No Runny Eggs

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.

Day by Day cartoon

Archive for the 'Grand Theft Courts' Category

April 28, 2011

Wisconsin Supreme Court Recount – Day 2 (and some recall news)

There actually is a dearth of stories from Wisconsin media today on the recount in the Supreme Court race. A quick scan of various state media sites turned up only stories filed about yesterday’s start to the recount, and those were almost completely without exception general “the recount has started slowly but surely” pieces.

That is not to say that there wasn’t any news today. The first bit of news came when the Government Accountability Board took down the running-total spreadsheet this morning, with very little explanation and a promise to have a revised one up by noon. Noon came and went without an update, but a fuller explanation came just after 5 pm – they made some data entry errors yesterday.

I’ll cut them just a bit of slack; this is the first election where either the GAB or its predecessor State Elections Board has reported any election results other than the official and certified numbers. However, this is also not the first time this election they had to pull back reported unofficial numbers; while the counties were reporting their canvassed totals, GAB pulled back numbers reported for two different counties for unspecified reasons, then put up revised numbers before the last county reported just before the deadline. In those two cases, a total of six reported votes were affected.

As of 6:05 pm, they released an updated spreadsheet, with 52 reporting units “reviewed by G.A.B. staff”. Consequently, I have updated my tracking spreadsheet with the numbers from (and only from) those 52 reporting units. I almost don’t want to report the change from such a small number of the 3,602 reporting units, mostly because there are a significant number of counties that have reported results from reporting units to the GAB but have not had numbers entered into GAB’s spreadsheet, but Prosser did gain a net 10 votes on his pre-recount 7,316-vote lead.

The other item comes out of Waukesha County, from a friend who was at the recount, Kyle Maichle (note; the vote totals Kyle mentions were not included above):

Day 2 of the recount in Waukesha County resulted in all of the wards in the Town of Brookfield and the Town of Delafield fully counted. Waukesha County Spokeswoman Ellen Nowak, told me that there is no change on Prosser’s lead in Waukesha County. The only thing has had change was the votes that Prosser gained yesterday in the Town of Brookfield.

After recount activity resumed after the lunch break, there was a very contentious moment when ballot bags for the Town of Delafield were about to be opened. A Kloppenburg campaign attorney challenged one of the bags due to no inspector statement written on the bag. After both campaigns huddled with the presiding judge to go over the ballot bag issue, the Clerk for the Town of Delafield was asked to testify to campaign representatives and the canvassers to determine if the ballots should be allowed. The Board of Canvassers unanimously rejected the Kloppenburg Campaign’s challenge and allowed the ballots to be counted.

There were two other ballot issues today involving the Town of Brookfield. In wards 9 and 10, one ballot was never assigned a voter number and canvassers had to examine if the ballot was valid. In wards 5 and 7, a hand recount of Prosser absentee ballots were ordered after one of their attorneys successfully challenged the canvassing board on grounds that two folded absentee ballots issued on election day were put in the wrong pile.

Do note the “unanimously” above. That means Ramona Kitzinger, the Democrat on the canvassing board, voted to reject Kloppenburg’s challenge of the bag of ballots in question. Side question – what is the over/under on Kitzinger recanting that decision in the same vein of her recantation of her declaration the canvas was on the up-and-up?

Meanwhile, Wisconsin political news was dominated by the recalls (first 2 items courtesy the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the third courtesy WisPolitics):

