Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Racine County Sheriff Calls For Felony Charges Against Wisconsin Election Commissioners
The Federalist ^ | 11/05/2021 | Margot Cleveland

Posted on 11/05/2021 8:26:19 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

On Wednesday afternoon, the Racine County Sheriff’s Office issued a press release announcing it had forwarded to the county district attorney recommended charges for election fraud against five members of the Wisconsin Election Commission, including two felony counts. The announcement followed last week’s 75-minute press conference by Sheriff Christopher Schmaling and lead investigator Sgt. Michael Luell.

During that press conference, Luell provided a methodical review of the Wisconsin Election Code and his investigation into a complaint lodged by “Judy,” whose mother “Shirley” was a resident of the Ridgewood Care Facility.

After her mother died on October 9, 2020, Judy discovered a vote in the November 2020 presidential election had been cast in her mother’s name. In an affidavit originally filed with the Wisconsin Election Commission, Judy stated that she believed the residential care facility had taken “advantage” of her mother’s “diminished mental capacity and filled out ballot(s) in her name.”

While their investigation focused on Ridgewood Care Facility, during the press conference, Schmaling and Luell made clear that the fundamental violation of election law occurred when the Wisconsin Election Commission, or WEC, directed municipalities not to “use the Special Voting Deputy process to service residents in care facilities,” and instead to “transmit absentee ballots to those voters by mail.”

As Luell detailed in the October 28 press conference, Section 6.875 of the Wisconsin election code provides the “exclusive means” of absentee voting in residential care facilities, and that statute requires the local municipality to dispatch two special voting deputies, or “SVDs,” to a facility. The election code further requires the SVDs to personally deliver a ballot to residents of the facility, and then witness the voting process. And only a relative or an SVD may assist the voter in the process, and once voting is complete, the SVD must seal the ballot envelope and deliver it to the clerk.

By directing municipalities not to use SVD, as required by state law, Luell explained, the WEC appeared to violate Section 12.13(2)(b)(7) of the Wisconsin Election Code, entitled “Election Fraud.” That section expressly provides that it is a crime if, “in the course of the person’s official duties or on account of the person’s official position,” the official “intentionally violates or intentionally causes any other person to violate any provision” of the election code, “for which no other penalty is expressly prescribed.”

Also noted were several other relevant criminal provisions, including the crime of receiving a ballot from, or giving a ballot to, a person other than the election officer in charge, or receiving a complete ballot from a voter unless qualified to do so. Here, Luell explained how ballots were handled by low-level employees, kept unsealed in drawers, and otherwise maintained in violation of state law.

Whether to charge these crimes is a matter for prosecutors to decide, the sheriff and his lead investigator explained. However, given that Racine County is just “one of 72 counties,” and “Ridgewood is one of 11 facilities within our county,” they encouraged the state attorney general to launch his own investigation.

Late Wednesday, in a media release, Schmaling explained that, because of the failure of Attorney General Josh Kaul to initiate a statewide investigation into the WEC’s directive to voting clerks not to use the Special Voting Deputy process required by Section 6.875, his office had “forwarded charging recommendations to the Racine County District Attorney’s Office.”

The sheriff then explained he had recommended charges for Commissioners Margaret Bostelmann, Julie Glancey, Ann Jacobs, Dean Knudson, and Mark Thomsen. Jacobs, Thomsen, and Glancey are Democrats, while Bostelmann and Knudson are Republicans. The only member of the WEC not referred to the prosecutor’s office was Robert Spindell, Jr., a Republican appointed to the Committee by the Wisconsin Senate Majority Leader, Scott L. Fitzgerald.

No explanation was provided for why Spindell was omitted from the referral. Spindell had originally voted along with his five fellow commissioners to “suspend” the use of SVP in the spring of 2020, before the primary election. But then in September, Spindell reversed course, questioning where the WEC’s authority to override the legislative mandate came from. He then pushed the WEC to reinstate the use of SVP before the November 3, 2020 election.

Given that the Sheriff Office’s investigation and criminal referral concerned only the November 3, 2020 election, the omission of Spindell’s name from the list provided to the district attorney’s office makes sense.

Spindell’s name was also conspicuously absent from the two-page letter the WEC released late in the evening the day of the October 28, 2021 press conference. All of the commissioners, except Spindell, had signed that letter, with Spindell telling the press, there was “a lot in that statement I did not agree with.”

