Wisconsin – When The Abuser Goes To Work…

This Is Not The Legal Profession’s Finest Hour…

Here’s the latest from the bullying, virtue signaling, mostly Democratic, anti-President Donald J. Trump segment of the legal profession.

Superior Court Judge Craig A. Karsnitz of Baltimore ruled last week that former Trump adviser Carter Page could not be represented by his choice of legal counsel, L. Lin Wood, in a defamation case stemming from former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe.

Judge Karsnitz said a couple of hyperbolic tweets by Wood in support of Trump’s claims of election fraud “no doubt” helped “incite” the Jan. 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol. It’s not clear how Judge Karsnitz knows this, let alone know it to a certainty. He did not point to any actual evidence that Wood’s impassioned (some would say inflammatory) tweets incited anything but backlash against Wood.

No Election Fraud?

Judge Karsnitz’ ruling bordered on breathless.

For one thing, he concluded there was no election fraud in Georgia and that Wood’s lawsuit to that effect was “without basis in law or fact.”

Georgia U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Batten’s ruled that Wood, who was only a party in the Georgia lawsuit, lacked standing to bring the case. Moreover, Batten’s ruling is being appealed.

Federal Judge’s Threat May Chill Future Election Lawsuits

Many big law firms dropped their representation of President Donald Trump and Trump advocates in the face of blatant intimidation after the election.

Now, it seems federal judges are getting into the act.

U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg of the District of Columbia this week threatened sanctions against a prominent attorney representing Republican voters and legislators in a lawsuit filed on Dec. 22 that raises a U.S. Constitutional challenge to the election results in the swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona.

Judge Boasberg , who was appointed to the court in 2011 by Democratic President Barack Obama, on Monday rejected the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction to prevent the U.S. Congress from counting the electoral votes in the defendant states.

The plaintiffs’ claim the U.S. Constitution gives state legislatures the non-delegable power to conduct post-election certification of votes and electors. They argue state and local officials usurped this authority by blocking legislators requests for special legislative sessions to review voter fraud allegations in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona.

Citing one of America’s founders, Alexander Hamilton, the plaintiffs argued the “wholesale delegation of legislative authority” to state officials “operates contrary to the Constitution by inviting ‘cabal, intrigue and corruption’ rather than operating to prevent the same.”

Warning Shot

The 116-page lawsuit alleges Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s gave $400 million to local and state executives through a private charity “that dictated how the recipient local government officials would manage the election.” Urban election officials used the money to promote the Democratic vote while deterring Republican oversight, the lawsuit alleges.

The lawsuit complains that GOP efforts to address alleged election improprieties have been met with intimidation. They note, for example, that Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat, announced she is criminally investigating GOP legislators who voiced election concerns.

Judge Boasberg was anything but sympathetic…

A Quadrillion, Trillion or Billion To One Long Shot Falls Short

Some novelist somewhere is writing a book about how malevolent forces in a political party used a worldwide pandemic to throw a U.S. Presidential election in four swing states under its control.

When voters caught on, they went to the courts in these four states – lets say, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin – and demanded justice. But the courts refused to act. And so did the state legislatures. (Skeptics said it was because they were controlled by the “Winning Party.)

The “Losing Party,” which seemingly was caught unawares, was ostensibly outraged that its Presidential candidate was robbed of a solid victory.

In truth, the leaders didn’t care much for their loud-mouth Presidential candidate. He was an outsider, always making trouble, and his alma mater is second-tier Ivy League. More importantly, the corruption in the four states didn’t affect down ballot voting and the “Losing Party” actually picked up many Congressional seats and grew much stronger. The leaders of the “Losing Party” stayed mostly quiet.

Point of No Return

At the point of no return, the hero of this tale, The Lone Star state of Texas, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Supreme Court, the highest court in the land. It argued the four rogue states had invalidated the will of voters of the state of Texas and the country as a whole. There was no other forum for redress, Texas argued.

Federal Courts Face Their Biggest Challenge in Modern History

The mainstream media says Democrat Joe Biden handily won the presidential election and there is no evidence of widespread fraud or irregularities.

In fact, Biden hasn’t won. The Electoral College will meet on Dec. 14 to declare a winner. The U.S. Congress must vote to certify the electoral result on January 6, 2021.

And there is evidence of widespread fraud and irregularities in swing states where crooks engaged in ballot stuffing and election officials negligently relied on voting machines and software that are notoriously unreliable.

