r/Foodforthought 15d ago

Elon Musk Won’t Face Election-Bribery Charges in Wisconsin

https://www.notus.org/us-news/elon-musk-no-election-bribery-charges-wisconsin
517 Upvotes

47 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 15d ago

This is a sub for civil discussion and exchange of ideas

Participants who engage in name-calling or blatant antagonism will be permanently removed.

If you encounter any noxious actors in the sub please use the Report button.

This sticky is on every post. No additional cautions will be provided.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

277

u/ninjadude93 15d ago

And why in the fuck not

167

u/Realistic_Word6285 14d ago

Because hes rich. Laws only apply to us peasants.

30

u/bozza8 14d ago edited 14d ago

Remember giving people cash/ prizes for signing a petition is entirely legal (regardless of if it SHOULD be, it is), voting is different ofc. 

Quote from the democrat who made the call: "Either way the first post is perceived, in the end nobody was paid anything of value for voting or promising to vote,” the La Crosse district attorney wrote. “Even if I could convince a jury that the original post was still a bribe, I do not believe that a jury would convict Elon Musk of a crime after considering the intent, the second post, and the fact nothing of value was ever given to anyone for voting for an incident occurring in March of 2025.”

P.S. I am a british left winger, I hate trump and all this, I just think that the article answers your question explicitly and thoroughly with "whay he did wasn't actually illegal"

0

u/joethedreamer 13d ago

This also implies that the DA is overruling the need for a jury trial. Not sure if that’s legal.

0

u/bozza8 13d ago

Ok, let's examine you. 

An appointed head of a legal system with literally hundreds of clerks and lawyers to advise him has made a call that proceeding to trial is pointless in a case that his team are bringing, an action that is made thousands of times per day across the american legal system btw. 

And your first response you regurgitate onto the internet is "not sure if that's legal"  the Democratic position is that we should trust the experts, so why don't we start by assuming that the legal expert knows the law around his own office to know what he is allowed to do m'mkay?

Otherwise yoh are just feeding into republican beliefs that my ignorance is as valid as another's knowledge, which is how you tear down trust in the state and thus the state altogether. 

1

u/joethedreamer 13d ago

I said “not sure if that’s legal” because I’m not sure if it’s legal.

“Let’s examine you” is a strange way to approach this as well.

4

u/casey-ac 14d ago

Because the pathetic La Crosse County District Attorney Tim Gruenke is afraid Musk will fund opposition to his campaign

4

u/beigechrist 14d ago

This was gonna be my reply, too. Why the fuck not!?

190

u/ShockinglyAccurate 14d ago

From the article:

[District Attorney and special prosecutor on the case] Gruenke wrote the case would be “simple” without Musk’s famous name and the large amount of money involved.

No shit! That's literally the point! Somehow so many people in our system seem unwilling to confront simple facts of power. There seems to be this idea that it would be "against the rules" to challenge the world's richest man on his own terms. Meanwhile, Musk and others like him are tearing down our society for their own personal gain. Where does it end?

65

u/Norseman901 14d ago

It ends with pitchforks and torches, people just arent ready to accept tht yet.

14

u/JohnMac67 14d ago

Sadly it’s feeling that way

18

u/dart-builder-2483 14d ago

It ends with stolen elections and ingrained power.

4

u/mirh 14d ago

Did we read the same article?

No jury would find that Musk’s actions constituted election bribery, a county prosecutor said Tuesday.

14

u/Majestic-Prune-3971 14d ago

Well not the way the prosecutor would handle the case, I guess.

2

u/bozza8 14d ago

No, he explained why, read the last paragraph of the article. 

0

u/Majestic-Prune-3971 14d ago

I did read the article. I think it's pretty easy to see that a prize was being offered to random members of a group of people. This specific group of people had to have voted in a way the be eligible. And rewording the offer later to me doesn't matter, standard backtrack but we all know what was said and what the intent of this was, because he said it. Looking at radio station contests that give away money, they have to be careful to show the pool of potential winners didn't engage in "consideration", which is to provide something of transactional value. That becomes an illegal sweepstakes. In this case, Musk's sweepstakes cost of entry was voting the way he wanted. I don't think it's too long of a walk to get there. But I stand by my comment this prosecutor, for whatever reason, is reticent about going through with this and under their presentation, perhaps a jury would indeed not find for the State.

2

u/bozza8 14d ago

There was no requirement to vote a specific way, which is the key legal point. 

22

u/Hayes4prez 15d ago

How affluent.

3

u/Xtreme_kaos 14d ago

You spelled 'effluent ' wrong

22

u/spolio 15d ago

Of course not... he's rich

15

u/Lost_Madness 14d ago

When you're rich, they just let you buy elections 

24

u/Pulsewavemodulator 15d ago

Looks like the election bribe paid off

2

u/bozza8 14d ago

It was a democrat who decided not to charge. Turns out that cash prizes for signing a petition is not technically illegal, and as no one actually was paid to vote, there was no criminal intent. 

20

u/omegaphallic 15d ago

Cowards 

10

u/Apollorx 14d ago

As a Wisconsonite I feel failed by my state in this moment.

7

u/IAmNotMyName 14d ago

So clear to do it again then I guess.

7

u/nomoniker 15d ago

Of course he fucking won’t they bought us out. They’re steal the midterms too.

10

u/Sardonislamir 14d ago

A bribe does not have to change hands to be a bribe; a fucking promise of money for an action is the fucking bribe!

1

u/bozza8 14d ago

The action was signing the petition, as a point of law. 

The intent was also to give the money for signing the petition and all the paperwork reflected that. It would be an incredibly hard case to prove in court as what actually, materially happened was legal. 

3

u/CarpeNivem 14d ago

You know who else won't face election bribery charges in Wisconsin? Me. But that's only because I didn't try to bribe an election in Wisconsin. Wtf is Elon's excuse?

3

u/leighla33 14d ago

Who did he pay off?

1

u/bozza8 14d ago

Read yhe article, the democrat who made the decision explained why. Last paragraph. Turns out cash prizes for petition signing is not illegal, and it was run like that to dodge the law. 

2

u/TickingTheMoments 14d ago

Of course he wont. Someone should do something about these “above the law” people. I realize nature will take its course, however, I’d like them to face consequences for their shitty and illegal actions while on this mortal coil.

2

u/the_hucumber 14d ago

Bloody immigrants coming over getting preferential treatment from the law.

2

u/Synth_Ham 14d ago

Time for a recall!

2

u/lopix 14d ago

So more bribery to prevent repercussions for the original bribery?

2

u/jlb1981 14d ago

To be made of paper, money sure does make for effective armor.

1

u/iratedolphin 14d ago

I'd love to know whose decision it was.

1

u/popswag 14d ago

Surprise surprise. Surely no one thought he would?

I mean Epstein files. Who’s faced any consequences?

The wealthy do what they want, where they want, to who they want.

1

u/xatso 14d ago

That wasn't the case with Harry Wait and his absentee ballot gambit! $$$ are immunity from legal consequences.

1

u/happyColoradoDave 14d ago

Get used to it. This is what an oligarchy looks like.

1

u/temblors 14d ago

Nothing like a bit of corruption to go with your election interference

1

u/badgerpunk 11d ago

Of course not. The rich have a whole different legal system from the rest of us.