Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
so many stupid liberals with drug induced halucinations. There are rules about when and if a hand recount is conducted. If it merits one, it will be done. As it stands the vote count does merit a automatic recount (under 1/2%) so that will be done by the state.So why don't they put all this controversy to rest? Count the paper ballots and the paper trail on the VVPAT. 100% manual recount. Of course, with no signature required at the polling place, this crooked douche lady Kathy Nickolaus could have just filled in the bubbles for voters that hadn't voted that night.
So many opportunities for fraud...
What actions would those be? Oh wait! You don't actually have any actions, all you got is bullshit suspicions based on the AP having the wrong count.awwwe, you must have missed the election story from the 6th in the Brookfield paper. Thats precious... go cry.
And pray tell us how that changes the FACTS regarding Nickolaus' actions, Benny? I'll wait for a more detailed re-count before I give Nickolaus a clean bill of health on this election.
The canvassing is done, the votes were counted by Democrats and Republicans and they both confirm the accuracy of the canvassing. There is no "there", there.
There is no evedence of any previous voter fraud in waukesha county, and you're a completely disingenuous hack if you think there is. Which of course is explantion for why you think there is. Some liberal blogs allegations do not comprise "evedence" of anything. the link to the milwaukee PD investigation highliting the difference in ballots cast vs votes counted in the SAME election is linked in the thread. In Milwaukee county it was 4600-5300 more votes counted than ballots casts which the special investigations unit found was "mostly" explainable due to same day registration, provisional ballots, paper ballots, absentee ballots, and the typical machine error "overvotes) with a very few instances of possible actual voter fraud. The reasons the milwaukee PD gives are EXACTLY the same reasons Waukesha county sites with the exception of the "overvote" problem, which is minor.What actions would those be? Oh wait! You don't actually have any actions, all you got is bullshit suspicions based on the AP having the wrong count.And pray tell us how that changes the FACTS regarding Nickolaus' actions, Benny? I'll wait for a more detailed re-count before I give Nickolaus a clean bill of health on this election.
The canvassing is done, the votes were counted by Democrats and Republicans and they both confirm the accuracy of the canvassing. There is no "there", there.
Benny's either fucking stupid or just insipidly stubborn, folks. The chronology of the posts clearly shows me posting a link to an article that reports on Nikolaus' previous actions regarding voter fraud.
April 7, 2011-Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus magically delivers enough votes for former boss Prosser | Solidarity Wisconsin
Obviously Benny just ignores what he doesn't like, then babbles on like the willfully ignorant neocon parrot that he is. I'll respond when Benny can actually discuss ALL the information available.
so many stupid liberals with drug induced halucinations. There are rules about when and if a hand recount is conducted. If it merits one, it will be done. As it stands the vote count does merit a automatic recount (under 1/2%) so that will be done by the state.So why don't they put all this controversy to rest? Count the paper ballots and the paper trail on the VVPAT. 100% manual recount. Of course, with no signature required at the polling place, this crooked douche lady Kathy Nickolaus could have just filled in the bubbles for voters that hadn't voted that night.
So many opportunities for fraud...
Your assertions of past malfeasance are ridiculous, there is no evedence of past malfeasance no matter how much you claim there is. Your imaginings of wrongdoing do not make anything actual wrong doing. Whether or not a hand recount is "merritted" in your opinion is irrelevant as there are laws and rules which must be followed which render your oppionion meaningless. That you imagin Nickalaus feverishly filling in bubbles on blank ballots is not reason for an investigation, niehter is it evedence that any such activity took place, and neither is the AP reporting the wrong numbers evedence of anything.so many stupid liberals with drug induced halucinations. There are rules about when and if a hand recount is conducted. If it merits one, it will be done. As it stands the vote count does merit a automatic recount (under 1/2%) so that will be done by the state.So why don't they put all this controversy to rest? Count the paper ballots and the paper trail on the VVPAT. 100% manual recount. Of course, with no signature required at the polling place, this crooked douche lady Kathy Nickolaus could have just filled in the bubbles for voters that hadn't voted that night.
So many opportunities for fraud...
