The Stein/Cinton recount losing major momentum with several legal set-backs today

It's important to make clear the Commonwealth Court case is not filing for a recount," said Department of State spokesperson Wanda Murren. "They are contesting the entire election. In order to do that, they have to prove there was something illegal about the election. It's possible the judge may order a recount. Otherwise, there is no mechanism for a statewide recount, unless the final margin is less than 0.5 percent.

Stein is trying to take away the rights of PA voters to have a say in this election.
Her court case is attempting to invalidate the ENTIRE STATE, not just request a recount!!
She wants to remove our electors from the vote, with no valid reason.

WHY would she attempt that, other than to help Clinton?

Stein is officially an enemy of our country.

source

a reply to: BlueAjah

I think that this fits with the theory that Clinton is attempting to use this "recount" along with other schemes, such as flipping faithless electors.
If she can get PA thrown out totally, that is 20 less electors that they need to flip.

a reply to: Indigo5

To me this is terrifying. I'd rather see the ballots counted by hand in full public view with total transparency. I have no confidence in machine tabulators.

If they could have had a virus on election day, then they can have one for a recount. Zero confidence in what is going on and it doesn't help that Stein didn't want to fight for the hand recount.

I get a bad feeling we are being poised to completely move away from paper ballots...because, hey, machines count them.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Yeah...but cutting down all of those trees to make PAPER ballots causes Global Warming...or Global Cooling...or Global Something...

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Indigo5

To me this is terrifying. I'd rather see the ballots counted by hand in full public view with total transparency. I have no confidence in machine tabulators.

If they could have had a virus on election day, then they can have one for a recount. Zero confidence in what is going on and it doesn't help that Stein didn't want to fight for the hand recount.

I get a bad feeling we are being poised to completely move away from paper ballots...because, hey, machines count them.

She did fight for a hand-recount and was denied?

And according to MI and WI law on recounts...which I happened to read...They must be announced and done in a public forum...aka a local open office or facility where any joe public can go and watch as it happens.

Personally. I'd like a couple reps from DOJ, NSA and a private security firm chosen at random to examine a few of the machines for tampering in the code. Prior to this election MANY people were sounding off on how easy it would be to hack a voting machine...the average age of voting machines is 10 years old...think about your PC 10 years ago...grade-schoolers in india could hack that technology.

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: Voiceofthemajority

As of this evening...in Mich, some 80,000 voted and didnt get to vote for President...just everything else...so they are suspicious that the optical counting programs were either flawed or hacked, and they are going ahead having until Dec 18th I believe to re-count...by hand.
...

You know you didn't HAVE to vote for President right? I mean it was only the two presidential candidates with probably the worst negatives ever. Stein Lost, Clinton lost. Move on.....

Proof hindsight is 20/20... if I knew what I know today, I would never have voted for Stein. Had my suspicions... sigh... this whole ordeal saddens me...

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Indigo5

To me this is terrifying. I'd rather see the ballots counted by hand in full public view with total transparency. I have no confidence in machine tabulators.

If they could have had a virus on election day, then they can have one for a recount. Zero confidence in what is going on and it doesn't help that Stein didn't want to fight for the hand recount.

I get a bad feeling we are being poised to completely move away from paper ballots...because, hey, machines count them.

She did fight for a hand-recount and was denied?

And according to MI and WI law on recounts...which I happened to read...They must be announced and done in a public forum...aka a local open office or facility where any joe public can go and watch as it happens.

Personally. I'd like a couple reps from DOJ, NSA and a private security firm chosen at random to examine a few of the machines for tampering in the code. Prior to this election MANY people were sounding off on how easy it would be to hack a voting machine...the average age of voting machines is 10 years old...think about your PC 10 years ago...grade-schoolers in india could hack that technology.

By 'fight' I meant 'appeal.' She's not going to appeal the decision to not do a hand recount...which, IMO, is the very thing to fight for if she thinks machine tabulators might have been tampered with. Link

And I don't see how it's transparent to watch people feed ballots into a machine and see the machine spit out a total.

I remember the hand recounts in Florida. People mocked the pregnant and dangling chads on the punchcard ballots, but there was nothing funny about them -- they showed voter intent. That's why paper ballots are the gold standard. They can be examined to determine voter intent.

Anyway, I am suspicious per the usual. A hand recount was worth fighting for...err...worth appealing the decision to not do one -- IF Stein's motivations were genuine, but I don't believe for a second that they are.

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: Voiceofthemajority

As of this evening...in Mich, some 80,000 voted and didnt get to vote for President...just everything else...so they are suspicious that the optical counting programs were either flawed or hacked, and they are going ahead having until Dec 18th I believe to re-count...by hand.
...

