@JennJacques Hmmmm pic.twitter.com/ZyagmIPKHy
— Howard Roark Laughed (@Major_Skidmark) November 26, 2016
Democratic Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton may have publicly conceded the presidency to Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump the morning after the November 8 election but behind the scenes she was scheming with an army of operatives to find ways to steal the presidency from Trump.
In public Clinton acted out the part of the gracious, retiring loser–being seen in photos running into supporters as she roamed around her hometown of Chappaqua, New York. But the ‘accepting Hillary’ image was a front that hid the true Hillary who was furiously seeking a way to claw back Trump’s election for herself.
Hillary Supporter Bumps Into the Clintons Walking in the Woods https://t.co/DY8gVMs5jQ #westchesterCounty pic.twitter.com/OyU5cL79Bn
— Westchester Roundup (@WestchesterRU) November 16, 2016
“Hillary Supporter Bumps Into the Clintons Walking in the Woods http://dlvr.it/MgpyZ8 #westchesterCounty”
I am thankful for Hillary sightings!! At a grocery store in Chappaqua ❤️❤️ pic.twitter.com/FkrBWxROnN
— All Things Hillary (@AllThingsHill) November 24, 2016
“I am thankful for Hillary sightings!! At a grocery store in Chappaqua ❤️❤️”
Hillary Clinton takes selfies with fans while Thanksgiving shopping in upstate NY https://t.co/vMKGWlSNnq pic.twitter.com/NRX0Kk0kzx
— Daily Mail US (@DailyMail) November 24, 2016
“Hillary Clinton takes selfies with fans while Thanksgiving shopping in upstate NY http://dailym.ai/2g8A42z”
Clinton campaign lawyer Marc E. Elias gave the scheme away in an article published Saturday morning at Medium announcing Clinton would join the recount effort in Wisconsin by Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein and that Clinton would join Stein should she also file for recounts in Michigan and Pennsylvania.
Elias wrote that starting the day after the election the Clinton campaign worked to find ways to reverse Trump’s election. Those efforts continue through the present, Elias wrote, and now include joining the recount efforts by Stein.
Elias’ statement about Clinton’s behind the scenes scheming excerpted from Medium:
…we have quietly taken a number of steps in the last two weeks to rule in or out any possibility of outside interference in the vote tally in these critical battleground states.
First, since the day after the election we have had lawyers and data scientists and analysts combing over the results to spot anomalies that would suggest a hacked result. These have included analysts both from within the campaign and outside, with backgrounds in politics, technology and academia.
Second, we have had numerous meetings and calls with various outside experts to hear their concerns and to discuss and review their data and findings. As a part of this, we have also shared out data and findings with them. Most of those discussions have remained private, while at least one has unfortunately been the subject of leaks.
Third, we have attempted to systematically catalogue and investigate every theory that has been presented to us within our ability to do so.
Fourth, we have examined the laws and practices as they pertain to recounts, contests and audits.
Fifth, and most importantly, we have monitored and staffed the post-election canvasses — where voting machine tapes are compared to poll-books, provisional ballots are resolved, and all of the math is double checked from election night. During that process, we have seen Secretary Clinton’s vote total grow, so that, today, her national popular vote lead now exceeds more than 2 million votes.
In the coming days, we will continue to perform our due diligence and actively follow all further activities that are to occur prior to the certification of any election results…”
Elias admits the campaign could find no evidence to support a challenge to Trump’s victory, but that is not stopping them from joining Stein in trying to overthrow Trump’s presidency before it begins.
Hillary clinton learned something from Al Gore Hey Hillary the Hag dont drag this nation down with you and your demac-RAT party
The right wouldn’t be trying to discredit a closer examination of the vote count unless they suspected on some level that Trump might be found to have benefited from any irregularities.
I suspect the fact that Hillary Clinton won the popular election by an unprecedented margin of over 2 million votes makes them a little nervous. That, together with the one-sided Russian hacking incidents, the one-sided attack by Wikileaks, the carefully timed illegal releases of bullshit from persons unknown inside the FBI, and the fact that the election results are contrary to the projections of virtually every poll during the weeks before the election, have created an understandable doubt about the integrity of the process.
Then there’s the fact that every serious warning sign concerning Donald Trump has been almost totally ignored, while most of the accusations about Hillary Clinton could not be proven true, despite endless investigations.
Day and night on the hour, every hour, a bot put $160,000 into Jill Stein’s recount effort.
That is NOT because American voters support the idea.
It is a Hillary supporter such as George Soros or the Saudis.
“Go to Jill Stein’s fundraiser page and watch the progress. You will see that her funding is coming in at a PERFECTLY CONSISTENT 160,000 an hour. …. [W]hen everyone is sleeping and right through the time when the whole world slows down, her donations for this came in like clockwork, with no deviation from the steady pace whatsoever.
The only way that can happen is if a bot was set up to fake her getting donations from multiple people, and whoever set it up did not consider the fact that practically everything would come from America, and practically everyone is asleep at 3AM.”
@Nanny G, #3:
She raised the money by crowd sourcing. Collected funds are often transferred to the beneficiary of a crowd sourcing campaign incrementally by the crowd sourcing site’s software, rather than on a flow basis as every individual donation comes in. There could be hourly intervals, and preset limits for each hourly transfer. You’d probably crash your program by trying to process and distribute every donation in real time as a separate transaction.
This was a very popular fund-raising effort. There was a flood of individual donations, which were then transferred to the beneficiary at fixed, programmed intervals. There’s nothing suspicious about it. That’s just how the software works. If you do online banking, you might notice that transaction updates are not instantaneously reflected in your online balance; even with fully electronic transactions there are most often delays, with multiple transactions being processed together at intervals.
Opening up this can of worms should lead to investigation into voter fraud in every state, should this ridiculous attempt to overturn the election results move forward.
Nothing unprecedented about a winning margin of more than 2 million votes in the popular vote count….
Greg: A baseball team can outscore their opponent in a World Series and still lose. Hillary lost, because our founding fathers did not want one state to dictate to the rest of the country who would lead it.
It’s clear why Democrats like open borders, in the hope to turn Texas blue with a flood of illegals.
I dare you to disagree.
If Hillary won California and New York with 100% of the vote in each state it wouldn’t matter.
She dissed red country and paid the price.
She lost—assuming that the popular vote counts in the states that determined the winning electoral college votes are accurate. That is where the uncertainty lies, and that is what people want to be absolutely certain of.
The other factors are nothing more than indicators suggesting this has not been a typical election, and that assumptions should not be made.
I might point out that people representing red state views have showed enormous disrespect for both Clinton and her supporters, not to mention President Obama. Trump’s entire campaign was an exercise in lies and personal insults, often on the level of juvenile taunts. If they can’t take an occasional pointed comment in return, maybe they should think more carefully about what they say themselves.
Greg, #9; she lost because she did not get enough votes in each of the 50 states to meet the requirements to be declared the winner in sufficient states.
Disrespect towards politicians? That is normal behaviour.
Personally, I would like to see a recount in California
I would as well, I am sure it would reveal some inconsistencies, just not the ones greg would be fond of seeing.
And the people representing the Clintons, why they showed no disrespect for Trump and his supporters…..
A comment from a leftist about me makes me want to go out and vote straight ticket democrat, not……
Geesh greg, a bit delusional…..yes
Jill Stein posted to her Jill2016 website that she had raised enough money to “file” for a recount in Pennsylvania. However, the Green Party candidate left out some key details about the filing of recounts in Pennsylvania that many of her supporters likely would have wanted to know before donating. For example, candidates cannot file a direct request for a recount in the state and instead must appeal the election in court.
you are a socialist and an alinsky follower.
@Nanny G: ” That, together with the one-sided Russian hacking incidents, the one-sided attack by Wikileaks” Isn’t that called a consensus? When many newspapers refused to endorse Trump, you on the left concluded this meant Hillary deserved to win. Doesn’t the unified objection to Hillary by so many powerful foes, by your own logic, mean she did NOT deserve to win?
“Then there’s the fact that every serious warning sign concerning Donald Trump has been almost totally ignored, while most of the accusations about Hillary Clinton could not be proven true, despite endless investigations.” Aside from the fact that ALL the “serious warnings” were total fabrications of the left, and continue to be so, Hillary’s corrupt posed a far greater threat to the Republic than any phony vilification created by the DNC and the left wing media. Hillary’s wrongdoing and corruption has not yet been fully investigated. Obama, Hillary and the Obama-controlled DOJ have all stonewalled any investigation. The most damning conviction has been provided by Hillary herself by committing perjury, on video, under oath before Congress. The perjury is established; what needs to be further proven is WHY she lied and WHAT she lied about. What has been definitely proven beyond any debate or shadow of a doubt is how proud liberals are of their naivete and ignorance.
“I might point out that people representing red state views have showed enormous disrespect for both Clinton and her supporters, not to mention President Obama. ” By their words and actions, they have ceded their right to respect.
A recount initiated by Democrats invariably turns up a pile of previously uncounted ballots from unlikely places which always seem to favor their candidate. In other words, election fraud. Wisconsin has a democrat Secretary of State and a corrupt judiciary which gave us the hideous “John Doe” campaign of political terror recently exposed and overturned by Federal courts.
No recount has ever changed a 10,000+ vote margin. Election fraud of this level could, and perhaps, should result in armed rebellion from the citizenry.
@Bill… Deplorable Me: I’m not sure I’m who you are quoting or even referring to in your post.
But @DaNang67: You bring up an interesting point.
Does Hillary need thousands of new ballots with her name on them to ”win,” the recount?
All she needs is the recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, taking longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters. If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232. No one hits 270. Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump but he is ever seen as illegitimate.
Maybe Hillary doesn’t ”win,” but the Democrats do.
November 27, 2016
The Democrats’ real strategy in launching recounts
By Richard Baehr
The recount in Wisconsin, and the coming ones in Michigan and Pennsylvania will not change the outcomes in any of the states. No recount ever changes thousands of votes. I do not think that is the purpose.
The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters. If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232. No one hits 270.
Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump, and Senate selects Pence. This would be first time this happened since 1824, but in that case, John Quincy Adams won in the House, though he had fewer electoral college votes than Andrew Jackson.
If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it? The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.
That would be another lie, from a man who has lied every other time he’s opened his mouth. It’s a right-wing propaganda meme. There’s absolutely no evidence supporting that claim. None whatsoever.
If you want to be stupidly led around by a nose ring fastened to a tether of blatant lies, I guess that’s up to you. I think Forrest Gump had an applicable quote. See if you can figure it out. Consider it a test.
“Trump: ‘I Won the Popular Vote If You Deduct the Millions Who Voted Illegally’”
I think it’s safe to assume that the above statement is technically correct.
LOU DOBBS EXPOSES MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD! 18 MILLION INVALID VOTER’s REGISTERED + 2 MILLION DEAD
Gallup surveyed Californians. Of those who admitted to being illegals 13% said they actually voted.
A conservative estimate of 10% nationwide results in a loss of votes for Hillary results in a loss of the popular vote by Hillary.
If you subtract 10 sanctuary counties in California and just Chicago Hillary’s lead is cut by at least 3.98 million votes. Now whom do you think illegal aliens voted for?
@July 4th American, #22:
Gallup conducted no such survey.
The “results” are from a 2013 poll conducted by John McLaughlin, a former Nixon speechwriter and political commentator, which was privately sponsored by John Jordan, a wealthy republican PAC donor and winery owner. The results were then misrepresented by Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation. You’ve got to wade through all of his deceptive blather and examine the poll linked in his article closely to realize the claim he’s making is a load of manure. Most people don’t do that, because it’s only his bogus conclusion that goes viral, without any analysis of how he got it; something along the lines of National Survey Proves 13% of Illegal Aliens are Voting! It’s total horse sh-t, but that’s what the target audience remembers and believes—especially after seeing it endlessly repeated in a variety of locations.
On some level I realize that this sort of garbage will win in the end, because fewer and fewer people know how to separate fact from fiction. They go with what feels right to them, not really caring about evidence or established facts. Trump understands how that works. I understand why the Department of Education is high up on the right’s Things to Get Rid Of list. The powers-that-will-soon-be like low education voters. How do I know that? I listen to what they say, and heard them say it.
Donald Trump’s bogus claim that millions of people voted illegally for Hillary Clinton
Maybe the president elect has delegated all Twitter posting to his 10-year-old son, Barron. This could explain a lot.
The ultimate source of the “3 million alien voters” tale is Gregg Phillips, who evidently just makes stuff up. He has provided absolutely no documentation of any kind for this claim. Neither has anyone else.
It’s useless to point such things out. Those who believe without needing evidence have already been inoculated against the truth. That inoculation took the form of the “mainstream media” meme, which was one of the early message that was pushed out and firmly implanted through endless repetition. That’s the liars telling you everyone else is a liar.
You are a fool to believe there is or never has been voter fraud in the sense of dead people voting, people voting multiple times and illegal aliens voting. Talk about one who would be inoculated from the truth, look in the closest mirror…..
The real Hillary, unmasked….
Warning; Graphic image:
Fake news giant: I feel bad about putting Trump in the White House
That story recently appeared in The Hill, a conservative news outlet. Even Conservapedia recognizes is as a conservative news outlet.
Oh well, guess Trump wins again. This whole recount thing is nothing but a charade. It is not going anywhere and it is not going to change the outcome. Who is it now, greg, who will not accept the results of the election?