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

Skip to comments.

Judge schedules hearing for Green Party's Pennsylvania recount push
Philly.com ^ | 12/6/2016 | Jeremy Roebuck

Posted on 12/06/2016 3:06:18 PM PST by dirtboy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last
To: dirtboy

I’ve been hearing DOA for weeks and yet here we are. I don’t know what the point is to be honest. They haven’t been able to count the votes in a month, they aren’t going to recount them in time to seat electors. So, it’s either you accept the results or don’t seat your electors. One judge gets to decide this? B.S if you ask me


21 posted on 12/06/2016 3:37:51 PM PST by wiseprince
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Okay, not aggrieved, not a problem, but Stein still has no standing, that is to say, skin in the game. And she hasn’t shown any cause for the court to believe that fraud was committed in places that would have helped the winner.


22 posted on 12/06/2016 3:41:39 PM PST by Genoa (Luke 12:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: wiseprince

It has to be played out. Part of the problem is that WI and to a lesser extent MI did not require any proof of a problem with the canvassing. PA did and that is why Stein dropped her suit in PA and went running to the federal courts. As someone noted above, the fact that the judge scheduled 3 days out in a highly time-sensitive matter is an indication of what he thinks of this suit. I read parts of it and it is the most juvenile legal writing I have ever seen. A lawyer friend said the judge should award court costs and attorney fees to the defendants without them even asking - it’s that bad. And also sanction the Stein team for abusing the federal court system and have the marshals toss them out the front door.


23 posted on 12/06/2016 3:43:20 PM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Genoa

Constitution says it’s all up to the state legislature, however they have made the laws. Feds shouldn’t be able to start or stop a recount. Must be done according to current state law, whatever that is.


24 posted on 12/06/2016 3:52:27 PM PST by Timmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

This Judge Diamond sounds vaguely familiar, in a rattish way.


25 posted on 12/06/2016 3:53:02 PM PST by rfp1234 (DinosorosExtinction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rfp1234
FWIW: From 1993 until 1995, Diamond worked as the treasurer and as the counsel for the failed 1996 presidential campaign of U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter.

Let's hope this is an irrelevant footnote.

26 posted on 12/06/2016 3:57:20 PM PST by rfp1234 (DinosorosExtinction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

Per the what? Do we still use that thing?


27 posted on 12/06/2016 4:01:34 PM PST by BruceS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wiseprince

You are right. People on this forum keep saying this is going to stop and over and over it keeps going. I have no confidence PA is going to be any different from the other states. None of these states should have allowed any recounts.


28 posted on 12/06/2016 4:05:04 PM PST by Hattie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

She may be much more than a simple idiot:

Who is Jill Stein?Mystery Woman- She Has No Background

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aJtBww1-hE

8min


29 posted on 12/06/2016 4:10:50 PM PST by Right-wing Librarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Genoa
Jill Stein lacks standing as she is not properly aggrieved, nor has she exhausted all appropriate avenues of redress at the state level.

I agree. I'm glad you used the phrase "properly aggrieved."

I listened to the last 2/3 of the Federal Court appeal of the Stein/Michigan recount today. A lot of the argument centered around the fact that the statute didn't define "aggrieved." So, Jill's lawyer argued that anyone could just say they were aggrieved. One of the judges made a comment about this being form over substance, but nobody talked about a "properly" standard that validates being aggrieved.

30 posted on 12/06/2016 4:15:16 PM PST by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Hugin

So was Roberts . . . .

But I’m joking. This is, and always has been, a done deal.


31 posted on 12/06/2016 4:28:23 PM PST by LS ("Castles Made of Sand, Fall in the Sea . . . Eventually" (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

A lot of people here and other sites have been saying for weeks “she has no standing”. Actually she does since she was a candidate. People were convinced that this was a “scam” to raise money. I never trusted her or who she really represents (Clinton/Soros).

The problem is the Donald let this get too far and now we are fighting in Federal court. When she pulled her suit back on Saturday, Trump’s lawyers were ready, but again, we are fighting defense. I hope this judge agrees that there is nothing to be gained especially since the recounts in some of the precincts in Philadelphia and Allegheny Counties yielded nothing.

Wisconsin is looking like nothing will change within a few 100 votes. So that will put us at 270 EV. Michigan is in for a full recount with a number of areas not being counted due to discrepancies with machine and ballot (too many votes not matching number of ballots - Clinton areas).

We definitely need this Judge to throw out the PA case. I’m sure we all have a lot of “pain and suffering” due to Stein and let’s hope it is over on Friday.


32 posted on 12/06/2016 4:30:55 PM PST by bobsunshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
I read parts of it and it is the most juvenile legal writing I have ever seen.

Not only that, but there is no evidence at all to support their positions regarding hacking of voting machines. The very DHS document their affidavit cites says the opposite of what they say it does. They cite to attempts to access voter registration databases in Arizona and Illinois as evidence of an "illegal" election in Pennsylvania. That kind of logic is usually associated with the Art Bell show, not a legal brief.

33 posted on 12/06/2016 4:33:08 PM PST by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

You mean to say “the Michigan State Court” appeal.


34 posted on 12/06/2016 4:34:50 PM PST by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine
Actually she does since she was a candidate.

That gave her standing in WI. MI said she had to be an aggrieved party, which the MI Appeals Court just shot down. And in PA she had to make a prima facie case that something went wrong with the election, and she admitted she had no case, hence the end run around the PA courts to the feds. WI is the only recount that legally should happen, under the respective laws of the three states.

35 posted on 12/06/2016 4:36:10 PM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: freeandfreezing

I admit it, I was confused watching it. I thought it was Federal. It was hard to tell.

Do clarify.


36 posted on 12/06/2016 4:36:42 PM PST by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: piytar
And does she have any idea of the consequences if she pulls off this coup for Hillary?!

She might have been warned of consequences if she didn't, especially since her campaign could have cost Hillary the election.

37 posted on 12/06/2016 4:43:56 PM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Clinton's actions speak louder than Trump's words.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

I will bet a Whopper that EVERY state in the USA is looking long & hard at their laws regarding recounts.

The listed price of $125 per precinct isn’t enough to count for more than about 12 hours. The taxpayers shouldn’t be on the hook for all this nonsense.

I sincerely hope someone from Michigan sues Stein for all those costs.


38 posted on 12/06/2016 4:44:17 PM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
The live coverage was from the Michigan State Appeals Court, a number of us watched the same proceeding. There was a lot of argument presented over the meaning of "aggrieved" since Jill Stein may be lots of things, but she isn't an "aggrieved" party by any means in this election.

Separately there was a hearing in the Federal Circuit Court, where the argument was focused on the District Court's order to start the recount. Federal proceedings are not televised.

39 posted on 12/06/2016 4:53:32 PM PST by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: piytar

For over a week, I have read posts here by the “legal experts” that her efforts would be killed at the next juncture. Surprise, they have been consistently wrong and she keep progressing through all the legal hoops. Her success with the manipulation of the system tells me that Stein and Hillary have thought this through and think that they have a path to get these three states plus Florida tossed out, giving Hillary a one vote lead. I expect one of the usual experts to weigh in and say “it will never happen”, but so far these experts have been wrong at every turn.


40 posted on 12/06/2016 5:24:32 PM PST by damper99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 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