Stein Pays Wisconsin For Recount

Her petition does not offer any actual evidence that the results were tampered with. Fed. deadline to get the recount done is 12/13.
 
Are the voting machines locked away "un-powered"? CMOS backup internal data storage "forever"? Or, do they simply re-sum the counts that were downloaded to something else and backed up?


Paper ballots, you say they re-run through machine. Are the ballots in a vault? Serialized! Old data available to "computer" cross-check?

When Dems get hands in there? Who knows?
 
Typical federal government waste, fraud and abuse… LOL
 
Looks like a mixed bag. Seems to be mostly paper?

Neil Albrecht, executive director of the Milwaukee Election Commission, said it took nearly a month to complete the recount in the April 2011 Wisconsin Supreme Court race between Justice David Prosser and JoAnne Kloppenburg. The city will now have about two weeks to recount more than twice as many ballots — a challenge that will play out across the state.Most machines in Wisconsin are optical readers. Voters fill out a paper ballot and feed it into the machine, which then electronically records the vote. In a hand recount, clerks would individually tally those ballots. In a machine recount, they would feed the ballots back through the machines, though they would also run a number of other checks, such as reconciling the votes and signed names on poll lists.A small percentage of votes in Wisconsin are cast on touch-screen machines, which also generate paper records.None of the machines used for voting in the state are connected to the internet, and they could not be hacked remotely, said Mike Haas, the administrator of the Wisconsin Elections Commission.

Stein sues after Wisconsin refuses to order hand recounts
 
Stein is an idiot - the reason she wants the recounts according to her is because the bloated, skewed, all-in media-faked polls said Hillary would win in a landslide...and, like so many other Snowflakes, she can't accept the truth.


Stein: We want recounts because the polls said Hillary would win

"In a revealing interview on The Alan Colmes Show Monday afternoon, failed Green Party candidate Jill Stein conceded (perhaps inadvertently) that the reason she’s calling for a recount in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania is, in part, because Hillary Clinton was expected to win those states."

B...b...but Hilary was SUPPOSED to win..."

And today's 'Butthurt Snowflake' award goes to JILL STEIN! :p


Stein: We want recounts because the polls said Hillary would win - Hot Air
 
$3.5 million is a lot of money to pay just because you're butthurt and don't want to accept the outcome of an election. :p
 
Pays 3.5 million dollars. Good! It's 3x more than she originally thought. Wisconsin is fleecing this Hillary/Soros surrogate bitch.


Jill Stein Delivers $3.5MM For Wisconsin Recount | Zero Hedge

stein-recount.jpg
 
She raised a lot more than that apparently.

The surplus will be going to the

Election integrity efforts. That's right. Election integrity efforts.
 
at this pace she will have the 27,000 votes in 74 years.

OMG LMAO I think they will find all the recounts will end this way because there was never anything said about fraud in any of those States.

A waste of time and effort by those people who have to do those recounts. They should get that seven million, not Stein.
 
According to this article he gained 440 before the recount even started-

Even before the recount began, Trump’s unofficial lead of 22,177 was due to grow by 440 votes, as officials moved to correct a reporting error in Oneida County. Trump’s vote in the Town of Hazelhurst had been recorded as 44 instead of 484. (Clinton’s vote total was 330 in the same town).

http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...tions-staff-layout-recount-timeline/94539210/
 
According to this article he gained 440 before the recount even started-

Even before the recount began, Trump’s unofficial lead of 22,177 was due to grow by 440 votes, as officials moved to correct a reporting error in Oneida County. Trump’s vote in the Town of Hazelhurst had been recorded as 44 instead of 484. (Clinton’s vote total was 330 in the same town).

http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...tions-staff-layout-recount-timeline/94539210/

Bet Stein wish's she'd kept her big fucking mouth shut. LOL
 
According to this article he gained 440 before the recount even started-

Even before the recount began, Trump’s unofficial lead of 22,177 was due to grow by 440 votes, as officials moved to correct a reporting error in Oneida County. Trump’s vote in the Town of Hazelhurst had been recorded as 44 instead of 484. (Clinton’s vote total was 330 in the same town).

http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...tions-staff-layout-recount-timeline/94539210/
Ouch, Hillary is going to embarrassed twice!
 
There's no doubt that in the vast majority of electoral district, the counts were accurate, so it's not surprising if there was no difference in the early recount totals. We'll have to wait and see if there's a significant difference in the questionable districts. Expect those to take a bit longer.
 

Forum List

Back
Top