November 26, 2016

Things I just want you to know I've seen.



Link to Memeorandum.

72 comments:

Rusty said...

I don't think a recount in Wisconsin is going to bring the result they're hoping for.

David Begley said...

Stein's request should be denied. She has NO chance of winning. She was a fake candidate to begin with. She's just a proxy for the request Hillary won't make Because the request has not come from the real party in interest, it should be denied.

Some Dem tweeted something to the effect that too bad that now Stein cares about a 300,000 votes in key states.

MadisonMan said...

What Rusty said, maybe. Be careful what you look for!

It seems like a colossal waste of time and money to me. I hope the State cashes all the checks from Stein first before doing everything, and demands all the money needed up front.

tcrosse said...

So what's in it for Jill Stein and where did the millions come from ?

David said...

David Begley said...
Stein's request should be denied.


On what basis?

Do the recount, even if there is no chance of change in result. That should shut them up about this issue at least.

sane_voter said...

The conspiracy theory behind the recount: Jill Stein thinks that she really got more than 1% of the vote nationally, actually closer to 5%, and Hillary stole her votes to be able to beat Trump. And she is getting Dems to pay for the recount under the guise of Hillary overtaking Trump, but really it is to show Hillary stole votes from Stein.

At least according to this guy

He actually was writing about this before the election. And it ties into the thought that Hillary stole the primaries from Bernie.

AllenS said...

WI election laws need to be changed so this doesn't happen again. Two people who ran are asking for a recount. Stein who received 1.1% of the vote, and Rocky Roque De La Fuente who received 1,561 votes or 0.1%. This is starting a precedent, and unless changes are made, this could happen for all elections from now on. There are enough rich Dems to fund these recounts every year.

AllenS said...

every year = every election

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

Verifying the voter rolls would be a necessary first step, it would seem. GIGO.

Quaestor said...

But has Althouse seen this?

David Begley said...

@David at 7:43

I was involved in a Dem party primary recount in Nebraska. Trust me. Our country doesn't want a recount run county-by-county in Wisconsin. I hear 50,000 Hillary votes were missed in Milwaukee.

AllenS said...

I'd love to see Gov Walker instruct the polls to recount only votes for Stein and De La Fuente.

AprilApple said...

Recounts always go democrats way. There are hidden trunks and semi-trucks filled with newly found ballots. It's a miracle!

Original Mike said...

Blogger AllenS said..."I'd love to see Gov Walker instruct the polls to recount only votes for Stein and De La Fuente."

You, sir, are a steely-eyed missile man.

RJ said...

They are busy right now creating "missing" ballot boxes (or the equivalent) in Milwaukee.

rhhardin said...

Once you know how many votes you need, you can find them.

Normally you want to keep fraud small enough so that it isn't noticed, but you have to guess how much you need. Now you know how many and can do that.

Ann Althouse said...

The Prosser/Kloppenberg recount went conservative.

Bob Boyd said...

That's why they call it the Green Party.

David Begley said...

AA

But the fate of the world depends upon Hillary winning the Wisconsin recount. Higher stakes. More incentive to cheat.

AprilApple said...

Correction: Switch "always" to "mostly".

JAORE said...

Sooooooo..... if the recount costs are lower than the funds raised, where can the money go? Stein's campaign loans? Stein's personal/political slush fund?

But, hey,keep those $5'sand $10's rolling in.

Clyde said...

5.5 million is a LOT of Green.

tcrosse said...

Is there any push-back from the Trump side ?

Mac McConnell said...

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...
"Verifying the voter rolls would be a necessary first step, it would seem. GIGO."

Yes and every case of students voting at home and the university should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Same goes for illegals. If they are lucky the can serve time with Hillary.

Renee said...

How does she have standing?

I voted for her, for the purpose of not voting for Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.

Then she gets this cash?

BS. Complete BS.

Big Mike said...

@Renee, with all respect, you've been played.

damikesc said...

Jill Stein, working the money marks hard.

Stein's request should be denied. She has NO chance of winning. She was a fake candidate to begin with. She's just a proxy for the request Hillary won't make Because the request has not come from the real party in interest, it should be denied.

PA is already a no-go. There are certain criteria that must be met to demand a recount and none of those fit.

I hear 50,000 Hillary votes were missed in Milwaukee.

After several weeks of counting --- who would believe "Well, we found these votes in a trunk"?

I mean, besides Democrats...

This isn't from an election two or three days ago. I know Franken pulled it off, but nobody will buy it now and you would likely see Trump voters riot nationally if it was even tried.

