Clinton campaign counsel: We'll participate in recount

[mystery-ak]

Clinton campaign counsel: We'll participate in recount
By Harper Neidig - 11/26/16 10:48 AM EST

An attorney for Hillary Clinton’s campaign says it will participate in the Wisconsin recount initiated by Green Party presidneetial nominee Jill Stein.

Marc Elias, the campaign’s general counsel, wrote in a post on Medium on Saturday that the Clinton team has been conducting an extensive review of election results, searching for any signs that the voting process had been tampered with.

He emphasized that analysts employed by the campaign have largely found no evidence to conclude that the election was sabotaged, but said that the campaign is committed to helping ensure a fair recount process.

“The campaign is grateful to all those who have expended time and effort to investigate various claims of abnormalities and irregularities,” Elias wrote.

more
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/307559-clinton-campaign-attorney-promises-to-participate-in

[TomSea]

They are certainly being sore losers.

But recount, I don't care, the bad thing is if fraud gets into the recount which it may well have with Franken Coleman back in '08.

[Free Vulcan]

(Looks at watch) Yep, right on time.

Clinton makes her entrance perfectly in this Soros sponsored kabuki theater.

[ABX]

[Oceander]

Ahh, folks, getting recounts is part and parcel of the electoral process.  Demanding a recount is not the same thing as refusing to accept the results of the election.  The results of an election are not final until all reasonable recounts have been had, or the time for demanding a recount has passed.

[ABX]

Ahh, folks, getting recounts is part and parcel of the electoral process.  Demanding a recount is not the same thing as refusing to accept the results of the election.  The results of an election are not final until all reasonable recounts have been had, or the time for demanding a recount has passed.

True, but it is so fun throwing their words back in their face.

[libertybele]

Ahh, folks, getting recounts is part and parcel of the electoral process.  Demanding a recount is not the same thing as refusing to accept the results of the election.  The results of an election are not final until all reasonable recounts have been had, or the time for demanding a recount has passed.

We kind of cockamanie bull-crap are you spewing?  We live in a Republic where our president is determined by electoral votes, not popular votes as clearly stated in our Constitution.  It would seem to me if Clinton actually thought she needed a recount she would have asked for one before weeks passed.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

Stein raises a whole bunch of money, most of which to pay lawyers.  Lawyer says he'll participate.  Didn't see that coming.

[Talisker]

Trump does not represent the will of the people.  If we really wanted to respect the decision of "the people," then Clinton would be the president-elect, not Trump, for the simple reason that she won the popular vote.

Don't be childish, we don't live in a pure democracy, we live in a democratic republic. And one of the ways people vote here is where they choose to live - that's WHY we have separate states. To protect that choice we have the electoral college, so votes from smaller states still count effectively. Otherwise Los Angeles county would control the entire national election, through illegal votes from illegal Mexicans registered to vote when they got their state driver's license - all two million of them! Is THAT "representing the will of the people"?

So be serious, this is a serious subject.

[mrclose]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nI9cpLKIwVk

[Free Vulcan]

Ahh, folks, getting recounts is part and parcel of the electoral process.  Demanding a recount is not the same thing as refusing to accept the results of the election.  The results of an election are not final until all reasonable recounts have been had, or the time for demanding a recount has passed.

True, but it can also be used as a strategy to game the system, like they may be doing here. Asking for a late recount before votes are certified, to drag it out past the EC voting date, and get those states out of the voting.

Not unlike someone with big resources suing someone with few. Yes it's their right, but they also know that the guy with few resources will likely settle or cease and desist than try and go thru a court battle.