Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Can we finally stick a fork in the Michigan recount?

Can we finally stick a fork in the Michigan recount?

State Supreme Court refuses to hear Jill Stein’s appeal.

Is it finally “over over” in Jill Stein’s impossible dream to recount votes in Michigan?

Here’s hoping so. After the Michigan mid-level appellate court ruled against her, and a federal judge dissolved an injunction that had kept the recount alive, Stein’s only hope was that the state Supreme Court would rule in her favor.

But first, the state Supreme Court had to agree to hear the case. And it just declined to do so.

The Detroit News reports:

The Michigan Supreme Court on Friday denied Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s appeal to restart a partially completed presidential election recount, meaning President-elect Donald Trump’s 10,704-vote victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton stands.

In a 3-2 ruling, the state’s highest court said the Michigan Court of Appeals correctly ruled that Stein was ineligible to pursue a recount.

Republican-nominated justices Stephen Markman, Brian Zahra and David Viviano denied the appeal. Zahra and Viviano wrote a concurring opinion that further explained why the Court of Appeals was correct to rule that Stein is not an “aggrieved” candidate who could request an appeal. She finished a distant fourth behind Trump and Clinton.

“Thus, petitioner failed to allege that she has been harmed or that her legal rights have been infringed in any way whatsoever,” Zahra and Viviano wrote in the majority opinion.

Chief Justice Robert Young Jr. and Justice Joan Larsen, two Republican-nominated justices, disqualified themselves from the decision because Trump named them to his short list of possible nominees for the U.S. Supreme Court during the campaign.

Unfair to Stein, right? Ed Morrissey notes the recount wasn’t helping Hillary much, anyway:

The recount in Michigan wasn’t doing Stein or Hillary much good, as it turns out. The tally from the Secretary of State when the recount was suspended shows a shift of only 102 votes to Hillary after recounting roughly 40% of all precincts in the state. That barely dented Trump’s lead of 10,704 votes from Election Night. When Wisconsin wraps up their recount this weekend, it should be all over.

But there’s always Pennsylvania. Right? Ed Morrissey thinks not:

It’s not looking any better in the Keystone State for Jill Stein, either. When Stein couldn’t put up the money for a statewide hand recount in Pennsylvania, she took the state to federal court to force the state to conduct one anyway. On Monday, US district court Judge Paul Diamond promptly put off a hearing for four days, scheduling it for earlier today. After Stein’s attorneys finally made their case for federal intervention in a state process, Diamond decided to think it over for a while longer … and issue his ruling within hours of the safe-harbor deadline of December 13th.

Philly.com reporter Jeremy Roebuck reported on the coincidence:

A federal judge in Philadelphia will rule Monday on the Green Party-backed petition for a Pennsylvania recount, leaving just one day before the state needs to certify its presidential vote total for the electoral college.

Judge Paul Diamond signaled his plan after a Friday afternoon hearing in which supporters of Green Party nominee Jill Stein pushed their bid for a recount, citing concerns about the integrity of Pennsylvania’s voting system and the technology it uses.

Pity all those Democrats who donated money for the recount. Who’s guessing they are the same people who have flocked to purchase subscriptions to the NY Times post-election?

I am.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Will she try to go to the US Supreme Court? If so, highly doubt they will hear the case.

“Pity all those Democrats who donated money for the recount. Who’s guessing they are the same people who have flocked to purchase subscriptions to the NY Times post-election?”

You misspelled “Soros…”

There have been articles floating around facebook (so it must be true!) examining the donations and times for Steins funding efforts.

They concluded that approximately $170,000 rolled in every hour, with no statistical deviation during the hours humans are typically asleep…

“They concluded that approximately $170,000 rolled in every hour, with no statistical deviation during the hours humans are typically asleep…”

I detect the smell of Brimstone all over this.

VetHusbandFather | December 9, 2016 at 8:15 pm

“Thus, petitioner failed to allege that she has been harmed or that her legal rights have been infringed in any way whatsoever,” Zahra and Viviano wrote in the majority opinion.

This is what I pointed out to all the liberal loons as soon as this recount business started up. Once again they dug their heads into the sand though.

The judicial system seems to be wasting an awful lot of time on some major-league frivolity.

No wonder government is so expensive.

If the recount in Michigan is done Wi and Pa don’t matter … Michigan gets Trump over 270 … Wi and Pa are gravy or if clinton salt

Personally, I think that the recount in Michigan should have been allowed to continue. Everyone, yes, EVERYONE, knew that the recounts in WI, MI, and PA would not change the outcome of the election. What it would have shown was the tremendous amount of voting irregularities, in not outright fraud, in the urban centers of those states. Stein said that she wanted to find out if the election process was honest, or not, and in Metro Detroit it appears that it was not. In over 1/3 of the precincts, there was an over tabulation of ballots [less ballots existed than the count showed were counted]. And, in all of these instances, Clinton was the apparent beneficiary of those over tabulations. Could this be why the courts decided to end the Michigan recount? It is also interesting that the MSM made no mention of these irregularities. Then there is PA and especially Philadelphia. What might we find if those ballots were recounted and scrutinized?

Now, the private examination of voter eligibility and fraud studies currently being done. While we will get no report of their findings until well after the election, does anyone want to bet that they do not find widespread voter intelligibility issues. especially in states such as California?

Was there vote fraud perpetrated in this election? Yes. But, if finding out how much, where it occurred and who benefited from it is really important, then every single state in the Union should be canvassed, not just three states. But, if Michigan is any indication, the Democrat party would come off the villain, not the Republicans.

aLikde Liberace, Jill Stein cries all the way to the bank.

Her motive? Stomping on any chance Donald Trump could throw a massive party following his victory over Hillary.

Is Hillary pissed? Jill Stein stole her limelight. There is no downside for Trump.

Media personalities have suffered! They get paychecks for their appearances in news stories. And, Jill Stein cut this stream off.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend