FRAUD 12 – Following the Numbers

Numbers Don’t Lie – People Do

The image above features the ghostly images of Kathy Nickolaus and Judge Prosser surrounded by numbers, and crossed over by graphs that challenge their stories, and positions in the ever evolving story of fraud in the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election.

People…..Do Lie

1. “I forgot to save.”

Kathy Nickolaus April 7, 2011(On discovering 14,000 votes in Brookfield)

 

2. “I can’t remember if I went to the Capitol that night.”

April 21, 2011 (One of many different responses of Prosser to his meeting with Gov. Walker on the day after the election)

3. The G.A.B. and its staff are committed to ensuring that Wisconsin elections are administered through open, fair and impartial procedures that guarantee that the vote of each individual counts, and that the will of the electorate prevails.

(Director Kevin Kennedy of The Government Accountability Board mission statement )

Numbers Don’t Lie

Welcome to the world of numbers.
This is not another TV series, but a real look at some people who have been crunching election numbers for years who have applied their knowledge and research to the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election.

Meet Richard Charnin. Richard’s web site Member of the face book group Election Integrity and author of the book Proving Election Fraud;a detailed analysis of pre and post-election polling data that the mainstream media avoids discussing. The book proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the recorded vote is always different from the True Vote. As a programmer using second-generation computers that took us to the moon, Charnin knows that voting machine “glitches” are not the cause of the failure to properly count the votes. It’s the fault of the humans who program them.

Meet Jim Jacobs Jim’s web site Another number cruncher who has helped bring some truth through numbers through the fog of the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election. His graphs and pictures are filled with colors and lines that point to the truth of the vote count. We’ve heard the lies of the people. Numbers don’t lie. They demonstrate the serious anomalies, the unexplained departures of the vote pattern that defy logic, and raise a foul veil over the Wisconsin we know. They point to election fraud.

Here is the Truth of the Numbers

This may look like some lines on paper, it did to me at first glance. These are the lines that cross over the pictures of Kathy Nickolaus, Prosser at the top of the page because they do filter out the dishonesty of their statements.

The variance shown in the graph may seem inconsequential to most of us, but to number crunchers, like Jim and Richard, they reek of fraud. They are the cause of nausea and sleep deprivation to them as would a sock filled with rotten egg under our beds.

The graph below is little more than the snap shot of a spread sheet showing vote totals in the City of Milwaukee.
The Top Graph
The spread sheet shows the vote totals of Obama compared to Jim Barrett in 2011 shown by the red line. You see how it runs fairly close to the dotted line or the expected route?

The kicker is that you would expect the count of those who voted for Barrett to be close to the count of those who voted for Kloppenburg and run fairly evenly with the red line. NOT even close! The departure is beyond statistical logic. It is demonstrated by the bue line. The only way such a departure can be explained to a statistician is vote fraud!

The Bottom Graph
Each of the thirteen blue columns represents a Milwaukee voting ward. The higher the column the greater difference is shown between the votes for Obama in 2008 and Kloppenburg. You see that in four of the wards (the tallest columns) that over 50,000 votes shifted – a total of over 200,000 voters who voted for Obama in 2008 turned heel and voted for Prosser in the Supreme Court election? How is that possible?

It is not statistically possible . The shift defies all logic except one – election fraud. The chain of custody was broken so that the torn, ripped, and cut bags could have easily been stuffed with Prosser votes. The statistics say there were stuffed. It is the only explanation for the drastic shift in the Milwaukee vote.

You can review Jim’s spread sheet for yourself

The mission statement of the GAB:

3. The G.A.B. and its staff are committed to ensuring that Wisconsin elections are administered through open, fair and impartial procedures that guarantee that the vote of each individual counts, and that the will of the electorate prevails.

is the lie.

The truth is in the numbers.

Note: Jim says that the Votes for the Milwaukee Wards are still under analysis.

Advertisements

Darling Disgrace

As we honor those who have given their lives for Democracy and the right to vote, what is Roberta Darling up to?


She is engaged in vote suppression tactics that would be unethical on any day, but on the eve of Memorial Day, her action is nothing less than disgraceful.

