It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Holy Nightmare - Hillary Might Be Our Next President. A 3-state Recount is Possible.

page: 12
27
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: JimmyJones63
She already stated she lost. She is a loser and there is no way a bogus, corrupt "elite recount" will be tolerated. I think we would have a real civil war if they tried..


Trump spent months saying he would not accept the results if it was close.

“America is a constitutional republic with a system of laws. These laws are triggered in the case of fraud or in the event of a recount, where it’s needed,”

“In effect, I’m being asked to waive centuries of legal precedent designed to protect the voters,”

He and his campaign have been making the strong case for a recount for months leading up to the election.

Jill Stein has raised the requisite funds. We will see what happens next.




posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Actually, all he said was that he was going to wait and see. That is neither saying he would accept or deny the results. It's walking the middle of those two.

And Stein has already raised the bar on what the requisite funds actually are from her original mark. It remains to be seen what if anything she plans to do with them.
edit on 24-11-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   
What will happen next is that Donald Trump will be inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2017 as the next President.


I do not understand how anyone could possibly think anything different unless Trump died before then. Pence will become the next POTUS after that.


There will screaming and yelling, re-counts, yada yada yada yada.

The final results will be the exact same as the last 4 times someone won the popular vote and lost the electoral vote...that person that had the most electoral votes will become the POTUS.

Bet on it.
edit on R092016-11-24T10:09:36-06:00k0911Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R102016-11-24T10:10:16-06:00k1011Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: windword

MotherJones is your source? And you mock other sources?


Yes, Mother Jones. Mother Jones is currently a member of the White House Press Corps.


The White House press corps is the group of journalists or correspondents usually stationed at the White House in Washington, D.C., to cover the President of the United States, White House events, and news briefings. Their offices are located in the West Wing.

en.wikipedia.org...

What sources of yours have I mocked?
edit on 24-11-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

Well if Mother Jones is a member of the White House press corps, then no one should complain if Breitbart gets a seat.

Let's just put it that way.
edit on 24-11-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

PA would definitely be the place to start as that is the biggest margin of Trump win. If the recount shows little change there then recounts in MI and WI are pointless.

As your article explains...the "3rd way" a recount can be initiated is by a candidate contesting. Clinton isn't doing so...but Jill Stein is...and she raised the 2.5 Million needed to start the recounts.

70k votes would be highly unusual to swing in a recount...that would most likely involve hacking vs. bad counting...

If she was serious about it, she should send in a crack cyber-security team to examine the electronic voting system....because I don't think 70k votes would flip due to error or small scale fraud. If there is no evidence of hacking in PA, she should throw in the towel IMO...but I guess we will find out...she's got the funds and she can request it as a candidate.



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

She can't just request it.
The court would have to approve her request. She would have to have a good reason.
And I don't see that she has a good reason, as it is not going to change the outcome for her no matter what.
Jill Stein got 0.82% of the votes in PA.

And:

There were two statewide recounts in Pennsylvania recent memory, one in 2009 and another in 2011. In 2009, a mandatory statewide recount was ordered (because of that 0.5 percent threshold) in the primary race for Commonwealth Court. The original result was sustained, and the recount cost taxpayers more than half a million dollars. In 2011, there was a primary recount for the Superior Court under the same conditions. That result was also sustained.


billypenn.com...


edit on 11/24/16 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/24/16 by BlueAjah because: eta



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I never complained about Breitbart getting a seat on the White House Press Corp. In fact, I don't have a problem with it at all. The White House Press Corps get access to White House briefings, press conferences and press releases, and, if they're lucky, they get to ask questions. The more questions and the more diverse and pointed they are, the better! Then they disseminate what they heard and learned. The more the merrier, I say!




edit on 24-11-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

I would question anything coming from Mother Jones / David Corn considering he shows up quite a bit in Podesta's emails. Thus far the emails show a bias against Republicans going all they way back to the 2008 elections.
edit on 24-11-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Election recount criteria information

Pennsylvania
* - Citizens for Election Integrity - Pennsylvania State Law
* - Pennsylvania Department of State - Voting and Elections


Michigan
* - Citizens for Election Integrity - Michigan
* - MI Administrative code - Election recounts ***PDF LINK***
* - Michigan Secretary of State - Elections


Wisconsin
* - Citizens for Election Integrity - Wisconsin
* - Wisconsin State Laws - Elections ***PDF LINK***
* - Wisconsin Legislator - Elections
* - Wisconsin elections commission
* - Wisconsin election recount procedures ***PDF LINK***


* - Nov 23rd - Detroit Free Press - The numbers are in: Trump wins Michigan by 10,704

The Michigan Secretary of State posted results Wednesday that were submitted by the state's 83 county clerks on Tuesday after the votes were reviewed and certified by each county.



The state's Board of Canvassers will officially certify the results on Nov. 28. The electoral college in all the states, including Michigan's 16 electors, will cast their votes on Dec. 19.

"Many people have asked about Michigan’s process for counting ballots and certifying election results. Please be aware that all 1,521 Michigan cities and townships completed ballot counting and reported unofficial results by the morning of Wednesday, Nov. 9," according to a statement on the Secretary of State's website. "The county canvassing boards, as they do after every election, then began their work to review and certify the results from each precinct."

►Related:Michigan elections director casts doubt on vote-hacking concerns
►Related:Betsy DeVos tapped by Donald Trump for education secretary

Across the nation, Trump won 306 electoral votes -- including Michigan's 16 -- to 232 for Clinton. In the popular vote, Clinton holds a lead of more than 2 million votes.

