Jill Stein Recount

[de officiis]

Thought I'd start a thread to track this endeavor by Jill Stein since it garnered interest at the DCF. Latest news is that she has abandoned her effort to force a Pa. recount in their state courts due to a bond requirement, and is filing for relief in federal court instead.

Green Party Takes Bid for Statewide Pennsylvania Recount to Federal Courts

A Green Party-backed campaign changed its strategy to force a statewide recount of Pennsylvania’s Nov. 8 presidential election, won by Republican Donald Trump, and said late Saturday night that it will seek help in the federal courts, rather than the state courts.

The announcement that it would seek an emergency federal court order Monday for a recount came hours after it dropped a case in the state courts.
...
The decision came two days before a state court hearing was scheduled in the case. Saturday’s court filing to withdraw the case said the Green Party-backed voters who filed it “are regular citizens of ordinary means” and cannot afford the $1 million bond ordered by the court by 5 p.m. Monday. Green Party-backed efforts to force recounts and analyze election software in scattered precincts were continuing.

Not sure what to make of this move because I'm thoroughly ignorant of the nuts and bolts of election law. I guess we'll just have to see what pans out.

[TheReal_ND]

Basically litigation in PA is her only recourse and it's a valid one except for the fact she has nothing. Part of the suit maintains that hackers infiltrated the system and being hackers they were sure to leave no traces of their activity. So her evedince is there is none.

Michigan was within the margin of error that required a mandatory recount which they have done already. That's why it took so long for them to report their delegates. Stein is going to have to convince them to recount again and that's sure to go over like a lead balloon. What's the third one? Wisconsin? Well the third one is done electronically so if she pays them the money they can just turn the machines on again and spit out the same answer for her.

This is really just a scam to raise money from crest fallen liberals and if you look closely at her donation page it states that all the proceeds will go towards "voter integrity," which doesn't actually mean anything. Voter integrity could be a beach house in the Hamptons. Stein came up with this idea apparently on her own but Hilary people have backed it recently because it's the way liberals operate. To quote Bill Mahr some years back concerning the Al Franken case, "liberals keep counting until they win."

ETA:

[Penner]

I say there should be a recount. I mean it wouldn't change any results but at least we can say, "yeah, we made sure the first results were right".

[TheReal_ND]

No refunds.

[TheReal_ND]

This crazy plant lady is all over the map. Figures. I always fall for the crazy ones.

[SuburbanFarmer]

[SilverEagle]

[AverageJoe]

Anytime anyone starts to mention Steins idioctic recount(s) they should preceed it with:

[The Conservative]

Saying Hillary was surprised about anything is like saying that the world is flat... both are lies.

[Penner]

Michigan must begin its presidential recount at noon on Monday, a federal judge ruled in a late-night order that could make it more likely the state will complete the count ahead of a 13 December deadline.

In his ruling on Sunday night, judge Mark Goldsmith rejected an effort by state officials to delay the hand-counting of about 4.8m ballots.

Analysis US election recount: how it began – and what effect it could have
Jill Stein has raised millions of dollars for recounts, but it remains unclear whether the costly process will make a difference after Donald Trump’s victory
Read more
Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein argued that a law is unconstitutional that requires a break of at least two business days after the Board of Canvassers’ final action on a recount request. Goldsmith found that Stein had “shown the likelihood of irreparable harm” if the count was delayed even by two days and rejected the state’s arguments about the cost to taxpayers.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... udge-rules