Godlike Productions - Reply to Thread

Users Online Now: 1,578 (Who's On?)	Visitors Today: 1,231,261
Pageviews Today: 2,159,952	Threads Today: 813	Posts Today: 16,306
11:15 PM

REPLY TO THREAD

Subject Oops! Jill Stein Must Prove Voter Fraud In Court To Recount Pennsylvania

User Name

Font color: Font:

In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.

Original Message Oops. Jill Stein forgot to mention to her donors that she cannot file a direct request for a recount in Pennsylvania.

Stein did not make the recount process clear for her donors. Her outline makes it sound as though a candidate can simply file for a recount if they raise enough funds for the filing fee.

Stein would have to present a case showing voter fraud took place.

Per Pennsylvania regulations, there is only one way remaining for Jill Stein to get a recount in Pennsylvania and it is a complicated process. BillyPenn reports that Stein would have to file for a court appeal and present a “prima facie case” showing that voter fraud took place. While prima facie has a lower burden of proof threshold than “beyond reasonable doubt,” it is still significant. Stein would have to prove in court that fraud was “probable.” This is going to be very difficult given that even the computer specialists recommending the recount say there is no proof of hacking or fraud.
[link to www.inquisitr.com]

Pictures (click to insert)





\| Next Page >>