If anything merits a 100% manual recount, this does, especially considering the past malfeasance of this woman. A county of over 200,000 with over 90% turnout? Things that make you go Hmmmmm....
Your assertions of past malfeasance are ridiculous, there is no evedence of past malfeasance no matter how much you claim there is. Your imaginings of wrongdoing do not make anything actual wrong doing. Whether or not a hand recount is "merritted" in your opinion is irrelevant as there are laws and rules which must be followed which render your oppionion meaningless. That you imagin Nickalaus feverishly filling in bubbles on blank ballots is not reason for an investigation, niehter is it evedence that any such activity took place, and neither is the AP reporting the wrong numbers evedence of anything.so many stupid liberals with drug induced halucinations. There are rules about when and if a hand recount is conducted. If it merits one, it will be done. As it stands the vote count does merit a automatic recount (under 1/2%) so that will be done by the state.
If anything merits a 100% manual recount, this does, especially considering the past malfeasance of this woman. A county of over 200,000 with over 90% turnout? Things that make you go Hmmmmm....
AP) MADISON, Wis. (AP) Results from Wisconsin counties show a conservative state Supreme Court justice has won re-election in a race seen as a referendum on Republican Gov. Scott Walker's divisive union rights law.
County tallies show Justice David Prosser defeated JoAnne Kloppenburg by 7,316 votes.
State election officials must review those numbers before declaring an official winner. They say they won't start that process until Kloppenburg has a chance to request a recount. She has until Wednesday.
Kloppenburg, a little-known state attorney, got a boost after supporters worked to turn anger over the union law against Prosser.
The race was too close to call after unofficial returns were reported last week. Then an error was discovered that gave Prosser a 7,500-vote lead.
Canvass shows conservative wins Wis. court race - CBS News
There is no evedence of any previous voter fraud in waukesha county, and you're a completely disingenuous hack if you think there is. Which of course is explantion for why you think there is. Some liberal blogs allegations do not comprise "evedence" of anything. the link to the milwaukee PD investigation highliting the difference in ballots cast vs votes counted in the SAME election is linked in the thread. In Milwaukee county it was 4600-5300 more votes counted than ballots casts which the special investigations unit found was "mostly" explainable due to same day registration, provisional ballots, paper ballots, absentee ballots, and the typical machine error "overvotes) with a very few instances of possible actual voter fraud. The reasons the milwaukee PD gives are EXACTLY the same reasons Waukesha county sites with the exception of the "overvote" problem, which is minor.What actions would those be? Oh wait! You don't actually have any actions, all you got is bullshit suspicions based on the AP having the wrong count.
The canvassing is done, the votes were counted by Democrats and Republicans and they both confirm the accuracy of the canvassing. There is no "there", there.
Benny's either fucking stupid or just insipidly stubborn, folks. The chronology of the posts clearly shows me posting a link to an article that reports on Nikolaus' previous actions regarding voter fraud.
April 7, 2011-Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus magically delivers enough votes for former boss Prosser | Solidarity Wisconsin
Obviously Benny just ignores what he doesn't like, then babbles on like the willfully ignorant neocon parrot that he is. I'll respond when Benny can actually discuss ALL the information available.
AP) MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Results from Wisconsin counties show a conservative state Supreme Court justice has won re-election in a race seen as a referendum on Republican Gov. Scott Walker's divisive union rights law.
County tallies show Justice David Prosser defeated JoAnne Kloppenburg by 7,316 votes.
State election officials must review those numbers before declaring an official winner. They say they won't start that process until Kloppenburg has a chance to request a recount. She has until Wednesday.
Kloppenburg, a little-known state attorney, got a boost after supporters worked to turn anger over the union law against Prosser.
The race was too close to call after unofficial returns were reported last week. Then an error was discovered that gave Prosser a 7,500-vote lead.
Canvass shows conservative wins Wis. court race - CBS News
And there ya have it...
Ok folks, shows over... Drive safe... Last one out please turn off the lights and lock up...
Who's afraid of a recount? The winning percentage was less than .5%, so if klappenbagger wants a recount she's entitled to one, just the way the law says, not some long drawn out chad hunt.Your assertions of past malfeasance are ridiculous, there is no evedence of past malfeasance no matter how much you claim there is. Your imaginings of wrongdoing do not make anything actual wrong doing. Whether or not a hand recount is "merritted" in your opinion is irrelevant as there are laws and rules which must be followed which render your oppionion meaningless. That you imagin Nickalaus feverishly filling in bubbles on blank ballots is not reason for an investigation, niehter is it evedence that any such activity took place, and neither is the AP reporting the wrong numbers evedence of anything.If anything merits a 100% manual recount, this does, especially considering the past malfeasance of this woman. A county of over 200,000 with over 90% turnout? Things that make you go Hmmmmm....
Ridiculous are they? ROFLMAO...
People don't usually get immunity granted if they aren't guilty of anything. There is also the matter of her being audited in the past because of her "practices".
Why are you so afraid of a recount?
Try reading the story dumbass. It has nothing to do with election fraud, it has to do with staff working on campaigns and it was BOTH parties caucus' doing it.There is no evedence of any previous voter fraud in waukesha county, and you're a completely disingenuous hack if you think there is. Which of course is explantion for why you think there is. Some liberal blogs allegations do not comprise "evedence" of anything. the link to the milwaukee PD investigation highliting the difference in ballots cast vs votes counted in the SAME election is linked in the thread. In Milwaukee county it was 4600-5300 more votes counted than ballots casts which the special investigations unit found was "mostly" explainable due to same day registration, provisional ballots, paper ballots, absentee ballots, and the typical machine error "overvotes) with a very few instances of possible actual voter fraud. The reasons the milwaukee PD gives are EXACTLY the same reasons Waukesha county sites with the exception of the "overvote" problem, which is minor.Benny's either fucking stupid or just insipidly stubborn, folks. The chronology of the posts clearly shows me posting a link to an article that reports on Nikolaus' previous actions regarding voter fraud.
April 7, 2011-Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus magically delivers enough votes for former boss Prosser | Solidarity Wisconsin
Obviously Benny just ignores what he doesn't like, then babbles on like the willfully ignorant neocon parrot that he is. I'll respond when Benny can actually discuss ALL the information available.
Once again, Benny tries to substitute his willful ignorance, supposition and conjecture for ALL the facts. Here's something else for Benny to deny:
COUNTY CLERK CANDIDATE PART OF STATE CAUCUS INVESTIGATION WAUKESHA POLITICIAN, A FORMER STATE WORKER, GRANTED IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION IN CASE.(LOCAL/WISCONSIN)
Publication:The Wisconsin State Journal (Madison, WI) Publish date:June 4, 2002
COUNTY CLERK CANDIDATE PART OF STATE CAUCUS INVESTIGATION WAUKESHA POLITICIAN, A FORMER STATE WORKER, GRANTED IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION IN CASE.(LOCAL/WISCONSIN) - The Wisconsin State Journal (Madison, WI) | HighBeam Research
Like I said before, I'll wait for the re-count and/or a full investigation to get the official word on the legitmacy of the latest election.
Try reading the story dumbass. It has nothing to do with election fraud, it has to do with staff working on campaigns and it was BOTH parties caucus' doing it.There is no evedence of any previous voter fraud in waukesha county, and you're a completely disingenuous hack if you think there is. Which of course is explantion for why you think there is. Some liberal blogs allegations do not comprise "evedence" of anything. the link to the milwaukee PD investigation highliting the difference in ballots cast vs votes counted in the SAME election is linked in the thread. In Milwaukee county it was 4600-5300 more votes counted than ballots casts which the special investigations unit found was "mostly" explainable due to same day registration, provisional ballots, paper ballots, absentee ballots, and the typical machine error "overvotes) with a very few instances of possible actual voter fraud. The reasons the milwaukee PD gives are EXACTLY the same reasons Waukesha county sites with the exception of the "overvote" problem, which is minor.
