Carl Cameron reported that in PA, a recount can be asked for in specific precincts if there is a petition made by three of the voters in that precinct along with a notarized affidavit (he didn’t say what the affidavit had to include). The deadline is not the same for all precincts and the deadline has passed in many of them. So there is no way to petition for a state wide recount via this method.
I’m assuming the remaining method is to petition the court and I’m not sure what criteria would be used to make a finding in this situation. I would think the bar would have to be pretty high at this late a date. They’ve had almost three weeks and doing this at the stroke of midnight will hopefully be seen as a cynical ploy.
Stein/Clinton only have one shot at A statewide recount in PA and that will today before a state judge. Along with the petition they must provide prima facia evidence of fraud or tabulation error according to PA Law. Since Stein and Clinton have both stated they have no evidence of fraud or other irregularities, if the judge follows PA Law, they must deny their petition due to lack of evidence!
If the judge wrongly approves the petition, then the judge is violating not only PA Law, but also Federal Law (Safe Harbor Law). One of those provisions prohibits states from changing election laws/rules AFTER the election. By approving this petition without adequate evidence, the judge would in essence be changing the law/rules post election and thus violate not only state, but federal law as well.
Below is a FR link on PA recount
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3498751/posts
I wonder if Hillary is hoping that specific precincts in Philadelphia can discover enough additional votes for her to overcome Trump’s substantial margin in the state? Even the MSM might have a hard time believing that...and I think Trump can have observers watching the recount if one did take place. 100% turnout might be one thing, but getting away with 1000% turnout (or higher) may be harder.