Clinton Campaign Looking into Challenging Outcome of Election to Undermine the Vote

During the weeks before the final day of the campaign, both the Clinton camp and the media attacked Donald Trump for refusing to say he would automatically accept the outcome of the vote on Election Day. But now Clinton’s campaign chief is taking meetings with groups urging him to do just that by considering a challenge to the final vote in several of the key states that gave Trump the White House.

Reports from several sources revealed on November 22 that Clinton campaign chief John Podesta was taking meetings with a group claiming it had discovered “irregularities” in several counties of some of the states that Trump won.

LINK

There is evidence that there was cheating for Trump. I'm not surprised by this move on Clinton's part. What will come of it?

How can there be a recount without a paper trail? Do you check the computer records again? Does that make any sense to anyone?

Any predictions concerning how this will end?

a reply to: Profusion


Damned woman belongs in jail.

The nerve of that women is something else,after all the BS she still has the kahunas to state such things.....

RA

Ah the new state media Breitbart hilarious.

Here is a non-state source lol.

MSN Article

Says similar things but without the state media spin.

originally posted by: Night Star
a reply to: Profusion


Damned woman belongs in jail.

Not according to Trump apparently.

a reply to: odzeandennz

Trump's just playing politics. Chaffetz and Gowdy already have her lined up on the chopping board.

Her criminal history isn't going to be forgotten so easily.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: odzeandennz

Trump's just playing politics. Chaffetz and Gowdy already have her lined up on the chopping board.

Her criminal history isn't going to be forgotten so easily.

Correct! It wont be TRUMPOTUS that will be doing it. Smart move. This way he can move towards uniting the Nation.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: odzeandennz

Trump's just playing politics. Chaffetz and Gowdy already have her lined up on the chopping board.

Her criminal history isn't going to be forgotten so easily.

Correct! It wont be TRUMPOTUS that will be doing it. Smart move. This way he can move towards uniting the Nation.

originally posted by: Profusion
There is evidence that there was cheating for Trump. I'm not surprised by this move on Clinton's part. What will come of it?

How can there be a recount without a paper trail? Do you check the computer records again? Does that make any sense to anyone?

Any predictions concerning how this will end?

What has been pointed out so far is a statistical difference between the digital machine vote and the paper vote, iirc particularly in Wisconsin. Ironically, I think it's the other way around, i.e. it's most likely evidence of Democrats cheating for Hillary.

The academics who noted the statistical difference assumed this difference meant hacking, but the thing about hacking is that if a machine was hacked, it's easy to verify, because you can just look at the code. An investigation would surely and easily catch hacking.

Whereas the traditional way to cheat is after polls close, the local poll workers sit around and go through the registration lists and vote for as many of the home team voters who didn't show up as they have time and care to vote for. So it's actually much harder to catch this sort of old school ballot box stuffing than hacked machines.

So I expect what will happen is that the Clinton people and the Democrats will let this rumor float in the hopes of further undermining Trump, while ultimately not pursuing recounts because obviously they wouldn't want to catch their own ballot box stuffing.

I'm betting any recount will show Trump won by more votes.

I'll be there to hand out coloring books and play doh to the snowflakes once this second charade is also an epic failure. Trump 2017 MAGA!

Just the fact she was @!#@ slapped with a wet towel by voters is enough for me. The election defeat will hurt her a long time.

Above was meant to tag Night Star's comment regarding clinton having to go to jail.

a reply to: Profusion

Apparently a “group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers” met with Podesta to express their belief that they “found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked,”

The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots. Based on this statistical analysis, Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000.

Their rationale is...because she got fewer votes on electronic voting machines...it must be that they were hacked. Of course...they dont have any real proof of any hacking going on. Like the establishment always does...state that there are reports from "anonymous high intelligence official" to make it appear credible...but then never produce those reports and simply rely on the buzzwords doing all the damage.

seems like a desperate long shot.

They just dont realize it still...the crap will not work anymore.

Does anyone think the NSA watching the voting machines may have meant they had intel Soros and Hilllary operatives were going to try to hack them to give her more votes. Maybe the NSA saved the day by thwarting the voting machine fraud.

Just a thought.

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: Profusion

Apparently a “group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers” met with Podesta to express their belief that they “found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked,”

The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots. Based on this statistical analysis, Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000.

Their rationale is...because she got fewer votes on electronic voting machines...it must be that they were hacked. Of course...they dont have any real proof of any hacking going on. Like the establishment always does...state that there are reports from "anonymous high intelligence official" to make it appear credible...but then never produce those reports and simply rely on the buzzwords doing all the damage.

seems like a desperate long shot.

They just dont realize it still...the crap will not work anymore.

The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots. Based on this statistical analysis, Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000.

lol!!

What they are actually saying is that the hackers FORGOT to hack those machines.

That is what the meeting was about.

Podesta is challenging their bill.

If she does, Trump will assign a special prosecutor for her crimes.

I don't think the Democrats will, they are the ones that stuff ballot boxes and bus people to voting booths.
They cheated, its just that Trumps popularity was big enough to still win.

My only concern is that they try to fabricate polling irregularities in tangent with their own rigging.

The protests have died down, people went back to work!

If Soros really plays this move the people wont take it!

a reply to: burgerbuddy

I like the words..."may have been hacked" and "may have been denied".

In the world of liberal machinery...that's a proof enough.

In Pennsylvania there were at least several areas where machines had to be removed or recalibrated because they were flipping votes from Trump TO Clinton.
This was verified by voting officials, and in at least one district the FBI was called in to investigate.
I did not hear of any at all flipping votes to Trump.

I think people were more alert to watch for machine issues this election because there was so much talk about it in advance.

The machines in many state come from a company whose owner is on the board of Soros's Open Society.

There were also a couple of Democratic voting registration groups in PA who were arrested because they were found to have created fraudulent registrations. Duplicates, invalid addresses, people who don't exist.

If anything, evidence was showing Democrat fraud, not the other way around.
I think they were surprised to lose because they thought they had it all arranged and too many of their attempts were thwarted.
I wonder how many of the votes they did get were fraud.

And yes - I agree with others that the bogus Russia hacking accusations were set up in advance to give the Democrats an excuse to undermine Trump votes.

Oh and they are hypocrites.
Remember how much grief they gave Trump for saying that he was not going to say in advance if he would accept the results?
Now they are not accepting.

It'd be amusing if they did a recount and found out that Trump had an even greater lead over Clinton in the swing states.

a reply to: thepixelpusher

Does anyone think the NSA watching the voting machines may have meant they had intel Soros and Hilllary operatives were going to try to hack them to give her more votes. Maybe the NSA saved the day by thwarting the voting machine fraud.

Just a thought.

And now Trump seems to be considering the NSA director for a cabinet post:

www.npr.org...

I'm sure it is just a coincidence that the head of one of the only organizations that could successfully hack the election just met with the President Elect.