You know you didn't HAVE to vote for President right? I mean it was only the two presidential candidates with probably the worst negatives ever. Stein Lost, Clinton lost. Move on.....

In 2012, about 40,000 people in Michigan didn't vote for president. I can easily believe that twice as many people decided they weren't going to vote for either Trump or Clinton.

In other news, it's being reported that Republicans will file an objection to Michigan's recount on Friday. Given that Michigan has already conducted a recount of the vote, I'm hoping they rule that another recount is not warranted. At a minimum, perhaps they'll force Stein to pay for the full cost of the recount, so taxpayers don't have to pay for this farce.

Yet Another miserable Dem failure.They need a Yuuge mass cry in!

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Don't disagree about paper ballots being the Gold Standard...She did request a paper ballot recount, then expedited a legal protest demanding it when WI refused (it was denied by the judge) and only then decided not to appeal only because that legal battle would have delayed the recount getting done before the electoral college meets in a couple weeks.

Time matters here..

Time constraints and an interest in focusing resources on the recount prompted Stein not to appeal, her spokeswoman said. The count is scheduled to run from Thursday through 8 p.m. Dec. 12.

host.madison.com... 8348472da812.html

a reply to: MotherMayEye

BTW - I am also confident that on the remote chance a virus was included in the calibration SW installed on the voting tabulation machines right before the election...It would have been done by a state actor that is sophisticated enough to include an eraser to cover it's tracks. Meaning ...they don't want to leave behind the virus...it's a simple line of code deleting all the virus either by time stamp...Ex: Delete at midnight 5 days after election day...or delete once x number of votes have been counted...or when there has been no tabulation activity for 24 hours ...etc

I do think that the tabulation machines should be forensically examined...send the diebold coders out to assure nothing is different from the OS code that should be there....but I also think that the virus would have been built to erase itself after it got done the first time.

BTW...Do I think it was hacked?...I put it 2% chance...do I think their was human fraud in the loop? ..I put it at 10% chance...Either way it needs to be looked at.

a reply to: Indigo5

Or, she might have been hoping for (read as: presented a legal argument to support) only a machine recount, all along.

On the court's decision:

State law sets a high bar for a judge to order a statewide hand recount. The law says the candidate seeking one must give “clear and convincing evidence” that using machines to conduct a recount will produce incorrect results and that there’s a “substantial probability” that recounting the ballots by hand or another method will produce a more correct result — and change the outcome of the election.

Sounds like a really crappy legal argument was made...."a recount is necessary because the machine tallies may have been wrong, but I have no clear or convincing evidence of that, so another machine recount will do, just fine."

Circular logic on Stein's part and the judge's part. It's not above suspicion, IMO.

a reply to: pavil

As I said...the question came up over the fact that the optical readings here were malfunctioning and either reading the choices incorrectly, or not at all...plus the missing Presidential choice on possibly fraudulent ballots given out.

As of tonite Thurs...she raised the $$$...but the Electoral votes wouldnt change anyway to make a difference...and Prez Elect has filed an objection today in Michigan protesting the recount having no basis.

His objection was 38 pages....I cant for the life of me figure out what shes try to do, or get across...but...we have that right to recount.

I still thinks she deluded......

a reply to: MotherMayEye

OK...THIS IS getting weird...

So even IF...IF ..A Recount in Michigan flipped it to someone else...Trump still wins the electoral college by a healthy margin..So....

Trump camp moves to block Michigan recount
www.politico.com...

Why?...It's getting weird...what's he hiding?

a reply to: Indigo5

When all is said and done, and we are past inauguration day...let's evaluate. Because I do not believe any of the parties involved are acting independent of one another.

If all of this recount/blocking-recount stuff just results in some more awful, horrible election reform...we will see that 'they' won and we lost, again. And we will know the culprit is 'them' who run the dirty world of U.S. politics.

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: MotherMayEye

OK...THIS IS getting weird...

So even IF...IF ..A Recount in Michigan flipped it to someone else...Trump still wins the electoral college by a healthy margin..So....

Trump camp moves to block Michigan recount
www.politico.com...

Why?...It's getting weird...what's he hiding?

Michigan already HAS counted the vote twice. Not hiding anything. There is no indication of fraud and no need to count third time. That's the jist of Trump's atrguemnt. There is not basis for a third recount.

a reply to: pavil

Show me a reliable link explaining that MI has counted twice.

I think that is a BS claim... please prove me wrong

Hilarious that these mindless hopeful fools were taken by Jill Stein for millions with no results except the plain truth that Trump is our next President. What idiots.