Tale of the Tapes: Wisconsin's 'Dog-and-Pony Show' Faith-Based Supreme Court Election 'Recount'

Tale of the Tapes: Wisconsin's 'Dog-and-Pony Show' Faith-Based Supreme Court Election 'Recount'
As the count nears its end, more irregularities emerge, including mis-dated poll tapes, unprinted 'paper trails', duct taped bags and the state's unwavering faith in the machine...

For weeks, we've been reporting on the mess seen in the statewide "recount" of Wisconsin's very close and very contentious April 5th Supreme Court election between Republican incumbent Justice David Prosser and his challenger, Asst. Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg.

As The BRAD BLOG obtained evidence of new irregularities this week --- to add to previously reported revelations of, among other irregularities, ballot bags discovered "wide open" with mismatched or missing serial numbers as well as ballots discovered completely unsecured, all in violation of the secure chain of custody, and other similar messes and mistallies across the state --- we wanted to find out if the state's chief election agency, the Government Accountability Board (G.A.B.), was able to confirm that the ballots counted during the "recount" were actually the ones cast on Election Day. And, if so, how they could confirm that.

To date, with about 25,000 "recounted" votes still to be canvassed from the now infamous Waukesha County, some 2,690 votes have been discovered during the "recount" to have been originally mistallied. That's according to the G.A.B.'s own figures, and includes hundreds of thousands of ballots which were simply re-tallied rather than counted by hand during the "recount", on the same computers which tallied them --- either correctly or incorrectly --- on Election Night.

31 out of the state's 72 counties counted some or most of their ballots by hand for the first time during the "recount" (including several of the largest counties). But, given the fact that supposedly "secured" ballot bags were discovered during the "recount" to have been "wide open" and not secured at all, with little or no explanation from officials, after being accessible for weeks by the same untrustworthy and partisan election officials, such as Waukesha's County's activist GOP County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus, who screwed up the tabulation in the first place, how is it that anybody knows if the ballots finally counted by human beings are actually genuine?

We've been trying, with no small amount of frustration, to get a definitive answer from the G.A.B. on that question for the past week, as well as from the campaigns of both candidates in the race.

The G.A.B. generally agrees with the campaign of the election's current leader, incumbent Justice David Prosser, that broken security seals, opened ballot bags --- even some that are torn open and taped back shut with duct tape, as seen in Waukesha County this week (photos below) --- and other violations of chain of custody are of little concern. So long as the newly tabulated results largely match the results printed on the poll tapes by the computer tabulators at the end of Election Night on April 5th, that is, essentially, close enough for government work.

The G.A.B. and the Prosser campaign, as we confirmed with each directly, and as the G.A.B. indicated on a recent post to their website published in the wake of the specific questions we've been asking them --- are placing their faith largely in the accuracy of the state's oft-failed, easily-manipulated, privately-manufactured electronic voting systems made by companies like Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia. They are also placing faith in their election official colleagues around the state.

All of which begs the question: What's the point of having a "recount", or of using security procedures and physical seals for the ballots after the election, if violations of those procedures and seals are of little concern to the state's top election agency?

Worse, if the results printed on the poll tapes are the ultimate proof of the accuracy of results, what happens when --- as discovered among poll tapes from the City of Pewaukee in Waukesha County late last week --- the "recount" uncovers "Official Results Report" poll tapes dated a full seven days before the actual election was held?

Or, worse still, what happens when poll tapes failed to print at all on Election Day, as has been seen in a number of towns across the state?...

FULL STORY: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8531

this issue since Al Gore was elected president in 2000

what the point of even voting is, if no one cares that the vote can be manipulated this easily and blatantly.

The tape lists the vote counts 6 days before the vote even happened? No Problem! Ballot bags wide open? No Problem! Blatantly partisan officials in total physical control of the voting bags and no secure chain of custody? No Problem!

I'm starting to see a huge problem - and it looks like the main problem is as the GAB, which clearly doesn't give a flip about accountability whatsoever.

absolutely NO faith in electoral politics to get representation FOR the people. When you see huge majorities in polls supporting Left or leftish positions on issues and yet the VOTING shows nothing of the sort, you KNOW that things are being manipulated by the rich capitalists.

Extra electoral remedies. Join a socialist group in your area and eventually we can take care of this.

voters don't even SIGN the pollbooks when they arrive to vote. Two crucial security precautions that aren't even written into the WI election procedures.

secured, then anyone can put names in the books, and create as many "extra" ballots as they want. Those two details alone make the election impossible to verify! One would need to find out who wrote in the voters' names in the books, have them swear under oath, and then check with each voter listed in the books to find out if they actually went to the polls and voted in person, or if someone maybe voted for them and wrote their names in the book.

This in a state which now wants voter IDs? Really, it loooks like anyone working during the election can just add some ballots and some names. pretty easy.

Given the info in this article, it's amazing more folks have noticed, rec'd it, etc.

"Official Results Report" dated 7 days BEFORE The election. "Paper trails" printed a month AFTER the election. Duct taped bags, and the state's top election agency who says "all is well!"

Sigh...

It's no longer ANY sort of surprise to any of us (especially here) that this kind of stuff happens. THAT'S why there's no more attention paid. And the ones who DON'T pay much attention don't like having to think about it because it would mean that they have to get off their dead ass and DO something.

It's easy for me. Being a revolutionary Marxist, I've never had much faith in the electoral system anyway. You can vote for capitalist candidate A or capitalist candidate B and nothing's going to change because the capitalist candidate is going to win. Although I must admit, nowdays one of the capitalist candidates is closer to overtly fascist than it has been in the past.