  • The Democrats turned in recall petitions against the 6th of their targeted 8 Senate Repbulicans, Robert Cowles (R-Green Bay). There’s going to be more elections than I anticipated, but I still am not moving off my early prediction of a 2-2 split of flips or a 3-2 Republican advantage.
  • The local-based group that fell just short of enough signatures to force a recall of Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller (D-Monona) said that it will not consolidate its efforts with those of the Utah-based American Patriot Recall Coalition.
  • The GAB has gone to court to seek an extension of the 31-day signature review period of the recall petitions against Sens. Dan Kapanke (R-La Crosse) and Randy Hopper (R-Fond du Lac) so that the first 8 recall elections (or at least primaries; if more than one Democrat, one Republican or one Constitution Party candidate files to run, the first election would be a partisan primary with the general recall election 4 weeks later) could all be held on the same day, July 12. In response, the Democrat Party of Wisconsin wants to force at least three separate recall election dates – one for Kapanke and Hopper, one for Sens. Jim Holperin (D-Conover), Bob Wirch (D-Burlington), Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay), Luther Olsen (R-Ripon), Sheila Harsdorf (R-River Falls) and Alberta Darling (R-River Hills), and a third for Cowles.

Revisions/extensions (7:42 am 4/29/2011) - For those of you who think Kloppenburg will go quietly into the good night once the recount affirms Prosser’s win, WisPolitics has a dose of cold water for you – Kloppenburg campaign says ‘anomalies’ warrant more review. Therefore, I’ve once again dusted off a classic category I had hoped was permanently retired.

R&E part 2 (10:55 am 4/29/2011) – WISC-TV’s Jessica Arp is live-tweeting the court proceedings in the “recall election consolidation” case. Running through the by-the-book timeline (31 days after the petitions are received to review, GAB needs to determine whether the petitions are sufficient for filing, then 6 weeks plus the days to the following Tuesday if the 6 weeks doesn’t end on a Tuesday before the election), the recall election of Cowles would also be on July 12, which would, if GAB is successful, put all 9 recall elections (or primaries as the case may be) on the same day.

April 20, 2011

New NRE Poll – When will Prosser’s win be official?

by @ 17:42. Filed under Grand Theft Courts, NRE Polls.

Since JoAnne Kloppenburg has asked for a recount, and strongly hinted that she would pursue a post-recount judicial appeal if she doesn’t somehow overcome a 7,316-vote deficit, it’s time to fire up the NRE Polls once again. If you’re wondering why the answers are presented in the order I presented them, they are, in my humble opinion, in decreasing lprobability.

When will the Prosser victory over Kloppenburg be made official?

Up to 1 answer(s) was/were allowed

  • By hook and by crook, Kloppenburg will be declared the winner (34%, 37 Vote(s))
  • When Kloppenburg accepts her recount-affirmed defeat (25%, 28 Vote(s))
  • When the federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals smacks down the state-level kangaroo court and SCOTUS upholds (15%, 16 Vote(s))
  • When the Abrahamson-appointed judge shocks the world and upholds the recount-verified victory, and the 4th District Courtn of Appeals upholds (11%, 12 Vote(s))
  • When SCOTUS smacks down the state-level kangaroo court (8%, 9 Vote(s))
  • When a federal district court smacks down the state-level kangaroo court and the higher federal courts uphold (4%, 4 Vote(s))
  • When the state 4th District Court of Appeals smacks down the state-level kangaroo court (3%, 4 Vote(s))

Total Voters: 110

Loading ... Loading ...

Revisions/extensions (6:32 pm 4/20/2011) - If you’re wondering why I don’t have the Wisconsin Supreme Court included in the poll, while the state-level appeal would eventually end up there, it would be before a 3-3 divided court due to either Prosser recusing himself as he would be a party to the suit or Prosser’s seat being vacant after July 31. If you doubt that the result would be a 3-3 split, just look at the liberals’ attempt to toss Justice Michael Gabelman after he ousted “Loophole” Louis Butler (who, ironically, is likely going to be the reserve judge Lawgiver-In-Black chosen by Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson to all-but-certainly deliver the outcome Abrahamson and her former clerk Kloppenburg have a vested interest in).

Behold the return of Grand Theft Courts

by @ 16:11. Filed under Grand Theft Courts.

It is still a bit early to officially bring the “Grand Theft Courts” category out of retirement, but in her press conference today announcing her decision to seek a full statewide recount, JoAnne Kloppenburg tipped her hand on what will happen after the recount affirms her loss to Justice David Prosser. She strongly hinted that her post-recount judicial appeal will seek to have the results from the entirety of Waukesha County, and not just the city of Brookfield, declared null and void.

Damn if I didn’t predict that.

Revisions/extensions (4:23 pm 4/20/2011) - Kloppenburg claimed that the Government “Accountability” Board will join her in court tomorrow to ask for a full hand recount of at least several counties, and she asked for a special investigator into the actions of Waukesha County clerk Kathy Nickoulas (the basis for my analysis of what will happen after Prosser wins the recount by somewhere between 6,816 votes and 7,816 votes, and likely closer to the 7,316 votes that it is now). I guess it isn’t too early to bring “Grand Theft Courts” out of retirement. Now if I could remember what I did with that graphic,….

October 4, 2006

No further raids on Green’s campaign funds – for now

JSOnline’s DayWatch is reporting that, in their session today in Brookfield, the State Doylie Elections Board failed to take up whether to finish Grand Theft Courts on the Green Team’s funds. I wonder if it was late-breaking word that the co-author of the McShame-Slimeroad Lieberal Protection Act, John McShame (RINO-Media), and the campaign manager of fellow co-author Russ el-Slimeroad’s (Moonbat-Al Qaeda) 1998 campaign, Mike Wittenwyler, both called out Team Craps, including refuting the late-rising claims that the conversion of Green’s campaign from a federal one to a state one somehow violated the McShame-Slimeroad Lieberal Protection Act. Maybe it was the location of this meeting, which is proving troublesome to certain members of the DEB. Maybe, just maybe, they actually read the state Constitution, read what ElBd 1.39 said on January 25, 2005, and came to their senses.

The inaction of the DEB and the statement from McShame also put wooden stakes into the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign’s efforts to get the Federal Elections Commission to commit Grand Theft Courts and thus help their member groups’ man Jim “Craps” Doyle (WEAC/Potawatomi-For Sale).

The original $468,000 highway robbery, which likewise wasn’t revisited, now heads to the state Supreme Court. Jeff Wagner has more on the Team Craps’ whispering campaign against justices perceived as less-than-willing to sanction Grand Theft Courts.

September 29, 2006

Team Craps looking to fix the State Supreme Court as well

Just when you think Team Craps can’t get any slimier and lower, Charlie and Jeff report as their Friday Internet Exclusive Podcast that Team Craps has commenced a whispering campaign to get the two State Supreme Court justices perceived as most likely to vote against Grand Theft Courts, Jon Wilcox and David Prosser, to recuse themselves from the case. If they do so, that would leave the Doylies with, at a minimum, a 3-2 lieberal majority on the SCOW (Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, whose representative on the State Doylie Elections Board was “conveniently” absent when the original highway robbery happened, Ann Walsh Bradley, and Loophole Louis Butler, who owes his seat to Jim “Craps” Doyle).

Just as a reminder, the Doylies had absolutely no problem when Doyle’s (WEAC/Potawatomi-For Sale) personal representative on the Doylie Elections Board, Sherwin Hughes, who owes both his current and future position there solely to Doyle, ignored his conflict of interest to participate in the highway robbery.

September 28, 2006

Pubbie member of SEB resigns, Doylie ‘Rats apoplectic

According to JSOnline’s DayWatch, Republican member of the State Elections Board Patrick Hodan, who abstained from the Team Craps’ highway robbery of the Green campaign’s treasury because a member of his law firm is representing Green’s campaign, resigned from the SEB today. Predictably, Team Craps, who gleefully accepted the vote of Doyle appointee Sherwin Hughes, despite the fact that Hughes owes both his current and future position on the board solely to Jim “Craps” Doyle’s (WEAC/Potawatomi-For Sale) occupation of the governor’s mansion and the whim of said occupant, loudly objected, claiming that this is being done just so Green can get another vote on the board.