And as for whether the WEC violated the law? “That’s not up to me to determine whether the commission did or not,” Spindell said, I just don’t know.”

For now, Racine County District Attorney Patricia Hanson will need to decide whether to initiate criminal charges, and if so, on what basis. The Sheriff’s Office had recommended three misdemeanor and two felony charges, as follows:

Misconduct in Public Office in violation of Wis. State 946.12(2) (Felony)

Election Fraud –Election Official Assisting with Violations in violation of Wis. Stat. 12.13(2)(b)7 (Felony).

Party to the Crime of Election Fraud-Receive Ballot Non-Election Official in violation of Wis. Stat. 12.13(3)(n) (Misdemeanor)

Party to the Crime of Election Fraud—Illegal Ballot Receipt in violation of Wis. Stat. 12.13(3)(p)

Party to the Crime of Election Fraud—Solicit Assistance in violation of Wis. Stat. 12.13(3)(s) (Misdemeanor).

While the Racine County Sheriff Office’s press conference had explained the basis for the various election fraud charges, the recommended charge under Section 946.12(2) is new. That section, entitled “Misconduct in Public Office,” provides:

Any public officer or public employee who does any of the following is guilty of a Class I felony: (2) In the officer’s or employee’s capacity as such officer or employee, does an act which the officer or employee knows is in excess of the officer’s or employee’s lawful authority or which the officer or employee knows the officer or employee is forbidden by law to do in the officer’s or employee’s official capacity.

The various clips and quotes included in the summary of the Racine County Sheriff Office’s investigation provide pretty strong evidence that the WEC members knew they were exceeding their lawful authority and thus violated Section 946.12(2) of the criminal code, as well as the election code provisions specified.

To date, however, no one cared. Will District Attorney Patricia Hanson?



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: audit; election; electionrigging; notafraid; racinecounty; sheriff; votefraud; voterfraud; wi; wisconsin

1 posted on 11/05/2021 8:26:19 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Here is my problem:

As a general rule, when the Sheriff or Police find “Probable Cause” you committed a Crime, THEY ARREST YOU AND CHARGE YOU, the case goes to the DA and charges are filed before your arraignment while you SIT in Jail or Post Bail.

Why is there apparent SPECIAL TREATMENT being afforded to these ACCUSED FELONS?? Why doesn’t the Sheriff ARREST AND JAIL THEM like EVERY other Citizen accused of a Crime is??


2 posted on 11/05/2021 8:36:42 AM PDT by eyeamok (founded in cynicism, wrapped in sarcasm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The SCOTUS had their chance to save America and looked the other way. They may get another chance but will they just spit on our constitution again?


3 posted on 11/05/2021 8:45:53 AM PDT by spincaster (i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Any public officer or public employee who does any of the following is guilty of a Class I felony: (2) In the officer’s or employee’s capacity as such officer or employee, does an act which the officer or employee knows is in excess of the officer’s or employee’s lawful authority or which the officer or employee knows the officer or employee is forbidden by law to do in the officer’s or employee’s official capacity.”

Using that law would be a good way to get rid of 90% of bureaucrats.


4 posted on 11/05/2021 8:46:23 AM PDT by Seruzawa ("The Political left is the Garden of Eden of incompetence" - Marx the Smarter (Groucho))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Shirley you jest


5 posted on 11/05/2021 9:03:25 AM PDT by dsrtsage ( Complexity is just simple lacking imaginationd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok

Because in most cases, especially when it comes to a property crime(stolen car, theft) or ‘Crimes Against a Person’(murder, rape, robbery, assault) the crimes and fact thereof are pretty clear cut. And even in a significant number of those cases, consultation with the local DAs office is done.

In this case, with the matter at hand, the folks involved, and a corrupt to the core state Government, you should look at two things, and I don’t know anything about the Racine DA:

If the Sheriff’s Office brings the case to the DA, and the DA is a corrupt Democrat or RINO that doesn’t want to deal with the case, they can nitpick through the file and come up with something, no matter how minor, as a reason not to prosecute

If they take the case to the DA and have them process it and have them make the charges, then the DAs office CANNOT decline to prosecute. The DA doesn’t have an out. And the chance that something the investigators did/didn’t do, which could get ruin the case, will be diminished, if not completely eliminated.

Basically, the Sheriff is putting the DA on the hot seat. Forcing them to do their job or not. And if the folks of Racine take ‘law and order’ seriously and they have issues with the election results of last year, the DA won’t be the DA much longer.