Trump is the first Republican presidential candidate since 1988 to win Michigan.

The vote totals that will be submitted to the state Canvassers Board on Nov. 28 are:

Donald J. Trump, Republican: 2,279,543
Hillary Clinton, Democratic: 2,268,839
Gary Johnson, Libertarian: 172,136
Jill Stein, Green: 51,463
Darrell L. Castle, U.S. Taxpayers: 16,139
Evan McMullin, write-in: 8,177
Emidio Mimi Soltysik, Natural Law: 2,209
Michael Maturen, write-in: 517
Tom Hoefling, write-in: 95
Laurence Kotlikoff, write-in: 87
Ben Hartnell, write-in: 39
Monica Moorehead, write-in: 30
​Cherunda Fox, write-in: 10


I think the issue is dead in Michigan now.
edit on 24-11-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Wisconsin does not use electronic voting as far as I know



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Or the fact that he knew it would do no good.

Those areas are so lib that he didn't have a chance.

That's why we have an electrical Congress if not nyc, la and a couple other cities would win all the time.

Look at the map of counties that went for him and not the state map. He won all most every one outside the big cities. Even NY was almost all his.



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Just remember folks, Trump and his banana republicans are the bringers of the swamp. The right wing has had their hands in rigging elections for quite some time now. Just look at the Bush elections with the caging of voters and the US attorney scandal.

I hope they recount the votes. Let's conclusively see who one the votes in those three states.



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Basically you are implying that the people who counted the votes the first time did so wrongly?

You understand that in Michigan, there are no electronic voting machines to be hacked, right?



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Michigan elections director casts doubt on vote-hacking concerns


Chris Thomas, the longtime director of Michigan's Bureau of Elections, said Michigan doesn't use the electronic voting machines identified in the report as being the sources of potential hacking.

"We are an entire paper and optical scan state," Thomas told the Free Press this morning. "Nothing is connected to the Internet."

Halderman, who also is listed as a professor of electrical engineering and computer science in U-M's College of Engineering, did not respond to messages left on his cell phone, office phone, or e-mail. But in a blog posting earlier today, he said the media reports contain inaccuracies, though he does think recounts of paper ballots in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are a good idea and has had discussions with the Clinton campaign.


Interesting how the "Federal Government Agencies" push the hack theory as fact when MI uses all paper ballot voting. Can any desperate Clinton supporters please explain?

A question
Why are Democrats / Liberals concerned about election fraud when they werent concerned about it when they engaged in it during the Democratic primaries?

Sanders, imo, would have won had Democrats not engaged in election fraud to ensure Clinton won. This hoopla about contesting this election over fake hacking accusations is nothing more than an attempt by Democrats to shift the blame of why they lost from themselves to anything else.
edit on 24-11-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust
She won't. She probably had the election rigged and still lost. Don't want that coming out. Must be for some reason. I mean she wanted it so bad and a bunch of statisticians are telling her the results have a high chance of being false then why wouldn't she, unless it's to her own detriment.



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Well now, this is interesting. It's not so much "rigging" as "hacking". And optical scanners, such as what states like Michigan use, use computer drives and software that can be hacked. Hackers have gotten into election offices in other states, so there is cause for alarm re the integrity of the voting system. There should be an accounting to see if those states in the article also had any election interference by hackers.

Regardless of outcome, we need to be assured of the integrity of the system. Paper ballots should be checked against what was reported by the optical scans.



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: desert

Except for the fact the optical scan ballot machines arent connected to the internet.

The only thing interesting about this is how such a ludicrous story can be pushed as factual given the glaring inconsistencies in machines / methods used and the intentional distortion of one of the researchers statements who said the machines in MI werent hacked.

One would think considering how many times the Democrats and media have been caught lying this election they would quit while they are behind and buried.

Apparently they have ethics that would raise eyebrows in the Court of Caligula.
edit on 24-11-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra


"There are still plenty of computers involved” even without digital touch screens, says Appel. “Even with optical scan voting, it’s not just the voting machines themselves—it’s the desktop and laptop computers that election officials use to prepare the ballots, prepare the electronic files from the OpScan machines, panel voter registration, electronic poll books. And the computers that aggregate the results together from all of the optical scans.” “If any of those get hacked, it could could significantly disrupt the election.”
.....
“Whether it’s an optical scanner or a DRE, the votes still get totaled on a memory card. And at the end of the election, you put that memory card into a central card system,” Epstein tells me. “You could use it to infect the tabulator system, and once you infect the tabulator system, it could transmit on.”


How to Hack an Election in 7 Minutes



posted on Nov, 24 2016 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: desert

Familiarize yourself with MI voting count procedures. The procedures dont support the claim being made in your post.


The state's Board of Canvassers will officially certify the results on Nov. 28. The electoral college in all the states, including Michigan's 16 electors, will cast their votes on Dec. 19.

"Many people have asked about Michigan’s process for counting ballots and certifying election results. Please be aware that all 1,521 Michigan cities and townships completed ballot counting and reported unofficial results by the morning of Wednesday, Nov. 9," according to a statement on the Secretary of State's website. "The county canvassing boards, as they do after every election, then began their work to review and certify the results from each precinct."


At what point does the "hacking" occur? The unofficial reporting, the verification count process in each location or on hte 29th when the results are accepted as official and released.

edit on 24-11-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
27
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join