The Prosser/Kloppenberg recount went conservative.

But wasn't that because a conservative county kept their totals quiet until the very end?

exiledonmainstreet said...

"The conspiracy theory behind the recount: Jill Stein thinks that she really got more than 1% of the vote nationally, actually closer to 5%, and Hillary stole her votes to be able to beat Trump. And she is getting Dems to pay for the recount under the guise of Hillary overtaking Trump, but really it is to show Hillary stole votes from Stein"

However, it just so happens Stein wants recounts in states that shocked us all and clinched the election for Trump by going from blue to red. I'm sure that's just a coincidence.

Michael K said...

There are two theories I've read.

One is that this is just fund raising for the Green Party. Remember Nader said 15 years ago that "The National Organization for Women" had deteriorated into a money raising machine.

Two is that Hillary promised Trump she would not contest the results if he would promise to drop the investigations of her. That theory would make Stein a stalking horse for Hillary to contest the election in spite of her promise.

I tend to support the first theory.

exiledonmainstreet said...

I'd be a bit sad if a Wisconsin recount somehow came out in Hillary's favor, because I'm enjoying living in a red state, but even if Wisconsin flipped (unlikely), MI and PA will not and Trump will take the oath of office in January.

I see this foolishness as yet another attempt by flailing, desperate leftists to delegitimatize the Trump presidency before it even begins.

It is amusing though, to visit leftist sites and see how excited Stein has made many of the poor fools there. Keep hope alive! I really hope Shiloh and Unknown/Inga have donated to the cause. Jill Stein needs your cash!

Original Mike said...

Whatever happened to "there is no voter fraud"?

steve uhr said...

It does seem odd that stein only received 30,000 votes in WI. I would think she would get that in Dane County alone. What was she polling before the election?

sunsong said...

Stein and Johnson siphoned off votes that Hillary needed. She is trying trying to make amends with the left, imo.

tcrosse said...

Two is that Hillary promised Trump she would not contest the results if he would promise to drop the investigations of her. That theory would make Stein a stalking horse for Hillary to contest the election in spite of her promise.
This is an attractive theory in that it explains Stein's involement, the sudden influx of Big Money and the states chosen for recounts. It points to HRC's connivance. But DJT could figure this out and call off the plea deal at any time. Maybe the HRC camp is still convinced he's an idiot.

AllenS said...

Ah, tcrosse, if Trump ends up losing the election from these recounts, he won't be the President. He won't be able to do plea deal cut offs.

tcrosse said...

Ah, tcrosse, if Trump ends up losing the election from these recounts, he won't be the President. He won't be able to do plea deal cut offs.
That's a mighty big If.

campy said...

Recounts always go democrats way. There are hidden trunks and semi-trucks filled with newly found ballots. It's a miracle!

And why aren't these ballots counted on election night? Who has incentive to hide them? Rethuglicans.

AllenS said...

Listen, I live about 20 miles from Minnesota. I watched Franken beat Coleman when a woman said she just remembered that she had 400 votes for Franken in the trunk of her car. If you don't believe that something like that wouldn't happen again, then you are a damned fool.

exiledonmainstreet said...

AllenS: I have no doubt whatsover that if there is a recount in Wisconsin, "missing votes" will mysteriously be "discovered." But Michigan has already had a recount. That is why it has taken them so long to certify the vote. They are not going to do it again. From what I understand, it will also be very difficult to force a recount in PA.

JAORE said...

"And why aren't these ballots counted on election night? Who has incentive to hide them? Rethuglicans."

Ah, you naive waif. They are not counted on election night. They are not filled out until the required number is established.

And geez, "Rethuglican"? Really? Be more original, call them doo-doo heads. Or grow up. Your choice.

AllenS said...

According to the Detroit Free Press, they are getting ready to recount the Michigan votes:

http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/25/michigan-preparing-potential-hand-recount-48m-presidential-votes/94429196/

Wonder what this is going to do to the stock market.

alan markus said...

No way that this would be a path to Clinton becoming President - all 3 states would have to flip. Trump 306 EC - 20 PA = 286. 286 - 16 MI = 270 (so still at 270). 270 - 10 WI = 260. Again, all 3 states would have to flip.

Now, it is possible that a recount could deny Trump the presidency - from what I have been seeing, the states have a deadline to get their Electoral votes in - if recount is in process, they may not be able to meet the deadline. In that scenario, not candidate has 270 EC votes, and the House (or Senate?) decides who will become President - Republican majority - they could select Trump or anyone else.