Let’s see; they still hold a 4-3 partisan advantage over the Pubbies, assuming that John Gard fills the position before October 4, not counting either the Losertarian or SCOW chief justice appointees. They already got the Losertarian to vote with them once. What are they afraid of? Not being able to do that again? Not being able to do the same with the SCOW rep? Hughes growing a conscience, realizing that his continued participation in Grand Theft Courts is a conflict of interest, and abstaining?

September 27, 2006

Did the Doylies really want to take Grand Theft Courts federal?

JSOnline’s DayWatch is reporting that Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, a non-partisan group conglomerate of lieberal special interests whose individual members, almost to a group, support Jim “Craps” Doyle (WEAC/Potawatomi-For Sale), filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission alleging that Mark Green violated the McShame-Slimeroad Lieberal Protection Act by converting his federal Congressional campaign to a state gubernatorial one. Unlike the State Doylie Elections Board, a majority-owned subsidiary of Team Craps, the FEC is controlled by neither party. In its complaint, WDC, like the state Department of “Justice” and Doylie Judge Niess, specifically ignores that ElBd 1.39, as it existed on January 25, 2005, specifically allowed the conversion of Green’s federal campaign to a state campaign.

Hey Doylies, thanks for taking your best arguments to an entity you don’t control. Here’s hoping you have the same lack-of-success you did in 2000 and 2001.

September 26, 2006

Unconstitutional Highway Robbery endorsed by Doylie judge – part 2

Revising and extending my comments from yesterday

Why did the State Doylie Elections Board feel compelled to create emergency rule ElBd 1.935, in an ex-post-facto attempt to strip the Green campaign of $468,000? It is because, back in July 2001, when then-Attorney General and Democrat gubernatorial candidate Jim Doyle complained about then-Congressman and Democrat gubernatorial candidate Tom Barrett including out-of-state PAC money in his federal-to-state campaign conversion, they issued Opinion and Order 01-07 that specifically allowed said conversion. The text of the order is exceedingly hard to find, and is only found in two places, including the 1/26/2005 Dunst memo linked earlier (pages 18 and following). I draw your attention to item #6 in the “Conclusions of Law” section (page 23 of the linked PDF file):

6. The conversion of funds received for federal purposes by a federal candidate committee from committees registered with the FEC at the time such contributions are made is not prohibited. The non-resident committee contributors to the Barrett federal campaign committee were not subject to a Wisconsin registration requirement when they made their contribution to the Barrett Committee and are not now subject to a Wisconsin registration requirement because of the conversion of that committee to a Wisconsin personal campaign committee.

This was not successfully challenged by Team Craps. Thus, that opinion, despite what the Doylies wish to believe, was the status of the body of state law on January 25, 2005, when Mark Green converted his federal campaign to a state campaign. Your Doylie Elections Board was a day late and a dollar short.

Just in case the first attempt at Grand Theft Courts fails…

(H/T – Kathy)

…the Journal Sentinel is reporting that, at the next State Doylie Elections Board meeting on October 4, bought-and-paid-for ‘Rat board member hack Robert Kasieta will seek to go aftter the $775,000 of the Green campaign’s money the state Justice Just Us Department is going after in Doylie Judge Robert Niess’ courtroom. Again, you heard the prediction here first on September 6

Here’s a bold prediction; whether the Craps strategy of trying to smear Green while starving his campaign of some funds works or not in the public arena, Craps will try to get his Doylie Elections Board to declare the other $800,000 Green transfered from his federal campaign "illegal" by early October, using the "justification" that federal law prohibits the transfer of state campaign funds.

