Oathkeeper: Is This a Recount or Something Else?

U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- Dr. Stein started an initiative to recount the votes in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan less than two weeks ago.

She stated that a study from the University of Michigan claiming that irregularities in the tabulated results for the states of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan were her inspiration. The study and the sworn statements from the professors involved with the study’s development provide absolutely no evidence of fraud, hacking, or inaccuracy of the election results.

The study discusses methods by which election results can be electronically altered and discusses various conspiracy theories raised by the campaign of former Secretary Hillary Clinton. The authors attempt to provide some mathematical analysis that describes an increase in mail-in ballots that somehow could relate to “hacking” of voter registration files. The authors also inject speculation regarding the extent to which pre-election polls were wrong; polls that were badly manipulated by the media to make it appear that a Hillary Clinton Presidency was inevitable. It is important to note that the study only concludes that issues exist in the very three battleground states that Hillary Clinton would need to overturn in order to change the outcome of the election.

“I believe the most likely explanation is that the [pre-election] polls [showing Clinton winning those three states] were systematically wrong, rather than that the election was hacked. But I don’t believe that either one of these seemingly unlikely explanations is overwhelmingly more likely than the other. “ – J. Alex Halderman

The real comedy begins when representatives of the Green Party filing the recount in Wisconsin stated that one concern that led party officials to request a recount stemmed from major differences between statewide exit polls and the actual election results in the Badger State.

“The exit polls indicated that [Trump] should have had 44.3 percent” of the vote,” Wisconsin Green Party Representative George Martin said, noting that Trump instead received about 48 percent.”

The exit polls in the Badger State indicated that Trump should have received 48.5% of the vote. In fact, exit polls for each of the states being challenged by the Green Party correctly predicted the outcome. I won’t attempt to ascribe motive for the University of Michigan professors that are advising and testifying on behalf of Dr. Stein and the Green Party, I will state that their methods and the accuracy of the information they have presented is irreparably flawed. If professors could be charged with malpractice, these individuals would certainly have exceeded the bar.

Meanwhile, Dr Stein sincerely believes that the overwhelming financial contributions received to conduct the recounts are an indication of how concerned citizens are about their election process. It is difficult to understand how Dr. Stein could be under this impression. The donations that she has received are from people disappointed in the results of the election. The donations came from people who voted for or financed Hillary Clinton, hoping for one more bite at the apple.

Exit polls are the most useful tool when assessing the fairness and accuracy of a large-scale election process. The fact that the University of Michigan, Dr. Stein and the Main Stream Media have all decided to ignore the accuracy of the exit polls with relation to the claims of “hacking”, fraud and vote manipulation points to their motivation.

Dr, Stein, professors from the University of Michigan and a professor from Georgetown University presented their case to a Wisconsin judge earlier today. It became clear that nobody could articulate the existence of evidence to support their outlandish claims. Their case was one of conspiracy theories that foreign “hackers”, “people with screwdrivers” and employees of the State of Wisconsin could have altered the results of the election. Their argument completely ignored the fact that the exit polls showed that the President Elect should have received a certain tally of votes and actually did receive that tally of votes. Once the exit polls are factored into the equation, all of their conspiracy theories become mute.

Is Recounting the Vote Really the Goal?

Considering the extent of the ridiculous arguments being made both in the courts and in their public appearances, it is becoming clear that auditing the vote with a recount is not the real goal. Knowing full well that their arguments are not based on facts and subject them to ridicule, the proponents of the recount persist.

The legal advisors for former Secretary Hillary Clinton joined in the legal fray today, also demanding a hand recount of the Wisconsin votes. Certainly they know that a machine recount is going to be a much faster way to determine if the votes were counted accurately. These are professors of computer science providing the advice. What motivation is driving their insistence on a hand recount that will take weeks and could risk the ability of Wisconsin to certify their vote by the deadline required to participate in the Electoral College? Time is the reason.

If the proponents of the hand recount can cause the recount to effort to intentionally slow down the certification, they potentially can disenfranchise the citizens of Wisconsin from being represented by their electors at the Electoral College. Let’s not forget that the electors from these states have been harassed and threatened by the supporters of Hillary Clinton to not vote for the President Elect. Let’s also not forget that former Secretary Hillary Clinton has said nothing about these threats coming from her supporters. Not one word from someone who aspired to be President of the United States to her faithful followers to stop the harassment and end the threats. Let’s also not forget that the study that this entire recount effort is based upon only concludes that issues exist in the very three battleground states that Hillary Clinton would need to overturn in order to change the outcome of the election.

I also find it curious that Dr. Stein missed critical filing deadlines in both Pennsylvania and in Michigan. Deadlines that were established by the states in order to enable them to have time to process and conduct a recount if one should be warranted. Is there a motive to these apparent mistakes? Dr. Stein has already filed court challenges in Pennsylvania. A hearing is scheduled for Tuesday December 5th to allow her and her associates to present arguments as to why Pennsylvania should risk their ability to be represented at the Electoral College by accepting the late challenge from Dr. Stein. It is certain that this same process will play out in Michigan, the very home of the flawed study that started this recount/Electoral College nightmare.

I ask you to consider the possibility that the goal of this entire escapade from the outset was the intentional disenfranchisement of millions of American citizens to be represented by their electors at the Electoral College. We know for a fact that the University of Michigan team responsible for the study met with the advisors to former Secretary Hillary Clinton long before enlisting the cooperation of Dr. Stein and the Green Party. Could this have been the plan all along? Could a person who aspires to be the President of the United States be so diabolical and determined that she would use a rival candidate to present legal challenges in the very three states required for her to overturn the results of the election? Is this really so difficult a leap considering that this same Presidential hopeful has steadfastly refused to criticize her followers for harassing and making death threats against these same electors? Is this so difficult to believe from a person that refuses to demand that her supporters stop rioting in cities across the nation?

I will let you make up your own mind on this. Clearly I have already come to a conclusion. The President Elect will still become President with or without the electors from the three states that Dr. Stein has unwittingly attempted to disenfranchise. In the end, all that Dr. Stein will accomplish is the further division of the people of our nation. She has given sore losers a second chance to lose. She has added fuel to an already dangerous level of anger and frustration for the supporters of former Secretary Hillary Clinton. More protests and riots will be her only accomplishment.

Update 11/29/2016 8:30PM EST – Wisconsin Judge Rejects Stein’s Request for Hand Recount

Dane County Circuit Judge Valerie Bailey-Rihn said the effort to force the hand recount – which was backed by Democrat Hillary Clinton’s campaign — did not meet the state’s legal standard for prohibiting the use of machines in the recount, saying that the two campaigns did not show a hand recount, though more thorough, was necessary or show there was a clear and convincing evidence of fraud or other problems. Bailey-Rihn said there were good reasons to do a hand recount but no legal basis for her to mandate it.

See http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/11/29/steins-recount-headed-court-tuesday/94598740/

Update 11/30/2016 10:00AM EST – Recount Petition Filed In Nevada

Just when you thought the post-election recount circus couldn’t get any more ridiculous, it has. Per NBC, Roque “Rocky” De La Fuente, an independent 2016 U.S. presidential candidate, has officially filed a recount petition with the Secretary of State of Nevada requesting recounts in 93 precincts. Rocky won 2,552 votes in the state of Nevada or roughly 0.23% of the total.

Under Nevada law, officials are only required to recount the votes of the petitioner and the winner of the election. Then, only if a discrepancy of 1% or more is found in vote totals does a full statewide recount occur.

Read the article at ZeroHedge.com

About Navy Jack

I enlisted in the USN in 1977 and was honorably discharged in 1986. During my service I deployed on various platforms, including submarines, amphibious assault units and special boats. I participated in expeditionary and humanitarian missions to the North Atlantic, Iran, Beirut, Libya, and the Caribbean. After leaving the U.S. Navy I went to work for a large DoD contractor. I became President of that company in 1993. In 2002, I founded an Internet service company and I am currently the CEO of that company. I am a Patron Life Member of the NRA. I am an Oath Keeper Life Member. I have worked diligently to defend the Bill of Rights and have testified many times before various Federal and State legislative committees.

About Oath Keepers:

Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters who will fulfill the Oath we swore, with the support of like minded citizens who take an Oath to stand with us, to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God. Our Oath is to the Constitution.

For more information, visit: www.oathkeepers.org.

This post Oathkeeper: Is This a Recount or Something Else? appeared first on AmmoLand.com Shooting Sports News .