Michigan Supreme Court denies Stein’s recount appeal

The Detroit News | December 9, 2016 | Jonathan Oosting

[bobsunshine]

Blocked due to Copyright - Link Below.

[freeandfreezing]

I agree, and would add that the election officials who are essentially accused of participating in a giant conspiracy by Stein and her experts are also Democrats. So under Stein’s theory a number of Democrats hatched a plan in Pennsylvania to throw the election to Trump. I guess they were supposed to be under some kind of Russian mind control ray gun.

[xkaydet65]

They did exactly the right thing. They knew it would be a 3-2 reault but if they made it 5-2 their alleged conflict would be the story and Stein’s hope for federal intervention. Sometimes stepping away is exactly the right thing to do.

[pas]

She isn’t doing this for Hillary. She is trying to protect the vote. People with floppy disks running around reprogramming machines and erasing votes on ballots. What else can explain this?

If the green party has her as their head after this, they are all even dumber than she is.

[olezip]

I was hoping this would have continued. I don’t want the ballot boxes with more votes than signed voters to disappear, and I fear they are going down the memory home before they can be investigated further.

Perhaps a thorough recount could take place after the fact, that is, after the count has been certified.

A software contractor or the like could take whatever time is needed to perform the recount, identify discrepancies and causes, assess the veracity of the votes, and the overall accuracy of the system, with special attention to errors and causes. The contractor could then recommend actions to mitigate the weaknesses in the system.

These studies would produce a voting system that the people would have confidence in the results for future voting. How good are our voting systems across the country? Voter concerns include double counting, illegal voters, stuffed ballot boxes, hacking of voting machines, etc.

[ExTexasRedhead]

You mean drinking and throwing things?

[Cboldt]

Read the recusal statement of CJ Young. He blistered the federal district court.

[Paladin2]

I still see no need to recuse. Do you have a link to the recusant?

[Cboldt]

The Court hears Cases when Lower Courts Disregard past Supreme Court decisions

Not always. The SCOTUS allowed Federal Circuit courts to apply the Presser case for the OPPOSITE of what it waid, for decades. It did so becuase SCOTUS approved of the result.

Courts are highly political, but because of the role they have, they will deny this fact. Same idea as the press being objective. The press will deny being partisan, because it is in the press's self-interest that people believe the myth.

[Cboldt]

The ED of MI ruled on the merits of Stein’s case. Just because she lost doesn’t mean that federal court didn’t rule. The long hearing on Wednesday was to address her claims on the merits, and the opinion was on the merits.

[Cboldt]

http://courts.mi.gov/Courts/MichiganSupremeCourt/Clerks/Documents/Recount%20lawsuits/154886%202016-12-09%20or.pdf

[djpg]

I expect her to use her favorite phrase, “Make no mistake.”

[Cboldt]

http://courts.mi.gov/Courts/MichiganSupremeCourt/Clerks/Documents/Recount%20lawsuits/154886_154887%20RPY%20disqual%20stmt.pdf

He agrees with yout technical argument, and expalins why he recused in spite of having no legitimate/legal reason to do so.

[Mr. Lucky]

Federal Courts of Appeal don’t have appellate jurisdiction over state courts. Stein could seek a writ from the United States Supreme Court (if she wanted to make an utterly complete fool of herself).

[Democrat_media]

Agree again.

This is a coup by Soros

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5eqg9p/red_alert_jim_stone_discovers_soros_bot_funding/

[Democrat_media]

That’s where Soros is going. He’s got an army of lawyers and billions to put to this

[Cboldt]

If Stein goes to the 6th Circuit, it would be to appeal the recent decision of the ED of MI district court. basically her argument would be that recounts are a matter of constitutional right.

The dissent in the MI Supreme Court decision to deny hearing her case is a template for arguing something slightly different to SCOTUS.

She has already made a complete fool of herself. In for a penny, in for a pound (as opposed to not sending good money after bad, a cliche for every occasion!)

[Paladin2]

I have read his recusal (many thanks for the link) and don’t find it compelling. Quite the contrary as he explains why he is quite unlikely to be appointed (age).

[Mr. Lucky]

Her problem with filing an appeal from the District Court Order (aside from the obvious one that her case is frivolous) is that December 13 will have come and gone long before the Court could issue a ruling. Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure govern the hearing of an appeal.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

The need to at least send a check for 2 cents.

[Cboldt]

-- I have read his recusal and don't find it compelling --

Even though he agrees with your technical legal point, and cites his own further elaboration? Even though he explains that he is recusing

... in order that the decision made by my colleagues in this case will not be legitimately challenged by base speculation and groundless innuendo by the partisans in this controversy and beyond.

For others, those who are too lazy to read the linked statement, CJ Young also alludes to the principle of keeping courts out of politics (unless necessary), rather than being quick to jump in as the federal courts did in this case.

You are of course free to disagree with his judgment and decision. I think his statement is compelling and correct, so we part in disagreement. No big deal, such is life.