ABSENTEE BALLOTS ARE RARELY COUNTED. DO NOT ABSENTEE VOTE!!! From Recall Scott Walker: “Shorewood residents received calls tonight from the Darling camp. Caller ID says Republican Party, phone number is Darling’s HQ, 414-727-4445. Caller … asks for a person by name. Asks if you are voting for Darling or Sandy Pasch. When you say Sandy, they offer to send you an absentee ballot.

The Motive?
Seems obvious she wants to get absentee ballots in the hands of those who would vote against her. Why? I really don’t even want to wander into the hearts and minds of the Republican party when it comes to vote suppression, and election fraud. Your guess is as good as mine, and on the eve of Memorial Day it is irrelevant.

The strikingly obvious point here is: JUST STOP! Hold off on your self serving, power grabbing, and manipulative behavior for the Memorial Day Weekend. You are disgracing yourself and every family that is remembering a loved one who has served to allow us the prime democratic right to vote.

FRAUD 11 – Pesky Poll Tape

Is a slip of paper the “deep throat” of the Supreme Court Election Fraud?>

Please “blocked” update below

It is peculiar how the smallest, most innocent, observations can become the “straw that breaks the camel’s back”.

An observer of the Waukesha County recount noticed such a small, innocent piece of paper that was spit out of a voting machine in Pewaukee. It was a poll tape from a voting machine on which is recorded your vote. But what caught her eye was the date at the top of the tape: 03-30-2011 or March 30. That was six days before the Supreme Court election of April 5!

I recall the face book messages in the group Election Integrity as she communicated the finding to the group. “Get a picture!”, and she did.

Probably a test?
Ok. You must admit this is well…..suspicious. Her first inquiries about what it was, what it was doing there, and how it came to be in the official recount material, was met with the response, “It was probably a test.” I guess this goes along with the “human error” defense of all that is Waukesha, but look at the time stamp on the tape: 01:10 a.m.!

I know there are dedicated election officials out there, but who would run a test of a voting machine in those wee hours of the morning? Can you imagine the scenario? A person leans over to his/her mate and says: “Honey, I can’t sleep. I’m going down to the Court house and do a quick test of the voting machines”.

No such machine in Pewaukee

The other explanation for the poll tape was something like, “There are not electronic voting machines in Pewaukee,” Response? “Oh. Ok. My mistake. I must not be seeing a poll tape from a voting machine that clearly says, “Pewaukee”. “I must change my medication.” Come on. If there are no such machines in Pewaukee, how did such a poll tape record materialize?

Trying to bury the photos

The people in the Election Integrity group have posted and shared the photos with friends, newspapers, and media and have found something fishy. The links and posts have been deleted from postings or reported to the face book admin as being “inappropriate”. Is someone pulling a “Scott Walker stealing all the papers from his College election” action? There seems to be an attempt to keep the photos out of view and the story hushed.

UPDATE – 3:15 p.m. May 26

This story has been blocked by face book – the message below appeared on a Bloggers Link:


We are on to something……..????

Another Unanswered Question

To date, no one has come up with a plausible explanation for the poll tape that appeared during the recount process in Waukesha, not even the Government Accounting Board GAB (That is BAG backwards!) See GAB Behind the Curtain post.

So why hasn’t the GAB demonstrated some concern in the highly irregular March Poll tapes findings?

It turns out that any questions about the integrity of the Wisconsin electronic voting system strikes deep into the heart and history of GAB Director Kevin Kennedy.
Jim Mueller has been looking at the integrity of Wisconsin elections for many years, and had this to say about GAB’s Kevin Kennedy.

“The fear is that these companies throw money around is such a way that we do not know that people who are in positions of trust have been compromised. Since the Accenture deal occurred, I haven’t felt good about Kennedy’s performance”

The Accenture Deal

Article By Mike McCabe

November 26, 2004

Can you believe it?

They want to privatize our highways, our university, our museums and now our elections. Egad! Kevin Kennedy, executive director of the state of Wisconsin’s Elections Board, signed a contract with a multi-national calling itself Accenture (it was part of Enron-tainted Arthur Anderson) to create “a total management package to run our elections.” Hello? See Bill Lueders’ column in Isthmus for the full, disturbing story, and then ask, What in the world is wrong with Kevin Kennedy?/

No public hearings were held on the outsourcing of our elections to a company–one that is based in Bermuda to avoid taxes in this country. When I called the Elections Board on Wednesday, I was told that it is, in essence, too late to complain because the contract has been signed. Really? Is it too late to fire Kennedy, appoint a new board, and cancel the contract? I don’t think so.

