentence. Patty. The state's high court ruled the, that means voters themselves must return absentee ballots and can not use drop boxes. While the plain English would suggest that the key phrases in person and it must be assigned its natural meaning justice Rebecca Bradley wrote for the majority. In a dissent, justice Ann Walsh Bradley called the majority dangerous to democracy. See how it works? So the justice and the majority says, well, that's what it says in the law. And in the descent, that's dangerous to democracy. These aren't judges. These are clowns. Both of the Ann Walsh Bradley, the clown. It has seemingly taken the opportunity to make it harder to or to inject confusion in the process. Whenever it has been presented with the opportunity she wrote, the two bradleys on the court are not related. Oh, really? The majority opinion flatly stated ballot drop boxes are illegal under Wisconsin statutes. Now that is the way it should work, that's how I court is supposed to rule. That's what it should have ruled in Pennsylvania. This is what has Donald Trump upset among other things. The ballot boxes should not have been used during the 2020 election that drop boxes. And in Pennsylvania, many of the rules that were passed by the state legislature were breached by other parts of the government controlled by the Democrats. That is not being looked into by the January 6th committee or the Washington compost or the New York slimes or anybody else. Or
"rebecca bradley" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Used in a murder trial This centers around crystal Kaiser She was 17 years old when she allegedly killed a man whom she says trafficked her Her team's lawyers wants to use an affirmative defense which has never been used in a homicide case in the state Here's NPR's Cheryl corley In 2018 crystal Kaiser traveled from Milwaukee Wisconsin to Kenosha and allegedly shot and killed Randall valar Prosecutors said she then set his house on fire and stole his car She was 17 he was 34 Authorities say vollard was under investigation for molesting and sex trafficking Kaiser and other underage girls and videotaping his alleged assaults on them Kaiser was arrested and charged with intentional murder arson and theft what's at issue now is not only whether Kaiser is guilty or innocent of the crimes but whether she can use what's called an affirmative defense in her trial An affirmative defense is when you admit to a crime but you offer a reason that should excuse or lessen what the crime actually was Diane rosenfeld heads the gender violence program at Harvard Law School She's part of a coalition of advocacy groups keeping a close watch on the case and they filed legal documents supporting Kaiser and what we're arguing in crystal's case is that there's a statute in Wisconsin that should absolve her of anything because she was a child sex trafficking victim Several states have affirmative defense laws which grant some immunity to victims of child sex trafficking who commit crimes as a direct result of the trafficking Wisconsin attorney Julius Kim says those laws often specify witch crimes could be excused Like battery or prostitution or robbery or things of that nature Some of them specifically say that homicide is not part of the affirmative defense But in Wisconsin the law is ambiguous That's prompted a court fight over whether the law can be extended to a victim who kills her trafficker along with a battle over the meaning of phrases in the Wisconsin law allowing an affirmative defense for any offense that's committed as a direct result of being trafficked Wisconsin Supreme Court has reconvened At a hearing before the Wisconsin Supreme Court this month Kaiser's attorney Katie York stressed that the clear language of the state law allows her to use it in the effort to clear her client of murder The legislature chose any offense This affirmative defense applies to any offense And that's because that is the language that the legislature chose Let assisted attorney general Timothy barber argued that crystal Kaiser did not kill villars as a direct result of an immediate attack that instead it was a premeditated murder He says that's reason enough not to use the affirmative defense law in this case If the statute is broad enough as they say this really seems like if you're being trafficked you can kill your trafficker and not face unreliability But in the hearing Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley rejected that assertion saying it's ultimately up to a jury to decide what happens if the affirmative defense is used It's not a get out of jail free card She still has to convince a jury that she did this because she was being trafficked and not for financial gain or some other reason It's not clear when the Wisconsin justices will issue their ruling But their decision could help determine the extent of immunity for sex trafficking victims across the country Cheryl.
