Wisconsin Official Blows Whistle on Zuckerberg-Funded Group That ‘Seized Control’ of Election

BY MATT MARGOLIS, PJ MEDIA             JUN 23, 2021 3:40 PM ET

A now-retired elections clerk from Brown County, Wisconsin, says political activists working for a group funded by Mark Zuckerberg “seized control” of the November elections in key cities in the state, including Green Bay, according to a report from Just the News. Career experts found themselves sidelined as these activists made last-minute changes that may have violated state law.“They had no business doing that,” ex-Brown County clerk Sandy Juno told Just the News.

According to the report, the Zuckerberg-funded Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) “injected chaos and unnecessary changes to how ballots were counted in Green Bay in November.”“We need to be really on top of this, because if this is how elections are going to go, we won’t have election integrity,” Juno warned.

The group poured millions of dollars into multiple key Wisconsin Democratic strongholds in the months leading up to last year’s presidential race, ostensibly in an effort to shore up voting systems and infrastructure amid the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic. The organization was ultimately funded with more than a third of a billion dollars by Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan; that money was funneled to additional election funding efforts across the country.

Juno claimed that following the infusion of the CTCL cash into Green Bay “the mayor’s office and chief of staff began to take over election functions.”

“And that is not something under state statutes they have the authority to do,” she said, “because under Wisconsin law, municipal clerks, the county clerk and the Wisconsin Elections Commission are the individuals charged with running elections.”

“As we got closer to the November election we found out that this outside group had come in and was basically trying to redo our forms and documents that we use statewide. And these people were from out of state and had no business doing that,” Juno explained.

Emails revealed earlier this year showed efforts by CTCL and other groups to, in part, redesign ballot instructions and other election documents in multiple cities around the state, including Green Bay.

Juno said the state normally has a clear procedure by which such alterations are made.

“As clerks, we meet with our state elections commission at least three times a year,” she told Solomon, “and [we] have continuous and ongoing correspondence with them, so that, you know, the whole state is conducting the elections in harmony.

“When you have an outside group coming in, and all of a sudden trying to dictate how to run an election — and these people were all from out of state. They had no expertise in Wisconsin, for our processes and procedures for conducting an election.”

Juno argued that the management “had an impact on the overall election,” and that the process itself was “very closely monitored by individuals who are normally not running elections.”

Juno said private money “should stay out of the system.”

This revelation is particularly significant because President Trump won Wisconsin in 2016, and Biden won the state in 2020 by only about 20,000 votes out of 2.24 million votes cast for president. Is it possible that outside groups like CTCL and the chaos they caused had something to do with that? I can’t say for sure, but considering what we’ve learned so far from the audits in Arizona and Georgia a I think it’s a possibility.

June 24, 2021 | 3 Comments »

Leave a Reply

3 Comments / 3 Comments

  1. Some things you can fake, but you forget to do so – it’s pronounced as an unforced error while stealing the presidential election. 😀

    EXPLOSIVE REPORT! WE CAUGHT THEM AGAIN: New Findings Shows Coordination and Collusion Between PA and GA in 2020 Election Steal
    By Joe Hoft
    Published June 25, 2021 at 1:30pm
    310 Comments
    Share (177)
    Tweet
    Share to Gab
    TelegramTelegram
    Clouthub Share
    Email

    We obtained a report showing what appears to be a coordinated effort in posting results in the 2020 Election between the states of Pennsylvania and Georgia. The timestamps of updates to the 2020 Election results in these two states are too similar to be a coincidence.

    The report below shows a comparison between the Presidential results recorded for Pennsylvania and Georgia in the 2020 Election. Per a review using the Edison data released after the election, the report shows tabulations in the election which are far too consequential.

    Below is a chart of the results of the Presidential election for each state. The charts are similar and show similar patterns at first glance, especially noting the time from when counting started in the election.

    TRENDING: President Trump Cheers HUGE Court Win in Georgia – Calls Out “No Good” Michigan RINOs, “They’ll Be Overthrown” (VIDEO)

    Next, the study identified some key times in the election counting process. These times were recorded by date by hour by minute using the UTC time zone which is the time zone used in the Edison data. (For example, 4d 07:41:48 is November 4th at 7:41:48 in the morning UTC time.) Here were some key times identified in the study:

    Next, the study shows these same timestamps which are only minutes apart between states in most instances. The chart shows that not much activity was reported in the time periods between timestamps A and B, between C and D, and between E and F which was unique. This indicates that the elections between the states of Pennsylvania and Georgia may have been coordinated.

    Also, the pauses that occurred between A and B, C and D, and E and F are to date unexplained. Why was there a pause in reporting during these time periods that occurred at the exact same time? Was there coordination of reporting taking place?

    The report notes that the time period needed to count ballots in Ohio, for example, was 6.5 hours for 5.6 million ballots. Why did it take so long for Pennsylvania and Georgia to count their ballots? The study overall shows that there was a coordination in counting procedures between states.

    Finally, we also noted that President Trump’s lead was ultimately overturned at the timestamp referred to as F above. At that point, Biden took the lead. In Georgia, another 12,600 ballots were counted after Biden was given the lead (after timestamp F) and nearly every batch of ballots was recorded with the same percent of ballots to Biden and Trump.

    In addition, we noted that at timestamp F, in Pennsylvania is when Biden took the lead there. From that point forward all of Pennsylvania’s ballot batches also were recorded at nearly the same ratio giving Biden the majority of the ballots by the same percent (50% for Biden to 49% for President Trump). In Pennsylvania, another 60,600 ballots were counted after timestamp F.

    thegatewaypundit.com/2021/06/caught-new-report-shows-coordination-collusion-pa-ga-2020-election/

  2. The judge allowed the defendants in the Fulton Co. case to remove the offices of the Fulton Co, the Fulton Board of Electors offices, and Fulton County Clerk offices to all be removed as defendants in the case. He also allowed individual members of the Fulton County Board of Elections to be added as defendants in lieu of the previous Offices. The concern in doing so is the issue of Sovereign Immunity. Sovereign Immunity is a legal statute that prevents the state from being sued. I suspect that a Biven suit will result from this move by the judge, but no one has stated this as the case. A Bivens suit allows officials to be sued directly and they are personally responsible for the penalties and the court costs. A stipulation of the Bivens suit requires that the officials in question were operating with some unsanctioned bias, like ballot stuffing, so I think it would work. But again no one is suggesting this that I have found….

    BREAKING: Court Rules For Petitioners Again In Fulton Ballot Inspection Case
    by CD Media StaffJune 24, 20212 6346
    Share12
    Fulton County Attorneys Try And Claim Sovereign Immunity In GA Election Fraud Case

    Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gab TV

    This story is developing…

    The Henry County, GA court of Judge Amero has ruled in favor of peititioners to continue scanning ballots for election fraud evidence. CDMedia will bring more information as we receive it. Below is a comment from the head of VoterGA.org, Garland Favorito.

    ———————–

    VoterGA Comment:

    “We are pleased that the court has ruled in our favor again for the fifth time. The ruling substitutes Defendants by replacing currently named government organizations with individual board members we named originally in our lawsuit. It also moots Don Samuels’ attempt to dismiss our case. This continues the string of victories we have including how we obtained the original protective order, conditional approval to inspect ballots, access to ballot images, and the order to unseal the ballots.”

    Garland