I think the same strategy is behind the attempts to get Electoral voters to change their votes, but not necessarily to Clinton - just enough to get Trump under 270 so that someone else could be selected.

So, this more a "anybody but Trump" movement than getting Clinton in office.

AllenS said...

Hillary has 232 electoral votes. I she can flip MI (16) (more than likely), and flip WI (10) (quite possible), she would be at 258. I don't think she can flip PA because she'd have to overcome 60 some thousand votes. At 258 electoral votes, she needs to flip only 12 electoral voters to reach 270. Well, there goes the stock market rally.

tcrosse said...

If this were a path to Clinton becoming President, then it would be a very poisoned chalice, indeed.

Original Mike said...

"And why aren't these ballots counted on election night?"

Because they didn't exist on election night.

campy said...

Ah, you naive waif. They are not counted on election night. They are not filled out until the required number is established.

Oh please, that's not even remotely plausible. If the ballots were fraudulent, our impartial, unbiased press would expose the nefarious scheme. Obviously the "doo-doo heads" hide them.

We can only wonder how many other elections there are where the ddh party gets away with it. Could be dozens — perhaps even hundreds — of brilliant, patriotic democrats denied their rightfully earned chances to serve their country by this treachery.

The mind boggles.

Michael K said...

This recount stratagem gives more impetus to new voter ID legislation.

The GOP Congress can say, "Gee, if there is enough doubt about vote fraud to propose a recount, maybe we should make an effort to be sure only real live citizens vote. Thanks for the idea !"

damikesc said...

Hillary's lawyer has said they will be participating in the recount. Any attempt to overthrow the duly elected President should be met with the swiftest and harshest violence ever seen.

MayBee said...

Hillary's participating.


Hahahahhhhahaha! I hope Democrats and the Media realize what hypocrites they are. This is hilarious.

MayBee said...

Obama said worse things about Donald Trump than he did in his statement about Castro.

Seeing Red said...

NC governor's race is in contest. Supposedly 90k+ votes were manually inserted in a heavily dem area.

Seeing Red said...

It's all about power.

Static Ping said...

As John Hinderaker points out, this is pretty explicitly the Green Party doing the dirty work for the Democratic Party. If Jill was really concerned about the recounts, she would be also asking for recounts in places like New Hampshire, Nevada, and Minnesota which were also close but not in any way that would help Hillary.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/11/recount-freakout.php

I will note that nothing good can come of this. The best case scenario is wasting a lot of money.

tcrosse said...

This is one method of turning grudging Trump voters into enthusiastic ones.

Gahrie said...

Now there are reports that the Hillary campaign is actively supporting the recount(s).

Gahrie said...

Does the Left really believe that the country will sit and watch them steal this election?

Bruce Hayden said...

From a pure political point of view, I see stealing the election through election fraud easiest in PA, with Dems as Gov, AG, and Sec of State, and hardest in WI, for the opposite reasons (ok, Dem as Sec of State makes election fraud possible), with MI in the middle. So, it is possibly boy doable, if those Dem office holders want to kill their careers in their state (but they may be open to jobs in DC thanks to a thankful Crooked Hillary).

But, I don't think that is the end of it. As pointed out above, finding truckloads of Crooked Hillary ballots in all three states would not go down well with the much better armed Trump voters. We all know how the game is played by now, and overt cheating will be noticed and resisted. Al Frankenstein was one of 100 Senators. We are talking the future of the 2nd Amit here, as well, maybe, of abortion. And, illegal immigration and the economy. Stakes are too high this time for her to get away with overtly cheating her way into the White House.

YoungHegelian said...

Interestingly enough, the Obamaites are against this recount business. It's the Clintonistas who are all gung-ho.

I could be a sane,reasonable NYT kind of guy & attribute that to the Obamaite wing of the party wanting bygones to be bygones & wanting the nation to heal. But where's the fun in sane & reasonable when I've got a brand new tinfoil hat I'm just dying to wear to the opera tonight?

I think the reason the Obamaites are against a recount is because they are looking to inherit the shattered shards of the Democratic Party from the Clinton machine. Part of the Democratic machine ground game is to be not too exacting, to say the least, in their definition of what constitutes "voting irregularities". Payments to vote in the black communities ("Walk-around money"), dead people voting, ballot stuffing, & non-citizens voting are all part of the mix.

If a recount goes forward, the Republicans now have a ready-made excuse to do a detailed post-mortem on the voter rolls. I don't think the Democrats want that to happen. Trump made a big deal about the Democrats "rigging" the election. After the DNC revelations about how they screwed Bernie, the Trump administration will use any irregularity discovered to push for tighter voting controls. The Donald on the stump: "See, see, I said they were rigged. And here's the proof! But even though it was all rigged against us, we won! We, the American people won, and we won't stop until we've made America great again!" The PR pieces write themselves, don't they?

Forbes said...

Do the recount petitions get audit verified to ascertain their legitimacy? It would appear imprudent not to do so. Otherwise the mischief stirred up--from fraudulent recount petition to fraudulent ballots found--would devolve voting to a process to recount until the preferred outcome is achieved.

AllenS said...

If Hillary is elected, any such thoughts of using the rule of law to reverse this recount bullshit, is completely out of the question. She's already shown that she is above the law, and won't comply with the rule of law, so that is not an option.

At least we can count on her bombing the fuck out of countries over there.

exiledonmainstreet said...

From the Powerline piece linked to by Static Ping:

" However, there is zero chance that a recount will change the result in any of those states, let alone all of them. Trump won Wisconsin by more than 20,000 votes, Michigan by 10,704 votes, and Pennsylvania by more than 70,000 votes. Lots of luck with those recounts."

That's why I'm not too worried. They'll have to find an awful lot of ballots in an awful lot of car trucks to overcome those numbers.

Again, this is about undermining the Trump presidency. "But Hillary won the popular vote!" persuades nobody, so they have to attack the election process in the states that put Trump over the top.

Nobody is asking for recounts in NH and Nevada.

MayBee said...

YoungHegelian said...
Interestingly enough, the Obamaites are against this recount business. It's the Clintonistas who are all gung-ho.

I could be a sane,reasonable NYT kind of guy & attribute that to the Obamaite wing of the party wanting bygones to be bygones & wanting the nation to heal. But where's the fun in sane & reasonable when I've got a brand new tinfoil hat I'm just dying to wear to the opera tonight?

I think the reason the Obamaites are against a recount is because they are looking to inherit the shattered shards of the Democratic Party from the Clinton machine
==============

Yeah, I've been thinking about this too. There was a story yesterday that Obama called her election night and told her to concede. It's like he can't wait to push her out. And it's like she joined Jill to get at Obama.
I want to know what's going on.

MayBee said...

I also agree that Dems can't want an audit of voter rolls. They are forever bringing lawsuits against SoS who try to clean them up.

exiledonmainstreet said...

It is weird. During the campaign, Stein came under fire from the Hillary camp for saying Clinton would be more dangerous as CiC than Trump. Now she's joined forces with the Clintonistas.

Will the leftist fools who donated to this recount drive ever get their money back? I hope not.

AllenS said...

Money is no object for the Dems, if it was, they'd be launching human wave attacks instead.

Yancey Ward said...

I think it notable that when the idea was floated that Stein had no standing to file for the recounts because there is no chance she could win such a recount, the Clinton Campaign's lawyer immediately put out a statement that Clinton's Campaign would participate in the recount. I think this literally proves the Clinton Campaign instigated the recount, but hired Stein as its public face.

It will go forward, and don't be a bit surprised when two package trucks with a hundred thousand ballots each turn up in Milwaukee and Madison.

campy said...

Does the Left really believe that the country will sit and watch them steal this election?

Oh, they have no doubt you'll write some very angry blog comments about it.

tcrosse said...

Oh, they have no doubt you'll write some very angry blog comments about it.

Which will be about effective as yours.
If Trump's election supposedly opened the floodgates of Hate and Intolerance, imagine what his dis-election will do.

Michael K said...

"this is pretty explicitly the Green Party doing the dirty work for the Democratic Party"

There is also the possibility that this is a Green Party fundraiser. Ralph Nader said that the NOW had become a money raising operation.

Who is going to audit the donated funds ?

rcocean said...

Why should anyone be surprised that the "Green party" is doing the dirty work for the Democrats?

Most Green party members hate the Democrats because they aren't extreme enough.

Michael Fitzgerald said...

LOL @ the blatant money grab by greedy green Stein. Initially asked for $1 million to take care of costs, and when that sum was donated in the first hour, she didn't say Thanks, now we can do what we set out to do! No sir, not the virtuous In-it-for-the-little-guy progressives. Stein saw millions flowing in and screamed "Keep it coming!" Fuck the ballots, Jill's counting the green!

damikesc said...

If Hillary isn't making the demand personally --- what standing does Stein have to make the demands? Can I demand recounts in states that I got virtually no votes in too?