jill-steinThe Call For Battleground Recount

Prior to the Thanksgiving Holiday the Green Party Candidate Jill Stein announced that she would be calling for a “Recount” on the votes in three key battleground states based upon a an opinion of a group of computer scientists, election attorneys and the Hillary Clinton Campaign, citing that the voting machines may have been hacked, though there is no evidence to support such a claim.

Stein is calling for recounts in Michigan (Stein received 1.1%), Pennsylvania (Stein received 0.8%) and Wisconsin (Stein received 1.1%), three of the main battleground States which, if the results are reveresed, would give Hillary Clinton the Presidency.

We see two (2) red flags here. The first is that: Jill Stein was the biggest loser of the 2016 Election, barely garnishing 1% of the vote, and often less, in most states. She was second to Gary “Aleppo” Johnson. So why is she the one challenging the result?

The Second red flag we see is: none of the voting of election result calculating computers are connected to the internet in the States in question so any “hacking” would have to have been done from “the inside”, in each of the reporting counties and would have had to have been a very organized and coordinated effort, for which their is no evidence or indication of having occurred.

Though the recount effort is not being lead by the Clinton Campaign or the DNC, which should give pause to the average person, it is highly unlikely that they have not played a hand in in this effort. As we have pointed up Jill Stein has nothing to gain by a recount in the selected states. Her sudden concern with the election integrity is rather suspicious, to say the lest.  Especially in light of the fact that the only allegations of a “hacking” narrative to have been floated throughout the 2016 Election campaign have come from the DNC and the Clinton Campaign which has been related to the WikiLeaks DNC and Podesta email leaks.

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 Wednesday. “Nothing is connected to the Internet.”

J. Alex Halderman , the Professor of Computer Science, University of Michigan, who’s blog report has stirred this latest recount effort has admitted that not only did the media miss report his theory, but also that it was unlikely that the elections results were hacked.

You may have read at NYMag that I’ve been in discussions with the Clinton campaign about whether it might wish to seek recounts in critical states. That article, which includes somebody else’s description of my views, incorrectly describes the reasons manually checking ballots is an essential security safeguard (and includes some incorrect numbers, to boot)

He went on to state that;

Were this year’s deviations from pre-election polls the results of a cyberattack? Probably not. I believe the most likely explanation is that the polls were systematically wrong, rather than that the election was hacked


editororial-editor-1Here is a thought….

Imagine you had worked tirelessly and put so many safeguards in place to “Rig” an election, such as behind closed door meetings with elections officials [Hillary’s Closed Door meeting with Brenda Snipes, Fla. Elections Director ] and using campaign support groups to establish negative media narratives about the opponent and his supporters by inciting violence and riots at the opponents rallies, as contained in this video.

Imagine you had plans in place using tried and proven methods to have successfully committed voter fraud before. Like busing people to voting stations in different States [See This Video] or allowing illegal immigrants to vote because you knew they would vote, in their best interest, for the Democratic candidate, as admitted by the New York Elections commissioner in This Video admitting busing and illegal voting going on.

Imagine, with the media heavily in your pocket, and all these safeguards in place in order to ensure a win….you suddenly lost. Impossible, you might shout. Something is terrible wrong, you might think. This couldn’t happen, you had made sure of it. The problem would then be; How do you prove it ? You can’t very well say…”We had this rigged. It is impossible for the Trump to have won !

You would have to find some way to “prove” it was impossible for the other party to have won without exposing that you had made it impossible for them to have done so. Perhaps find some stooge who could be “persuaded” to assist you. Perhaps an offer of a cabinet position or using your influence to help position one of the other failed candidates in some other position in government. Perhaps with a hefty cash bonus.  

Ok that done, now you would need to find a plausible excuse to revisit the vote counts. Something that had already taken hold in the media and had been successful so far. Ahhhh. Hacked email = Hacked Election Results. That will do.

Every State Election official was contacted and made aware of possible Cyber-security threats and precautions were instituted, with the assistance of the Department of Homeland Security, months before the election. Add to this the fact that several states had much tighter voter results but Stein is only calling for recounts in State won by Trump, though she claims her effort is not for the benefit of one candidate or the other.


Surely this is yet another tell tale sign indicating the moving force behind Stein’s sudden recount movement.

The Evidence For Recount, or Lack Thereof

Jill Stein has based her push for the recount of these three States on the allegations of J. Alex Halderman, Professor of Computer Science, University of Michigan, claiming that some electronic election machines could possible be hacked by foreign actors.

While there is absolutely NO Indication or Evidence of any such thing having happened in Election 2016, Stein and the Clinton Campaign Election lawyers are pursuing the recount. But only in specific state and only those won by Donal Trump.

Even Nate Silver has stated that the results are Demographics, Not Hacking. Nate surely can not ever be mistaken for a Trump supporter.

Why Jill Stein is Full of Shit

 The Stein website initially claimed that the recount effort would require $ 2.2 Million to conduct the recount in the three targeted battleground states. Once that goal was reached, and even exceeded, the goal was raised to $ 3+ Million to include the anticipated “attorneys fees”.  When that goal was met Stein then increased the fund raising effort to $ 7 Million [Current goal at time of this Article].

Now, the State filing fee’s have not been raised over the Thanksgiving Holiday so why does the stated fundraising goal keep rising to amounts greater then Stein was able to raise even for her presidential campaign? What is also a little suspicious as that funds keep trickling in. One would expect that, upon announcing the news, there would have been the massive influx of donations within the first day or two. Most people were busy during the Thanksgiving holiday spending time with family and friends and looking forward to spending any excess cash on Black Friday. We find this rather suspect, unless you factor in some nerd sitting at Hillary’s old email server and logging into the Stein website trickling in donations periodically.

But here is the kicker….


 The ripoff disclaimer. Guess we know how Stein is receiving that substantial cash bonus we spoke about earlier herein above.

Stein, Clinton & DNC….Why?

In case you have not figured it out yet there is A Lot more at steak here then just a presidential election. The Democratic party has spent years setting up a power-base and voter stronghold. They have installed a President who, prior to his presidential run announcement, was virtually unknown to most Americans…an unimpressive senator from Chicago. He was able to further their agenda by importing millions of voters through wide open boarders who would support the politically party that supported them…the Democrats.

Hillary Clinton would continue to be a democratic stooge, so long as she was able to line her own pockets while doing so.

Election 2016 was supposed to be the decimation of the Republican party and agenda. When they were sure Clinton had the election in the bag the DNC focused their stooges (Obama and Clinton) on the down ticket races in an attempt to take over the house and senate with majorities, eliminating any resistance to their agenda’s passage, and their opportunity to stack the Supreme Court with Liberals like Ruth Ginburg who took her oath to uphold the Constitution as seriously as one might take the National Inquirer.

They had hoped to fill the Court with Justices that would, as Hillary Clinton revealed in the Second Trump/Clinton Debate; “I want to appoint Supreme court justices who understand how the world really works, who have real life experience….who understand what people are up against..blah, blah, blah” without a single mention of the Constitution. See the full answer HERE.

Having made such a concentrated effort to ensure that the Democratic party retains power indefinitely, and is able to implement there liberal agenda, what happens if the Republican President and Congress do a good job? Just in it’s first 2 weeks since Trump was proclaimed the President-Elect the stock market has soared and broken records, as has Trump’s approval rating, and he has not even taken office yet.

If Donald Trump and the Republican party meet their expected goals and do the job most American’s want, the Democratic party may be shelved for decades! So you can see, their is a lot more at stake here then just this presidential election.