Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Trump Campaign Alleges ‘Unlawful and Unconstitutional Acts’ by State Officials in Wisconsin Recount Lawsuit

Trump Campaign Alleges ‘Unlawful and Unconstitutional Acts’ by State Officials in Wisconsin Recount Lawsuit
Listen to this article

President Donald Trump’s campaign filed a lawsuit (pdf) against the Wisconsin Elections Commission and others, accusing them of “unlawful and unconstitutional acts” during the recount of the 2020 presidential election.

They filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Milwaukee Division.

Bill Brock, Trump’s lead counsel in the Wisconsin federal suit, said the campaign accuses the officials of breaking “Wisconsin Election Code” in the recount:

“The United States Constitution prevents the rules in a Presidential Election from being changed at the last minute by un-elected bureaucrats and local politicians who may have a more narrow interest in the outcome of the election. We have alleged in our Complaint on behalf of the President that the Wisconsin Elections Commission and other state and local officials in Wisconsin broke the Wisconsin Election Code and ran an unconstitutional and unlawful election. Nothing is more important to our national fabric and future than integrity in our electoral process. This lawsuit is one-step in the direction of fairer, more transparent, more professional and ultimately more reliable elections in America.”

The lawsuit names Wisconsin Secretary of State Douglas La Follette, but a Wisconsin elections clerk noted on Twitter that the secretary “had nothing to do with election administration” along with the City of Milwaukee Clerk.

The woman mentioned the lawsuit only named five of the six Wisconsin Elections Commission members. It did not name Julie Glancey.

The campaign noted these key allegations within the lawsuit:

  • Directives by the Wisconsin Elections Commission undercutting Wisconsin’s Photo Identification Law.
  • A Plan by the Mayors of Wisconsin’s five largest cities (Milwaukee, Madison, Kenosha, Green Bay and Racine) and funded by an out-of-state organization known as the Center for Tech & Civic Life to implement a new form of balloting in Wisconsin using un-manned, absentee ballot drop boxes without adequate or uniform chain of custody standards and security protocols contrary to the Wisconsin Election Code.
  • Directives by the Wisconsin Elections Commission that facilitated the unlawful, un-manned absentee ballot drop box Plan by endorsing illegal drop boxes (which were then ultimately used throughout the State in the election), failing to adopt uniform chain of custody and security protocols for the ballots in the drop boxes and failing to ensure public access to the process.
  • Directives by the Wisconsin Elections Commission to election officials to tamper with witness certifications on absentee ballot envelopes which facilitated the counting of unlawful ballots in the election in violation of the Wisconsin Election Code.

The campaign already asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to throw out 221,000 ballots in Dane and Milwaukee counties.

Municipal, county, and state authorities ruled the ballots valid and legal, including “in-person absentee ballots without an associated written application, incomplete and altered absentee ballots, indefinitely confined absentee ballots and ballots collected at Madison’s Democracy in the Park event.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


mrtomsr | December 3, 2020 at 9:41 am

For some reason the “pdf” extension is not included in the link provided

    Concise | December 3, 2020 at 8:15 pm

    Very amusing article despite not a little anti-Trump bias. And, whatever the potential chaos of a Congressionally disputed election resolution, given the impending disaster of a Biden administration, I welcome the chaos if this spares the country the disastrous consequences of democrat win.

Milhouse | December 3, 2020 at 9:58 am

The lawsuit names Wisconsin Secretary of State Douglas La Follette, but a Wisconsin elections clerk noted on Twitter that the secretary “had nothing to do with election administration” along with the City of Milwaukee Clerk.

…who likewise has nothing to do with election administration. This is unprofessional, and doesn’t inspire confidence in these lawyers’ competence.

    felixrigidus | December 3, 2020 at 10:28 am

    It seems they are named because the court is asked to stop them from finalizing certification. You would know that if you had bothered to read the complaint linked to in the article. But, of course, a random “Wisconsin election clerk” will know best.

    “21. Douglas J. La Follette, is sued in his official capacity as the Wisconsin Secretary of State, and by virtue of his responsibility under the Wisconsin Constitution and Wis. Stat. § 6.30 to affix the seal of the State and register commissions.
    22. Tony Evers, is sued in his official capacity as the Governor of Wisconsin, and by virtue of his roles as the Chief Executive of the State of Wisconsin and under 3 U.S.C. § 6 in the certification activities for Presidential electors.”

    Concise | December 3, 2020 at 8:17 pm

    I see no problem with joining the gov and sec of state but the jurisdictional problems are giving me a headache to think about.

Interestingly the historical 20k blue shift turned into a 200k blue shift.

MarkSmith | December 3, 2020 at 10:26 am

I don’t think time is on our side. I need to see something positive like a real win.

I’m not a lawyer, but this sounds weak

felixrigidus | December 3, 2020 at 10:39 am

«The lawsuit names Wisconsin Secretary of State Douglas La Follette, but a Wisconsin elections clerk noted on Twitter that the secretary “had nothing to do with election administration” along with the City of Milwaukee Clerk.»

Well, if “That Clark Rachel”, who informs the public in her Twitter “bio” about pronouns (“She/her”), says so!
She certainly is a sane source of information on this legal action.
Her assessment should suffice to dismiss the complaint without delay.

Can’t sue ’em before the election, because you haven’t suffered harm yet.
Can’t sue ’em after the election because OMG look at the time these votes have to be submitted in the next week gee that’s too bad better luck next election.

