Hearing ends on Michigan recount; decision pending

Det News | 12/04/2016

[madison10]

Link http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2016/12/04/judge-holds-sunday-hearing-michigan-recount-suit/94952646/

[LouisianaJoanof Arc]

“Though I hope she loses, her request to begin the count immediately makes sense....

Trump had to follow the rule of the board who approved the recount with a 2-2 tie.

So, why doesn’t she have to wait and follow the rules like everyone else?

I cry foul. Come on Judge.

[vette6387]

“Will you knock it off?”

I absolutely believe what you wrote, but I can understand why some here are still concerned, because all too often the rule of law gets trampled by activist judges who make up the law to suit their own political views.

[MarMema]

Nothing to post. Heard some radio stuff on the way home from dinner out this evening. Then again it was the Dead Bear Brewing Company for dinner...and I cannot find it in writing.

We're confident the last chance is Schuette here.

There will be a recount and it will begin on Tuesday late afternoon or Wed morning. It's a Michigan thing.

[MarMema]

her request to begin the count immediately makes sense

Except she was asking a fed judge to over rule state law.

And except that on Tuesday the AG here is going to try to stop the recount.

And except that in this thing Michiganders have pulled together from both sides because we cannot AFFORD to spend 5 million on this idiot.

[MarMema]

The delay is a state law here in Michigan.

[odawg]

Thanks for the clarification. I personally have no idea what is going on.

[mrsmith]

Yes, that’s why it’s inferior to federal law.
I expect a Dem judge to rule this delay runs afoul of the Supreme Court’s ‘Safe Harbor’ ruling- because that ruling stopped the counting that might have given Gore the election- in their minds it did and they hate it and they would like to rub everyone’s noses in it.

And i expect the ruling to be overturned on appeal.

[Swanks]

She wants to get her hands on the 75K ballots who had no vote for President and then they will decide the intent of the voter.

These have been included in totals. Considered no votes 4 Prez. Last cycle it was 40,000 so it IS legit. Also both sides vetted and agreed to this.

But, in Libtard world they have the wisdom to discern no one would (not) vote for Prez AND, all of the 70k meant of course to vote for HRC. Now if a judge would just see it their way..

[shhrubbery!]

You're right - they want a hand recount of the so-called undervoted ballots. They hope to have a replay of the Florida 2000 recount, where officials somehow divined the "intent of the voter" ... by reading pregnant chads, dimpled chads etc. But I don't think Michigan uses the punch card-style ballots. I don't live there but am guessing voters use a pen to fill in circles on a card, then the card is read by optical scanner.

[thecodont]

I don't live there but am guessing voters use a pen to fill in circles on a card, then the card is read by optical scanner.

So how on earth does one discern voter intent when the space is blank, but the ONLY way one can register intent is with the ink of a pen?

[MarMema]

Not circles but more like rectangles...otherwise yep.

[shhrubbery!]

So how on earth does one discern voter intent when the space is blank, but the ONLY way one can register intent is with the ink of a pen?

Exactly. If true that ballots in MI are marked with ink (or #2 pencil, like SAT tests).

I guess Stein could ask for tiny ink marks to be counted as "the intent of the voter," if they landed anywhere near her name (or Hillary's name). Hey, not everyone is capable of coloring inside the lines! /s

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Today on Chris Wallace she talked about those ballots and she also said there is no way you would go to vote but not vote for President.

She's either an idiot, or she's just spewing this crap for the "benefit" of the low-info person.

[shhrubbery!]

Thanks for the information. Are you asked to use black ink? Or #2 pencil? Or do they give you a pen specifically for voting?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

She wants to get her hands on the 75K ballots who had no vote for President and then they will decide the intent of the voter.

Hopefully, people counting the ballots will know better, but I'm sure that some of them will conveniently think otherwise.

[usafa92]

Not sure I do either, but as of now, the case is still scheduled for hearing in MI on Tuesday. The MI AG has petitioned the state Supremes to take it up. Stein and the rest of her merry band of commies are requesting of a Federal judge that a two day waiting period to begin the recount is umreasonable. Since the Board of Canvassers is deadlocked 2-2 on the recount, it in theory can go forward but per state law, can’t start until Wed morning. In the meantime, if the Mich SC throws out the case, the point is moot, until of course she claims that federal due process laws were violated. Still, it’s much ado about nothing. It’s irritating, but the Feds are not ordering a recount, just may rule on when it can start. However, I doubt a federal judge will rule on anything before the state would.

[MarMema]

Like a felt marker supplied at the stations.

[MarMema]

There is great hope that the Mi SC will toss it. It is not something we can spend money on right now. 5-2 republican court.

We have Flint, Detroit, and an aging pipeline under the Mackinaw bridge.

Which is why Michiganders are coming together on this on the local news sites. 4-12 million estimated.

[reformedliberal]

Considered the 2nd most socially conservative Circuit Court. Ruled states could ban same-sex marriage. So, can the progs skip directly to Federal Court?

[bobsunshine]

From the Michigan Supreme Court roster of filings:

MI Supreme Court

"Recount Lawsuits ​Pleadings filed with the Michigan Court of Appeals and Michigan Supreme Court pertaining to the presidential recount lawsuits will be posted to this location as they are docketed:

​Attorney General v Board of State Canvassers (MSC No. 154862; COA No. 335947)

​AG's complaint for writ of mandamus in Court of Appeals
AG's brief in support of complaint in Court of Appeals
AG's motion for immediate consideration in the Court of Appeals
AG's bypass application in the Supreme Court AG's motion for immediate consideration in the Supreme Court

Donald J Trump v Board of State Canvassers (MSC No. 154868; COA No. 335958)

Donald Trump's complaint for mandamus and injunctive relief in the Court of Appeals
Donald Trump's motion for immediate consideration in the Court of Appeals
Donald Trump's bypass application in the Supreme Court Donald Trump's motion for immediate consideration in the Supreme Court ​