September 25, 2006

Unconstitutional Highway Robbery endorsed by Doylie judge

The last sentence of the order from Dane County District Court Richard Neiss (appointed by Jim Doyle to the bench in 2004) that denies the Green campaign’s request for a temporary injunction (both links from JSOnline) against the State Doylie Election Board’s ruling retroactively declaring $467,884 of the $1.3 million the Green campaign says it all regarding the approach of Team Craps –

The bottom line is that the Elections Board reached the correct result, regardless of the infirmities, if any, in its process.

Allow me to translate – it doesn’t matter whether the state Constitution (specifically, Article 1, Section 12) is violated, just as long as Team Craps and the State Doylie Elections Board gets to commit highway robbery. Morever, the Doylie judge has set up the rationale to complete the full-monty Grand Theft Courts of the $1.24 million the state “Justice” Department now wants to pull off.

Just how is the state Constitituional prohibition against ex post facto laws violated by Team Craps, which now includes a hand-picked judge? First, let’s take a look at the section itself (the annotated version of the state Constitution is linked above):

No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation
of contracts, shall ever be passed, and no conviction shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate.

Just what is an ex post facto law? The annotated version of the state Constitution defines it as such:

An ex post facto law is one that punishes as a crime an act previously committed, that: 1) was innocent when done; 2) makes more burdensome the punishment for a crime, after its commission; or 3) deprives one charged with a crime of any defense available at the time the act was committed. State v. Thiel, 188 Wis. 2d 695, 524 N.W.2d 641 (1994).

The annotated verison further goes on to note that this provision applies to judicial pronouncements:

The ex post facto prohibition applies to judicial pronouncements as well as legislative acts. The question to be addressed is whether the new law criminalizes conduct that was innocent when committed. State v. Kurzawa, 180 Wis. 2d 502, 509 N.W.2d 712 (1993).

So, what was the status of state law regarding the conversion of a federal campaign to a state campaign as of January 25, 2005, the date that Mark Green’s campaign made said conversion? Since the State Doylie Elections Board subsequently changed the applicable administrative rule (ElBd 1.39), we have to head to pages 9 and 10 SEB legal counsel George Dunst’s memo of January 26, 2005, where Dunst describes how the administrative rule that applied to a conversion of a federal campaign to a state campaign could be amended to prohibit same. Stripping out the language underlined and restoring the language struck through reveals the status of ElBd 1.39 as of the date Mark Green converted his campaign from a federal one to a state one:

ElBd 1.39 Conversion of federal campaign committee to state committee.

(1) As used in this rule,
(a) “Federal campaign committee” means the campaign committee of a candidate for federal office, which is not registered with a state or local filing officer, and
(b) “State campaign committee” means the personal campaign committee of a candidate for state or local office.

(2) A federal campaign committee may convert to a state campaign committee and use funds collected for federal purposes in a state or local campaign filing a campaign finance registration statement, pursuant to s. 11.05, Stats., with the appropriate filing officer and simultaneously filing a campaign finance disclosure report showing the sources of all funds on hand at the time of the report, pursuant to the requirements of s. 11.06 (1) (a), (b), (c), (d) and (f), Stats. In determining the sources of funds on hand and allocating those funds among the sources, the funds shall be treated on a last-in, last-out basis, so that they will be attributed in the report to the most recent sources, in the full amount received from each source.

Indeed, Judge Neiss acknowleges, as part of the “Undisputed Facts” of his order, that the emergency rule (ElBd 1.395) that the Green campaign seeks relief from did not apply at the time of the conversion (emphasis in the original):

17. On January 25, 2005, Congressman Mark Green converted his federal campaign committee to a state campaign committee by filing a campaign finance registration statement and a campaign finance disclosure report….

19. On January 26, 2005, the Board met for the purpose of, among other matters, discussing the issue of the conversion of federal campaign committees to personal state campaign committees….

20. The Board voted to promulgate an emergency rule (ElBd 1.395). The Emergency Rule was published on or about February 3, 2005….

21. The Emergency Rule states:

ElBd 1.395 Use of funds transferred by a federal campaign committee to a state committee restricted.

Funds which have been converted by a federal campaign committee to a Wisconsin state campaign committee may not be used for political purposes in Wisconsin if the contribution of those funds to the federal campaign committee would not have complied with Wisconsin law if the contribution had been made directly to a Wisconsin campaign committee. The state campaign committee shall divest itself of such money in compliance with s.11.26(11), Stats.

22. Wis. Stat. § 227.24(c) states with respect to emergency rules:

A rule promulgated under par. (a) takes effect upon publication in the official state newspaper or on any later date specified in the rule and, except as provided under sub (2), remains in effect only for 150 days.

The ruling then goes on to justify the denial of the injunction by essentially denying that the version of ElBd 1.39 that existed on January 25, 2005 ever existed. I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t profess to play one on the Web, but that sure looks like a violation of the state Constitution to me. Of course, we all know what the state Constitution means to Jim “Craps” Doyle (WEAC/Potawatomi-For Sale) and his Craps-packed State Supreme Court.

September 22, 2006

Who’s running Team Craps and DEB, Riley Coyote? – part 2

(H/Ts – Aaron and Kathy)

Paul Bucher is proving himself to be every bit the bulldog, even to the last, as he announced that his office is launching an investigation into the coordination between Team Craps and the ‘Rat members of the State Doylie Elections Board that do not directly owe their continued state employment to Jim “Craps” Doyle (WEAC/Potawatomi-For Sale> in the latter’s highway robbery of Green’s election fund. Guess the DEB shouldn’t have done that meeting in Brookfield. As long-time Cheeseheads, they’re supposed to be smarter than Donovan “Vote twice like a ‘Rat” Riley; after all, Riley had the excuse of being a FIB at the time.

Equally not surprising, the other DA that Mike Ellis (RINO-useful in this case though) asked to look at this, Dane County DA Brian Blanchard, took a pass. I knew he would; he only persecutes enemies of the Madistan branch of the DPW.

Reaction from the Green Team:

GREEN BAY – Today Waukesha County District Attorney Paul Bucher announced that he would open an investigation into the collaboration between Governor Jim Doyle’s campaign and the state Elections Board prior to its decision to retroactively change campaign finance rules to bolster the governor’s campaign. In response to the news, Mark Graul, campaign manager for gubernatorial candidate Mark Green, issued the following statement:

"Yesterday, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported what all of us have long suspected – that Jim Doyle manipulated the state Elections Board to try and strengthen his floundering re-election campaign. This desperate and outrageous display of corrupting a state agency for political gain showed that the governor will ignore the rules to keep a grasp on power.

"The good news is that we have an opportunity to turn things around in Madison. We can reject Jim Doyle’s brand of politics, and embrace Mark Green’s hopeful vision for the future of our state – a vision of lower taxes, good paying jobs, educational opportunities and honest government."

# # #

The Team Craps fix continues

(H/T – Elliot)

Somehow I don’t think that a “random” assignment of cases brought the Green challenge to the State Doylie Elections Board to Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess. After all, there’s this little tidbit in today’s Journal Sentinel story

Doyle named Niess a judge in 2004.

No wonder why Team Craps is now going for the full-monty Grand Theft Courts.

On November 7, remember to say, “And all of Craps’ horseshit, and all of Craps’ men, couldn’t put the USS Jim Doyle back together again” as you vote for Mark Green, JB Van Hollen, and your local Legislative Pubbie.

September 21, 2006

Doylie Electons Board highway robbery becoming Grand Theft Courts

You have to hand it to Team Craps for total chutzpah – JSOnline’s DayWatch is reporting that state Justice Department lawyers Michael Bauer, Christopher Blythe and Lara Sutherlin argued in court that the Green campaign should be forced to give back $1.26 million of the $1.3 million and be allowed to keep only the $43,128 they say state law allows any candidate committee to give a gubernatorial candidate.

