Oops. Jill Stein forgot to mention to her donors that she cannot file a direct request for a recount in Pennsylvania.
Stein would have to present a case showing voter fraud took place.
Trump won Pennsylvania by 70 thousand votes.
Stein would have to prove that fraud was “probable.”
That does not seem likely. Then again, we are talking about the Clintons here.
The Inquisitr reported, via Free Republic:
Per Pennsylvania regulations, there is only one way remaining for Jill Stein to get a recount in Pennsylvania and it is a complicated process. BillyPenn reports that Stein would have to file for a court appeal and present a “prima facie case” showing that voter fraud took place. While prima facie has a lower burden of proof threshold than “beyond reasonable doubt,” it is still significant. Stein would have to prove in court that fraud was “probable.” This is going to be very difficult given that even the computer specialists recommending the recount say there is no proof of hacking or fraud.
In fact, the Medium reports that Clinton’s own legal team headed by Marc Elias has noted that Clinton’s team “had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology.” The Obama administration echoed that by stating that the government did not observe any increased level of malicious cyber-activity aimed at disrupting our electoral process on election day. According to Newsmax, Obama is standing behind the results which indicate that Trump won the election, saying the election was “free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective.”
Elias also noted that in even the closest margin state, Michigan, Trump’s win “well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount.” Therefore, Elias says that is why Clinton herself did not pursue a recount effort. However, since Stein has funded and initiated the effort, Elias says that Clinton will participate to ensure fairness.
More… Via Reddit and Michael Tracy:
Jill Stein would have to present evidence of fraud or systematic error in every MI county to initiate a statewide recount. It’s a pipe dream
Stein has to prove that fraud took place:
Even in WI, which has more permissive rules and a more centralized structure, there is no guarantee that a recount will actually take place.
In addition to submitting the petition, Stein must demonstrate that “a mistake or fraud has been committed.” She has not yet done so.
Looks like Jill can now buy her lakefront digs.
Stein is just another Progressive Liberal Democratic troll. All you people that voted for Stein wasted your vote. You should just have voted for HiLIARy. The truth is now revealed. A recount does Stein no good, but it would benefit HiLIARy, maybe.
She reminds me of that despicable Elizabeth Warren.
All carpet munchers.
Finally – the adults are in charge.
Fuck you Jill. Fuck you Hillary.
So the money she raised to cover a recount, what’s the status of that now?
See the first comment above.
I’m talking actual legal status, is there any law covering this the way there is for leftover campaign funds?
You think Stein/Clinton will have difficulty finding a judge who requires a recount based upon some spurious theory of “fraud”? I don’t. I guess the deadline is today, so we should know by tomorrow.
If finding a judge isn’t a problem, and I don’t think it is, then it will be easy to find a judge that issues an injunction against the state preventing it from enforcing today’s deadline.
A more likely outcome, however, is for Wisconsin to simply quote a high cost for the hand-recount. As I see it, Stein has only raised a little under 7 million dollars for the recounts, and that has to cover the fees and associated costs. I think it likely the recount will get deep-sixed on the costs alone.
And this from Wisconsin
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-28/wisconsin-denies-request-recount-hand-stein-threatens-sue
Jill and Hill teamed up! That certainly tells you something.
FM–How much do you want to bet that the recount will go against Trump and not one vote cast illegally will go against HiLIARy. If true, that would be a statistical anomaly.
She didn’t get any illegal vote only Trump did because she was the Media’s shoe-in as winner, after all, they told us so, and Trump with the help of the Russians must have rigged the vote for him to win! Hahaha!
God help me! I’m surrounded by imbeciles. Jill and Hill get out of my life!
God, You sent me to a criminally insane planet, gasp!
A recount would only look at who the vote was cast for, not its validity as a legal vote.
The only illegal votes it might catch would be non existent ones that were counted in spite of not being cast and those would only be reflected in the total count of the recount vs the total count of the initial count.
This would more likely affect Hillary than it would Trump.
I’ll bet they find a huge pile of fake votes for Hillary in Philadelphia.
The whole thing is a cynical and venal attempt to set up some kind of demented power brokerage for Stein and her friends in Boston.
Typical massholes.
They could easily prove fraud, just reveal the DNCs work.
SooN aLL WiLL Be ReVeaLeD
WRoNGDoeRs WiLL Be BRouGHT To JuSTiCe
Be PaTieNT iT WiLL HaPPeN SooN