Posted on 11/28/2016 7:07:06 AM PST by dirtboy
Unlike Wisconsin, in Penn one must have a legitimate reason for a recount....She does not.
They need full disclosure of who is making these donations.
So.... then she gets to keep the money ?
So what is this business with the stat guys?
They are saying the districts with voting machines voted differently than the districts with paper ballots?
I really dont understand the theory they put forth.
Well, Trump himself said over the weekend there was rampant voter fraud in this election. How about that reason?
Playing devil's advocate for the DEMs ...
Without PA, a recount in WI is theater.
Hillary never had a path to the WH without PA.
Overturning a 68,000 Trump vote lead there is akin to winning the lottery.
Pretty much.
Through chicanery, they might be able to “find” 10,704 needed votes in Flint or Detroit, swinging Michigan; a lot less likely that they might be able to swing 22,000 votes in Wisconsin. But its an infinitessimal chance that they can steal 70,658 votes in Pennsylvania; for one thing, there are virtually no adults who didn’t vote in Philadelphia and an intense review might reveal just how much fraud was committed in that city, where Hillary got 81 percent of the votes.
She will get nowhere in all three. The push-back has begun.
I don’t expect they’ll be getting any help from Tom Wolf. Wolfie boy has been quaking in his boots ever since the red rural voters in his state stood-up and made themselves heard. He is in self-preservation mode. Not going near this with a 30 foot pole IMHO.
Proof is in the eye of the beholder. And, it's conjectural--only the recount can provide proof.
So, prepare for a spate of fairy-tale legal briefs and behind the scenes judge shopping. And, if that doesn't succeed (as it shouldn't) for a spate of Dem wailing about the inherent unfairness of the Electoral College, and how we need a uniform, national form of democracy, meaning a National Popular Vote for national office.
“Well, Trump himself said over the weekend there was rampant voter fraud in this election. How about that reason?”
Need more than the naked accusation.
Gee, isn't it amazing that, in a few short days, she raised more money for the recount than she probably did for her entire campaign?
If dems are in contact with actual votes, I’m nervous.
Saying something is not the same as proving it.
praying for God to continue to strengthen people of our country to do what is right by Him and our laws and expose those doing the opposite.
Saying is one thing. Proving a prima facia level case that fraud occurred is another, and prima facia is the evidentiary standard in this situation.
She is asking for voters in Pa to sign and notarized affidavit saying there was fraud and the fraud is based on the findings of J. Alex Halderman. He is one of the compete scientists who was urging the Clintons to do a recount.
He does not have any proof of fraud only the polls and the news stories and also the results that showed Trump won because he says Trump could not have one. Here is the affadavit that she is asking to be filled out she wants 3 voters from each preceinct:
Read the whole paper affadvit and you will what they are asking for on the full recount including getting their hands on the machines.
If they failed to cheat enough the first time I beleive they will be able to do it now. They are asking for it not to prove fraud but to change the elections results in Clintons favor.
Has it occurred to the Democrats that in demanding a delayed recount that they may wind up DISENFRANCHISING voters in all the states where the recount can’t be completed in time and the electoral votes may not count?????? I realize Trump and Pence will still take office, thank God.
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.