Last October the Racine County Sheriff announced that he’d found evidence of election fraud in one nursing home in his county in which residents somehow voted who didn’t have the cognitive ability to vote.
After his findings, a special counsel was appointed by the Wisconsin Assembly to investigate these matters across the state and has subsequently found evidence of rampant fraud and abuse in nursing homes across five counties.
Wisconsin Special Counsel Finds ‘Widespread Election Fraud’ In 2020 Nursing Homes https://t.co/U4i2wSo8aX
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 3, 2022
Here’s more from The Federalist:
“Rampant fraud and abuse occurred statewide at Wisconsin’s nursing homes and other residential care facilities,” according to the Office of Special Counsel’s second interim report filed on March 1 with the Wisconsin Assembly. That conclusion represents but one of the key findings of election irregularities detailed in the nearly 150-page report—a report that also confirms the conclusion of the Racine County Sheriff’s office last fall that fraud occurred at nursing homes in Wisconsin.
Special Counsel Michael Gableman, the retired state Supreme Court justice appointed by the Wisconsin Assembly to investigate integrity concerns about the 2020 election, vetted more than 90 nursing homes in five different counties before concluding there was “widespread election fraud at Wisconsin nursing homes in November of 2020.”
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.
I’m going to skip over the technical fraud by the Wisconsin Election Committee and get to the nitty gritty:
Further, the special counsel’s report showed that fraud found was not merely “technical” fraud but resulted in ballots cast and votes counted contrary to the intent of the nursing home residents. The “improbably high voting rates” alone creates a strong inference of fraud, but the special counsel also gathered evidence of fraud, such as suspected forgeries of residents’ signatures and situations in which the residents who “cast” a vote had been adjudicated mentally incompetent, meaning they no longer had a legal right to vote. Other residents, while not adjudicated mentally incompetent, “were unaware of their surroundings, with whom they are speaking at any given time, or what year it is.”
The report backed up these conclusions with specifics, such as the case of Resident D. Resident D lived in a facility in Brown County, Wisconsin. 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.
Because a ballot had already been cast in her name, Resident D was disenfranchised, and she was far from alone given the findings of the special counsel’s report. Those findings were limited because, while the special counsel’s staff “spent significant time and resources investigating the fraud and abuse that occurred at Wisconsin’s nursing homes,” the special counsel’s audit was limited in scope. To fully understand the significance of the fraud, Gableman concluded, “a state-wide, complete audit of all absentee votes from all facilities” required to use SVDs is necessary.
Here’s the bottom line…
With about 92,000 people in Wisconsin who reside in these facilities, 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,” according to the report. Those 2020 general election results showed the midwestern state breaking by 20,682 votes to Joe Biden.
Whether the state Assembly will direct Gableman to conduct a further audit of the nursing homes is unclear, but what appears clear is that Wisconsin’s Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul is unlikely to do so, as he rejected calls by the Racine County Sheriff’s Office to launch an investigation. Instead, Kaul called the southeastern county’s investigation “a publicity stunt.”
While Democrats and their media mouthpieces will likely paint Gableman’s report in the same light, Wisconsinites might soon make them care by ousting Kaul this November when he is up for re-election. State legislators up for re-election this fall may also find that their constituents care about election integrity even if they don’t.
In other words, nothing will likely be done about all of these findings because Democrats like Kaul will protect their own in order to keep voter fraud alive and will to serve their purposes.
There’s much more in the full article so be sure and check it out.