What we are seeing here is one group within the country, the Trump supporters, following the rule of law while another group, those opposing Trump engaged in any activity necessary to gain their objectives, even extra legal ones. What we have is a contest which is being played with two radically different sets of rules. And, following the rule of law places one side at a tremendous disadvantage, when the other side can do whatever it wants, without penalty. In order to compete, equally, the rule of law side is being forced to play by the rules adopted by the anything goes side.

What the Liberal Progressives are betting on is that the Trump supporters will follow traditional patterns and continue to play by the rules of society and do nothing about the criminal acts involved in the past election. They expect to win by default. However, since 2012, they have been wrong about nearly everything political and societal. They were wrong about the public mandate for Progressivism during the Obama administration. They were wrong about Trump’s chances to win the Presidency. They were wrong about HRC’s chances of winning the Presidency. They were wrong about their chances of forcing Trump from the WH. They were wrong about the “Blue Wave” being enough to defeat Trump. They have wrong about everything for the last decade. Now, they betting everything on being right about how half the population of the nation will react to an obviously stolen election with glaringly obvious evidence of large scale election fraud. If they are wrong again, the results could be dire.

And, so it begins:

    Dathurtz | December 3, 2020 at 12:11 pm

    This is exactly it. We play by the rules because we are honorable and believe that if everybody plays by the rules we have a better chance of a functional society. Our side has to decide what we will do when a large section of society refuses to play by the rules in order to gain control of our institutions. We needed to figure this out 90 years ago.

      Here is why a knowledge of history is important.

      There were two main documents responsible for the founding of the United States of America. One was the US Constitution, which defined our nation. Most people are aware of the existence of this document, even if they have no idea what it says. But, there is a second document which was possibly even more important than the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence. Many have forgotten this document even exists. But, without it, the Constitution and the Nation would not exist.

      These two document are inextricably linked. The Constitution is a template for running a nation. The Declaration is the template for severing political bonds and creating a new nation. As long as the Constitution remains viable, the Declaration lies in abeyance. However, when the government{s} no longer adhere to the tenets set forth in the Constitution and are no longer responsive to the will of the populace, then the Declaration rises into ascendancy. “We the People, of the Unites States of America, in order to form a more perfect union…” will be supplanted, n the minds of the people, with the words, “When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them to another…”. That point is very, very close. Maybe even too close. Will the rule of law win out? Or will it be the law of the jungle?

      It’s over for our country. The depth of corruption is too deep. It’s as if America is one big Tammany Hall on steroids.

      While the Tammany Hall political mobsters were criminals, they were not traitors.

      There is a epidemic of treason in our country.

      Face it: It’s over for America as we knew it. Our only salvation is to split the nation in at least two parts. We’ll all be happier. Much happier. Though we on the right’s happiness will be enduring, and enormously powerful.

      The left’s portion of ‘America’ will rot like every other banana republic.

        Dathurtz | December 3, 2020 at 3:23 pm

        Why let them have anything? If we have the power to split the country, then we have the power to cleanse the rot. I think our republic is in grave danger, but it isn’t over quite yet. Is there no way at all to cleanse the corruption and restore integrity? No way at all?

        ” Our only salvation is to split the nation in at least two parts.”

        We tried that in 1860. It did not work out. So, we are left with the only other option: one side has to triumph and dominate. Time to make a choice which one you support.

    JusticeDelivered | December 3, 2020 at 3:04 pm

    What Dems have done is copy China’s Wolf warfare, Dems have so much in common with China.

alaskabob | December 3, 2020 at 2:45 pm

Considering the present mindset of Democrats, it is hard not to see that the bar is set abnormally high for any Republican challenge to status quo interpretations by courts. The Wis SC just chunked the suit. Hearsay and rumor are grounds for “investigations” of Trump with process crimes created for those around him but sworn statements and evidence here is deemed inadmissible. This is not superficial bias but deep seeded dislike (hate) that is seamless to their thought processes. As Douglas Murray describes it.. go to a movie and at the end, the whole movie outcome is 180 degrees apart for the Left and Right viewing the same film. It’s helpless and now going to hopelessness… and that is the whole ball game.

It’s quite telling that Democrats don’t have DINOS, that they all root for the doctor to kill the baby, all believe in taxation, regulation and confiscation, all hold the anonymous collective of socialism superior to the personal and individual soul.

The lie at the heart of deviancy is that there is absolutely no absolute truth, that one thing can be another and that I’m entitled to believe that is absolutely true.

Further, they contend that moral values are arbitrary and subjective and that ‘the golden rule’ and the Decalogue are impositions on their freedom,lol, whatever that is now.

This is progressivism: i can lie because there is no truth. I can kill because I have a reason to. I can claim human nature is in con-stant shift so I’m never responsible for my person or nature, certainly not my colorless, indivisible, odorless, immortal, weightless, immaterial spiritual, soul.

However, human nature never changes because then it wouldn’t be human nature. You’d have no reference. One thing can never be another because you would not have the order of creation so necessary to defying it.
You wouldn’t be you.
You would not have the soul you must have to prove you don’t have one.

The whole contraption consists of persons who don’t know where the good God met their parents and formed them having known them before they existed and will always know them. There is a father of lies and the Truth is Crucified.

Just read wisconsin’s liberal hack judges and one wuss rino denied Trump a hearing on his lawsuit.

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