BenNatuf
Limit Authority
Thats a lie. Why do you insist on lying? The investigation into both the democratics and GOP caucus' had nothing to do with vote tampering, they had to do with staff working on campaigns. Once again the only thing you've shown is that you're a horrible liar who's even stupid enough to link the very story you lie about proving you're lying. Why are you such a liar? Can't you help yourself?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 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 evidence of complicity in any crime. It is merely evidence that the person who accepted it believes they could be prosecuted for a crime based on their 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.
As the chronology of the posts shows folks, Benny just ignores what he doesn't like and continues to bray his version of reality like the jackass he is. Benny just keeps injecting his personal supposition and conjecture where the legal definitions are in order to make his opinions and assertions seem more viable.....I almost pity our insipidly stubborn and willfully ignorant Benny...almost. Bottom line: you have a woman who was granted immunity from prosecution in order to testify against others arrested for vote tampering...
Once again you're just a horrible liar. When a whistle blower is complicit in a crime, they are routinely granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for their testimony. The truth is what it is, neither you nor I have any proof that, that, is not exactly what happened. Could be she was implicated in the investigation and gave testimony in exchange for immunity, could be she blew the whistle on it and was granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for her testimony. That you don't know either is possible is evidence of nothing except your own stupidity..the same woman is now the center of questionable actions regarding tallying of another elections votes. Any cop/lawyer worth their salt will tell you that she is suspect via her court record...and NO ONE grants immunity from prosecution to someone who was NOT indicted for a crime or held as a suspect (if this exist, I'd like to see the legal case precedent). As we've seen earlier, Benny didn't even know the damned difference between whistle blowers and immunity from prosecution!
The recount will be done according to the laws of the state of WI. I would imagine that means a machine recount for machine countable ballots and hand recount for ballots that can't be tallied on a machine... just like they did the first time.As of now, the move to recount has commenced. Whether it will be an actual paper trail recount or just some electronic review is another story....I'll wait the outcome....and meanwhile watch Benny just parrot the SOS ad nauseum.....chuckling like a Benny fool while pushing neologism mindset