Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Michigan to Move Ahead with Presidential Recount
CnN Politics.com ^ | December 5, 3016 | Max Blau & Joe Sutton

Posted on 12/05/2016 5:36:02 AM PST by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies

Michigan will become the second state to conduct a recount of ballot casts during the 2016 presidential election.

U.S. District Judge Mark Goldsmith early Monday morning issued an order for Michigan election officials to begin counting ballots starting at noon. The ruling follows a request from Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein after a razor-thin margin made the state the last to be called in the November election. President-elect Donald Trump ended up winning Michigan's 16 electoral votes by just 0.2 percentage points, or just under 10,000 votes out of over 5.5 million cast.

"It is inexcusable for Stein to put Michigan voters at risk of paying millions and potentially losing their voice in the Electoral College in the process," Schuette said in a statement. It is inexcusable for Stein to put MI votes at risk of paying millions and potentially losing their voice in the Elec College.

— A.G. Bill Schuette (@SchuetteOnDuty) December 2, 2016 Stein has spearheaded a recount effort in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin -- three battleground states where Donald Trump narrowly defeated Hillary Clinton. Trump supporters in Wisconsin have unsuccessfully tried to stop the recount in progress there. Stein's campaign, who withdrew a recount request in a Pennsylvania state court, this weekend said she would instead file the lawsuit seeking a statewide recount in federal court Monday morning.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: clinton; election2016; electionfraud; jillstein; michigan; recount; soros
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last

Trump people need to contest the count on the grounds that there has been no security or chain of custody of the votes where all interested parties oversee all the locked up votes 24/7 until the SOS certifies the election.


41 posted on 12/05/2016 6:43:55 AM PST by USCG SimTech
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: New Jersey Realist; nhwingut

But, us Constitutionalists must not ^depend^ on party affiliation to proffer our cause in this issue.
Just because an affiliation is ideological (e.g; “Republican”) this does not mean the judge will not bend to political expediency for sake of their (well paid) position.

SCOTUS-CJ-Roberts comes to mind. It appears he did not want pitchforks and torches outside his home if he decided against Obamacare. Neither would he consider Arkancide as an alternative.

We must be aware that personal considerations of the court adjudicators (overall, human) may change for any number of reasons.


42 posted on 12/05/2016 6:44:05 AM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic, Anthropogenic Climate Alterations: The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Do we have a law case for the Supremes?

Terrible mistake to involve the courts. Suppose Hillary and her team have been judge shopping since November 9. Suppose they have 3 Federal judges to nullify the results in PA, WI, and MI.

Now, you take it to the USSC, and their 4-4 deadlock leaves the lower court ruling in place.

You, by submitting this for adjudication by a Federal Court, are basically affirming that the authority of these courts extends over the State Legislatures' power to appoint electors, when it obviously does not.

NEVER NEVER NEVER acknowledge that Federal Courts can nullify a State Legislature's appointment of electors. They have no such power.

Motions filed in those courts do not deserve a reply. Orders of those courts should be ignored.

The Legislature of Michigan has appointed its electors. They should meet, vote, and send their votes to Congress. Let the courts go hang.

43 posted on 12/05/2016 6:44:32 AM PST by Jim Noble (Die Gedanken sind Frei)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: East Tennessee Redhead
Essentially, he removed the matter from the state courts and the count has to continue until he orders it stopped

Or until this "order" is ignored, as it should be.

44 posted on 12/05/2016 6:45:41 AM PST by Jim Noble (Die Gedanken sind Frei)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA

Some people “blanked” the presidential election.

They only voted for down ballot candidates, because they didn’t want Clinton or Trump nor did they want any of the minor party candidates.

No selection for president should remain a non-vote for any candidate.


45 posted on 12/05/2016 6:46:58 AM PST by july4thfreedomfoundation (November 8, 2016..... Donald Trump schlongs Hillary Clinton. 306 Electoral Votes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Beautiful_Gracious_Skies
Link to the order and opinion.

The press will NEVER tell an honest story involving politics.

