Posted on Mar 8, 2022
Wisconsin Special Counsel Finds ‘Widespread Election Fraud’ In 2020 Nursing Homes - [your]NEWS
782
15
11
7
7
0
Article Quote: But the establishment’s defense to arguments over the legitimacy of the vote count always has been that there’s been no “widespread election fraud” found.
Now there has.
She explained, “According to the report, nursing home staff and administrators illegally handled absentee ballots, illegally assisted with ‘marking’ residents’ ballots, illegally ‘witnessed’ the voting, and possibly included forgery of the elderly residents’ signatures. Under Wisconsin law, these violations of the election code constitute fraud.”
How sad there are still stories on the internet saying alleged election fraud was debunked. How sad our news agencies won’t find and report the truth.
Now there has.
She explained, “According to the report, nursing home staff and administrators illegally handled absentee ballots, illegally assisted with ‘marking’ residents’ ballots, illegally ‘witnessed’ the voting, and possibly included forgery of the elderly residents’ signatures. Under Wisconsin law, these violations of the election code constitute fraud.”
How sad there are still stories on the internet saying alleged election fraud was debunked. How sad our news agencies won’t find and report the truth.
Wisconsin Special Counsel Finds ‘Widespread Election Fraud’ In 2020 Nursing Homes - [your]NEWS
Posted from yournews.com
Election 2020
Joe Biden
Donald Trump
Edited 2 y ago
Posted 2 y ago
Responses: 3
1
1
0
I understand that people wish to believe the worst because it confirms their view of what happened. I live in Wisconsin. This report is a full of alternate facts. Gableman calls for a decertification of the results knowing full well as a former judge that cannot be done. The decertification suggestion was met by swift criticism from members of both parties. Republican Assembly Majority Leader Jim Steineke shot it down, saying it is "still not legal under Wisconsin law."
We have a nonpartisan election commission in our state created to a very large extent at the behest of the Republican Party. I supported that then and still do. According to the Wisconsin Election Commission, "Transparency is the backbone of the Wisconsin Elections Commission in that all our decisions are made fully in public and require bipartisan agreement. Special Counsel Gableman’s report is based upon mischaracterizations of Wisconsin election statutes and administration, and therefore, the utility of his report is minimal." They added, “The integrity of the November 2020 election, and of the WEC, has been shown time and time again through court cases and previous investigations.”
Gableman suggested that $8.8 million that the Center for Tech and Civic Life gave to Miluwakee, Madison, Racine, Kenosha and Green Bay for assistance running the 2020 election was akin to "election bribery" and that the grants were essentially partisan get-out-the-vote efforts. Getting out the vote by either party is what they should do and is not illegal.
Courts have previously rejected challenges to those grants, including a federal judge in October 2020 who wrote that "the Court finds nothing in the statutes Plaintiffs cite, either directly or indirectly, that can be fairly construed as prohibiting the defendant Cities from accepting funds from CTCL."
Gableman lack of how voting is administrated has lead to erroneous statements. Again, the Wisconsin Elections Commission has said, "The commission's report also went into detail on allegations Gableman made that election data wasn't secure, saying Gableman "lacks understanding" of security systems like "multi-factor authentication protocol." In addition, commission staff disputed Gableman's suggestion that nursing home turnout was especially high in 2020. There are many nursing homes where voting was down from 2016. Gableman is on the same level as the Cyber Ninjas were in Arizona.
We have a nonpartisan election commission in our state created to a very large extent at the behest of the Republican Party. I supported that then and still do. According to the Wisconsin Election Commission, "Transparency is the backbone of the Wisconsin Elections Commission in that all our decisions are made fully in public and require bipartisan agreement. Special Counsel Gableman’s report is based upon mischaracterizations of Wisconsin election statutes and administration, and therefore, the utility of his report is minimal." They added, “The integrity of the November 2020 election, and of the WEC, has been shown time and time again through court cases and previous investigations.”
Gableman suggested that $8.8 million that the Center for Tech and Civic Life gave to Miluwakee, Madison, Racine, Kenosha and Green Bay for assistance running the 2020 election was akin to "election bribery" and that the grants were essentially partisan get-out-the-vote efforts. Getting out the vote by either party is what they should do and is not illegal.
Courts have previously rejected challenges to those grants, including a federal judge in October 2020 who wrote that "the Court finds nothing in the statutes Plaintiffs cite, either directly or indirectly, that can be fairly construed as prohibiting the defendant Cities from accepting funds from CTCL."
