Joanne Kloppenburg held a news conference at Warner Park in Madison on April 20 at 4:00 p.m. to announce that she is exercising her right to a recount since she lost by less then the required 5% by Wisconsin statutes.
The official tally shows Kloppenburg lost to Prosser by 7,316 votes – less than 0.5% of the 1.5 million votes cast in the race. The election initially appeared much closer, with Kloppenburg up by 204 votes, before Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus announced her initial, unofficial tally failed to include the 14,315 votes from the City of Brookfield.
Kloppenburg said at a news conference that her campaign detected “widespread anomalies” in the election around the state. She didn’t directly answer questions about whether she felt she could make up 7,000 votes, saying instead she wants to shine light on how the election was conducted. Please read the article in Huffington Post
Kloppenburg also called on the board to appoint a special investigator to probe Nickolaus’ “actions and words.” Her statement supports the concern about irregularities in Waukesha as expressed by many journalists including Rick Unger of Forbes Magazine and Rep. Tammy Baldwin. Please read articles and concerns at Playful post “Read my lips – Recount”
Kloppenburg alarms us to a new allegation surrounding Nickolaus and Walker.
Her complaint seeks a probe of Nickolaus, Kloppenburg and alleges Prosser had a one-on-one meeting with Republican Gov. Scott Walker on the day after the election – an explosive charge in an officially nonpartisan race where the candidates questioned each other’s claims of political independence.
Prosser and Walker aide Chris Schrimpf denied the two met on April 6.( Which is quiet possible since the alleged meeting took place the day after the election when Kloppenburg was thought to enjoy a 200 vote lead or April 7.)
Melissa Mulliken, Kloppenburg’s campaign manager, said she had been in touch with two or three people with knowledge of a Prosser-Walker meeting, including at least one who observed Prosser entering the meeting. She declined to name the people……………………
Please read full criminal complaint detailing the suspicious action of Nickolaus
Please read commentary on report from Bluecheddar.
Please read more from Democratic underground.
Willing to provide convincing evidence for the need of a hand recount.
Separately, Kloppenburg said she wanted the recount to be done by hand. She would need to provide a court with “clear and convincing evidence” that a hand recount would be more accurate than a machine recount, according to Magney.
Hand recounts are typically more expensive and lengthier than machine recounts, Jay Weiner said. Although the accountability board is an independent agency, Kloppenburg said she believed the agency worked too closely with Nickolaus to properly investigate her.
The allegation that Government Accounting Board and the network of County Clerks work to closely together to be able to remain objective is supported by including emails between these government officials such as:
In a separate e-mail, Wood County Clerk Cindy Cepress wrote, “We all know it could happen to anyone. Our support is with you. Good thoughts going out to you!!!!!!!”
Magney said it would be up to the board to decide whether to hire an outside investigator. Most of the board’s work on investigations is secret.
When Kloppenburg was questioned at the news conference about whether her action could result in a win she consistently deflected the insinuation that she was being frivolous with responses like she had won so much already, while reiterating that her main concern was to restore complete confidence in the fairness of the Wisconsin vote in any future elections.
Her final words of the press conference were met by a chant of “THANK YOU – THANK YOU – THANK YOU” from those present.
The count from the machines in Waukesha precincts including the city of Brookfield have been officially matched with the count on the notorious lap top of Nickolaus, so why the need for further investigation?
Because back in the Kerry/Bush presidential election of 2006 there was an investigation of the Ohio vote which lead to the revelation of some new and quite diabolical tactics that were, in fact, being sought by Republicans. Yes. There have been real instances of Republican contracting election altering software that could tip an election as revealed in the You tube video below: Eugene Curtis
Of note: Q: Could election official notice such tampering? A: They would never see it. They would need to find a programing string or SOURCE CODE.
Another question: Could such a source code to stored in a lap top computer that only one person in the whole country had access to?
I am not a programmer. I don’t know.
Where is Nickolaus’ lap top computer today?
We are preparing to file an action in Circuit Court (represented by the Wisconsin Department of Justice) this Thursday, April 21 to seek court relief in some fashion to obtain permission to clear memory devices for reuse during the recount or to conduct a Statewide hand count of all ballots in the recount.
This presents a dilemma for the judge: If an original pack is reprogrammed for the recount and a different total should then result, the pack could no longer be analyzed for evidence to prove criminal election fraud. Of course, a hand recount would be much more expensive. The counties are responsible for the costs of this recount just as for the costs of the election.