2020 Election Thread

[Mori Chu]

[Indy]

it doesn't matter how guilty he is, they won't get him into a court room.

[Mori Chu]

Oath Keepers leader pleads guilty for 1/6 actions.

[ShadowHawke]

Anyone read the WI Special Counsel report on the 2020 election?

[Indy]

I didn't read the 150 pages, but I read some summaries of it.

[Mori Chu]

Anyone read the WI Special Counsel report on the 2020 election?

I hadn't heard, but I'm looking now. It sounds like they recommend decertifying the 2020 election?

https://www.wpr.org/gableman-report-cal ... -thats-not

The special counsel hired by Wisconsin Republicans to investigate the 2020 presidential election told lawmakers Tuesday that they "ought to take a very hard look" at decertifying the election, a move that has been widely dismissed as legally impossible.

Former state Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman also said private grants used to run the election constituted "election bribery" and called on lawmakers to "eliminate and dismantle" the Wisconsin Elections Commission. The commission’s administrator, he said, should be fired.
...

Gableman’s assertion that the Legislature should — or even could — decertify the presidential election has next to no support, either in the judicial system where he once served, or among lawmakers from either party in the Wisconsin Legislature.
...

"Handing authority to partisan politicians to determine if election fraud exists would be the end of our republic as we know it," Steineke said. "Reminder: Giving politicians that power when you don’t like the results of an election will also give them the authority to overturn elections when you do."

It sounds like the guy who ran this investigation, Gableman, is a Trumper, hired by Republicans. Why let a partisan shill run an "investigation" like this? Why are we talking about decertifying elections in which there were no significant problems? Are Republicans going to ever let this go? Do they really think Joe Biden is going to be unseated as President or what?



According to this site, here are the things Gableman claims constitute evidence that we should decertify WI's 2020 election:

1. Election officials’ use of absentee ballot drop boxes in violation of Wis. Stat. § 6.87(4)(b)1 and § 6.855;

2. The Center for Tech and Civic Life’s $8,800,000 Zuckerberg Plan Grants being run in the Cities of Milwaukee, Madison, Racine, 8 Kenosha and Green Bay constituting Election Bribery Under Wis. Stat. § 12.11;

3. WEC’s failing to maintain a sufficiently accurate WisVote voter database, as determined by the Legislative Audit Bureau;

4. The Cities of Milwaukee, Madison, Racine, Kenosha and Green Bay engaging private companies in election administration in unprecedented ways, including tolerating unauthorized users and unauthorized uses of WisVote private voter data under Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC) policies, such as sharing voter data for free that would have cost the public $12,500;

5. As the Racine County Sheriff’s Office has concluded, WEC unlawfully directed the municipal clerks not to send out the legally required special voting deputies to nursing homes, resulting in many nursing homes’ registered residents voting at 100% rates and many ineligible residents voting, despite a guardianship order or incapacity;

6. Unlawful voting by wards-under-guardianship left unchecked by Wisconsin election officials, where WEC failed to record that information in the State’s WisVote voter database, despite its availability through the circuit courts—all in violation of the federal Help America Vote Act.

7. WEC’s failure to record non-citizens in the WisVote voter database, thereby permitting non-citizens to vote, even though Wisconsin law requires citizenship to vote—all in violation of the Help America Vote Act. Unlawful voting by non-citizens left unchecked by Wisconsin election officials, with WEC failing to record that information in the State’s WisVote voter database; and

8. Wisconsin election officials’ and WEC’s violation of Federal and Wisconsin Equal Protection Clauses by failing to treat all voters the same in the same election.

https://www.wsaw.com/2022/02/28/public- ... stigation/

More reaction:

Democrats and some Republicans have called the investigation a “sham.”

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers called it a “circus” and an “embarrassment for our state.”

“This effort has drawn bipartisan opposition, and nothing about it has changed or will change what the courts, the nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau, and multiple other reviews have already proven: Wisconsin held a free, fair, and secure election in November 2020. Wisconsinites’ votes were counted in every municipality by trusted local officials, in the presence of representatives from both parties, and machines across the state were subject to an official audit. This effort has spread disinformation about our election processes, it has attacked the integrity of our clerks, election administrators, and poll workers, and it has emboldened individuals to harass and demean dedicated public servants,” says Evers.

Ann Jacobs, chair of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, said Gableman had gone “full in crazy conspiracy theory” with discussion of decertification.

“In other words, if the legislature doesn’t like the outcome of an election, it could refuse to send electors to Washington,” Jacobs says.

This smells like a big nothing-burger to me.

[Mori Chu]

I found this interesting. Even though the 1/6 committee stated that they feel Trump committed crimes, their standard of evidence is lower, and so it may not really lead to any indictments.

[Mori Chu]

[Superbone]

Lock him up!

[Nodack]

Not really news to anyone but, more confirmation that Trump made up the whole thing.



New evidence shows Trump was told many times there was no voter fraud - but he kept saying it anyway
https://www.greenwichtime.com/news/arti ... 975783.php
A data expert for former President Donald Trump's campaign told him bluntly not long after polls closed in November 2020 that he was definitely going to lose his campaign for reelection.

In the weeks that followed, multiple top officials at the Justice Department informed Trump that they had closely examined allegations of fraud that were being circulated by Trump's close allies - and had found them simply untrue.

And in the days leading up to the joint session of Congress on Jan. 6, 2021, even Trump's loyal vice president, Mike Pence, repeatedly conveyed to Trump that he did not believe the Constitution gave him the power to overturn the election as he presided over the counting of electoral college votes giving the presidency to Joe Biden.

According to the panel and others, at least 11 aides and close confidants told Trump directly in the weeks after the election that there was no fraud and no legal way to overturn the result.

The committee's goal was to convince a federal judge there is a "good-faith basis" for concluding Trump and others engaged in a "criminal conspiracy" to defraud the United States and obstruct Congress before the attack on the Capitol - and to prove that Trump was acting corruptly by continuing to spread false claims about the election long after he had reason to know he had legitimately lost.

The committee has no law enforcement powers and the filing has no bearing on whether the Justice Department will file criminal charges against the former president in connection with his post-election activities. Indeed, several witnesses whose statements or emails were cited by the committee in the filing said Thursday that they have not been contacted by law enforcement as part of any investigation.

"I mean, he, he understood what he was doing was wrong," said committee member Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., in an interview. "I've never really doubted that from the beginning. But all of this evidence makes it certain that he had consciousness of guilt as he proceeded to try to overthrow the election result."

In the court filing Wednesday, the committee argued that the fact that Trump's claims that the election was marred by fraud were repeatedly refuted by knowledgeable aides led to "a good-faith inference" that Trump's statements came "with knowledge of the falsity of these statements and an intent to deceive his listeners in hopes they would take steps in reliance thereon."

Then-acting deputy attorney general Richard Donoghue told the committee that during a phone call with Trump on Dec. 27, 2020, he told the president: "Sir, we've done dozens of investigations, hundreds of interviews. The major allegations are not supported by the evidence developed."

Separately, former attorney general William Barr writes in a new book that he told Trump in an explosive meeting in the Oval Office on Dec. 1, 2020, that his claims of election fraud were groundless.

"I've told you that the fraud claims are not supported . . . And others have also told you this. But your legal team continues to shovel this . . . out to the American people. And it is wrong," Barr recounts in his new memoir, which was obtained by The Washington Post ahead of its March 8 publication.

Former campaign adviser Jason Miller testified to the committee that a campaign data expert had told Trump days after the election that he had lost, according to the committee's Wednesday court filing. Miller has told others privately that Trump repeatedly rejected such briefings and was "never going to give it up."

[Superbone]

Duh. The amazing part is that so many people believe it.

[Nodack]

They believe in Trump. They believe whatever he says no matter what, except for vaccines of course. Trump has convinced himself he won the election and no amount of evidence will convince him otherwise, therefore no amount of evidence will convince his supporters otherwise.

[Mori Chu]

Uh oh. A Republican just got indicted for attempting to tamper with voting machines. Republicans dislike election fraud, right? So of course they want this lady to spend a good long time in prison, right?

[In2ition]

Uh oh. A Republican just got indicted for attempting to tamper with voting machines. Republicans dislike election fraud, right? So of course they want this lady to spend a good long time in prison, right?

Ok, I know quite a bit about this case and I will say there is a ton of shit that is going on here and not being reported. This is a political play and some egregious evil happening. This pisses me off to no end. I can't get into all of it right now, but this would piss off everyone here if you knew the whole story.

[Mori Chu]

Did @MagaTrumpLvr911 tell you so? If you have more info on it I'm happy to listen.

[Nodack]

Indicted. Tells me all I need to know.

[Indy]

Indicted. Tells me all I need to know.

?

You mean that the DA thinks she is guilty? Or that she is?

[In2ition]

Indicted. Tells me all I need to know.

?

You mean that the DA thinks she is guilty? Or that she is?

Indicted. Once you are indicted, that means you are definitely and positively guilty and only carrying out the death sentence is all that is left for you. You know, it's all you need to know. Don't tell me anything else.

That's how I took it, at least.

[Nodack]

It means the prosecutors think they have a case against you. Enough so to prosecute you. It still has to go through a court of law but, It cuts right through the “It’s all fake!” BS. Call all the news fake and some dude’s Tweet fake but, prosecutors don’t file fake indictments.

[In2ition]

It means the prosecutors think they have a case against you. Enough so to prosecute you. It still has to go through a court of law but, It cuts right through the “It’s all fake!” BS. Call all the news fake and some dude’s Tweet fake but, prosecutors don’t file fake indictments.

Crooked prosecutors do all the time, I'm afraid. In a Grand Jury, the prosecution is known to use some very questionable "expert" testimony at times. Otherwise, you would never win in court later, or never put innocent people in prison. Prosecutors can "think" they have a case all the time, but it doesn't mean that they have a 100% conviction rate either.