Wisconsin should be a primer for what NOT to do. The entire state was in an uproar for weeks. The working class was as united as it had been for 80 years or so. A general strike was actually being discussed and could have EASILY spread to the entire midwest. But "cooler heads" prevailed and they decided to put their eggs in the "reform" basket, a la recalls and this SC election. We see how that turned out. I expect more bullshit with the recall elections too. They're already disenfranchising folks legally.

I actually predicted something like this when the "cooler heads" prevailed.

That is why they are so blatant and open about stealing the votes.
They are saying to us...."yes we can steel an election and there is nothing you can do about it....so just go away and don't bother us no more"

Does anyone have to answer for this, who and based on what legal codes?

Such information implies responsibility upon whom to take what actions?

http://law.justia.com/codes/wisconsin/2010/12/12.13.html
2010 Wisconsin Code
Chapter 12. Prohibited election practices.
12.13 Election fraud.
12.13(2)(b)4.

4. Intentionally assist or cause to be made a false statement, canvass, certificate or return of the votes cast at any election.

12.13(2)(b)5.

5. Willfully alter or destroy a poll or registration list.

12.13(2)(b)6.

6. Intentionally permit or cause a voting machine, voting device or automatic tabulating equipment to fail to correctly register or record a vote cast thereon or inserted therein, or tamper with or disarrange the machine, device or equipment or any part or appliance thereof; cause or consent to the machine, device or automatic tabulating equipment being used for voting at an election with knowledge that it is out of order or is not perfectly set and adjusted so that it will correctly register or record all votes cast thereon or inserted therein; with the purpose of defrauding or deceiving any elector, cause doubt for what party, candidate or proposition a vote will be cast or cause the vote for one party, candidate or proposition to be cast so it appears to be cast for another; or remove, change or mutilate a ballot on a voting machine, device or a ballot to be inserted into automatic tabulating equipment, or do any similar act contrary to chs. 5 to 12.

12.13(3)(c)

(c) Willfully or negligently fail to deliver, after having undertaken to do so, official ballots prepared for an election to the proper person, or prevent their delivery within the required time, or destroy or conceal the ballots.

12.13(3)(d)

(d) Remove or destroy any of the supplies or conveniences placed in compartments or polling booths.

12.13(3)(e)

(e) Prepare or cause to be prepared an official ballot with intent to change the result of the election as to any candidate or referendum; prepare an official ballot which is premarked or which has an unauthorized sticker affixed prior to delivery to an elector; or deliver to an elector an official ballot bearing a mark opposite the name of a candidate or referendum question that might be counted as a vote for or against a candidate or question.

12.13(3)(f)

(f) Before or during any election, tamper with voting machines, voting devices or automatic tabulating equipment readied for voting or the counting of votes; disarrange, deface, injure or impair any such machine, device or equipment; or mutilate, injure or destroy a ballot placed or displayed on a voting machine or device, or to be placed or displayed on any such machine, device or automatic tabulating equipment or any other appliance used in connection with the machine, device or equipment.

12.13(3)(k)

(k) Forge or falsely make the official endorsement on a ballot or knowingly deposit a ballot in the ballot box upon which the names or initials of the ballot clerks, or those of issuing clerks do not appear.

12.13(3)(L)

(L) When not authorized, during or after an election, break open or violate the seals or locks on a ballot box containing ballots of that election or obtain unlawful possession of a ballot box with official ballots; conceal, withhold or destroy ballots or ballot boxes; willfully, fraudulently or forcibly add to or diminish the number of ballots legally deposited in a ballot box; or aid or abet any person in doing any of the acts prohibited by this paragraph.

12.13(3)(y)

(y) After an election, break the locks or seals or reset the counters on a voting machine except in the course of official duties carried out at the time and in the manner prescribed by law; or disable a voting machine so as to prevent an accurate count of the votes from being obtained; or open the registering or recording compartments of a machine with intent to do any such act.

12.13(3)(z)

(z) Tamper with automatic tabulating equipment or any record of votes cast or computer program which is to be used in connection with such equipment to count or recount votes at any election so as to prevent or attempt to prevent an accurate count of the votes from being obtained.

Here's the Wisc. Gov't Statutes website link
http://legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/Stat0012.pdf

...the most pertinent statutes are WI's 9.01 Recount section. I go through them in the article, detailing how evidence of irregularities (versus a demonstration of "fraud") are the main key to overturning an election under this section of WI law.

As the statutes note: "Generally, to successfully challenge an election, the challenger must show the probability of an altered outcome in the absence of the challenged irregularity."

Are there enough "irregular" ballots to meet that bar? I'd be very surprised at this point, if there was not. But the Kloppenburg camp now has about 5 days to plow through ALL of the minutes from all 72 counties in hopes of making that determination.

See the article linked in the OP for much more.

(And thanks to Eowyn for the info from those other statutes as well!)

There has to be a line somewhere in this mess where on one side is incompetence and the other is conspiracy and racketeering.

As if they haunt DU :rofl:

...As I go through the statutes of note for the Kloppenburg camp to consider. As the statutes note: "Generally, to successfully challenge an election, the challenger must show the probability of an altered outcome in the absence of the challenged irregularity."

I believe there is likely evidence to demonstrate exactly that.

What country is this??? Is this the country that sends folks to monitor the voting in foreign nations??? Nah - can't be. :sarcasm:

for this post and for chronicling election issues in general. Corruption fatigue is our enemy. Wading through all of the irregularities is tough work, and I'm very grateful to everyone involved.