Posted on 11/28/2016 4:03:38 PM PST by GilGil
What about the prisons . If we can get the rolls cleaned and stop the fraud, the dems are in big trouble. They must be shaking with Trump taking office. Lets take California back and kick these losers to the back of the line.
Voter fraud??? It will only confirm that Trump was right....once again....
Remember the little disclaimer on Stein’s scam page .... she gets to keep the money if it is not used in the recounts!
I don’t see how recounting ballots would uncover rud. It wouldseem to me you would have to investigate voters instead.
I can't wait till they have the proof of massive voter fraud and the numbers so they can shut the leftist' yaps....
As far as I'm aware, nobody has made any rulings based on that argument.
In Wisconsin, apparently, if you can pony up the money needed to fund it, then they'll do a recount.
In the absence of actual evidence of vote fraud, it seems to me that a recount should only proceed if the candidate requesting it can reasonably claim that the outcome could be changed.
So if they find the machines were hacked and you can not attribute who got the votes I say they will disqualify the vote or Trump in particular.
If there were some evidence of "hacking" to emerge, then who knows what would happen next; it would be unprecedented.
They are actually using “Polling” data that had Hillary in the lead as their argument that Trump should not have won.
That's a seriously lame argument, given the evidence of all the other states.
The whole thing stinks.
On that we agree...
The article is full of beans. Jill Clinton is not trying to FIND fraud, but to commit it under cover of the recount process. After reading the pdf at your link, I’d think pulling anything will be difficult IF Trump fields a team of diligent monitors at every recount venue. If he does not, much mischief could be made from deciding the “intent” of ambiguously marked ballots.
I though that Wisconsin voting districts are only going to re-tally the vote TOTALS - at least that’s what I heard today on radio news. If that’s the case, then no illegal votes will be detected.
What did they try to do ? Insist on voting without ID, or ID that was not on the list of acceptable IDs ? Or did they try to vote twice, in person even though they’d sent in an absentee ballot, or what ? Enquiring minds want to know.
We keep winning!
Another article said they would be verifying signatures in the register books. Whether that just means they have signatures for all the ballots in the boxes of checking the signatures against some other database like deaths or immigration status, it didn’t say.
What do they do if they come up with thousands of ballots in the boxes for which they have no register book signature ? They have no way of knowing how those extra ballots were voted, right ?
If those register books had a removable barcode label next to each name line, and it was attached to the ballot before placed in the box, you could actually remove those ballots. But that certainly isn’t how they do it at my polling place in CA.
About the only thing they could find with a machine recount would be faulty or hacked reader machines. They might find that there were some machines which had been hacked to assign a predetermined percentage to each candidate, and if a different reader is used in the recount the numbers are WAYYY off.
Yeah. “Bill flipped out and started acting like a crazy person!” And then he’s completely calm on anything we saw.
But, I do think people need to stop acting like the Clintons are omnipotent beings who always have a plan and always get their way. It was treated like a given by some that she would easily cheat her way in, but she couldn’t.
Wisconsin insider? Yeah, sure. That Pepe sure gets around.
All she needs to do is start a foundation. Then she can donate all this money to her foundation. As head of her foundation, she can pay herself administration fees for the rest of her life. Like Hillary.
I thought the recount was just going to be a re-tabulation of the machines’ results. How can thye detect fraud that way?
someone on a thread earlier today made it seem a recount does not look at name sod voters. That is was just recounting actual ballots. I’d be glad if they do recheck voter rolls and signatures etc and if they come up with people who should not have voted but did.
Or, congress and trump can go after these people like pittbulls
What gets me is that if they find they have more ballots than they have voters in the poll books, they RANDOMLY REMOVE that many ballots.
This makes no sense to me. If 100,000 extra ballots turn up and they all came from Dim shenanigans, random removal will hurt Trump more than it will Hillary. It would cost Trump 50,000 real votes but leave 50,000 extra fraudulent votes for Hillary. I suppose it doesn’t change the margin of votes he wins by if you subtract 50K from each, but it is still crummy. I’d rather something was done to try to identify which ballots were fakes. Some way to remove the whole 100K just from Hillary.
Don’t spoil the fun.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.