Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03
    Announcement
     
    Announcement
     

    Kloppenburg Laying Foundation To Delegitimize Inevitable Prosser Win

    Kloppenburg Laying Foundation To Delegitimize Inevitable Prosser Win

    The recount in Wisconsin is moving along pretty much as expected given the history of recounts in Wisconsin:  There hasn’t been much change in the vote count.

    As of the end of the day yesterday, with 82% of the voting units in, and 78% of the votes recounted, Kloppenburg has picked up a couple hundred votes.  (added) 262 to be precise.

    But the Kloppenburg folks have focused their efforts on Waukesha County, and particularly the city of Brookfield, which went heavily for Prosser. 

    The mistake of the County Clerk in not reporting any votes from Brookfield to the AP on election night, which was discovered the next day, has led to false charges that the votes were “found.”  In fact, the votes were reported publicly by Brookfield on election night, and a review by the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB) found no wrongdoing.

    Nonetheless, Kloppenburg’s tactic is to try to throw out much if not all of Brookfield, based on supposed improper sealing of vote bags. 

    As reported by WisPolitics, the slightest deviation in the sealing of a vote bag is being used by Kloppenburg to challenge all the votes in the bag, a tactic which initially has been rejected by a supervising judge but which could lead to challenges in court:

    JoAnne Kloppenburg’s campaign today again raised objections to ballot bags that were not properly sealed, raising concerns about the integrity of those ballots.

    The objections raised today pertained to bags containing Brookfield votes, and Bill Hotz, representing the Kloppenburg campaign, objecting to the first five bags to be counted. They showed holes along the top, on either side of the bags’ seals, along with some seals that were pulled apart.

    In addition, the numbers on two of the bags did not match those on inspectors’ election night logs.

    “The integrity of the ballot count is only as good as the integrity of condition of the bags,” he said.

    The five bags in the second batch were much better sealed, but none of them had seal numbers, although the bag tag numbers did match the inspectors’ logs. Kloppenburg’s campaign asked that it be noted for the record that there was no evidence the bags were sealed.

    But in each case, retired Circuit Court Judge Robert Mawdsley, who was brought in to oversee the recount, allowed the ballots to be counted.

    Today’s objections continue a string of concerns that the Kloppenburg campaign has raised about the handling of the votes in Waukesha County.

    The Prosser folks seem on the ball so I doubt this will succeed for Kloppenburg, but succeeding likely isn’t the goal. 

    The goal is to try to create the appearance of impropriety as a justification either for court challenges or at least to taint the Prosser win.

    Update:  A reader who has seen some of the supposedly improperly sealed bags e-mailed me to make the point that the ballots could not fit through any of the gaps or small openings.

    Also, new post 5-8-2011 – Brookfield Falls To Prosser Forces Again, Kloppenburg To Mount Defense At Cities of Speculation And Conjecture

    Related: Kloppenburg’s First Big Recount Success – Nuns’ Ballots Thrown Out

    ——————————————–
    Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
    Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
    Bookmark and Share

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Tags:

    Comments


    Wait a second . . . @JoAnn May 7, 2011 5:36 PM Hmmmm . . . where have I heard that name before?

    Oh! Son of a gun! Is that you Kloppy? Heh!

    Boy, it sure sounded like a brief rehash of the "Kloppenburg election doctrine" to me! What . . . thought you'd try it out by runnin' a coupla those bad boys up the flag pole here, and see if anyone salutes 'em?

    'Frinctance:

    "This is not a Democratic or Republican thing. This is about keeping our voting system clean."

    Oh sure . . . that one is rich! You could do "stand up" with lines like that, as long as you could keep a straight face.

    Or this:

    "It is about making sure those in charge are honest and trustworthy and if not then they should be held accountable."

    By the way, JoAnn, you do know that the full GAB investigation into the Waukesha County matter concluded that there was no wrongdoing?

    And, do you recall that it identified (as possible changes) a grand total of only three extremely minor "anomalies" county-wide, which might have resulted in a change of either one, two or three votes altogether! If all three were changed, the result would have been a net pick up of ONE vote by JoAnne Kloppenburg (two for her, one for Prosser).

    And how about this howler?

    "If it is a rule/law that all bags must be sealed properly or they are rejected then so be it."

    Really? So, if someone on Kloppenburg's team got to just ONE person in the chain of custody and convinced them to slightly "mishandle" them in any way — like, to rip them just a little teenie bit while moving them — then you think all those votes should be thrown out and JoAnne Kloppenburg should win? Are you nuts?

    Then . . .

    "What is the explanation to why those bags looked tampered with? I, myself, find this unsettling. At the least it is all very, very suspicious and questionable. The whole thing stinks and certainly looks tainted."

    As far as I'm concerned, the best explanation is that somebody in the Kloppenburg got to ONE person handling, perhaps convincing them to rip them a little while moving them out for the recount, or in storing them. I agree that the whole thing stinks, but for reasons that have nothing to do with what you seem to be suggesting.

    What really stinks is the willingness on the part of Democrats to do ANYTHING to upset and/or undermine our elections processes when they don't win.

    @wrisky May 7, 2011 7:21 PM

    You say in your profile that one of your favorite blogs, one that you personally follow is "Palingates" . . . a site which I think we can all agree is exclusively dedicated to ad hominem personal attacks on Sarah Palin.

    Yet, your sole comment above was critical of the commenters here because of their "ad hominum" attacks, to wit:

    "Reading this comment thread makes me shake my head wondering why ad hominem snark has become the goto weapon in the right's rhetorical quiver !"

    Gee, is that because you've gotten your fill of all the "ad hominem" snark aimed at Sarah Palin over a Plaingates?

    Or, are you just demonstrating how to be hypocritical?

    @Trochilus

    I think Henry Cooper would have deservedly won his fight against Muhammad Ali, (Cassius Clay, at the time) in 1963 after knocking Ali down, … if you had been the referee that night. Instead, Angelo Dundee, Ali's trainer, knew he had to buy time for Ali to recover from the devastating hook, so he tore open Ali's glove and pointed it out to the referee. The referee was duped and the fight was put on hold until new gloves were found, allowing Ali to recover.

    Anyway … I like you better as a fighter than a referee, so keep taking the fight to the JoAnns and the wriskys. They are completely outclassed.

    P.S. What timing. Henry Cooper just passed away this week. Hopefully the dishonest "ripping tactic" used against him to steal the fight will pass away soon in Wisconsin.

    "makes me shake my head wondering why ad hominem snark has become the goto weapon in the right's rhetorical quiver"

    You mean the wingnuts, teabaggers and Brownshirts?

    Adding "guilt by association" to the list alongside "ad hominem snark".

    By my count 15/23 of the comments contain "ad hominem snark". Some may quibble over including one or two of the ones I included but still that's a pretty high percentage. The remarkable element is that supposedly political aware adults are the ones doing this. Perhaps it is just this blog that attracts the angry, sputtering, inarticulate sort ? Actually Trochilus' reply, which pretty much boils down to the "that's what you are, but what am I" schoolyard taunt, is probably as introspective a response one would expect.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend