- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
WI Supreme Court rules fraud took place.
Posted on 5/9/21 at 11:18 am
Posted on 5/9/21 at 11:18 am
I keep seeing that it did not happen. It indeed did.
Based on what the Gov stated, the clerks decided that the Pandemic was an excuse to be labeled "indefinitely confined".
What some may not remember or want to acknowledge is that the WI Supreme Court did infact tell the nation there was fraud.
In fact, they ruled the votes WOULD NOT COUNT. Their actual words!
Earlier the same day they ruled in another:
Where they stopped at was throwing out batches of votes and that the votes had to be challenged individually.
LINK
Based on what the Gov stated, the clerks decided that the Pandemic was an excuse to be labeled "indefinitely confined".
What some may not remember or want to acknowledge is that the WI Supreme Court did infact tell the nation there was fraud.
In fact, they ruled the votes WOULD NOT COUNT. Their actual words!
quote:
“The plain language of (state law) requires that each elector make an individual assessment to determine whether he or she qualifies as indefinitely confined or disabled for an indefinite period. A county clerk may not 'declare' that any elector is indefinitely confined due to a pandemic,” Chief Justice Patience Roggensack wrote for the majority.
The majority decision stated if voters falsely claimed they were indefinitely confined “their ballots would not count.”
Earlier the same day they ruled in another:
quote:
In its final decision Monday, the justices concluded it was up to each voter. They found the pandemic and the stay-at-home order — which has since been struck down — did not render all voters indefinitely confined.
On those points the seven justices were unanimous.
Where they stopped at was throwing out batches of votes and that the votes had to be challenged individually.
LINK
17
Posted on 5/9/21 at 11:24 am to Jjdoc
But CNN
Posted on 5/9/21 at 11:43 am to Ancient Astronaut
Exactly
Posted on 5/9/21 at 11:44 am to Jjdoc
Get ready for a ‘plague’ every 4 years
Posted on 5/9/21 at 11:51 am to Ancient Astronaut
quote:
But CNN
Yeah turned them on several times this week and they are going 24/7 to discredit the Arizona count and calling all the swing state fraud that took place "the big lie" along with their talking heads like Republican Adam Kinzinger who is their bitch.
Posted on 5/9/21 at 11:54 am to Jjdoc
The plain matter of the fact is that Trump won, but the powers-that-be have decided to take the illusion of choice away from the voters because of 2016.
This post was edited on 5/9/21 at 11:55 am
Posted on 5/9/21 at 12:00 pm to Jjdoc
Yep, once Arizona gets exposed other States will Follow.
Trump wins Congressional seat in Fl.
MAGA takes House and Senate.
DJT is selected as House Speaker.
Joe Impeached for BS in Ukraine and China.
Kameltoe Impeached for bailing out rioters.
And you know the rest...
Trump wins Congressional seat in Fl.
MAGA takes House and Senate.
DJT is selected as House Speaker.
Joe Impeached for BS in Ukraine and China.
Kameltoe Impeached for bailing out rioters.
And you know the rest...
Posted on 5/9/21 at 12:38 pm to Jjdoc
Well, it’s safe to tell the truth now that Trump can’t get back in the Whitehouse.
Posted on 5/9/21 at 12:44 pm to Jjdoc
But But not "much" fraud. "Mostly peaceful" protests.
Statists changing the English language right in front of us.
Collaborating media won't cover this.
Statists changing the English language right in front of us.
Collaborating media won't cover this.
Posted on 5/9/21 at 2:39 pm to Lynxrufus2012
I'm not quite following the thoughts expressed here.
All Wisconsin Judges said, in my understanding, is that the state can't entirely cancel and election in all or part of a state because "everyone's gotta stay home".
It's up to me and you and other folks to say, "Nah, I'm good, I'll go vote" or conversely "Leaving the house now to vote? Too risky, send me one of those mail ballots please".
And that is what Wisconsin did as far as I know. What am I missing here?
All Wisconsin Judges said, in my understanding, is that the state can't entirely cancel and election in all or part of a state because "everyone's gotta stay home".
It's up to me and you and other folks to say, "Nah, I'm good, I'll go vote" or conversely "Leaving the house now to vote? Too risky, send me one of those mail ballots please".
And that is what Wisconsin did as far as I know. What am I missing here?
This post was edited on 5/9/21 at 2:40 pm
Posted on 5/9/21 at 2:42 pm to Eurocat
quote:
What am I missing here?
Other than the process states must follow to change voting laws? Geeee, not sure
Posted on 5/9/21 at 2:49 pm to Rekrul
But nobody changed any law according to the linked article -
Wisconsin Supreme Court says individuals can determine for themselves whether they can avoid the voter ID law because of age or disability.
Patrick Marley
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
December 20, 2020
MADISON - The state Supreme Court ruled Monday it is up to Wisconsinites to determine whether they face challenges that allow them to vote absentee without providing a copy of a photo ID.
Under state law, people can vote absentee without showing an ID if they say they are indefinitely confined because of age, disability or infirmity. But two county clerks this spring contended voters could meet that status because of the coronavirus pandemic and a stay-at-home order issued by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.
The state Republican Party sued directly with the state Supreme Court and the justices quickly issued an initial order that said the advice from the county clerks was faulty. The clerks RESCINDED THEIR ADVICE.
In its final decision Monday, the justices concluded it was up to each voter — not clerks or anyone else — to decide when they qualify as indefinitely confined. In addition, they found the pandemic and the stay-at-home order — which has since been struck down — did not render all voters indefinitely confined.
On those points the seven justices were unanimous. But the court’s three liberals dissented on some parts of the majority opinion.
The issue of indefinite confinement was also raised in a lawsuit President Donald Trump brought against election officials after narrowly losing the state to Democrat Joe Biden. The state Supreme Court ruled in favor of elections officials and Biden in that case later Monday.
Wisconsin Supreme Court says individuals can determine for themselves whether they can avoid the voter ID law because of age or disability.
Patrick Marley
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
December 20, 2020
MADISON - The state Supreme Court ruled Monday it is up to Wisconsinites to determine whether they face challenges that allow them to vote absentee without providing a copy of a photo ID.
Under state law, people can vote absentee without showing an ID if they say they are indefinitely confined because of age, disability or infirmity. But two county clerks this spring contended voters could meet that status because of the coronavirus pandemic and a stay-at-home order issued by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.
The state Republican Party sued directly with the state Supreme Court and the justices quickly issued an initial order that said the advice from the county clerks was faulty. The clerks RESCINDED THEIR ADVICE.
In its final decision Monday, the justices concluded it was up to each voter — not clerks or anyone else — to decide when they qualify as indefinitely confined. In addition, they found the pandemic and the stay-at-home order — which has since been struck down — did not render all voters indefinitely confined.
On those points the seven justices were unanimous. But the court’s three liberals dissented on some parts of the majority opinion.
The issue of indefinite confinement was also raised in a lawsuit President Donald Trump brought against election officials after narrowly losing the state to Democrat Joe Biden. The state Supreme Court ruled in favor of elections officials and Biden in that case later Monday.
This post was edited on 5/9/21 at 2:50 pm
Posted on 5/9/21 at 2:54 pm to Eurocat
quote:
The state Supreme Court ruled Monday it is up to Wisconsinites
Courts do not make laws in the United States, Legislatures make laws. I’d suggest you look into the state constitution of Wisconsin and you’ll find your answer there
Posted on 5/9/21 at 3:02 pm to Rekrul
But courts can toss one out out thereby "making" law by eliminating some other (now tossed out) law.
Posted on 5/9/21 at 3:06 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
WI Supreme Court rules fraud took place.
You’re misrepresenting as usual, jjgateway.
Posted on 5/9/21 at 3:07 pm to Jjdoc
This is just sad now
Posted on 5/9/21 at 3:10 pm to Eurocat
quote:
But courts can toss one out out thereby "making" law by eliminating some other (now tossed out) law
Courts can do whatever but then there should be appeals to other courts up the chain because we just can’t allow courts to act unilaterally in and of themselves as well in essence becoming a de facto legislative body.
Posted on 5/9/21 at 3:10 pm to Eurocat
quote:
But two county clerks this spring contended voters could meet that status because of the coronavirus pandemic and a stay-at-home order issued by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.
Are bogus and did nothing but allow the steal.
Posted on 5/9/21 at 3:12 pm to dgnx6
How did they allow the steal, they rescinded their advice as the court requested weeks before election day, so how did they steal anything when they followed the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling?
Posted on 5/9/21 at 3:48 pm to Eurocat
quote:
How did they allow the steal, they rescinded their advice as the court requested weeks before election day, so how did they steal anything when they followed the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling?
So you’re able to understand this, that’s good. That is exactly why conservatives are fricking pissed, we take constitutional laws very seriously and as they’re written while progressive activists interpret laws depending on their feelings at the time.
If you can’t understand what I just said then you’re being willfully ignorant, sorry.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News