Call the elections Board and demand that they cancel this contract. Believe it or not Mr. Kennedy, the citizens of Wisconsin are quite capable of managing our own elections.

Kennedy’s Vested Interest

Kennedy has a long history of chummy ties with the Accenture and Electronic Voting Systems. He pitched the system to the legislature. Do you really think he is going to be fair and impartial in answering questions about poll tapes?

The Brad blog has been investigating elections in the country for years, and this is what Brad has to say about the pesky poll tape.

“Worse, if the results printed on the poll tapes are the ultimate proof of the accuracy of results, what happens when — as discovered among poll tapes from the City of Pewaukee in Waukesha County late last week — the “recount” uncovers “Official Results Report” poll tapes dated a full seven days before the actual election was held?’

The information for this post has come through intensive hard work and investigation by the people of the Election Integrity Group, many of whom have been advocating for fair “every vote gets counted ONCE” elections in Wisconsin for years.


Look at the Wisconsin SC Recount BALLOT / POLL TAPE Anomalies

A permanent, online web cache of photo stills revealing just *some* of the GLARING and ALARMING ballot “irregularities” recently seen during the STATE WIDE (VIRTUAL) HAND RECOUNT of the SUPREME COURT ELECTION, held on April 5th, 2011. The following was recently compiled through the collective efforts and shared documentation from many wonderful citizen observers from all over the Great Badger State of WI. The Election Integrity community commends them for all their diligence, tenacity and hard work, and thanks them for the important contribution it’s lending to *all* American Voters. This kind of real time photographic documentation of evidence in real time is, to our knowledge completely unprecedented. EI can use all the Facebook love we can muster…thanks!

GAB – Behind the Curtain

Who is/are the GAB?

I went to the web site and found a Welcome to the NEW web site:

We hope you find our new site easy to use and navigate.

The G.A.B. and its staff are committed to ensuring that Wisconsin elections are administered through open, fair and impartial procedures that guarantee that the vote of each individual counts, and that the will of the electorate prevails. The Board uses information technology and the Internet to make information readily available to the public about the financing of political campaigns, elections, lobbying, and financial interests of public officials. The Board and its staff are dedicated to enforcing the election, ethics, lobbying and campaign finance laws vigorously to reduce the opportunity for corruption and maintain public confidence in representative government.
(I didn’t find photo of Kevin Kennedy on the “new” site no biograpgy, no history, so I provided a photo for you on the right)
Kevin J. Kennedy, Director and General Counsel (pictured right)

I learned that:
The Government Accountability Board is comprised of six former judges who serve staggered, six-year terms.

Ok. That might have been fine and dandy information before I new that that Justice Prosser had served 12 years on the Supreme Court while failing to prosecute child abusers, and calling his court colleagues “bitch”. We need to know more about these six judges. Where are the biographies, ruling histories, and political affiliations?

Questions

So many questions remain unanswered. In fact, the recount of the Supreme Court election raised more questions then it answered for most of us. The face book group Election Integrity has raised a few questions, some old and some new.

So this is an introduction to each member of the GAB along with the “full documentation” provided by the “new” site as to their past history, rulings, and affiliations and some lingering, unanswered questions, questions, questions.


Chair – Judge Thomas Barland – Eau Claire -Eau Claire County Circuit Court, 1967-2000 – Term expires – May 1, 2015

Question: From Barbara With – Election Integrity: What was the special software they put on Nickalous’ computer and why did she get it and no one else and what was it for?


Vice Chair – Judge Gerald C. Nichol – Madison – Dane County Circuit Court, 1988-2004 – Term expires – May 1, 2012

Question: From Sheila Parks – Election Integrity – Since she had recused herself, why was Kathy Nickolaus sitting in her office the whole time during the Waukesha recount? Why did she have access to all the ballots, therefore, during the recount she had recused herself from?

Secretary – Judge Gordon Myse Appleton Wisconsin Court of Appeals, 1986-1999 Outagamie County Circuit Court, 1972-1983 – Term expires – May 1, 2011(Guess the site has not been updated?)

