Wisconsin Dems to be in Contempt?
- Thread starter Cancel 2018. 3
- Start date
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
huh? we aren't wrong. you clearly didn't understand what nigel posted. nor do you understand what we said.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
LOL...Right...whatever you say cupcake.
You claimed the orders signed Thursday by the Republican leader of the Wisconsin Senate allow the sergeant at arms to detain the missing senators and use police force if necessary.
...Nigel showed that you were wrong.
...Nigel posted how Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald was repeatedly warned he would be stepping outside the law if he forcibly returned 14 Democratic senators who fled Wisconsin in February, according to internal emails. Records obtained from the offices of Fitzgerald and Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Ted Blazel show Fitzgerald was told he was on shaky legal ground by attorneys from three state agencies.
That you can't admit you were wrong is SOOOOOOOOOOOO surprising!
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
uh....he was given OPINIONS as to the law...nigel's link clearly states that it is unknown whether it would be legal or not....and again, they were all merely opinions....thus, the governor may in fact have that power....
nice try, but you really need to go back and read it, because you have no idea what you're talking about and you're distorting that nigel posted.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Zappa's too busy falling all over himself because he thinks he finally got an opportunity to resemble a man. He's always shooting his wad way too soon and his hysterical joy at believing he's scored is truly a sight to behold.
Disloyal's just jealous because my equipment still shoots live rounds while her dried-up gash can barely produce a cloud of dust, let alone anything inviting, should a man come within range of her malodorous queefs
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Whatever you say Kreskin!
Attorneys from THREE STATE AGENCIES stated that Fitzgerald would be "stepping outside the law" and "on shaky legal ground"...so you and SF and whoever else can still hold your OPINIONS, but those with a better understanding of the law think otherwise.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i never said it wasn't the case....i don't recall disagreeing with you that the cops would not enforce his order...he can still have the legal authority though...
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Art IV section 7 may compel the attendance of absent members in such manner and under such penalties as each house may provide
therefore, they can compel them by arresting them to attend. this does not conflict with your cherry pick. you just want to ignore the law. Its clear, that if the members want to compel attendance by arrest, they can.
they can be arrested for high speed driving, drunk driving etc...the breach of the peace is broad nigel....and here they likely could be considered breaching the peace...so even if you want to go down that road, you will lose. courts in other jurisdictions have upheld such forcible returns with the same if not similar clause in their constitutions. if you can't use the arrest power, then it is absolutely meaningless to claim they have the power to enforce they own rules and COMPEL attendance. your view would make that law toothless and therefore meaningless.
such an interpretation would likely never win in court. i have case law backing me up...any case supporting you nigel?
Now now now...you JUST said that if the members wanted to compel attendance by arrest, they could have.
Now you're moving the goalposts...as usual.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
you are really a dishonest idiot....of course i was always talking about IN STATE powers...but i knew that morons like you and nigel would think i believed that officers could use their powers in other states....so i made sure you two idiots wouldn't think that....and despite making it clear....you two morons still believe it
LOL
First one said "should" not "will", second said, "they can, but won't"...
Two that were not wrong. Try again.
Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
I think the Sergeant-at-Arms should just take them all out and shoot them.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Wonder if we'll see Zaps admit he was wrong?
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Hey lookie there...more ridiculous semantic nonsense from Damo when he absolutely knows I am right.
The bottom line is they both cited what they thought was legal precedent to apprehend the Democratic Senators. Now however, it has come to light that attorneys with access to more information regarding this situation than either SF, Yurtle or yourself are privy to repeatedly advised Fitzgerald he would likely be stepping outside the law and on shaky legal ground if he attempted to do what SF and Yurt described...
In other words...
They.
Were.
Wrong.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Man-up Fatso and admit you were wrong.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
PROVE I was wrong...
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
how dishonest can zappa get....it is UNSETTLED law at this time....they might be right and we might be right. to say we are wrong at this time is total bullshit....its PURE OPINION on all parties at this point....you dumb hillbilly
you stepped in it big time zappa....
zappasguitar
Well-known member
how dishonest can zappa get....it is UNSETTLED law at this time....they might be right and we might be right. to say we are wrong at this time is total bullshit....its PURE OPINION on all parties at this point....you dumb hillbilly
you stepped in it big time zappa....
No, I'm afraid it's highly UNLIKELY that I stepped in it...however it is becoming more apparent that you LIKELY HAVE been proven wrong!
ROTFLMAO!!
1like·ly
adj \ˈlī-klē\
like·li·erlike·li·est
Definition of LIKELY
1
: having a high probability of occurring or being true : very probable <rain is likely today>
2
: apparently qualified : suitable <a likely place>
3
: reliable, credible <a likely enough story>
Poor, poor stupid, narrow minded Yurt...as the definition states...YOU MIGHT be right, but as I earlier stated, attorneys with better knowledge of the law and more access to information in this case claim there is a HIGH PROBABILITY of the opposite being true!
Spin it any way you want...it is still VERY PROBABLE that I am right.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Damo already did. I'm not surprised you're not man enough to admit that.