The only real question is whether the fraud is enough to make a difference. That’s the job of the courts to decide.

Alleged Bullycide of Wisconsin Woman Prompts Bill

April 7, 2010

Amid emotional testimony, bill targets workplace bullying

By DEE J. HALL

In 2008, 31-year-old Jodie Zebell appeared to have a full life. The UW-Madison graduate was married with two young children and a part-time job as a mammographer at a La Crosse clinic, where she was praised as a model employee.

But soon afterward, Zebell became the target of co-workers who unfairly blamed her for problems at work. After she was promoted, the bullying intensified, her aunt Joie Bostwick recalled during a legislative hearing Wednesday attended by members of her niece’s family, including Zebell’s mother, Jean Jones of Spring Hill, Fla.

After her niece had a run-in with her supervisor, Bostwick said, the boss joined in the harassment, filling Zebell’s personnel file with baseless complaints about her performance and loudly criticizing her in front of others.

“This went on for a series of months,” said Bostwick, a Blue Mounds native who now lives in Naples, Fla. “It just got worse and worse.”

On Feb. 3, 2008, the day before she was to receive a poor job review, Jodie Zebell allegedly committed bullycide – took her own life as a result of depression over bullying. A Madison attorney told the family it had no legal recourse since she wasn’t protected from workplace discrimination as would be an older worker or a racial, ethnic or religious minority.

“We were astounded to find there was nothing we could do. There were no laws unless you were part of a protected class,” Bostwick said.

The tragedy sparked Zebell’s family to join a national movement seeking to ban bullying from workplaces and give victims — who prefer to call themselves “targets” — tools to stop the harassment or sue abusive employers and bullies in court.

Abusive conduct

On Wednesday, the Assembly Labor Committee heard 90 minutes of often emotional testimony on a bill sponsored by state Rep. Kelda Roys, D-Madison, that would require employers to implement and enforce anti-bullying policies — or face their abused employees in court.

Seventeen states are considering such legislation, according to the Workplace Bullying Institute of Bellingham, Wash., whose director, Gary Namie, also testified at the hearing.

Under the proposal, workers who believe they have been harmed by “abusive conduct” could sue to force the employer to stop the bullying, to seek reinstatement or to get compensation for lost wages, medical costs, attorneys’ fees, emotional distress and punitive damages.

The bill defines abusive conduct as “repeated infliction of verbal abuse, verbal or physical conduct that is threatening, intimidating or humiliating, sabotage or undermining of an employee’s work performance or exploitation of an employee’s known psychological or physical vulnerability.”

Vaguely worded bill

Representatives of business groups told the committee the bill is too vaguely worded and would invite frivolous lawsuits by disgruntled and incompetent workers.

“AB 894 paints a target on the back of small employers … (who) can’t afford to fight claims in circuit courts,” said Pete Hanson, director of government relations for the Wisconsin Restaurant Association.

Andrew Cook of the Wisconsin Civil Justice Council, a consortium of large business groups, agreed. Cook said if Wisconsin becomes the first state to pass such a bill, it would harm the state’s ability to attract business.

Emotional stories

But at the hearing, such concerns were largely overshadowed by these stories:

• A Spanish teacher testified she was “iced out and isolated” for four years by older colleagues in her school district. Once a marathon runner, Susan Stiede now suffers from clinical depression, chest pain, panic attacks and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. She quit teaching in 2009.

• A nervous Stephanie Endres told of being harassed by a unnamed female boss in a state agency that she declined to name. Intimidated by Endres’ knowledge of the agency, the new supervisor circulated untrue rumors about her, Endres said, banished her to an office with no phone and separated her from her co-workers. When Endres took a six-month stress leave, the supervisor started bullying other members of the staff, she said.

• Dr. Deborah Lemke told lawmakers of an unnamed Wisconsin hospital where the nursing supervisor verbally bullied nurses on his staff. When she intervened on behalf of the nurses, Lemke said, holding back tears, she herself became a target.

Corliss Olson, associate professor at the UW-Extension’s School for Workers, said the bill is “desperately” needed. Olson said most targets of bullying are “normal, competent people” who can be driven to disability or even death. “This is a viciousness in the workplace that we need to stop,” Olson said. “We can and we must change our workplaces so they are civil.”

FROM: WISCONSIN STATE JOURNAL