Green Party's Jill Stein to Seek Hand 'Recounts', Forensic Tabulator Audits in WI, MI, PA

Bradblog.com ^ | 11/24/16 ast

[drewh]

The Green Party's 2016 Presidential candidate Jill Stein is announcing her intention to seek a "recount of votes in the battleground states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania." The campaign's press release, posted in full below, cites "a multi-partisan effort to check the accuracy of the machine-counted vote tallies in these states in order to ensure the integrity of our elections."

The announcement follows on word that leaked out yesterday at New York magazine that top electronic voting experts and election integrity advocates have been encouraging the Hillary Clinton campaign to file for similar hand-counts and forensic analyses of electronic voting and tabulation systems in the same states. The BRAD BLOG has independently confirmed that those efforts have been under way and are still being considered at the top level of the Clinton campaign.

We discussed just some of those efforts, and a number of reasons for them, on yesterday's BradCast program. University of Michigan computer science professor Alex Halderman, who has cracked many electronic voting systems in recent years, offers additional reasons to check the results and the systems in WI, MI and PA now right here.

Dr. Jill Stein, the 2016 Green Party Presidential candidate, on her announcement earlier today that her campaign plans to file for hand-counted paper ballot "recounts" and forensic audits of the Presidential election results in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. [Audio link to show and full interview posted below.]

"We have to move really fast in order to basically verify the vote and be confident our votes were actually counted," she tells me, citing the many concerns brought to her by computer scientists and voting systems and election integrity experts, all questioning whether paper ballots were counted accurately by error-prone and easily-hacked computer tabulators in WI and MI, and whether touch-screen systems were manipulated in some fashion in PA.

Across those three states alone, as we have been reporting, just 50,000 votes flipped from Trump to Clinton --- out of more than 13 million ballots cast in those states, where a number of anomalous results have been found --- could change who becomes the next President of the United States.

There is plenty of reason to question whether the results as reported are accurate. And not only because of the surprising results. As I note again on today's show, University of Michigan computer science and voting systems expert J. Alex Halderman, one of those urging the candidates to call for a hand-count, has cracked many electronic voting systems in recent years. He offered still more reasons to examine both the reported results and the systems used in WI, MI and PA earlier today.

Stein, explaining that some $2 million must be raised to meet the deadline to file in WI by Friday (and another $4 million or so for the other two states next week), tells me that it's an "outrage we have to go to extraordinary lengths to verify the vote," adding she is doing so, due to her "interests as a citizen, as a person in America, that the vote be valid." (The campaign has set up a fund raising page for the effort right here.)

"Why would anyone be against counting the votes?," she asks. "It’s long been demonstrated that our system of voting, relying on these machines, has virtually no security. They’re hack friendly [and] tamper friendly."

"People have felt such anguish during this election," Stein notes. "This is a joint effort, and there are many election advocates who are involved. A lot of the grassroots election integrity experts. If ever there was a time to stand up and demand an accountable and secure vote, this is the time to do it. If we don't do it now, when exactly, what would be the cause to do it?" She also details the attempt by the scientists and advocates to encourage the Clinton campaign to take up the effort as well. (I can confirm that effort happened and that the campaign was still considering doing so as of earlier today.) She says she welcomes other campaigns, such as the Libertarian Party and independent candidates with standing, to join the effort as well.

"It feels really good to be standing up right now," she tells me. "It’s time for us to take control of our democracy to start with. To give ourselves a gift on this Thanksgiving." We discuss all of that and the many concerns about the reported results, take a few calls afterward, and actually find a bit more to be thankful for on today's program Download MP3

[PIF]

Jill wants a state of her own with a beach mansion on 10,000 acres and ‘deplorables’ as her servants ... All of western Washington would be fine for her personal residence.

[Lazamataz]

Doesn’t matter if he does fall below 270. It’s a majority of the EVs. The EVs would be less if those three states are not in the mix, and he still has a majority there, too.

[PIF]

“They will not get the votes in Wisconsin. No recount has EVER flipped a 27,000 vote lead.”

There was NO way DJT could possibily win the election.

No one has seen the Soros controled voting machines (PA, WI, MI) in action. Perhaps now we will.

[damper99]

Gore could not cherry pick in FL because their law required a full recount. PA law apparently permits picking which counties you want recounted. I think the court ruling was that they had to follow what the state law. Each state manages its own elections...they are not federally managed elections.

[dila813]

Good for her, we will discover that Trump won the popular vote as well

[Redwood71]

I don’t feel they are disagreeing with me. I feel they are disagreeing with the people of the US. And you also. By your guess, one I share, they are using the state vote to try to overturn the people for the wrong reason. If Hilary wants a recount, get one. But don’t go behind the backs of the voters to assist another candidate that you competed with. That is dishonest. And to further her dishonesty she proclaimed on her twitter account, “My campaign’s goal: Transparent election processes. Didn’t take long to display that falacy.

And let’s face it, she has no chance of winning at all. So I hope all the people that voted for her feel they have been duped and will not support her in the future.

red

[Redwood71]

“these evil people keep pushing the envelope”

Sadly you are seeing only the early first of it. I looked at what is on the tube today and I am seeing more things about Nixon than ever before. And I have never seen such a barrage of women in charge documentaries since before the election when it should have stopped. I guess as long as they can use the media to short circuit Trump’s work, the idea of working across the aisle should be considered a one way trip. But that’s an old trick of the left, if you can’t disprove the message, hammer the messenger whether they deserve it or not or, in way too many cases, out and out lies.

red

[hsmomx3]

I have yet to see Trump or his people comment on this. Of course, I have yet to turn on the news.

[Redwood71]

I doubt he will comment. That is a no win situation. We, sometimes Unfortunately, live in a world of the use of laws, made by the people that use them. The creation of the ability to do a forced recount is very obviously not the reason it is being used. To think that in the states she could have had over one million votes miscounted, is not possible. So this recount has nothing to do with her.

If you apply for a job, and they decide not to hire you, can you demand they rethink the situation? They probably wouldn’t validate your parking when they asked you to show yourself out. And saying you are asking not for yourself, but to assist another candidate for the same position, to make sure they considered her more than either you or the chosen or just to create problems in the position for the chosen, is not reprehensible. Morally or otherwise. But is this type of action different from the business as usual for the libs? They talk working with the conservatives, just like they wanted (demanded) we do with them. But, as usual, their idea of cooperation is say no to every yes and yes to every no, every inch of the way, for us to take the blame for anything real or made up. And the media protects them. This is why it would be a no win.

red