Gableman lack of how voting is administrated has lead to erroneous statements. Again, the Wisconsin Elections Commission has said, "The commission's report also went into detail on allegations Gableman made that election data wasn't secure, saying Gableman "lacks understanding" of security systems like "multi-factor authentication protocol." In addition, commission staff disputed Gableman's suggestion that nursing home turnout was especially high in 2020. There are many nursing homes where voting was down from 2016. Gableman is on the same level as the Cyber Ninjas were in Arizona.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
The nice things about facts, in a nonmedical situation, is they don't change. There is no such thing as alternate facts. If you dispute something i the article please quote it and say how it is wrong. From the article: Gableman cited Resident D of Brown County. Her family took Resident D to vote at her assigned polling location, but when she presented herself to vote on election day, the election workers informed her she had already voted. After questioning from her family, Resident D recalled someone at the nursing home had talked with her about voting, but she denied voting at the residential facility. Nonetheless, records from 2020 show Resident D cast an absentee ballot, the report explained.
Gableman found that some 92,000 people in Wisconsin reside in such facilities, so the failure of Wisconsin election officials “to prevent wards and incapacitated persons from voting in the 2020 presidential election” casts “doubt on the election result,” Gableman said.
The one big thing in the article is the voting in all the nursing homes. That qualifies as “widespread election fraud”. We can get into the what, if's and when's, but no one is disputing these facts.
Gableman found that some 92,000 people in Wisconsin reside in such facilities, so the failure of Wisconsin election officials “to prevent wards and incapacitated persons from voting in the 2020 presidential election” casts “doubt on the election result,” Gableman said.
The one big thing in the article is the voting in all the nursing homes. That qualifies as “widespread election fraud”. We can get into the what, if's and when's, but no one is disputing these facts.
(0)
(0)
SP5 Dennis Loberger
Gableman does not claim that 92,000 even voted let alone that all votes cast were fraudulent. According to HHS, 4.182% of nursing home residents in Wisconsin are mentally incapacitated. Gableman doesn't even claim all those voted. If they did that would be 3,847 possible fraudulent votes. In a nursing home of 200 residents where voter fraud was investigated. Of the 200, 8 were suspected of being incapable mentally of voting. That would be 4%, consistent with HHS data. Too high? Yes, 1 is too high. Not enough to change the election. There is no confirmation that any of the 8 suspected were in fact fraudulent. Gableman did not provide documentation on his claims fraudulent voting in nursing homes. Under Wisconsin law, only a judge can declare someone as incompetent to vote. Nursing home residents retain their right to vote even if they are under the guardianship of someone. He provided a total of 0 people who were adjudged incapable of voting by a judge.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
SFC (Join to see)
A sad day for our country when we can't trust our election process. It will get even worse if our Progressive Democrats pass their voting bill.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
The fact is, before he was ever appointed to conduct his ‘investigation’, Gableman stated repeatedly, and without any evidence, that there was widespread fraud.
He made conclusions without any evidence, and magically he managed to find it. There’s a word for that. Biased.
Was the fact check inaccurate?
He made conclusions without any evidence, and magically he managed to find it. There’s a word for that. Biased.
Was the fact check inaccurate?
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
I’m all for investigations. But when doing any investigation, it’s inherently flawed if the investigator has a preconceived notion and is only looking for anything to corroborate that notion,
You follow the evidence to form a conclusion. You don’t look for evidence that supports your preconceived conclusion.
Gableman clearly acted in the latter. Therefore, it’s inherently flawed.
You follow the evidence to form a conclusion. You don’t look for evidence that supports your preconceived conclusion.
Gableman clearly acted in the latter. Therefore, it’s inherently flawed.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Great memes.
So, do you disagree with, “But when doing any investigation, it’s inherently flawed if the investigator has a preconceived notion and is only looking for anything to corroborate that notion,
You follow the evidence to form a conclusion. You don’t look for evidence that supports your preconceived conclusion. “?
So, do you disagree with, “But when doing any investigation, it’s inherently flawed if the investigator has a preconceived notion and is only looking for anything to corroborate that notion,
You follow the evidence to form a conclusion. You don’t look for evidence that supports your preconceived conclusion. “?
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Here you go. After investigations, someone actually charged with election fraud. You get one guess as to what side she’s on.
https://www.npr.org/2022/03/09/ [login to see] /colorado-clerk-indicted-on-13-counts-of-election-tampering-and-misconduct
https://www.npr.org/2022/03/09/ [login to see] /colorado-clerk-indicted-on-13-counts-of-election-tampering-and-misconduct
Colorado clerk is indicted for election tampering and misconduct
The indictment of Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters and her deputy on a laundry list of felony and misdemeanor charges is related to an election security breach in her office last year.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google