Question (regarding election information held on Kathy Nickolaus’ personal lap top computor)- Jacqueline Haessly: I am still curious about the status of the investigation into the computer: Was it taken and placed in a secure place? Is a computer forensics expert examining it? I can’t find any information on this. The topic seems to have disappeared in to the netherworld


Member -Judge Michael Brennan Marshfield Clark County Circuit Court, 1971-2001 Term expires – May 1, 2014

Question – Sharon Swenson/Nelson – Elaection Integrity: Why are there no GAB people at the recounts? Why did Kathy Nicklaus have that job after being in an election scandal before? Why DID the GAB send a victory letter to Prosser 2 days BEFORE the voting Began??? Why is Kathy Nicklaus not following the rules set in place regarding her computer???

Member – Judge Thomas Cane Wausau – Wisconsin Court of Appeals, 1981-2007 – Outagamie County Circuit Court, 1972-1981 -Term expires May 1, 2013

Question – Barbara With – Election Integrity: Why was there a date stamp on the DRE from Pewaukee from march 30, 1:40 AM? If it was just a test, why did they do it at 1:40 AM? If it was a technology mistake, doesn’t think concern the GAB that there could be more flawed technology?


Member – Judge David G. Deininger Monroe -Wisconsin Court of Appeals, 1996-2007 – Green County Circuit Court, 1994-1996 – Term Expires May 1, 2016

Question – Dennis Kern – Election Integrity – WHO is/are the GAB? I have tried to go to the web site only to find a l list of names with no bio or links to their prior professional history or affiliation. No pictures. No transparency. WHO are they?

FRAUD 10 – Wakesha Sequoia

This is the way election machine corporations view your vote.

(Intro to Dominion Data System web site)

Take the boredom and anxiety out of election card programming and multiply your efficiency by a factor of 20. With Dominion’s 20-slot Election Data Exchange System you can rapidly complete the task of writing data to and from election cards Connect directly to your central election database and generate election cards along with labels. For those special applications when you absolutely have to program 80,000 tabulators in a very short time frame, rest easy knowing that you can daisy-chain the units together, turning a virtually impossible task into a relatively easy one.

Sounds more like you are buying an appliance for a quick and easy solution to lawn care, dirty bathtub rings, or pesky bugs.

Vote like a Pac Man

That video display with PacMan on it is supposed to look like this: Yes, that is a voting machine. A voting machine that can be hacked to load PacMan without so much as a whisper of tampering. Via BradBlog: Sequoia’s voting machines, used in some 20% of U.S. elections , employ Intellectual Property (IP) still owned by a Venezuelan firm tied to Hugo Chavez.


If you live in Wisconsin (or Brookfield or Waukesha), the Sequoia/Eagle electronic voting system is most like the machine you used to cast your vote in the last election. Many of the anomalies that have resulted from the recount in the Wisconsin Supreme Court election, are the direct result of the Sequoia machine system.

What do open, and ripped bags have to do with a machine?

If the machine software is altered to flip the vote, the flip must be matched with the contents of the bags; your votes. These are the same bags that were stored in Kathy Nickolaus’ office during the long and tedious Waukesha recount. Kathy and her minions had full, complete, and 24hr access to the bags of votes, machines, and software!

But is the Sequoia vote system all the easy to manipulate? Really?

Yes. In fact there is a list of problems with tabulation of votes with the Sequoia system in election after election all over the country.

This is from a “partial list at A “partial” list

Here is an account just one report of Sequoia “problems” in Florida.

November 2004
Palm Beach County, Florida. In addition to seeing voters who had been told to go to the wrong precinct,
others who found their polling place closed with no sign telling them where it had been moved, and poll
workers giving incorrect instructions, one observer in Palm Beach saw touch screens repeatedly
registering incorrect votes and resisting correction.45
Tina [Knight] worked nine hours election day. She talked to a woman who said the voting machine had
repeatedly registered the wrong presidential candidate. After 8 or 9 tries, it finally showed the candidate she
had selected.
“Another lady said when she got to her review screen,” at the end of the voting process, “the opposing
presidential candidate was listed. . . . She called the poll worker and demanded it be fixed. The poll worker
went back through the screens” and agreed the woman had voted for a different candidate than the review
screen showed. “The poll worker said, ‘The review screen is wrong, but just go ahead and punch the
confirmation button.’ The woman refused. She made the poll worker cancel out the transaction, and she
voted again. But how many people would do that — go against what the poll worker advised?”

The people of New Jersey wanted to find out about the Sequoia “problems” in 2008. The whole battle for answers was well reported and covered by the Star Ledger in that state. Where is the Wisconsin press? Why are they missing the story of the Wisconsin Supreme Court recount?

Jersey disputes report faulting voting machines
Saturday, October 18, 2008
BY DIANE C. WALSH
Star-Ledger Staff

A computer expert from Princeton University has found New Jersey’s voting machines can be easily hacked, while a professor from Carnegie Mellon University scoffed at the findings, according to two divergent reports released yesterday by the Superior Court judge presiding over the case challenging the machines’ reliability.

“It takes about seven minutes, using simple tools” to hack into a voting machine made by Sequoia Voting Systems and install software that could steal votes and throw an election, Appel found. Most of New Jersey’s 3,500 polling places use Sequoia Advantage machines. Appel recommended switching to paper ballots read by optical scanners in the polling places.

The Coalition for Peace Action, which filed the lawsuit in 2004, prefers the optical scanners because, while they are also electronic devices, the system uses paper ballots that create a “verifiable record” that could be rechecked, said Irene Goldman, a chairwoman of the Princeton-based organization.

The media fueled investigation lead to real action

From Wired

Last year, a judge ordered New Jersey election officials to give source code for the state’s Sequoia AVC Advantage touch-screen machines to Princeton University computer scientist Andrew Appel and others for a lawsuit that challenged the integrity of Sequoia’s paperless machines. Voting activists had sued the state to decommission the units out of security and reliability concerns. Appel’s team found several vulnerabilities with the system, but wasn’t able to discuss them publicly.
—————————————-
More from Wired

The Open Source Digital Voting Foundation (OSDV) announced the availability of source code for its prototype election system Wednesday.

The OSDV, co-founded by Gregory Miller and John Sebes, launched its Trust the Vote Project in 2006 and has an eight-year roadmap to produce a comprehensive, publicly owned, open source electronic election system. The system would be available for licensing to manufacturers or election districts, and would include a voter registration component; firmware for casting ballots on voting devices (either touch-screen systems with a paper trail, optical-scan machines or ballot-marking devices); and an election management system for creating ballots, administering elections and counting votes.

“How we vote has become just as important as who we vote for,” Miller told the audience of filmmakers and technologists who gathered at the Bel-Air home of film producer Lawrence Bender to hear about the project. “We think it is imperative that the infrastructure on which we cast and count our ballots is an infrastructure that is publicly owned.”

The Sequoia Corp. was finally pushed by the activists and the press to produce the software codes.

Application software for an appliance that tabulates election results from data produced by ballot counting devices. The software counts your vote.
You can find the codes here.Application Software

Now we can sleep easier?

It seems the Wisconsin media thinks so. Yet we know, that as easily as programing software can be opened to the public, it can be rewritten behind the doors of Sequoia Election Data System. In the end, Sequoia determines what is written.

The Sequoia system and the Wisconsin Supreme Court recount

There are enough irregularities in the chain of custody of votes, statistical vote percentage drops, and questionable history of Kathy Nickolaus to warrant a full investigation.

The media in New Jersey covered the questions posed by the voters in that state. Here, in Wisconsin, we are still waiting for the investigative reporting that shook up New Jersey and forced Sequoia to become more transparent in, at least in a “PR” sort of way.

In Wisconsin, the voters are still waiting.

Fraud 9 – Duct Tape (Really!)

The Brad Blog calls the Waukesha recount a “Dog and Pony Show”

“As the count nears its end, more irregularities emerge, including mis-dated poll tapes, unprinted ‘paper trails’, duct taped bags and the state’s unwavering faith in the machine…”

Yet the headline in the
Milwakee Sentinel states: “Prosser Won”

The hard hitting, masterpiece of investigative journalism goes on to say:

“Kloppenburg’s campaign has raised questions about torn ballot bags in Waukesha County. But Geske said a rip in a ballot bag would not be enough for a court to throw out the votes in that bag without more evidence to draw a reasonable inference that fraud had been committed.”

Geske says nothing about duct tape! How could he miss it?

They make it sound the Kloppenburg found a rip in a single ballot bag and are claiming fruad. It wasn’t one bag. It was many bags. Not only did they appear slit, torn, and lapping open the numbering would be an embarrassment to a third grader! To top it off the slit bags were repaired with duct tape!

The ever alert and penetrating analysis of the Journel Sentinel goes on to say:

“The process moved more slowly in Waukesha County, in part because of the intense scrutiny. The recount there was overseen by retired Waukesha County Circuit Judge Robert Mawdsley after Nickolaus recused herself.”

“Recused Herself?”

Nickolaus recused herself alright. She was sitting in her office with all the votes, vote machines, and poll books. It is just as likely that the process moved more slowly so that Kathy could stuff bags to match the bogus vote tallies she hacked into the vote machines!

The in depth, credible, journalistic artistry of the Journal makes it sound as though the suggestion of a ripped (and duct taped) ballot bag is a frivolous piece of evidence that will not hold water any more than it will hold votes. Yet, in all the depth of research exemplified by the Journal, they missed reading the Wisconsin statutes that address just such a piece of evidence.

Wisconsin Statutes regarding bags and ballots

“The board of canvassers shall then examine the container or bag containing the ballots to be certain it has not been tampered with, opened, or opened and resealed. Any irregularities or possible tampering with the container or bag shall be noted.” [9.01(1)(b)3.]

As the count continues, “The board of canvassers or the chairperson or chairperson’s designee shall make specific findings of fact with respect to any irregularity…discovered during the recount.” [9.01(5)(a)]

Oh yeah. They know all to well that Kloppenburg has a case for vote tampering that could slice away votes from their boy, Prosser, like a mat knife through a ballot bag, and all the duct tape in the world will not save him.

FRAUD 8 – WIS. "GAB Government Avoidance Board"

The GAB says the statewide recount effort has gone smoothly, and no incidents of fraud have been found.


From WSN.com

GAB in their own words:

The G.A.B. and its staff are committed to ensuring that Wisconsin elections are administered through open, fair and impartial procedures that guarantee that the vote of each individual counts, and that the will of the electorate prevails. The Board uses information technology and the Internet to make information readily available to the public about the financing of political campaigns, elections, lobbying, and financial interests of public officials. The Board and its staff are dedicated to enforcing the election, ethics, lobbying and campaign finance laws vigorously to reduce the opportunity for corruption and maintain public confidence in representative government.

“Wisconsin has the most decentralized election system in the United States,” Kennedy said. “The system has strong local control coupled with state oversight, resting on the partnership between the Government Accountability Board, the 72 county clerks, and the 1,850 municipal clerks. State law clearly gives each county’s Board of Canvassers the primary authority to conduct the recount, and to decide which ballots should and should not be counted. Recounting votes is an open, transparent process in which each of the candidates may have representatives present to raise objections, and where the public may be present to observe. The G.A.B.’s legal role is to order the recount, to provide legal guidance to the counties during the recount, and to certify the results.(emphasis mine) If either of the candidates disagrees with the results of the recount, the law gives them the right to appeal in circuit court within five business days after the recount is completed. The circuit court is where issues discovered during the recount, but not resolved to the satisfaction of the candidates, are resolved.”

“We cannot stress enough our gratitude for the meticulous work conducted by county clerks and their Canvass Board members throughout this historic time,” said Nathaniel E. Robinson, Elections Division administrator. “The recount process has uncovered some issues and corrected some vote totals, but these are to be expected in any recount.”

The above is quoted from GAB site

Just one question Mr. Robinson……..????

If you are so interested in “enforcing the election, ethics, lobbying and campaign finance laws vigorously to reduce the opportunity for corruption and maintain public confidence in representative government”, then why did Kathy Nickolaus have unfettered access to the vote bags, machines, and software during the course of the Waukesha recount?

She admitted in a phone conversation on Thursday May 19 that, not only did she have all the votes stored in her vault, but also made a special area in her office for them.

This is the same Kathy Nickolaus who avoided indictment in 2002 for her testimony. Read KN (Kathy Nickolaus) Factor

No sign of fraud? Open vote bags stored in Kathy Nicholaus’ office? No sign of elephant in room when you are facing the north wall with a south positioned elephant?

And that’s not all. The Brad blog lists, line by line, many of the fraudulent elephants you seem to have missed.

If you don’t see the elements of fraud in the Wisconsin Recount, you can only be recusing yourself from the evidence.