This decision amounts to circumventing a two day delay imposed by law, in starting the recount. If Trump wins his appeal in state court, there was two days of counting that are a waste. It Trump loses on appeal, the recount goes on "as planned," except for starting the recounting two days earlier.

As for the opinion itself, it conflates the "right to vote" (invented by courts) and a "right to recount."

46 posted on 12/05/2016 6:50:25 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USCG SimTech

Nope.

Contest the “recount” as being ONLY specific to the POTUS vote and, consequently only to determine the “Stein-implied” impropriety in the voting.

Why simply recount the POTUS vote without investigating the “impropriety” alleged by Stein? Nonsensical!

The easy step is to re-verify the votes in all precincts by voter rolls and find anomalies. That is what Stein’s filing imposes; since she has no aggrieved standing in the POTUS vote total.


47 posted on 12/05/2016 6:51:20 AM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic, Anthropogenic Climate Alterations: The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: july4thfreedomfoundation

:: Some people “blanked” the presidential election ::

Consider the “sample” of #nevertrump voters on this board alone.

Intent, defined as ^not to vote^ should be considered. Down-ticket conservative or liberal are NOT an indication of POTUS intent.


48 posted on 12/05/2016 6:54:36 AM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic, Anthropogenic Climate Alterations: The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Michigan has already sent their votes to Congress.


49 posted on 12/05/2016 6:58:44 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Original counts will stand and the state will certify if recount is incomplete.

Is this a question or fact?

50 posted on 12/05/2016 7:00:30 AM PST by Heff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Michigan has already sent their votes to Congress

Then no other action by anyone is necessary.

If Goldsmith wants a recount, bring him the ballots and let him get going on it. Sh*t, even offer to send take-out, because it's going to take him a while.

51 posted on 12/05/2016 7:02:06 AM PST by Jim Noble (Die Gedanken sind Frei)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Beautiful_Gracious_Skies

Thought for sure they’d be asking for a recount in the College Football Playoff. Harbaugh’s really been coming unhinged.


52 posted on 12/05/2016 7:04:17 AM PST by Night Hides Not (Remember the Alamo! Remember Goliad! Remember Gonzales! Come and Take It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roostercogburn

What does the 6th circuit’s record look like? Their decision is likely to be the one that counts assuming the SCOTUS will wind up in a 4-4 decision along ideological lines.


53 posted on 12/05/2016 7:13:25 AM PST by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: pfflier

They are heavily conservative. Only two out of 16 are Obama picks. And only one or two Clinton. Rest are Reagan or Bush.


54 posted on 12/05/2016 7:16:55 AM PST by roostercogburn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: equaviator
The recount must not include would-be votes using the provisional ballot affidavit when the voter did not provide adequate ID within the 10 days they were given.

No it must not. But will it?

55 posted on 12/05/2016 7:26:02 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (The future doesn't belong to the fainthearted. It belongs to the brave. - - Ronaldus Magnus Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: roostercogburn

Thanks. That is a ray of light in this murkiness.


56 posted on 12/05/2016 7:44:25 AM PST by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

The cost of this recount should be enough to cover (over)due diligence. But will it?


57 posted on 12/05/2016 7:57:42 AM PST by equaviator (There's nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Night Hides Not

Lose the Woody Hayes glasses, Jim. Anyway, I think they must be the wrong prescription for you. No harm, no foul (cough)...Just think about it, wouldya?


58 posted on 12/05/2016 8:04:09 AM PST by equaviator (There's nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!

Alright I stand corrected, even better. Though a google search told me otherwise.


59 posted on 12/05/2016 8:23:02 AM PST by Robert DeLong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Original counts will stand and the state will certify if recount is incomplete.

That is not what a WI state Senator said. He said if the recount is not completed by the time it has to be certified, the elector vote will not count. Some say this is why they are doing it, if they can sue for a recount and the recount is not "state certified" by the time the electors vote, they will not vote due to the ongoing recount.

If this is true, then the PA, MI nor WI electorate votes will not count and then Trump will be below 270 votes and then is marginalized and not a legal elected POTUS.

60 posted on 12/05/2016 8:57:00 AM PST by thirst4truth (America, What difference does it make?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson