Posted on 08/02/2022 3:20:28 PM PDT by absalom01
“If elections are conducted outside of the law, the people have not conferred their consent on the government. Such elections are unlawful, and their results are illegitimate.” — Justice Rebecca Grassl Bradley, writing for the Wisconsin Supreme Court majority in Teigen v. Wisconsin Elections Commission
A court of law has finally confirmed it: The 2020 election was “illegitimate.” And all the demands for sufficient evidence of voter fraud to reverse the outcome were a red herring.
The truly dispositive factor, as stated by a Republican Wisconsin state legislator in a March hearing and affirmed in the opinion: “If a vote is cast in an illegal process, it’s an illegal vote!”
The reasons for legislatively enacted absentee ballot protections are clear. Justice Bradley quotes the Wisconsin Legislature’s rationale: “(P)revent the potential for fraud or abuse … overzealous solicitation of absent electors who may prefer not to participate in an election … undue influence on an absent elector … or other similar abuses.”
And that’s exactly what unlawfully relaxed provisions occasioned in Wisconsin:
But again, per Wisconsin’s Supremes, Donald Trump didn’t have to prove the existence or extent of fraud, only deviation from legislative schemes. Because – nota bene! – the votes’ unlawful nature is the proof.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at issuesinsights.com ...
Too bad the PA court is corrupt. They think it’s fine not to follow the law
Meanwhile, Jotato is still freely leaving slime trails all over our White House and his minions are merrily destroying our Republic.
This opinion was filed on July 8. We are just hearing about it now?
NOW WHAT WISCONSIN!?
Maybe Zuck should lawyer up?
Some of the conservative/right populist “lawtubes” have been discussing this for a while.
Makes a good point about making effective objections to exactly how the election was stolen in 2020. Hint, it wasn’t Lin Wood’s insane grift about Dominion machines.
Now what country? You all realize that nothing is going to come of this, right? It is one state and one judge. We need all the states to get to this point or at least the majority.
If elections are conducted outside of the law, the people have not conferred their consent on the government. Such elections are unlawful, and their results are illegitimate.”
for the full flavor.
Nailed it! Quo Warranto time (by what authority) to remove any States Congressional representation seated from an unlawful election.
Well we read today that San Mateo county - next door to Zuckerberg’s county of residence (Santa Clara) - sent deputies all the way to Indiana to arrest a guy over a disputed delivery date on a custom car.
Turnabout is fair play then. Send Wisconsin State Police to arrest Zuckerberg for all the crap he did there.
Sick will never ever be prosecuted by our corrupt DOJ.
But can’t WI prosecute him there?
That’s the only way we are ever going to see a fair prosecution of his Zuckerbucks scheme to throw the election to Biden and his Communist Masters.
Without Wisconsin, Joe would only be at 268. Had to get to 270. No win.
Makes me crazy. It’s obvious that the election was corrupt, but it’s important to know HOW it was corrupt, and not be distracted by dead-ends, or even worse, assuming an impossibly high burden to prove a specific “fraud”.
NOT NEEDED.
An unqualified ballot (chain of custody, lack of signature matching, voting methods not authorized by the legislature) should not be counted, and should be void. THAT’S how they worked the shell game in 2020, along with social media manipulation, deep state fraud (Hunter Biden revelations), and media collusion.
p
This is just intellectual masturbation, the result of the election will remain as it is.
Salute to the cheddar heads!
Pas the brats & string cheese
“Proving fraud legally isn’t necessary. What IS necessary is showing that a ballot is not constitutionally qualified to be counted. “
...sorry, not buying it. The judges - 1 wrote it, but 4 agreed with the opinion - made an arguable decision that could easily have gone the other way. Demonstrating fraud is WAYYYY different.
This court’s decision doesn’t make it a stolen election, and it doesn’t mean the ballots were dishonestly cast or that the voters wanted a different result - only that the court believed the ballot officials set up a procedure for casting ballots that the law didn’t allow.
I’m not sure how I would have voted if the issue had come to me - but it’s a pretty big step, a questionable step, to throw out ballots that the voters that made them thought were properly made.
Greetings, newbie. Nice contrarian opinion. Who pays you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.