Latest update on the Clintonstein recount: time to pay up or shut up in Wisconsin

The moment of truth is now, will Stein part from 3.5 million to give away for a recount on only one of the states she is targeting?

I don't think so, Michigan is already a done deal, they already gave the state win to Trump and for Pennsylvania is already too late, so one state recount will not take away the win for Trump.

Let see how much stein love her donations.

a reply to: marg6043

Ah, people have so much short time memories, Boadicea you forgot the infamous Florida hanging chads back in past no long time ago.

I haven't forgotten. I remember the dimpled chads too. And the perforated chads. Shall I go on?

When you have already a legit winner in any state, no state will want a repeat of the hanging chads in Florida.

Since chads and Florida has nothing to do with electronic voting and counting, and since the entire point is to prove -- not just accept as -- the legitimacy of the winner, I have no idea what you're even trying to say.... unless you're just making excuses for a system and a political establishment which has made it pert near impossible for any of us to even know how legitimate our election system really is, and therefore the legitimacy of the winner.

The more people complain about the recount, the more I wonder just what they're really afraid of.

FActs are what matter. If Russia gave this election to Trump via hacking the machines then he doesn't deserve to be the president elect. If any voting fraud occurred substantial enough to sway it in his favor or Hillary's then it should come out. I'm definitely in support of that.

I think some of you're dismissive because you either support Trump blindly or you have such extreme confidence in our election system you cannot fathom voter fraud. I can. I believe Russia could do it. I think it's less likely to source elsewhere, but not impossible. Our own government hacking the machines isn't necessary. Just creating propaganda is enough--and safe.

But it does look like things are bleak for Hillary.

a reply to: jonnywhite

"If Russia gave this election to Trump via hacking the machines then he doesn't deserve to be the president elect."

You do know the White House said there are NO signs of any hacking. Pretty sure if there was, they would be all over it so they could get cankles in the White House.

originally posted by: jonnywhite
FActs are what matter. If Russia gave this election to Trump via hacking the machines then he doesn't deserve to be the president elect. If any voting fraud occurred substantial enough to sway it in his favor or Hillary's then it should come out. I'm definitely in support of that.

I think some of you're dismissive because you either support Trump blindly or you have such extreme confidence in our election system you cannot fathom voter fraud. I can. I believe Russia could do it.

Russia had absolutely nothing to do with it.....nothing. Russia didn't hack the wiki leak emails, Russia was simply used as a diversion from wiki leaks by the corporate liberal media. If there was fraud, it's much more likely internal and has been going on long before this election.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Circumstantial.

Lucky for you that it is for the sake of argument. It's the only reason that the statement about making it clear that they weren't going to initiate a recount true, as long as Stein isn't being used as a proxy to do the same. I agree, it comes down to who you're willing to believe. The fact that I don't trust Hillary make my opinions biased, considering that she was/is a lawyer and a politician. I share the same distrust for Trump at the moment, so don't fire back in that regard.

The link to the story I provided is being picked up by the MSM now, hopefully causing Hillary to be confronted and asked about the phone call the future. Let's pretend for a second that what was conveyed about the conversation that took place between Obama and Hillary was true. Any idea why she would have to be told, instead of taking her own advice and willingly conceding? I admit, it was purportedly stated in the article, but speculation is born from the fact that a call was made.

a reply to: eisegesis

Whatever. I'm done with this tit-for-tat anyways. I've made my opinion clear about the recount. I don't support it and it won't produce a change of the election results in any meaningful way.

If you want to desperately believe that Clinton was behind it. Fine. Clearly nothing I'm going to say will stop you anyways. So do it. I don't want to argue it anymore because I just don't care who started it. So cya. I'm going to go talk about something more productive.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yes it is.

Is the Wisconsin payment due by office closing time or midnight?

The WEC closes at 4:30.

originally posted by: jonnywhite
FActs are what matter. If Russia gave this election to Trump via hacking the machines then he doesn't deserve to be the president elect. If any voting fraud occurred substantial enough to sway it in his favor or Hillary's then it should come out. I'm definitely in support of that.

I think some of you're dismissive because you either support Trump blindly or you have such extreme confidence in our election system you cannot fathom voter fraud. I can. I believe Russia could do it. I think it's less likely to source elsewhere, but not impossible. Our own government hacking the machines isn't necessary. Just creating propaganda is enough--and safe.

But it does look like things are bleak for Hillary.

Precisely.

For all the screaming about fraud and rigging done all the way through election night by the right, I find it very, almost comically, telling that few of them want to go the extra mile and make sure nothing nefarious is being given a carte blanche.

If there was rigging to be found, by any party, I want to f%&$ing know about it. Anyone who's all "Psshaw, no rigging here!" after all the crybabying over rigging for MONTHS on end is a complete hypocrite to dissuade a recount.

Do I personally think anything was rigged? Probably not, or at least not enough to change who won. Do I think it's possible and needs to be nipped in the bud right the F now if found? Yes. Not just yes, but hell yes. It's a slippery slope if that's what the underbelly of our election system looks like. Be a logical damned American already, if no one ever checks our process for manipulation, someone WILL have the stones to manipulate it next time you're going "Naw, doesn't happen here!"

a reply to: Voiceofthemajority

A count by hand...god how reliable is that...I have some really smart friends and I've seen them count large sums of money..to say they are correct 90% of the time would be a long shot..

originally posted by: Man0nFire

originally posted by: jonnywhite
FActs are what matter. If Russia gave this election to Trump via hacking the machines then he doesn't deserve to be the president elect. If any voting fraud occurred substantial enough to sway it in his favor or Hillary's then it should come out. I'm definitely in support of that.

I think some of you're dismissive because you either support Trump blindly or you have such extreme confidence in our election system you cannot fathom voter fraud. I can. I believe Russia could do it.

Russia had absolutely nothing to do with it.....nothing. Russia didn't hack the wiki leak emails, Russia was simply used as a diversion from wiki leaks by the corporate liberal media. If there was fraud, it's much more likely internal and has been going on long before this election.

the security agencies (NSA, CIA, etc.) of this country say the opposite...but obviously you believe nothing coming from them.

originally posted by: chrismarco
a reply to: Voiceofthemajority

A count by hand...god how reliable is that...I have some really smart friends and I've seen them count large sums of money..to say they are correct 90% of the time would be a long shot..

gees...you're comparing apples to pears....how is counting large sums of money compared to checking ballots for accuracy?....you do know when they count ballots they have a person from each "side" looking over each ballot...that's why it takes so long

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Voiceofthemajority

So far, all I'm learning from Stein's efforts does not bode well for any of us:

1. It's damn hard and really really expensive to conduct any kind of fact-check on our election system; and,
2. Our political critters sure don't want us to have any kind of fact-check on our election system.

So we're just supposed to take the word of those counting the votes. I'm not liking this at all...

And that's one of the whole points of doing it whether there was or wasn't any fraud. The grain is planted in your head there must have been because someone called for a recount and it was hard to get it (nevermind that the person doing it doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting anything out of it no matter what a recount shows) and thus, the system must be invalid no matter what.

Now the upcoming presidency is just that little bit undermined.

They did this with Bush too.

originally posted by: marg6043
The moment of truth is now, will Stein part from 3.5 million to give away for a recount on only one of the states she is targeting?

I don't think so ....

I don't either ....wouldn't it be hilarious if tomorrow morning green party HQ is found to be completely empty with nothing but a brochure for Belize on the floor

Well that's it.

Office is closed for the day.

No confirmation of payment.

Looking like the scam of the century.

fox6now.com...

Stein filed the $3.5 million fee Tuesday -- triggering the recount.
...
The Wisconsin Elections Commission has received a bank wire transfer of $3,499,689 from the Jill Stein presidential campaign to prepay the estimated cost of conducting a statewide recount.

With payment received, the Commission is issuing an order for the recount to begin on Thursday. The complete schedule is here: elections.wi.gov...

The Wisconsin Elections Commission on Tuesday afternoon, November 29th said the estimated cost of the recount in Wisconsin is now $3.9 million. The Commission said the $3.5 million estimate was based on computation error.

Stein is suing the Wisconsin Elections Commission in Dane County Circuit Court, asking a judge to force county clerks to hand count every ballot instead of using machines.

Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has filed to join the lawsuit.

I thought Clinton was just going to observe the recount.
Now she is joining the lawsuit.
It's so obvious that she was behind this whole thing.

a reply to: Nyiah

I am all for ensuring the integrity of our elections.

What I don't trust is how these particular recounts originated.

Someone had a great deal of money to sponsor this, and targeted only states where Trump won.
Someone with that much money (*Soros*) would likely have some kind of plan in place to cause fraud DURING the election and the recount.
He will either arrange to have false evidence planted to incriminate the GOP, or he will somehow produce ballots out of thin air that no one saw before to change the results.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Hahahaha!

They just raised the amount again, just like scammmer Stein.

Monday, the Commission released an estimate of nearly $3.5 million to the campaigns of Green Party candidate Jill Stein and independent candidate Rocky Roque De La Fuente. Unfortunately, there was an error in adding up figures from the 72 Wisconsin county clerks of their estimated recount costs, and the actual total is $3,898,340.

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
Well that's it.

Office is closed for the day.

No confirmation of payment.

Looking like the scam of the century.

I'm with you and per my source below the deadline was actually 4:30 pm but let's see what the evening brings. According to this article, even this morning Stein was still claiming she plans to pay today, although "the cost is exorbitant"

Wisconsin Public Radio News