For you budding (or recovering) lawyers out there, JSOnline happens to have the Team Craps brief, but not the Green Team’s ones. WisPolitics’ Courtwatch, however, comes through with the Green Team’s appeal as well as a supporting affadavit from the Green campaign treasurer. I don’t have the time at the moment to sift through all of that, but I will if anybody feels like commenting.

Ignoring the fact that, among other things, Tom Barrett transfered much more than $43,128 to his gubernatorial campaign from his congressional one without so much as a peep from the Doylies or anybody else, let’s see if Team Craps practices what they now preach.

Looking through the 2002 election cycle records at the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, I seem to see donations totaling $190,000 from a “political/ideological” entity called the “Lawton Committee”. I can’t seem to find any information on this committee with either a Yahoo or Google search, but I do know that Barbara Lawton was his lieutenant governor running mate and in fact is the serving lt. gov. My best guess is that the “Lawton Committee” listed in the WDC report is the campaign committee of Barbara Lawton, and I don’t think the $43,128 limit just popped into state law in the last 4 years.

Golly; once again, it looks like Team Craps has stepped in it. Of course, they’re on friendly turf in Dane County, and they do have a Craps-stacked State Supreme Court (one that was left unchallenged by the “R”PW earlier this year).

Remember, I predicted the full monty grand theft back on September 6

Here’s a bold prediction; whether the Craps strategy of trying to smear Green while starving his campaign of some funds works or not in the public arena, Craps will try to get his Doylie Elections Board to declare the other $800,000 Green transfered from his federal campaign "illegal" by early October, using the "justification" that federal law prohibits the transfer of state campaign funds.

I was slightly wrong on the timing (it’s only mid-September), the forum and the “justification”, but you have to give me credit for nailing the theft. As for the “remaining” $43,128, the Doylies will push to have that disappear in the form of “fines”.

Make this pic (borrowed from Patrick) happen; vote Mark Green Nov. 7

Who’s running Team Craps and DEB, Riley Coyote? (and an addition to the roll)

(H/T – Mike Huckleberry)

Mike Ellis, who I have little love for, noticed a little something about the State Doylie Elections Board’s kneecapping robbery of the Green campaign; namely, it happened in Waukesha County. Last I checked, Paul “The Marauder” Bucher was still DA there. Accordingly, Ellis has asked Bucher’s office to look into whether laws were broken by the Doylies. I don’t think the Doylies will come out in much better shape than Donovan “Vote twice like a ‘Rat” Riley.

For contributing “Riley Coyote” to the lexicon, silent E speaks just found its way onto the roll. Let’s make Doyle’s name mud-spelled backwards November 7.

Gov’s race – 9/21 update

Item #1 – The MJS reports Doyle campaign lawyer Michael S. Maistelman told the 3 ‘Rat members of the State Doylie Elections Board whose jobs aren’t directly tied to Jim “Craps” Doyle’s (WEAC/Potawatomi-For Sale) continued occupation of the governor’s mansion, “Even if this ends up in Court it is a PR victory for us since it makes Green spend money and have to defend the use of his Washington DC dirty money.” Further, they report that, contrary to earlier denials that Maistelman was working for the Doyle campaign, he was present at the August 30 meeting where the Doylies retroactively applied their rule to Mark Green to strip him of $486,000 that he had transfered to his state campaign from his federal campaign; and that Maistelman, in conjunction with Doyle campaign manager Dan Schooff, discussed possible penalties with the 3 “independent” ‘Rat members of the State Doylie Elections Board before they meted out their punishment revenge on Green.

I’m actually surprised that the Journal Sentinel took the time to dig this up and then reported it. Thank you, Team Craps, for proving just how sleazy you greedy, power-mad SOBs really are. If you doubt me, take a look at the copy of the Team Craps e-mails over at Boots and Sabers.
————
Item #2 – Poll-a-copia time. Strategic Vision’s mid-September poll (9/15-9/17) (H/T – Kevin) shows some odd results; despite a 52% disapproval rating (up from 50% in August), Doyle stretches his lead from 45%-44% to 46%-42%. Meanwhile, Rasmussen (currently a “members-only” link) has some bad news for Team Craps (again, H/T – Kevin; his lead dropped from 49%-41% on August 10 to 47%-44% on September 17.

Could the Rasmussen/Zogby Interactive (I do not trust the self-identification method of that particular division of Zogby) trend of tightening be related to item #3?
————
Item #3 – As predicted by me on September 6, Team Craps is going after some more of the money transfered from Green’s federal campaign. This time, they’re going after $48,000 that the Wisconsin Democracy claims violates the $10,000 limit. They claim that 30 donors who donated to Green’s federal campaign in 2003 and 2004, then later donated to Green’s gubernatorial campaign, illegally donated more than $10,000 to the Green gubernatorial campaign. Since the Journtinel doesn’t refresh your memory on what the SEB told Green when he transfered the money (again, I’ll point out he did so before they adopted the rule they later applied retroactively), I will – any money that entered the Green federal campaign on or after January 1, 2005, would be counted against that $10,000 limit.

I wonder if the Craps campaign will be suggesting punishments this time too.

September 6, 2006

Craps must go – Volume XXX (or something like that)

The campaign of Jim “Craps” Doyle (WEAC/Potawatomi-For Sale) released a TV ad today that claims that the $486,000 that the State Doylie Elections Board ordered Republican opponent Mark Green to divest himself was was raised “illegally”. Really? Let’s take a look at the facts:

  • At the time the funds were raised for Green’s federal Congressional campaign, state laws did not apply for two reasons – federal laws superceded state laws, and the money was raised for a federal campaign. There are no credible allegations that so much as $1 violated federal campaign finance laws.
  • Both at the time those funds were raised and at the time Green transfered the funds to his gubenartorial campaign, the status of state law was that funds raised legally under federal laws for a federal campaign could be transfered to a state campaign with no restrictions. Specifically, in 2001, the State Elections Board (pre-Craps) ruled that, as long as no federal laws were broken in the raising of the transfered funds, no state laws were considered to be broken.
  • It took all 4 DemonRAT members of the Doylie Elections Board, including a member whose position on the board is directly tied to Craps’ continued occupation of the governor’s mansion, to first change the rule after the action occurred, and then against the advice of the board’s legal counsel, apply it retroactively.

The Doylies are far more brazen than the McShame/Slimeroad crowd. At least when they neutered the First Amendment in order to protect lieberals and incumbents on the federal level, they didn’t apply their rules to that election cycle, much less to a time period before they could get the rules changed to benefit themselves.

Now, let’s take a look at the pre-primary campaign finance reports for Green and Craps (courtesy WisPolitics). Do note that this doesn’t reflect the highway robbery of the $486,000 from Green’s campaign, but let’s roll with it anyway, rounding each number to the nearest $1,000 (which will introduce some rounding errors). Craps started the summer with $5,176,000 in the bank, raised $494,000, spent $1,622,000, and ended up with $4,047,000 in the bank. Green started with $3,170,000 in the bank, raised $1,388,000, spent $838,000, and ended up with $3,720,000 in the bank.

Green entered the home stretch with a better-than-2-to-1 fundraising37 advantage (this during the Summer of Extreme Craps ads), and (at least before the DEB raid) a deficit of only $327,000 (or less than half his summer fundraising advantage and an 8% deficit to Craps). Even factoring in that raid, he’s still less than his summer fundraising advantage behind ($813,000).

Here’s a bold prediction; whether the Craps strategy of trying to smear Green while starving his campaign of some funds works or not in the public arena, Craps will try to get his Doylie Elections Board to declare the other $800,000 Green transfered from his federal campaign “illegal” by early October, using the “justification” that federal law prohibits the transfer of state campaign funds. THIS CANNOT STAND!

[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]