Once again, Benny tries to substitute his willful ignorance, supposition and conjecture for ALL the facts. Here's something else for Benny to deny:
COUNTY CLERK CANDIDATE PART OF STATE CAUCUS INVESTIGATION WAUKESHA POLITICIAN, A FORMER STATE WORKER, GRANTED IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION IN CASE.(LOCAL/WISCONSIN)
Publication:The Wisconsin State Journal (Madison, WI) Publish date:June 4, 2002
COUNTY CLERK CANDIDATE PART OF STATE CAUCUS INVESTIGATION WAUKESHA POLITICIAN, A FORMER STATE WORKER, GRANTED IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION IN CASE.(LOCAL/WISCONSIN) - The Wisconsin State Journal (Madison, WI) | HighBeam Research
Like I said before, I'll wait for the re-count and/or a full investigation to get the official word on the legitmacy of the latest election.
her and other staffers, from both parties, blew the whistle on the practice in exchange for immunity... that would be how blowing the whistle works.Try reading the story dumbass. It has nothing to do with election fraud, it has to do with staff working on campaigns and it was BOTH parties caucus' doing it.Once again, Benny tries to substitute his willful ignorance, supposition and conjecture for ALL the facts. Here's something else for Benny to deny:
COUNTY CLERK CANDIDATE PART OF STATE CAUCUS INVESTIGATION WAUKESHA POLITICIAN, A FORMER STATE WORKER, GRANTED IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION IN CASE.(LOCAL/WISCONSIN)
Publication:The Wisconsin State Journal (Madison, WI) Publish date:June 4, 2002
COUNTY CLERK CANDIDATE PART OF STATE CAUCUS INVESTIGATION WAUKESHA POLITICIAN, A FORMER STATE WORKER, GRANTED IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION IN CASE.(LOCAL/WISCONSIN) - The Wisconsin State Journal (Madison, WI) | HighBeam Research
Like I said before, I'll wait for the re-count and/or a full investigation to get the official word on the legitmacy of the latest election.
I'm beginning to suspect that Benny is really that fucking dumb and not just another insipidly stubborn neocon wonk.
I stand corrected on this one count, it's not "voter fraud" in the strict definition.
Bottom line: the article I presented shows our little Kwaukesha darling copping a plea......immunity from prosecution for turning evidence.
That is a logical falacy, one does not have to be guilty of anything to accept immunity in exchange for testimony. The granting of immunity is not evedence of guilt, it's evedence of the possibility of guilt, which is meaningless.In other words, she had to be guilty in order to make that deal.
and that hasn't happenned. last time i checked your suspicions were pretty irrelevant.Last time I check, screwing around with the votes to change the out come of an election is illegal....as the "results" are fraudulent in nature due to tampering.
There is no similar circumstance, your imaginings just don't create one. An incorrect unofficial tally was reported to the AP, the correct tally was reported officially through the canvasing effort. There is no vote fraud (which even if there were tampering wouldn't be the case... it would be elections fraud). There was no evedence of any election fraud. There was a mistake made in reporting the unofficial tally to the AP, which has no legal affect on the outcome of the election or the official tabulation of the votes. The official tabulation was verified by county officials and opposition party canvassers. Thats it. There is no "there" there.So Benny can mentally fondle himself over his victory. That a similar situation has happened again with the same player is suspicious to say the least. Benny and his neocon compadres are happy with the results, so they don't care. Me...I'll wait for the re-count and/or a full investigation to get the official word on the legitmacy of the latest election.
her and other staffers, from both parties, blew the whistle on the practice in exchange for immunity... that would be how blowing the whistle works. That is a logical falacy, one does not have to be guilty of anything to accept immunity in exchange for testimony. The granting of immunity is not evedence of guilt, it's evedence of the possibility of guilt, which is meaningless.Try reading the story dumbass. It has nothing to do with election fraud, it has to do with staff working on campaigns and it was BOTH parties caucus' doing it.
I'm beginning to suspect that Benny is really that fucking dumb and not just another insipidly stubborn neocon wonk.
I stand corrected on this one count, it's not "voter fraud" in the strict definition.
Bottom line: the article I presented shows our little Kwaukesha darling copping a plea......immunity from prosecution for turning evidence.and that hasn't happenned. last time i checked your suspicions were pretty irrelevant.Last time I check, screwing around with the votes to change the out come of an election is illegal....as the "results" are fraudulent in nature due to tampering.There is no similar circumstance, your imaginings just don't create one. An incorrect unofficial tally was reported to the AP, the correct tally was reported officially through the canvasing effort. There is no vote fraud (which even if there were tampering wouldn't be the case... it would be elections fraud). There was no evedence of any election fraud. There was a mistake made in reporting the unofficial tally to the AP, which has no legal affect on the outcome of the election or the official tabulation of the votes. The official tabulation was verified by county officials and opposition party canvassers. Thats it. There is no "there" there.So Benny can mentally fondle himself over his victory. That a similar situation has happened again with the same player is suspicious to say the least. Benny and his neocon compadres are happy with the results, so they don't care. Me...I'll wait for the re-count and/or a full investigation to get the official word on the legitmacy of the latest election.
Your logical falacy does not stand up. Immunity from prosecution is not proof of criminal activity. It's kind of like the 5th, not saying doesn't make you guilty or not guilty and cannot be taken as an admission of guilt, its just not saying because there is a POSSIBILITY that you MAY be incriminated.her and other staffers, from both parties, blew the whistle on the practice in exchange for immunity... that would be how blowing the whistle works. That is a logical falacy, one does not have to be guilty of anything to accept immunity in exchange for testimony. The granting of immunity is not evedence of guilt, it's evedence of the possibility of guilt, which is meaningless.and that hasn't happenned. last time i checked your suspicions were pretty irrelevant.I'm beginning to suspect that Benny is really that fucking dumb and not just another insipidly stubborn neocon wonk.
I stand corrected on this one count, it's not "voter fraud" in the strict definition.
Bottom line: the article I presented shows our little Kwaukesha darling copping a plea......immunity from prosecution for turning evidence.There is no similar circumstance, your imaginings just don't create one. An incorrect unofficial tally was reported to the AP, the correct tally was reported officially through the canvasing effort. There is no vote fraud (which even if there were tampering wouldn't be the case... it would be elections fraud). There was no evedence of any election fraud. There was a mistake made in reporting the unofficial tally to the AP, which has no legal affect on the outcome of the election or the official tabulation of the votes. The official tabulation was verified by county officials and opposition party canvassers. Thats it. There is no "there" there.So Benny can mentally fondle himself over his victory. That a similar situation has happened again with the same player is suspicious to say the least. Benny and his neocon compadres are happy with the results, so they don't care. Me...I'll wait for the re-count and/or a full investigation to get the official word on the legitmacy of the latest election.
I love it when willfully ignorant neocon wonks like Benny try to redefine reality to suit their belief system.
Pay attention Benny: whistle blowing DOES NOT require immunity from prosecution. Immunity from prosecution is granted to people WHO ARE COMPLICIT IN A CRIME, but are willing to turn States evidence against THEIR COHORTS in exchange for NOT going to jail themselves. "Whistle blowers" are employees who turn in their corrupt bosses/supervisors or illegal practices by their employers, and who recently had to have new legislation passed to protect them from hostile retribution by their companies. If you can legally and factually prove me wrong on this, Benny then please do...that means something other than your opinion, supposition and conjecture, Benny.
Now as I showed with the previous posts link, you have AGAIN the same person involved in "misplacing" votes that just happen to win the day for the GOP candidate. Coincidence? Perhaps...but when a person who beat a rap by turning rat is involved, I'll wait for a more in depth review.
Your logical falacy does not stand up. First off, learn to spell, it's f-a-l-l-a-c-y. And there is no such thing as a "logical" fallacy...another sign that Benny's more comfortable with his version of reality than actual reality. Immunity from prosecution is not proof of criminal activity. It's kind of like the 5th, not saying doesn't make you guilty or not guilty and cannot be taken as an admission of guilt, its just not saying because there is a POSSIBILITY that you MAY be incriminated.her and other staffers, from both parties, blew the whistle on the practice in exchange for immunity... that would be how blowing the whistle works. That is a logical falacy, one does not have to be guilty of anything to accept immunity in exchange for testimony. The granting of immunity is not evedence of guilt, it's evedence of the possibility of guilt, which is meaningless.and that hasn't happenned. last time i checked your suspicions were pretty irrelevant.There is no similar circumstance, your imaginings just don't create one. An incorrect unofficial tally was reported to the AP, the correct tally was reported officially through the canvasing effort. There is no vote fraud (which even if there were tampering wouldn't be the case... it would be elections fraud). There was no evedence of any election fraud. There was a mistake made in reporting the unofficial tally to the AP, which has no legal affect on the outcome of the election or the official tabulation of the votes. The official tabulation was verified by county officials and opposition party canvassers. Thats it. There is no "there" there.
I love it when willfully ignorant neocon wonks like Benny try to redefine reality to suit their belief system.
Pay attention Benny: whistle blowing DOES NOT require immunity from prosecution. Immunity from prosecution is granted to people WHO ARE COMPLICIT IN A CRIME, but are willing to turn States evidence against THEIR COHORTS in exchange for NOT going to jail themselves. "Whistle blowers" are employees who turn in their corrupt bosses/supervisors or illegal practices by their employers, and who recently had to have new legislation passed to protect them from hostile retribution by their companies. If you can legally and factually prove me wrong on this, Benny then please do...that means something other than your opinion, supposition and conjecture, Benny.
Now as I showed with the previous posts link, you have AGAIN the same person involved in "misplacing" votes that just happen to win the day for the GOP candidate. Coincidence? Perhaps...but when a person who beat a rap by turning rat is involved, I'll wait for a more in depth review.
I said before I didn't want YOUR opinion, Benny....I wanted you to provide fact based, documented, valid definitions as to what a whistle blower is and what Immunity from prosecution entails. You, Benny, don't know WTF you're talking about. So once again, I'll have to school you. Observe and learn:
State and federal statutes may grant witnesses immunity from prosecution for the use of their testimony in court or before a grand jury. Sometimes, the testimony of one witness is so valuable to the goals of crime prevention and justice that the promise of allowing that witness to go unpunished is a fair trade. For example, a drug dealer's testimony that could help law enforcement to destroy an entire illegal drug-manufacturing network is more beneficial to society than is the prosecution of that lone drug dealer. Although the FIFTH AMENDMENT to the U.S. Constitution grants witnesses a PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION, the U.S. Supreme Court has permitted prosecutors to overcome this privilege by granting witnesses immunity. Prosecutors have the sole discretion to grant immunity to witnesses who appear before a grand jury or at trial.
States employ one of two approaches to prosecutorial immunity: Use immunity prohibits only the witness's compelled testimony, and evidence stemming from that testimony, from being used to prosecute the witness. The witness still may be prosecuted so long as the prosecutor can obtain other physical, testimonial, or CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE apart from the witness's testimony. Transactional immunity completely immunizes the witness from prosecution for any offense to which the testimony relates.
Immunity - Immunity From Prosecution - Witness, Testimony, Grant, Witnesses, Drug, and Investigations
Accepting immunity from prosecution is no different, and sorry to burst your bubble but if a whistle blower is complicit in a crime or believes they MAY have been complicit in a crime they would be an idiot not to seek immunity in exchange for their testimony, and the state would be idiots if they didn't offer it at least conditionally. You don't know that anything different than that occurred as you have no more of the facts than I do. Could be either one.
Your supposition and conjecture is irrelevent, Benny. Here's another dose of reality for you:
Whistleblowers are individuals who have the courage and integrity to stand up and call attention to wrongdoing in government and private industry. They report illegal activities because it is the right thing to do, even though it can trigger retaliation.
San Francisco Whistleblower Lawyer :: What is a Whistleblower Lawsuit? :: Sacramento, California Qui Tam Attorney
Also dumbass, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, no votes were misplaced. Thats just your imagination working in overtime. The only thing that happenned here was that an incorrect unofficial tabulation of the votes was passed on to the AP, and that it was incorrect was discovered in the official canvas conducted by the county officials under the scrutiny of canvas watchers from both parties. There are no official acts to investigate. there is no "there" there. The only thing an investigation can show is how the incorrect number was given to the AP in the unofficial tabulation which has no bearring on the outcome of the election and its official results.
Are you honestly going to go with "there's no such thing as a logical fallacy"?Your logical falacy does not stand up. First off, learn to spell, it's f-a-l-l-a-c-y. And there is no such thing as a "logical" fallacy...another sign that Benny's more comfortable with his version of reality than actual reality. Immunity from prosecution is not proof of criminal activity. It's kind of like the 5th, not saying doesn't make you guilty or not guilty and cannot be taken as an admission of guilt, its just not saying because there is a POSSIBILITY that you MAY be incriminated.I love it when willfully ignorant neocon wonks like Benny try to redefine reality to suit their belief system.
Pay attention Benny: whistle blowing DOES NOT require immunity from prosecution. Immunity from prosecution is granted to people WHO ARE COMPLICIT IN A CRIME, but are willing to turn States evidence against THEIR COHORTS in exchange for NOT going to jail themselves. "Whistle blowers" are employees who turn in their corrupt bosses/supervisors or illegal practices by their employers, and who recently had to have new legislation passed to protect them from hostile retribution by their companies. If you can legally and factually prove me wrong on this, Benny then please do...that means something other than your opinion, supposition and conjecture, Benny.
Now as I showed with the previous posts link, you have AGAIN the same person involved in "misplacing" votes that just happen to win the day for the GOP candidate. Coincidence? Perhaps...but when a person who beat a rap by turning rat is involved, I'll wait for a more in depth review.
I said before I didn't want YOUR opinion, Benny....I wanted you to provide fact based, documented, valid definitions as to what a whistle blower is and what Immunity from prosecution entails. You, Benny, don't know WTF you're talking about. So once again, I'll have to school you. Observe and learn:
State and federal statutes may grant witnesses immunity from prosecution for the use of their testimony in court or before a grand jury. Sometimes, the testimony of one witness is so valuable to the goals of crime prevention and justice that the promise of allowing that witness to go unpunished is a fair trade. For example, a drug dealer's testimony that could help law enforcement to destroy an entire illegal drug-manufacturing network is more beneficial to society than is the prosecution of that lone drug dealer. Although the FIFTH AMENDMENT to the U.S. Constitution grants witnesses a PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION, the U.S. Supreme Court has permitted prosecutors to overcome this privilege by granting witnesses immunity. Prosecutors have the sole discretion to grant immunity to witnesses who appear before a grand jury or at trial.
States employ one of two approaches to prosecutorial immunity: Use immunity prohibits only the witness's compelled testimony, and evidence stemming from that testimony, from being used to prosecute the witness. The witness still may be prosecuted so long as the prosecutor can obtain other physical, testimonial, or CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE apart from the witness's testimony. Transactional immunity completely immunizes the witness from prosecution for any offense to which the testimony relates.
Immunity - Immunity From Prosecution - Witness, Testimony, Grant, Witnesses, Drug, and Investigations
Accepting immunity from prosecution is no different, and sorry to burst your bubble but if a whistle blower is complicit in a crime or believes they MAY have been complicit in a crime they would be an idiot not to seek immunity in exchange for their testimony, and the state would be idiots if they didn't offer it at least conditionally. You don't know that anything different than that occurred as you have no more of the facts than I do. Could be either one.
Your supposition and conjecture is irrelevent, Benny. Here's another dose of reality for you:
Whistleblowers are individuals who have the courage and integrity to stand up and call attention to wrongdoing in government and private industry. They report illegal activities because it is the right thing to do, even though it can trigger retaliation.
San Francisco Whistleblower Lawyer :: What is a Whistleblower Lawsuit? :: Sacramento, California Qui Tam Attorney
Also dumbass, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, no votes were misplaced. Thats just your imagination working in overtime. The only thing that happenned here was that an incorrect unofficial tabulation of the votes was passed on to the AP, and that it was incorrect was discovered in the official canvas conducted by the county officials under the scrutiny of canvas watchers from both parties. There are no official acts to investigate. there is no "there" there. The only thing an investigation can show is how the incorrect number was given to the AP in the unofficial tabulation which has no bearring on the outcome of the election and its official results.
Your last paragraph is just a regurgitation of his myopic viewpoint, supposition and cojecture. I've already presented two links as to what is the point of contention and the history regarding the votes that were initially not included in the tally. I'll wait for an investigation (if any) to give clarity to this. Benny will just keep bleating his BS like the willfully ignorant neocon sheep that he is.
Are you honestly going to go with "there's no such thing as a logical fallacy"? well, at least the little dope learned how to spell the word correctly...my teachings have not all been in vain.Your logical falacy does not stand up. First off, learn to spell, it's f-a-l-l-a-c-y. And there is no such thing as a "logical" fallacy...another sign that Benny's more comfortable with his version of reality than actual reality. Immunity from prosecution is not proof of criminal activity. It's kind of like the 5th, not saying doesn't make you guilty or not guilty and cannot be taken as an admission of guilt, its just not saying because there is a POSSIBILITY that you MAY be incriminated.
I said before I didn't want YOUR opinion, Benny....I wanted you to provide fact based, documented, valid definitions as to what a whistle blower is and what Immunity from prosecution entails. You, Benny, don't know WTF you're talking about. So once again, I'll have to school you. Observe and learn:
State and federal statutes may grant witnesses immunity from prosecution for the use of their testimony in court or before a grand jury. Sometimes, the testimony of one witness is so valuable to the goals of crime prevention and justice that the promise of allowing that witness to go unpunished is a fair trade. For example, a drug dealer's testimony that could help law enforcement to destroy an entire illegal drug-manufacturing network is more beneficial to society than is the prosecution of that lone drug dealer. Although the FIFTH AMENDMENT to the U.S. Constitution grants witnesses a PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION, the U.S. Supreme Court has permitted prosecutors to overcome this privilege by granting witnesses immunity. Prosecutors have the sole discretion to grant immunity to witnesses who appear before a grand jury or at trial.
States employ one of two approaches to prosecutorial immunity: Use immunity prohibits only the witness's compelled testimony, and evidence stemming from that testimony, from being used to prosecute the witness. The witness still may be prosecuted so long as the prosecutor can obtain other physical, testimonial, or CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE apart from the witness's testimony. Transactional immunity completely immunizes the witness from prosecution for any offense to which the testimony relates.
Immunity - Immunity From Prosecution - Witness, Testimony, Grant, Witnesses, Drug, and Investigations
Accepting immunity from prosecution is no different, and sorry to burst your bubble but if a whistle blower is complicit in a crime or believes they MAY have been complicit in a crime they would be an idiot not to seek immunity in exchange for their testimony, and the state would be idiots if they didn't offer it at least conditionally. You don't know that anything different than that occurred as you have no more of the facts than I do. Could be either one.
Your supposition and conjecture is irrelevent, Benny. Here's another dose of reality for you:
Whistleblowers are individuals who have the courage and integrity to stand up and call attention to wrongdoing in government and private industry. They report illegal activities because it is the right thing to do, even though it can trigger retaliation.
San Francisco Whistleblower Lawyer :: What is a Whistleblower Lawsuit? :: Sacramento, California Qui Tam Attorney
Also dumbass, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, no votes were misplaced. Thats just your imagination working in overtime. The only thing that happenned here was that an incorrect unofficial tabulation of the votes was passed on to the AP, and that it was incorrect was discovered in the official canvas conducted by the county officials under the scrutiny of canvas watchers from both parties. There are no official acts to investigate. there is no "there" there. The only thing an investigation can show is how the incorrect number was given to the AP in the unofficial tabulation which has no bearring on the outcome of the election and its official results.
Your last paragraph is just a regurgitation of his myopic viewpoint, supposition and cojecture. I've already presented two links as to what is the point of contention and the history regarding the votes that were initially not included in the tally. I'll wait for an investigation (if any) to give clarity to this. Benny will just keep bleating his BS like the willfully ignorant neocon sheep that he is.
also dumbass, nothing you've posted would in any way refute that the acceptance of immunity is not evedence of complicity in any crime. It is merely evedence that the person who accepted it believes they could be prosecuted for a crime based on thier testimony and would like to avoid the possibility of being prosecuted. To be guilty of actually committing a crime requires more than you believing you might be and the state threatening to charge you with one.