"rebecca bradley" Discussed on Unhinged and Bumbled up
"Of online dating. What can you expect in the podcast dating. Do's and don'ts guest the twenty twenty into begun forever. What people really think about these. Tricky eleventh awesome teaching trivia. Top tips and tricks vermont. Awesome guest expos. Luckily no little more about dating the waiting dayton is ignored. The red flags your filter in the right place. Do we talking about no dating back office showing join us. We all the things. I'm sorry. Post doc hello and welcome to unhinged fumbled up. I'm phil she's less and today we're joined by rebecca bradley. Rebecca is a dating coach for man and runs dating bites helping. Single men tackle their dating and relationship issues to track that dream woman and former a long lasting relationship together up this week. Rebecca will be sharing some of her great insight and top tips for men about how to be successful at dating. I'll be taking notes. Welcome back to the show and tell us a little. Bit about yourself and dayton buds. Yes absolutely thanks for having me fill in liz. I'm excited to be here and chat with you guys a little more. So yeah so i mean. You summed up of tagline knows dating. It's really nicely. There fell so i work with single men. I helped them to you. Essentially become better eaters to attract their dream woman into their life so i am specifically especially working with men who are in that stage in their life. They're looking for someone who's willing to be more like a companion partner versus something like more casual and things like that. That a lot of other dating coaches might focus on miami. She's a little bit more specific in that way. And i helped these single men in a variety of different ways. Things like looking at their confidence. Mindset 'cause you know that's pretty important foundation blocks there to establish Things like online dating. That's especially really big now in the pandemic especially and sexiness intimacy. It was very big parts of relationships in general and just any other general dating relationship topics might just kind of help them out like. I said it's become better daters and to really attract veteran partner into their life through excessive rebecca. What made you decide to kind of nation on men specifically and all those more meaningful long term relationships you ask that. because that's probably the biggest question. Should i get asked in my line of work especially as a woman you know. A lot of people tend to assume. All i ask female dating coach. I would want to work with women. So the reason i worked with men. There's actually kind of a few different reasons. But one of the biggest reasons i would say is because when i was kind of i'm in a long term relationship now committed relationship but when i was single and Doing more research into dating relationships to help my own dating life and things like that going on through the years and you know what. I would do research for myself as a woman. I found that you know especially looking for dating and relationship coaches. I could type that into a google search. And i would have thousands of her salts. Come up you know could choose to work with even a man or a woman you know it was just such variety for me so many people out there that wanted to help myself as a woman. Fine love but when i would do that same research from the perspective of a single man i would find that. There wasn't too many resources out there for single men. What's all the most common pitfalls that men make while dating. I'll be writing that down right now. You can take these office. We don't i think you're taking lana notes during this podcast. I just have a feeling. 'cause i'm dropping value today. I would say. Definitely one of the common mistakes i see. Is men not being ready today. So they're in a place Like almost like a mindset that they're not in a good place basically in their life and they might be doing it out of things like desperation like they don't wanna be single. They're scared they're going to be alone. Maybe for the rest of their life so that everyone that ensued desparation. And you know fear of loneliness things like that so really and that's something that you want to go in with dating right. You don't want to be going in afraid you don't wanna be going in with this desperation because it kind of tends in this. What i tend to see too is that it leads to you. Having very low standards it almost gets to the point. Where you're like anyone right of szigeti woman that shows interested in me as nice to me is you know wants to go on a date with me. All that right and that's not really good in that way when we kinda have that mindset right because were essentially settling right. We're not really choosing that going forward with that. Good mindset to choose ultimately if this is what we're looking for the best partner ryan young man. That's that's a really big wine. That i see really common another reas- another communist i see i. I refer to this as the term. I coined tunnel vision essentially.
"rebecca bradley" Discussed on News Talk 1130 WISN
"Judges. They believe it or not, I'm not making this up. You believe his name is Jeff Davis. This is I talking about Jefferson Davis before. This is too different to different. Jeff Davis is that I'm discussing within the same broad segment of the program, but it event Jeff Davis was appointed by Evers to the bench. Is the Milwaukee judge at quarrels and Brady. He had to move to Mak Kwan's because he had a live into the court living the court district and he's a lefty lawyer. And he's now a lefty judge. And not surprisingly, Evers put a lefty judge on the bench. There is a conservative opponent. Running against him. My name is Shelley drug Grogan. She's a longtime judge, and she's currently the top legal assistant to Supreme Court justice Rebecca Bradley. Yet. Republican state Senator Alberta Darling. Is endorsing the Evers appointee. To the bench now emailed Alberta prior to today's program, and I didn't get a response from her as to why Republican state senator is endorsing a liberal appointee. Of Governor Evers against the conservative jurist. And the answer is simply a Ah lot of these Republicans are not true to their