Federal Judge Halts Recount, Sealing Trump's Michigan Win

A federal judge who ordered Michigan to begin its recount effectively ended it on Wednesday, tying his decision to a state court ruling that found Green Party candidate Jill Stein had no legal standing to request another look at ballots.

The ruling seals Republican Donald Trump's narrow victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton for Michigan's 16 electoral votes.

U.S. District Judge Mark Goldsmith agreed with Republicans who argued that the three-day recount must end a day after the state appeals court dealt a blow to the effort. The court said Stein, who finished fourth in Michigan on Nov. 8, didn't have a chance of winning even after a recount and therefore isn't an "aggrieved" candidate.

Federal Judge Halts Recount, Sealing Trump's Michigan Win

I'm glad sanity prevailed here.

Jill Stein had NO standing to even ask for the recount.

The fact that it almost took place is scary...

As expected , Steingate with Hillary's "Green Party" puppet failed. Ol Jill better not go to parks or lift weights without a trusted spotter.
Penn is failing them and Wisconsin the more they recount , the larger Trump's lead.
Best thing Hillary and Jill can do now is stay out of the public eye completely for the next , say , 10 years.

Already posted brother, the same title and all.

Use the SEARCH button young Padawan.

Federal Judge Halts Recount. Sealing Trumps Michigan Win

a reply to: Riffrafter

Everything surrounding the criminal Clintons is scary. Jill was put up to this, its been obvious from the start

Putting her failed bid for the whitehouse to bed, again.

Maybe its best that way. Then she can go back to what she did before, accepting hundreds of millions of dollars of 'Pay to Play' money from foreign countries through her and Bill's foundation.

I bet thats a really secret cookbook recipe these days.

Yes, but according to the local news out of Lansing this morning, she's planning on taking it to the higher court, and "will not give up the fight".

Wonderful.

a reply to: Riffrafter
This reminds me of how "Bushie" was awarded FL by some magistrate (never heard from again) and we know how that turned out.

C'mon Judgie-wudgie, we have nothing to fear but fear itself. What are you scared of, losing? I bet.

Even the President Elect says the Election was rigged. How can you have it both ways?

Hmmm... disappointing. I was looking forward to hearing how the recounts turned out in the couple of counties Hillary won that had more ballots submitted than voters.

a reply to: Gothmog

Best thing Hillary and Jill can do now is stay out of the public eye completely for the next , say , 10 years.

Wouldn't that be wonderful?

I can't stand either of them.

Very silly to stop the recount.

If Trump won fair and square, wouldn't he win again with the recount?

But, by stopping the recount now, that just delays the count, until Jill Stein gets a higher court to restart it.

That means the Michigan count may never make it to the Electoral College.

Because of all the stops and starts.

Recount it, get it over with.

Why don't they want to know?

Anyone that thinks the judge ended this for any sort of legal compunctions is naive. His decision was nothing more than damage control to stop the DAILY revelations of mismatched ballot counts, ballot bag "malfunctions", broken security seals, etc.

I now can see why Clinton didn't want to be directly associated with this and on a related note, isn't it so satisfying that her own corruption not only didn't win the election for her, but also prevented any chance of a recount going in her favor? For once truth and honesty pays off in dividends, congrats once again Mr. Trump

originally posted by: AMPTAH

Very silly to stop the recount.

If Trump won fair and square, wouldn't he win again with the recount?

But, by stopping the recount now, that just delays the count, until Jill Stein gets a higher court to restart it.

That means the Michigan count may never make it to the Electoral College.

Because of all the stops and starts.

Recount it, get it over with.

Why don't they want to know?

lol ...I wouldn't be holding your breath for this to "restart" again. Even the democrats on the Michigan electors board voted to stop it. It's time to get over it, at this point there is NOT EVEN A REMOTE POSSIBILITY Clinton will be president, 0% chance... none, nada, etc

a reply to: AMPTAH

Is not going to happen, before the recount the votes were already certified on Nov. 28and the results send to Washington, the recount would have made a difference in the outcome.

So the electoral voters had the go to vote regardless no body is stopping them. Only the other two states that didn't have certified votes can stop the electoral.

Still the higher court will take the lower court decision in the bases of what the case intention was filed under, that Stein had not grounds for grievance.

The judge is correct, and the candidate did not have standing. The laws are clear on that.

However, what has been shown, should warrant a recount and look into the election system on a whole in those states. Due to the problems that are popping up, that there appears to be some form of rigging had happened. Machines tampered with, inaccurate counts in the ballot boxes, all suggest something far worse went on. Now it should be up to the people to also demand a recount and an investigation, as it is their voice that is at stake. If there was either a mishandling or voter suppression on the part of the state, well that could bode very bad in future elections.

originally posted by: muSSang
Already posted brother, the same title and all.

Use the SEARCH button young Padawan.

Federal Judge Halts Recount. Sealing Trumps Michigan Win

True, but in the Mud Pit, which is the reason I decided this should also post.

This is news and many people don't visit the Mud Pit for a variety of reasons. And as you know, there can be 2 different threads when it comes to a news item.

On a final note - I did look, but it must have just been posted or in the process of being posted as I was writing mine, as no results turned up.

Thanks fer yer support!

originally posted by: AMPTAH

Very silly to stop the recount.

If Trump won fair and square, wouldn't he win again with the recount?

But, by stopping the recount now, that just delays the count, until Jill Stein gets a higher court to restart it.

That means the Michigan count may never make it to the Electoral College.

Because of all the stops and starts.

Recount it, get it over with.

Why don't they want to know?

Want to know what? If Jill actually won? LoL?

Now, if you are suggesting a recount to see if Hillary won, then perhaps Hillary should request a recount?

But she didn't and she won't and obviously Trump won't and Jill has zero chance of getting the five percent she would need......so why recount?

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: Riffrafter
This reminds me of how "Bushie" was awarded FL by some magistrate (never heard from again) and we know how that turned out.

C'mon Judgie-wudgie, we have nothing to fear but fear itself. What are you scared of, losing? I bet.

Even the President Elect says the Election was rigged. How can you have it both ways?

Perhaps you should petition Hillary to request a recount?

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: Riffrafter
This reminds me of how "Bushie" was awarded FL by some magistrate (never heard from again) and we know how that turned out.

C'mon Judgie-wudgie, we have nothing to fear but fear itself. What are you scared of, losing? I bet.

Even the President Elect says the Election was rigged. How can you have it both ways?

OK, let's get the record straight on Florida 2000. The initial count showed a narrow Bush victory. Gore asked for a recount. The recount result was even closer, but Bush still won by a hair. Also, the recount had been tainted by reports of a mysterious box of uncounted ballots appearing in heavily-Democratic Broward county. This raised the specter that Democrats were trying to flip the state with last-minute ballot-box stuffing.

Following the first recount, Gore asked for another recount, which he was not legally entitled to. Florida's election laws did not allow for unlimited recounts. Lower courts granted this recount, but the Supreme Court ordered that the second recount be stopped, because the law did not provide for it.

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: Riffrafter
This reminds me of how "Bushie" was awarded FL by some magistrate (never heard from again) and we know how that turned out.

C'mon Judgie-wudgie, we have nothing to fear but fear itself. What are you scared of, losing? I bet.

Even the President Elect says the Election was rigged. How can you have it both ways?

Considering that the federal judge in the case is an Obama appointee, I'm not sure how well that insinuation of bias is going to work for you. If anything, he never should have gotten the federal court system involved in this to begin with by allowing the recount to start over the weekend. It was a matter for the Michigan state courts alone.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

Perhaps you should petition Hillary to request a recount?

Hillary is too embarrassed to ask for a recount, because she attacked Trump on this very point during the campaign, that he wouldn't accept the results.

You know the saying,

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? -- KJV, Matthew 7:3

Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? -- KJV, Matthew 7:4

Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. -- KJV, Matthew 7:5

She doesn't want to be thought "a hypocrite".

So, she tied her own tongue, by willful insinuations during the campaign. But, because of her Christian upbringing, she's aware of the hypocrisy in asking for a recount.

That leaves it up to Jill Stein, who always calls for recounts, to take on the work of "the people."