Wisconsin Election Fraud Revealed

Wisconsin Special Counsel, a former WI Supreme Court Justice, delivered his second interim report to the Wisconsin Assembly. It is devastating.

Highlights:

Special Counsel Finds Mark Zuckerberg’s Election Money Violated Wisconsin Bribery Laws. That’s one of the many troubling findings in the report submitted Tuesday by a state-appointed special counsel to the Wisconsin Assembly.

Nearly $9 million in Zuckerberg grant funds directed solely to five Democratic strongholds in Wisconsin violated the state’s election code’s prohibition on bribery. That conclusion represents but one of the many troubling findings detailed in the report submitted today by a state-appointed special counsel to the Wisconsin Assembly.

Last August, Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Robin Vos authorized the Office of Special Counsel, headed by retired state Supreme Court justice Michael Gableman, to investigate concerns about election integrity and the 2020 election. Gableman delivered an interim report to the state assembly on November 10, 2021. Earlier today, the special counsel provided a second interim report to the state legislative body, noting the report “is final in the sense that it provides a list of recommendations with time for the Legislature to act before the close of its session in March.”

While the special counsel’s nearly 150-page report closed with recommendations for the state’s legislative body, Gableman stressed from the get-go that the report did not seek to re-analyze the re-count that occurred in late 2020. Nor was the report’s purpose to challenge certification of the presidential election. Rather, the report represented a small step toward fulfilling “the duty of all citizens of our State and our nation to work hard to secure our democracy for this generation and the next,” the special counsel explained.

From the details exposed in Monday’s special counsel report, the state legislature has much work to do to address “the numerous questionable and unlawful actions of various actors in the 2020 election.” The first unlawful action, according to the report, concerned the payment of grant funds to five Wisconsin counties that were used to facilitate voting. That arrangement, Gableman wrote, violated Wis. Stat. § 12.11, which prohibits election bribery by providing it is illegal to offer anything of value to or for any person in order to induce any elector to go to the polls or vote.

According to the report, Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg providing financing that allowed the Center for Tech and Civic Life to offer nearly $9 million in “Zuck Bucks” to Milwaukee, Madison, Racine, Kenosha and Green Bay counties. In exchange, the “Zuckerberg 5,” as the report called the counties, in effect, operated Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts. Those grant funds then paid for illegal drop boxes to be placed in Democratic voting strongholds.

The illegal use of drop boxes represented a second area of concern to the special counsel’s office. The report notes state election code limits the manner in which ballots may be cast, providing that an elector must personally mail or deliver his or her ballot to the municipal clerk, except where the law authorizes an agent to act on the behalf of the voter.

The Zuckerberg 5 also violated the federal and state constitutional guarantee of equal protection, according to the special counsel report. The grant money targeted specific voters for special voting privileges, to the disadvantage of similarly situated voters located in other Wisconsin counties. The report also detailed troubling evidence the Zuckerberg 5 counties allowing private groups working with the granting organization, the Center for Tech and Civic Life, to “unlawfully administer aspects of the election,” including in one county where one organization was unlawfully embedded in local government election administration.

The special counsel’s report also highlighted the Wisconsin Election Commission (WEC) illegal directive to clerks to ignore the state election code governing voting in nursing homes. In several nursing home locations throughout the state, 100 percent of registered voters cast a ballot in the 2020 election—an unheard-of rate that included many ineligible voters.

Non-citizen and incapacitated citizens also remained listed on Wisconsin’s voting rolls, in violation of the law, according to the report. Because some non-citizens qualify for driver’s licenses, the law requires non-citizens’ names be removed from the master roll, but that was not done, according to the special counsel. Likewise, individuals declared incompetent must, by law, be removed from the master list, but again that did not occur.

Special Counsel Gableman detailed many other substantial problems with the 2020 election, but equally troubling to the widespread violations of election law established in the report were the attempts by government officials to impede the investigation. Both the Wisconsin Election Commission and the state attorney general “have refused to cooperate with the Legislature’s investigation and actively obstructed it,” according to the report, with a separate appendix detailing how the Office of Special Counsel and the state Assembly have been blocked from investigating portions of the Wisconsin government.

Efforts by the special counsel’s office to obtain the information needed for it to complete its work for the Wisconsin Assembly continue, with litigation seeking to enforce the legislative subpoenas previously issued. Once those subpoenas are enforced, the special counsel noted he will “manage and process the voluminous responsive records, and will facilitate any available audits.”

In the meantime, the special counsel presented the state legislature with numerous recommendations to address the problems and illegalities detailed in the report, including eliminating the Wisconsin Election Commission. How the legislature responds will be telling of their commitment to election integrity—just as the state attorney general and other government officials’ efforts to thwart the investigation speaks volumes.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/01...-bribery-laws/

Special Counsel Gableman: Wisconsin Election Commission left a "trail of victims"

There are 92,000 nursing home residents in Wisconsin

"In the Zuckerberg 5 cities, in all of those counties those nursing homes reported a voting rate of 100%, anywhere in between 95% and 100%."

Watch:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1498733310742347781

Here are some examples of the elderly who were taken advantage of and had ballots cast in their names in the 2020 Presidential Election

Son asked how his dad requested and turned in a mail-in ballot, when he doesn't speak or write

Watch

https://twitter.com/i/status/1498731987103846402

... Crikey! ... CNN and MSNBC will surely "debunk" this tomorrow.

#### Salty

https://m.metrotimes.com/detroit/mac...t?oid=29428126

Looks like she ate them afterwards to get rid of the evidence.

So zuck bucks are illegal, but PAC money isn't? I am not a fan of any PAC money period, or individual contributions over the allotted amount. It would be interesting to know how supposedly Zuckerberg was able to orchestrate additional drop boxes. That sounds highly illegal and very suspect in that it would be because of his money. It could have been Wisconsin election committees decision to put those boxes out but I doubt Zuckerberg had one bit of influence as to that particular assertion. Additionally in the report it says it's not trying to suggest that the count was wrong or that they want to revisit that specifically. So I'm wondering what exactly is the purpose of this report that's so fucking devastating??! If anything it sounds like a over-contribution ,but most mega donors do so through these pacs vs independent donations ala Dinesh D'Souza. When you guys read these kind of reports doesn't that make you wonder how in the world does this all add up? I doubt Mark Zuckerberg dropped a bag of 9 million on the doorstep of several individual candidates. Sorry not believing any of this since it's coming from the conservative lie bag the Federalist. And of course any follow-up comments from twitter, known as the source of all things not believable

eye,

I know you want to defend your political tribe, but as our current POTUS says “Come on, man”. PACS (on both sides) are generally limited to spending money on TV, radio, print, and social media ads encouraging people to vote for their favored candidate. While we can debate whether having tons of private money spent on election campaigns is a good thing, it’s undoubtedly legal. First Amendment guarantees a right to free speech; political ads are certainly covered under that heading.

Zuck bucks were not used to buy ads. If that’s all it was it would be a non-issue. Zuck used his money to fund election administrators in certain cherry-picked counties and not in others in order to ensure that the mechanics of the actual election favored one candidate over another. That’s quite a different activity than anything the PACs have ever done. Essentially he bribed the officials running the election in these heavily Dem counties to make rulings favoring Dem candidates, or at least that’s what the special prosecutor is accusing him of doing. Whether that can be proven or not is still an open question, but if it is, it’s certainly not the same as the PACs.

Whether that can be proven or not is still an open question Originally Posted by Smarty1

This is the key to all if this bullshit. It's not about what you know. Or think you know. Or pretend you know.

Proving it is the key.

In court.

Not in the media. Not in an echo chamber full of partisans. And certainly not in the minds of the folks here

This is the key to all of this bullshit. It's not about what you know. Or think you know. Or pretend you know.

Proving it is the key.

In court.

Not in the media. Not in an echo chamber full of partisans. And certainly not in the minds of the folks here Originally Posted by HDGristle

Except your use of the word "bullshit" tells us you've already made up your mind despite your posturing about due process!

Besides, it's up to the Wisconsin state legislature whether any of this even goes to court. It's not a strictly legal matter, it's highly political. Maybe Zuck can bribe the WI state legislators to bury everything?

"How the legislature responds will be telling of their commitment to election integrity—just as the state attorney general and other government officials’ efforts to thwart the investigation speaks volumes."

Sorry not believing any of this since it's coming from the conservative lie bag the Federalist. Originally Posted by eyecu2

Aww gee, eye! You're sooo open-minded and persuasive! If you don't like the message, just shoot the messenger!

P.S. Did you finish Miranda's book yet?

Bullshit is in regards to the bickering

Let the man make the case. If it's strong enough to take it to court, go for it.

Amazing that the left has somehow discovered perfect elections without fraud when it benefits their twisted goals. If the republicans were as good at it, they might not be afraid of media intervention as they are now, always doing things to stay out of the press just to get elected.

Video evidence was provided when wolf was running about voting machines, because there were hundreds of votes for him on the machines (when the polls opened) that were used in several places in white oak and west mifflin.

Its a well known issue, and commies want to gloss over it because it gets them closer to that feeling of being in control that they desperately want.

... They ALL KNOW what the truth is, mate.

They know there was voter fraud... But no one - from Judges
to the Supreme Court wanted to view the issue.

Why? ... because then they'd have to have a true investigation,
which surely would TAKE TIME - and they onley had a month
or so to do it before the certification. ... And they KNEW
that a true investigation would show all the "extra votes"
in 5 or 6 states - which would call the whole process
into question - and the RESULT.

So they surely turned a blind eye to everything.
And if the fraud comes out a year or two later... Oh well.
Too late to change things.

### Salty

Well regarding the original post here it was about illuminating past suggested and indiscrepancies, but not with the intent to go back or nullify the result, but to affect future elections. Certainly I see both sides wanting to have their say in election integrity, so let's see what gets proven from these allegations. I doubt very much will happen, and nothing will be proven, but that's just my perspective.

No surprise that Eye and Gristle already had their minds made up and discount the story. That's what close minded partisans do.

The Federalist is a legit news source and the Twitter links (since it's obvious Eye never looked at them) is actual video of the Special Prosecutor giving his testimony.

I have said it before, everyone should want to investigate all aspects of potential voter fraud, no matter what side or where it occurs