6 posted on 11/05/2021 9:14:24 AM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: qaz123

That’s a pretty fair explanation, I still don’t like it because I don’t believe in SPECIAL RIGHTS for Anyone and I think they should have all been perp walked in Orange Jumpsuits and the Sheriff should have initiated Complete Civil Asset Forfeiture Proceedings against all of them.. But I do understand the play now, Thanks


7 posted on 11/05/2021 9:18:46 AM PDT by eyeamok (founded in cynicism, wrapped in sarcasm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok

I’m with you.

One thing that gets this toothpaste out of the tube.....The Racine Sheriff meets with a bunch of his Sheriff buddies from around the state. All those other Sheriff’s send Investigators to meet with the Racine SO Sgt. Michael Luell, who briefs all of them on his findings and what he did to come up with his conclusions. They all go back to their respective counties and initiate the same investigations.

If they all start finding out that the same exact things took place in their counties, then all the DAs and the state have a serious problem. Some might flat out refuse to look at and/or prosecute anything, no matter how blatant. And they might be in safe counties with a base that agrees with them and loves CornPop. Others may not.

If I’m not mistaken, Republicans are in the majority in the Wisconsin government. Yet another shining example of how liberal/Dem dominated cities control a states politics, unfortunately, like so many others. So, there just might be a lot of support for more investigations.

The Sheriffs and DAs are elected. And they all like their elected positions in the world. If this snowball gets going downhill and starts growing, they’re all going to have a decision to make.


8 posted on 11/05/2021 9:31:43 AM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: qaz123

They all go back to their respective counties and initiate the same investigations.


For that, I expect that they need complaints of specific acts of local groups following those instructions in their county.


9 posted on 11/05/2021 9:35:07 AM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

ping


10 posted on 11/05/2021 10:20:45 AM PDT by gloryblaze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It used to be that those who broke the law paid the price, but under Democrats now prisoners are set free and those seeking freedom are imprisoned. In 2021 gulags are even a thing again (for the first time since the Soviet Union collapsed). I read an article proving it, “Federal Marshals Were Stopped From Investigating the Alleged Deplorable Jail Conditions of January 6 Defendants”, and you can give that a look at Townhall. Unprecedented is the word courts acting US Marshal uses and he is 100% correct. And if we are going after WI election officials we can just go after all of those that stole the election of 2020, regardless of state.


11 posted on 11/05/2021 10:32:50 AM PDT by ProfessorGoldiloxx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spincaster

Proving all that song and dance opposition to those 3 Trump nominees by the left was all for show.


12 posted on 11/05/2021 10:33:56 AM PDT by ProfessorGoldiloxx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: qaz123

I just know that over the last several elections Soros has helped get a LOT of communists elected as DA’s, and they refuse to prosecute criminals (aka democRATs).


13 posted on 11/05/2021 10:35:49 AM PDT by ProfessorGoldiloxx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ProfessorGoldiloxx

Therein lies one of the MANY rubs. Even if they aren’t a Soros backed/funded DA, there are many just like them that follow along to the same drummer.

On a side note, Soros more or less handpicked 3 DAs in Northern Virginia. All 3 won. All 3 beat Democrat DAs. And, if I’m not mistaken, one of the DAs that lost stated that these Soros DAs were going to be bad. Not sure if the DA in Loudon County is/was one of them. But that place is proving to be a complete and utter disaster and is proof of just how bad things are.

Annnnnddddd, it turns out that the DA in Loudon County is one of them.....crazy how things work out

Will Soros-Backed Prosecutors Protect School Board Members in Loudoun County?
https://townhall.com/columnists/ianprior/2021/08/24/will-sorosbacked-prosecutors-protect-school-board-members-in-loudoun-county-n2594600


14 posted on 11/05/2021 1:31:01 PM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lepton

In this instance I would think they would not. All the Sheriff has to say is, based on the findings on the Racine County investigation, I wanted to determine if the same crimes were committed in MY county. And it is THEIR county.

But, if they did want an official complaint, it wouldn’t take much. Just one person to find out that their dead relative voted or something like that.


15 posted on 11/05/2021 1:34:31 PM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: qaz123

I agree that the bar is low, but there is a bar. They need some people to step up and make a valid complaint. I’m sure they can be found.


16 posted on 11/05/2021 3:53:00 PM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson