Wisconsin election fraud

From Conservapedia - Reading time: 9 min

---

The Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) approved a $100,000 grant to the Mayor of Racine, WI in May of 2020 directing the Mayor to recruit four other cities (Green Bay, Kenosha, Madison, and Milwaukee) to develop a joint grant request of CTCL. This effort resulted in these cities submitting a “Wisconsin Safe Election Plan” on June 15, 2020 to CTCL and, in turn, receiving $6.3 million to implement the plan. This privatization of elections undermined the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), which requires state election plans to be submitted to federal officials and approved and requires respect for equal protection by making all resources available equally to all voters.

The provision of Zuckerberg-CTCL funds allowed these Democrat strongholds to spend roughly $47 per voter, compared to $4 to $7 per voter in traditionally Republican areas of the state. Moreover, this recruiting of targeted jurisdictions for specific government action and funding runs contrary to legislative election plans and invites government to play favorites in the election process. The “Wisconsin Safe Election Plan” was not authored by the state, and considered state election integrity laws as obstacles and nuisances to be ignored or circumvented. Moreover, CTCL retained the right, in the grant document, to, in its sole discretion, order all funds returned if the grantee cities did not conduct the election consistent with CTCL dictates.

Effectively, CTCL managed the election in these five cities. And this plan violated state law in, at least, the following fashion:

1) The plan circumvented voter identification requirements for absentee ballots by attempting to classify all voters as “indefinitely confined” due to COVID and later, after Wisconsin Supreme Court criticism, by ordering election clerks to not question such claims.

2) The plan initiated the use of drop boxes for ballot collection, significantly breaching the chain of custody of the ballot and failing to maintain proper logs and reviews to ensure all properly cast ballots were counted and all improperly cast ballots were not counted.

3) Initiated the consolidation of counting centers, justifying the flow of hundreds of thousands of ballots to one location and the marginalization of Republican poll watchers such that bipartisan participation in the management, handling, and counting of the ballots was compromised.

According to the Amistad Project, these are but examples of radical changes in election processes that opened the door for significant fraud. This two-tier system allowed voters in Democrat strongholds to stroll down the street to vote while voters in Republican strongholds had to go on the equivalent of a “where’s Waldo” hunt. These irregularities existed wherever Zuckerberg’s money was granted to local election officials.^[1]

2020 general election[edit]

Ballot dump[edit]

Theredelephants reports in Wisconsin, voter turnout matched the record high of 2004. The Wisconsin Elections Commission uses the estimated voting age population as the denominator when calculating statewide voter turnout numbers. According to the Elections Commission, there was a 73 percent turnout in this Wisconsin election.

Turnout was 67 percent in 2016; 70 percent in 2012; 69 percent in 2008; and 73 percent in 2004. Apparently Joe Biden smashed Barack Obama’s 2008 turnout in most places in the country.

In both Michigan and Wisconsin, several vote dumps occurred at approximately 4am on Wednesday morning November 4, 2020 which showed that Joe Biden received almost 100 percent of the votes. President Trump was leading by hundreds of thousands of votes in both states as America went to sleep, and turnout in the state of Wisconsin seems to be particularly impossible.

In Wisconsin on election day before the polls opened, Republicans led Mail-in Ballots requested 43% to 35%, and Mail-in and early in-person ballots returned 43% to 35%. Almost ALL of the ballots found, while most in the country were sleeping, after they officials stated they would stop counting, were for Joe Biden.

Some statistically savvy observers noticed other mathematical flaws, as random numbers in statistics should follow a pattern in their distribution. If the numbers are falsified, it is easy to detect.

Biden had 49,000 votes posted on the City of Milwaukee website as of 4 AM Wednesday and 194,000 votes as of 3 PM Wednesday.^[2] 102 wards added more than 500 votes, 16 added more than 1000. State margin 20k ^[3][4]

The increase in Democrats relative to Republicans was significantly higher when the Democrat was doing worse overall in early counting. Within each ward, late votes broke heavily to the Democrat in exactly the races where they are likely to affect the result.

Illegal instructions from the Election Board[edit]

In Wisconsin, the law states that ballots returned by a third party absent a witness statement are invalid and not to be counted. Municipal clerks and vote counters across the state filled out witness signatures themselves. Acting on false and unlawful advice from the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC), these clerks may have invalidated thousands of absentee votes.