conservative convictions. And be my side is too damn stupid to play by the same rules of the left, he said. In this case, it's not even an immoral tactic. You're merely saying, Hey, if they're going to oppose every conservative nominee to the bench and too liberal Connie's, we're gonna oppose every liberal nominee to the venture Conservative areas. But this is the disadvantage that my side has the lefties use a certain tactic and conservatives don't use it. So I am demanding to know of Alberta at any other so called conservative, including a few Republican elected officials and some of these counties who endorsed Davis. How are you anything other than a phony? If you don't fight to get good conservative judges on the bench when you claim that that is what you support. So it works this way. All the judges that Walker points and liberal areas get thrown off of the voters. But the judges that evil is a point that could save it of areas. Some of them actually get themselves reelected because my sides to GAM stop bed. And ineffectual and worse ified to play by these rules, thus, same point on the impeachment. No again. I don't think it would be good for America to if the Republicans met the house and the Senate in 2022. Who for no reason. I'm not seeing a real reason, but for no reason make something up in impeached by and you go back it after the fact Impeach Clinton. I don't think it would be good for America. But there's certainly nothing wrong with backing the right candidate for judge. The point that I make is it's an easy ability for lefties to abuse the rest of us when they have power when we don't use The same power that we have when we are in control. So anyway, I'll be talking about that election as we approach. This is not one that's on the ballot next week. This is there's no primary in this race. This would be an April election for the state Court of Appeals. So you don't need to know the names. No if they went In one ear and out the other. But state Court of Appeals is an important court, and I will certainly be discussing the fact that Eva's appointee is running for a full term on the appeals court bench in a conservative area and he has a good, solid conservative alternative. Despite the fact that there are at least some Republicans who sell out end There. Suck up the Evers. Or maybe they know the guy or whatever it is and back. Lefty, something that you would never and by the way, if you go through all the cases of Walker appointees that were appointed to the bench in Milwaukee, and some of them they were qualifications towered. Over the lefty who ran against him towered and it just didn't stop the lift. Oh, it's a walker plenty. We're gonna throw him off. So Walker point. We're gonna throw him off. It's a walker played it. We gotta throw him off, and so is a well you just wait. Waiting to lever starts putting judges on the bench. Conservative areas will throw him up. And then here we are too damn dumb to do it right. You live in that district. I'll have to make sure you both the wrong way that you don't do it. Albert and you can't do with Democrats like Albert and Evers do it unfair to call operate a Democrat. No, I think it is that fair to call her a Democrat. She just a Republican who isn't willing Use the same tactics And you think given how many times they tried to go Joe Bird, his eyes Oh, that she might remember some of that, but My side. As I say. It's partly to nice and partly to dumb, and it's partly lack of a commitment to fight partly a lack of a commitment to win. It's I've talked a lot about it's this. It's endemic to the Madison establishment. Of the Republican Party, but it affects Republicans that are scattered around the state is well, there's just not the same commitment. The cause of the issues to doing what's right. Really commitment to our values that liberals have in terms of their commitment, which is the one thing when everything and get all the power that they can Yeah. I mean these same Democrats just trying to get a bird or thrown out of office in the election in November. So why is she going to go on? Turn around? It's a you know, Tony, you birds that you know that was one of the state's seats that the that the Democrats targeted. They came sort of close. I mean, Alberto one, but it wasn't a ah wipe out, but they dumped a lot of money into the race to defeat her. And I already had a run a lot of ads at our own show in order to win, and here she is, she turns around, she endorses a candidate for judge That's being that was put on the bench by Evers, who's the head of the party that tried to get her beat out of office I made there's one thing for turning another cheek. My sight turns the cheek, the shoulder turns out rear end over our ankles. It Stands upside down and flips reverse cart wheels and can't keep pushing this analogy, the turning the other cheek. Well, not only two nights too stupid and out again. It's selling out our own principles that in this case, getting the conservative on the bench is the principal thing to do. It's not like the thing they're doing with impeachment. We're just kicking a guy when their daughter we don't want to kick. The other side's guy went down because we want have legitimacy of our government. In this case, it's actually endorsing the right candidate for judge rather than the lefty that Evers put onto the bench. It's 3 54. It is 3 54. It's 3 54 at news taik 11 30 W ASA. It's time for rapid traffic,.
Wisconsin Supreme Court rejects Green bid for ballot access
"The Wisconsin Supreme Court is keeping the Green Party off the November presidential ballots. In a 4 to 3 decision. On Monday, the court ruled that the Green Party waited too long to challenge the Elections Commission decision that kept them off the ballot in the first place. It states that quote it is too late to grant petitioners any form of relief that would be feasible and that would not cause confusion and undo damage. The three votes against were from the courts. Conservative justices Chief justice patients. Rogan Sachs says the motion suppresses people's rights to vote while Justice Rebecca Bradley argues that this is akin to disenfranchising black voters in Alabama during the 1960, Wisconsin radio networks Raymond Newport