The WEC sent uniform instructions to voters with their mail-in ballots that informed them that “your witness must sign and provide their full address (street number, street name, city) in the Certification of Witness section” and warned that “if any of the required information above is missing, your ballot will not be counted.” However, on October 19, 2020 the WEC sent instructions to clerks that they can simply fill in the witness address themselves so that the ballot would not be invalidated. “Please note that the clerk should attempt to resolve any missing witness address information prior to Election Day if possible, and this can be done through reliable information (personal knowledge, voter registration information, through a phone call with the voter or witness),” WEC wrote. “The witness does not need to appear to add a missing address.”^[6]

“The statute is very, very clear,” said retired Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman, who worked as a poll watcher in Milwaukee on Election Day. “If an absentee ballot does not have a witness address on it, it’s not valid. That ballot is not valid.” The former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice said the ballots should be invalidated. “In defiance of and direct contradiction to the statute, the Wisconsin Elections Commission gave guidance–that is, cover–to all 72 county clerks and turned the statute on his head,” Gableman said. “They said, ‘Gee, we know the law says an absentee ballot without the witness address is not valid, but county clerk, you have a duty to go ahead and look up on your own the witness’ address if there’s no address on the absentee ballot.”^[7]

Anticipating a legal challenge to this seemingly highly unlawful advice, the WEC instructed clerks to write in these witness addresses in red pen so that they would be easy to find during a recount or audit of the vote.

The Republican Party of Wisconsin estimates that thousands of witness addresses may have been changed, thus invalidating the ballots on which they appeared. The statutory remedy for this is to subtract a commensurate number of votes for the candidates for whom those ballots were cast, meaning that vote totals may substantially change.

Vote switching[edit]

Evidence shows that the vote totals for Rock County appeared to be switched between President Trump and Joe Biden. 9,516 votes were eliminated from President Trump and moved to Joe Biden. This 19,032 vote difference when corrected would eliminate Biden’s lead in Wisconsin.^[8][9]

Fraudulent ballots[edit]

Under Wisconsin state law, a voter must present a valid photo ID when requesting to vote by mail. The exception to the rule is for those voters who are currently hospitalized or “indefinitely confined because of age, physical illness, or infirmity.”^[10] Covid doesn't meet the qualifications for an "indefinitely confined" voter.

2020 primnary election[edit]

Primary election tampering[edit]

In a lawsuit filed by Democratic party operatives concerned about the CCP pandemic’s effects on voting, federal District Judge William Conley (an Obama appointee) extended the deadline for receipt of mail-in ballots from Tuesday, April 7, 2020 (the primary-election day), to Monday afternoon, April 13. That aspect of the federal district court’s ruling was not in dispute. Judge Conley, however, directed that absentee ballots were eligible to be counted regardless of the date of post mark or otherwise delivered, as long as they came in by the April 13 deadline. In effect, that meant absentee ballots could be cast after in-person primary voting had closed on April 7.

This meant the election could be materially altered by events occurring after formal conclusion of the primary election — not least, news about the apparent election result. To address this problem, Judge Conley further ordered the Wisconsin Election Commission and election inspectors to suppress any report of the voting results until after the new April 13 deadline for the receipt of absentee ballots.^[11] Democrat Gov. Tony Evers then banned in person voting in the April 7, 2020 primary. The Wisconsin Supreme Court then ruled Evers exceeded his authority with his Executive Order to cancel elections.^[12] The same day SCOTUS ruled to stay a district court order that had extended the absentee voting deadline. As a result, the absentee ballot postmark and in-person return deadlines were reinstated to April 7, 2020.^[13] The issue was that authority did not rest with the courts or the governor and there was no time to reschedule. Fake news media, of course, was quick to blame Republicans for the Democrat's lawsuit and the Democratic governor's overreach of executive branch authority.^[14] Democrat operative James Carville again stole the spotlight as the most demagogic.^[15] The Wisconsin State Journal reported three weeks after the voting that Wisconsin's rate of infection actually declined after in-person voting.^[16]

Supreme Court agrees to hear the case[edit]

Redstate reported:

"a federal judge extended the deadline for receiving absentee ballots during the primary election cycle by a period of six days. No one objected to that extension in the early days of state “lockdown” orders to address the outbreak of the COVID 19 virus. But, five days before the scheduled election, the same judge clarified the order to state that ballots postmarked on or before the extended day for receipt of ballots could be counted even though that violated Wisconsin election law which required that they be postmarked no later than Election Day, and no party in the case had asked for the Court to grant the additional relief. The Supreme Court reversed that provision of the district court’s order, writing as follows:

Nonetheless, five days before the scheduled election, the District Court unilaterally ordered that absentee ballots mailed and postmarked after election day, April 7, still be counted so long as they are received by April 13. Extending the date by which ballots may be cast by voters—not just received by the municipal clerks but cast by voters— for an additional six days after the scheduled election day fundamentally alters the nature of the election… This Court has repeatedly emphasized that lower federal courts should ordinarily not alter the election rules on the eve of an election…. The District Court on its own ordered yet an additional extension, which would allow voters to mail their ballots after election day, which is extraordinary relief and would fundamentally alter the nature of the election by allowing voting for six additional days after the election.

The four liberals on the Court, including the late Justice Ginsburg, dissented from this order and would have allowed votes to be cast and counted after the deadline imposed by state law in Wisconsin, basing their judgment on the complications of the COVID 19 pandemic.

So, you can see where the lower court judges are finding their “justification” for rewriting election rules more to the liking of plaintiffs who — in every case I’ve looked at — are Democrat party interest groups."^[17]

After Wisconsin's primary vote, Bernie Sanders dropped out of the race, pledging to toe the CCP/DNC party line; however an ABC/Washington Post poll showed 15% of Sanders supporters will support President Trump in the November 2020 general election.^[18] Sanders press secretary immediately ripped off the mask, saying in a tweet that she can now drop "Democratic" from explaining why "Democratic Socialism" is good.^[19] With Sanders out and the nomination locked up, Barack Hussein Obama still failed to endorse Biden.

Priorities USA Action — the Democratic Party's largest super PAC — spent $6 million on advertisements criticizing President Trump for his response to the coronavirus pandemic. The ads ran in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida. The PAC received $3 million in contributions from George Soros's Democracy PAC on Feb. 21, 2020, or 77% of Priorities USA income for the reporting period. Priorities USA said it intends to spend upward of $150 million against Trump in states like Wisconsin and Michigan. Its largest donor has been billionaire hedge fund manager Donald Sussman, who has given the group $8 million this cycle. Soros is the group's second-largest donor at $5 million. In addition, David Brock's American Bridge PAC has assailed Trump's coronavirus response. American Bridge has also been active in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan.^[20] Priorities USA aired a digitally altered ad that led to the NBC affiliate airing the ad being sued for defamation when it continued to air the ad after receiving a cease-and-desist order.

References[edit]

v • d • e Election Fraud Types of Election Fraud Arizona audit • Ballot harvesting • Democrat election fraud • Georgia election fraud • Michigan election fraud • Pennsylvania election fraud • Wisconsin election fraud • Hammer and Scorecard • Ranked-choice voting Individuals Fighting Election Fraud Shiva Ayyadurai • Lauren Boebert • Jair Bolsonaro • Mark Brnovich • Patrick Byrne • Fernando Cerimedo • Rudy Giuliani • Louis Gohmert • Mike Lindell • John R. Lott • Peter Navarro • Ken Paxton • Sidney Powell • Donald Trump • Kelli Ward • Lin Wood Election Integrity Alternate Electors • Electoral Count Act • Election integrity • Judicial Watch • Look Ahead America • Objectors to Biden Electors • True the Vote • Florida election integrity Groups Undermining Traditional Election Integrity ACORN • Biden junta • Center for Tech and Civic Life • Chan Zuckerberg Initiative • CNN • CCP • Democratic National Committee • Dominion Voting Systems • NextGen America • Open Society Foundations • Pelosi Panel • Perkins Coie • Priorities USA • Quadrivium • Smartmatic • Transition Integrity Project • Bills Undermining Election Integrity For the People Act • John Lewis Voting Rights Act • Court cases Kelly v. Pennsylvania • United States v. Throckmorton • Burson v. Freeman • Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee •