Greens’ Stein Questions Trump’s Victory

A sudden flood of cash enabled the Green Party’s Jill Stein to demand recounts of votes in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan, three formerly Democratic states that largely decided the 2016 election for Donald Trump, reports Joe Lauria.

By Joe Lauria

The Green Party is demanding a recount of votes in three key states that could potentially affect the outcome of the election that saw Donald Trump chosen as president. The party was able to raise $2.5 million needed to at least pay for the recount in Wisconsin in less than 12 hours from the time the Greens’ intentions were reported by the media on Wednesday.

Jill Stein, leader of the party that received less than 1 percent of the national vote, said in a press release that the Greens wanted the recount “because reported hacks into voter and party databases and individual email accounts are causing many Americans to wonder if our election results are reliable.”

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. (Photos by Gage Skidmore and derivative by Krassotkin, Wikipedia)

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. (Photos by Gage Skidmore and derivative by Krassotkin, Wikipedia)

The Green Party wants recounts in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan – the three states that effectively determined the result of the presidential race by slipping from the Democratic column in 2012. The deadline to file for a recount is Friday in Wisconsin, Monday in Pennsylvania and Wednesday in Michigan.

The cost of the Wisconsin recount is $1.1 million, according to the Green Party press release. The release does not say what the cost for all three recounts is, but the party initially sought $2.5 million. That was widely reported as the total amount needed. But once that goal was reached, the target was jacked up to $4.5 million.

Stein’s campaign web site’s home page appeal for money says the entire cost with legal fees could be $6 million to $7 million. This statement also includes a quote from Stein that blames “foreign agents” for hacking into “party databases, private email servers, and voter databases in certain states.” Her quote in the press release removed the words “foreign agents.”

Slim Margins

Trump narrowly beat Democratic contender Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and is leading in Michigan, which more than two weeks later is still too close to call. Just a 55,000-vote swing is all that is needed in the three states to flip the election to Clinton.

On Tuesday it was reported that a group of U.S. professors – computer scientists and elections lawyers – had held a conference call with the Clinton campaign to ask it to file for an audit in the three states. They said that actual results differed from exit polls and that Trump had done considerably better in areas where electronic voting machines were used. Clinton did better where paper ballots were used.

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein.

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein.

Some experts explained that electronic machines were used in rural areas, which were stronger for Trump, while paper ballots were used in urban areas largely backing Clinton.

The academics lobbying the Clinton campaign have suggested that a foreign government may be behind the hacks. The Obama administration had said before the election that Russia was trying to influence the election through hacking, though no evidence was made public.

In his final testimony to Congress last week, outgoing Director of National Intelligence James Clapper admitted that there was no proof about who was behind the supposed hacks into email accounts of Democratic leaders which proved embarrassing to the Clinton campaign.

The Clinton campaign has made no statement about the recount. But many Clinton supporters have backed the effort online. The Trump transition team has made no comment.

Trump won the Electoral College vote 290 to 232, with Michigan’s 16 electoral votes still outstanding and with 270 votes needed to be elected President. Clinton won the national popular vote by about 2 million votes.

The Green’s Motive

Because of Clinton’s popular-vote plurality, there have been calls for electors from states that voted for Trump to change their vote to Clinton, but there is no indication that Trump’s electors are switching sides. Twenty-four states do not legally bind electors to vote with the popular will of their states. The electors will vote in their state capitals on Dec. 19. The Congress will certify the election on Jan. 6.

The move by the Greens raises many questions. At face value, they say the integrity of the electoral system is the only thing at stake. But the Greens must know that the recount effort could only help Clinton and hurt Trump.

Is there some collusion between the Democratic Party and the Greens? Are they a Trojan horse for Clinton who can stay above the fray while getting the recount that some of her supporters have called for?

Have wealthy Clinton donors been behind the flood of cash into the effort in so short a time? Or are the Greens sincere in wanting voting irregularities exposed? One theory is that the recount will expose cheating by both the Republicans and Democrats – and thus reflect badly on the two-party system which has marginalized the Greens and other third parties.

There’s also the mystery of why one Stein quote mentions “foreign agents” while another doesn’t. In the waning days of the campaign, Clinton and her surrogates attacked Trump by suggesting Russian agents were conspiring to install him in the White House. Why did Stein, at least briefly, pick up that Clinton theme even though DNI Clapper had distanced himself from the accusation?

Though there’s widespread doubt among election experts that an audit of the results in the three states will swing the election to Clinton, there now is the possibility that the unpredictable 2016 election might still have a few last-minute twists.

Joe Lauria is a veteran foreign-affairs journalist based at the U.N. since 1990. He has written for the Boston Globe, the London Daily Telegraph, the Johannesburg Star, the Montreal Gazette, the Wall Street Journal and other newspapers. He can be reached [email protected]  and followed on Twitter at @unjoe.

215 comments for “Greens’ Stein Questions Trump’s Victory

  1. November 28, 2016 at 10:09

    Over the last year I have read so many comments on various web-sites, presumably from Green Party members, criticizing Clinton – and even Bernie Sanders – for every perceived or imagined infraction and lionizing Jill Stein as the only perfect, saintly alternative. Through it all I have wondered whether Jill Stein would ever do something to anger them and suddenly finding even Jill Stein to be flawed. I think this is what I am reading in the comments here.

    Our politicians are people and people make decisions. If you follow any person’s actions long enough you will find they do something you disagree with. It will always happen. Even if you follow your own actions you will probably find some you regret. Maybe the answer is to pay more attention to maintaining government and election structure and not focus entirely on individual leaders’ personalities.

    I did not vote for Jill Stein, but as a final note let me come to her side in this matter. Just maybe, what motivated her was a concern for cleaning up our election processes. Just maybe it was not that she finally realized that Clinton would have been a better choice as president than Trump. Then again, maybe that too was something that motivated her. People are complicated.

  2. JohnMMorgan
    November 27, 2016 at 21:38

    Consider this:
    “So Why is the Green Party’s Jill Stein Filing For Recounts in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania?”

  3. Christene
    November 27, 2016 at 08:11

    I find it so very interesting that the same day Consortium News broke the story about House bill 5732, Jill Stein miraculously raises over 5 million dollars in 2 DAYS to launch some dog and pony show recount fiasco on behalf of Hillary Clinton. What a clever, convenient distraction for the neocons and liberal interventionists in Washington, D.C. as they feverishly work to put into place the mechanisms to ignite WWIII.

    I have mercilessly pounded Jill Stein on this. I was absolutely LIVID that the same week 300 protesters were in injured and 26 hospitalized,with one woman possibly losing an arm, in the Standing Rock/Dakota Pipeline protest, she was apparently huddled with Soros and the Clinton machine and raking in millions of dollars to launch recounts in the 3 state Hillary needs to flip in order to overturn the election results.

    Hillary…….war-mongering, Wall Street shilling, billionaire schmoozing Hillary Clinton. Are you kidding me??!!

    If there is a God in Heaven……and there is…….ALL of these idiots will be shoveled into the dustbin or irrelevancy soon!!

    • Hillary
      November 27, 2016 at 21:41

      Yes Christene, Hillary Clinton is a .war-mongering, Wall Street shilling, billionaire schmoozer.
      But there is no God & no heaven & no “Santa Claus.”

  4. November 27, 2016 at 00:58

    “Stein’s campaign web site’s home page appeal for money says the entire cost with legal fees could be $6 million to $7 million. This statement also includes a quote from Stein that blames “foreign agents” for hacking into “party databases, private email servers, and voter databases in certain states.”

    The present version of the pages you linked, Joe Lauria, under the word “appeal”, does not include the word “foreign”, likewise the Google cached version. Do you have permanent evidence of this claim?

  5. Zachary Smith
    November 26, 2016 at 23:14

    As others have already pointed out, Stein’s motives are suspect after her previous statements about the risks of a Clinton presidency. And the $5.9 million raised by Stein in a few days is nearly double what she spent on the entire 2016 election. It’s clear to me that the surge of money is coming from either Hillary’s diehard fans or Hillary’s billionaires.

    I can’t speculate about the “why” of Stein’s recount demands. Perhaps she really does regard the integrity of the 2016 national election as all-important. Possibly she has been somehow ‘bought off’. Maybe it is something else entirely.

    So I’m going to press my Tinfoil Hat firmly on my head and discuss the prospect of Hillary Clinton being sworn into the Presidency next January.

    The 2016 election isn’t over until the Electoral College electors vote. Right now Hillary is behind. If her campaign can convince enough of those voters to be “unfaithful” and turn them from Trump to her, she can still win the election. Funding a “recount” will inevitably draw press attention to the close states, and to the techniques used by the GOP regarding voter suppression and vote flipping and all the other stunts that can be played out at the polling places. Besides working on the minds of those EC electors, the prospect of losing 2016 is likely to arouse violent talk and possibly actual violence by Trump people who believe their man has won. Deliberately provoking all the threats and violence by the Trump Base would also influence the EC electors. Some of those electors are going to consider the threats against the lives of themselves and their families as intolerable – a factor in possibly “flipping” them to Hillary.

    As we’ve seen in the Ukraine and other places, there might be more than mere threats. What if there is some kind of “false flag” event where actual shots are fired? Call it a Color Revolution right here in the US of A. It wouldn’t matter the least bit who was doing the shooting – the NYT and WP and FBI would instantly begin braying about how it had to be the evil Trumpies.

    Consider the ongoing effort to demonize sites which haven’t always been Hillary’s Lapdogs. Places like Truthout, Naked Capitalism, Black Agenda Report, Truthdig, Zero Hedge,, and of course Consortium News. All these sites are working for Russia! Putin!! By all means ignore what these Un-American places are writing.

    Would Obama cooperate by using an executive order to delay the Electoral College vote to allow a “proper investigation” of all the accusations? Would he endorse claims by Intelligence Agencies that the election of Trump resulted from tampering by the evil Russians? These might – all by themselves – serve to inflame the Trump voters and they could be relied upon to say – and perhaps do – things very useful for convincing other EC electors to waver and possibly “flip” to Hillary to avoid Trump’s Fascism.

    Needless to say, the “carrot” would be used along with the “stick”. Some very good things might happen to the people who saved America from Trump.

    I hope I’m wrong about all of this, but I really do fear that Clinton’s Neoconservative & Neoliberal backers don’t want to write off the half-billion investment they have in her. If it takes some blood in the streets to put Hillary into the White House, I don’t think those backers would hesitate for a single instant.

  6. Mark :D
    November 26, 2016 at 18:16

    Sounds like some commenting here don’t actually want an accurate and verifiable voting system. You sound so afraid of someone insisting on counting and re-counting all the votes, but I expect you’d raise holy hell if another country you didn’t like elected someone you didn’t like and there were suspected voting irregularities. Many individuals and election integrity groups have been highlighting since before the 2000 election the widespread irregularities with your voting systems, especially compared to the exit polling.

    If your electoral systems and processes aren’t verifiable, especially in key states and don’t accurately reflect the will of the people then you get what you deserve. Enjoy your next 4 years in Trumpland and pray that your broken electoral system doesn’t deliver another 4 years. Or perhaps you can work to fix it, with many good examples around the world to learn from and groups in your own country trying to do something about it.

    • Joe Tedesky
      November 26, 2016 at 19:39

      Marl D: I value your opinion, and all of what you said is most definitely needed and true, but Hillary herself cheated Bernie out of the game, but now should we show her mercy wrapped in democratic principles….I say, no to allowing this corrupt politician from seeking the highest office of our land due to her own lack of conscience. Although, as I stated above why not recount all the states where the margin of votes were the narrowness, and this would include the states where Hillary won, as well as the states where Trump won. Would that not be fair?

      I don’t feel I have a dog in this fight, since I consider both candidates a risk to us have quality government. Hillary ignoring government secrecy protocol should be of great concern to all of us, but then if you trivialize her security breach as does people like Bill Maher then Hillary gets a free pass. Trump is another matter for concern, but for now he is the president elect, and although the rules of the Electoral College don’t seem fair it is the rules that everybody agreed upon to run their campaigns with until reaching the finish line. I’m sure if the shoe were on the other foot Hillary, Jill, and all the rest would be up in arms over any Trump supporter demanding a recall.

      I see your point, but do you see mine? What we Americans really need is to pull ourselves together, each and everyone of us. We should quit allowing the system to separate us all. United we stand divided we fall, has never in my lifetime been such an important credo as it is now.

      Take care Mark D: and yes let’s all debate this thing down into the dirt, and let’s live for another day. As they say in all the karaoke bars, it ain’t over until the fat lady sings….have a good one Mark D:

  7. David F., N.A.
    November 26, 2016 at 18:02

    I think the GP needs to immediately release a statement endorsing Jill Stein or not. It’s been 3 days since I got a donate email from David Cobb. So they’ve had plenty of time.

    The msm is making this sound like it’s a GP recount. By carefully saying “the Green Party candidate is calling for a recount” a lot of people and journalists are assuming that the Green Party is behind it. And now they’re saying “the Clinton campaign will join in the recount.” Will why wouldn’t they be, they’re financing it (come on, the “foreign agents” slip definitely sound DNC to me).

    A GP value would be to eliminate voting suppression and rigged voting machines, but not picking and choosing states that would only benefit a conservative or conservaDem candidate (it’s a duopoly neoliberalism thingy). Plus financing a recount by the American people is one thing, but financing it by the rich is something completely different.

    So, if Jill Stein is now paving the way for the greater evil or not, the GP needs to speak up.

  8. Bill Bodden
    November 26, 2016 at 18:02

    To Joe Lauria:

    I hope you will continue to cover this story for two reasons: One for the story itself and what it might reveal and, two, to see how many of the comments above prove to have merit.

    • Joe Lauria
      November 27, 2016 at 07:48

      Hi Bill,
      I have written a follow-up to include the Clinton camp joining the recount and an interview I had with the Green Party national media coordinator in which it is clear the national party has distanced itself from Stein on this. Not included is Trump finally reacting to all this, calling it a scam on Twitter.

  9. backwardsevolution
    November 26, 2016 at 13:10

    Gregory Kruse – “How does anyone know that Hillary would start WWIII, and how does anyone know that Trump won’t start WWIII? There is only one major difference between them, and that is that Trump doesn’t know all of America’s secrets, and Hillary does.”

    Oh, there’s more than one major difference between them. No one knows for sure, but builders (Trump) usually want to build, not destroy. Can you honestly say that you could see Trump ever saying, “We came, we saw, he died”? Maybe, maybe against someone who was actually slaughtering his citizens, but not Gaddafi, who provided his people with free education/medical/dental, a $50,000.00 interest-free loan upon marriage, and who built a 1,500 mile pipeline to provide fresh water for his people. This sovereign leader was hunted down and then sodomized with a knife. Do you honestly see Trump saying, “We came, we saw, he died”? Trump is not an “assassin for hire” like Hillary is, and that describes her in a nutshell. She set out to destroy Libya, and she succeeded. It was deliberate, intentional, calculated, predicated on lies.

    Take a look at their lives. No doubt they’ve both been interested in making money, but Trump has concentrated on building (hotels, residential towers, casinos) whereas Hillary has concentrated on what? Clawing and scraping her way to the top? She and her husband have been involved in one scandal after another. They are totally corrupt individuals, both for-sale-to-the-highest-bidder types. They are not interested in the betterment of the country; they are interested in how they can enrich themselves. And if it takes murdering someone, then so be it.

    • Kiza
      November 26, 2016 at 19:29

      I could be accused of being discriminatory, but Wikipedia says:
      Trump … received a bachelor’s degree in economics from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania in 1968
      Clinton attended Wellesley College, graduating in 1969, and earned a J.D. from Yale Law School in 1973

      One is a builder and real-estate speculator with a degree in economics, the other is a lawyer with a degree in law. I do not know any lawyer who has ever built anything, the law is purely about manipulation, but would love any prominent example of a lawyer building or creating something.

      On top of this, Hillary is clearly a psychopath because only such would laugh at another person’s violent and demeaning death to which she contributed (We came, We saw …) and all this on national television. Talk about sick … Anybody who voted for such person must also be pretty wrong in the head, all 65 million of them.

  10. Gregory Kruse
    November 26, 2016 at 10:30

    I would love to see a recount in Wisconsin, and am pleased to have recently contributed (again) to the Green Party (not specifically for a recount). I have never seen such a large pile of stinking refuse in response to an article on Consortium News in all the time I have been reading and supporting this site. Such deep and irrational hatred of another human being is the basis of war and strife. How does anyone know that Hillary would start WWIII, and how does anyone know that Trump won’t start WWIII? There is only one major difference between them, and that is that Trump doesn’t know all of America’s secrets, and Hillary does. It mortifies me that Trump is being given access to virtually all the tools in the national workshop, and I expect him to use them to increase his and his family’s power. It’s Hillary and the Democrats’ fault that this is the case, and it won’t be changed by a recount or a vote of the Electoral College. I voted for Stein, and now that she and Baraka are hated by the left, I still don’t regret my vote. It was meaningless, but so was yours if you voted for Hillary. Trump isn’t president-elect because too few people voted for Hillary, he’s president-elect because too many people voted for Trump. 81% of neo-Zionist Evangelical Christians voted for Trump. That makes me very nervous.

  11. Andrew Nichols
    November 26, 2016 at 07:54

    Why? Do we really want WW3?

  12. Wm. Boyce
    November 26, 2016 at 01:39

    I guess every Trump botnet comes here now. What a load of crap most of these comments are. No don’t worry, the authorities are taking care of the situation. And your democracy ended sometime back.

    • backwardsevolution
      November 26, 2016 at 06:46

      Wm. Boyce – No, that’s not the case at all. Watch me go after Trump when he screws up, when he forgets what he promised. I do not like Clinton. The Clinton family are corrupt liars who have a knack of being in trouble constantly. Hillary was too closely aligned with Wall Street, the military-industrial complex, corporations, globalization, saber-rattling, AIPAC, George Soros, secretive trade treaties, coups, taking out sovereign leaders. She is a dangerous lady.

      I like that Trump reached out to the young Congresswoman from Hawaii. That’s what needs to happen. People should be concerned with what is in the good of the country, not how to line their pockets.

    • Kiza
      November 26, 2016 at 07:48

      You forgot to claim that we are Russian Government paid bots (you probably meant to say trolls, bots do not usually leave comments). You should get the story from the HQ right, Mr Boyce: the Russian fake news and conspiracy spreading tolls.

  13. November 25, 2016 at 22:56

    “So Why is the Green Party’s Jill Stein Filing For Recounts in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania?” Authored by Bruce Dixon, editor of

    • L
      November 25, 2016 at 23:44

      Well Dixon might ask the question, but he certainly can not answer it as simply as it is:

      Jill is a Shill for Hill

      • John Cerve
        November 26, 2016 at 00:40

        if Stein only wants to show that votes for third parties (especially her own) are being underreported, why doesn’t she demand recounts in states where she believes this has particularly occurred, rather than in states that Trump narrowly won from Clinton? Is it a coincidence that the states where the Green Party was possibly cheated are the same as those that the Democrats are complaining about for their own purposes? This makes the looking-out-for-third-parties explanation seem very unlikely and suspicious.

  14. CitizenOne
    November 25, 2016 at 21:41

    All the post election whining by Democrats and now the Greens who do not have a horse in the race is suspect. Likely money is glowing from democrats through the greens to make independent demands for investigations and recounts in an effort not to seem self serving. Let me think about that for a moment. Yup, I’m done.

    All the Monday morning quarterbacking after the game is like the bad news bears claiming they are be cheated from victory. Now they want to rewrite the rules after the final match.

    Hillary Clinton conceded the election. she called Donald Trump to congratulate him on his victory. So did Obama. There is no going back. Donald Trump will be president.

    It is kind of like the fake news angst that is suddenly surging in places like WaPo biting nails over possible Soviet influence on Face Book and Twitter.

    The problem with all of this is it is about to abruptly and suddenly disappear.

    We keep crying about all the unfair elections the day after and then nobody has another thought in their head until after the next election.

    We can fairly credit Mr Trump as being the only person in the room to be concerned in the slightest about possible voting irregularities before the election.

    I guess he is a bit precocious.

    We can also fairly credit the last people to complain about fake news to the news. Surprised it happened. If Putin has at least begun a discussion about why fake news might be wrong then good.

    There are a whole bunch of dead people because of the mess in Ukraine and Syria and Russia has had it’s fill with all the BS the USA has been doing with its bad calculations.

    There is only one other really bad calculation Clinton could make even more messes with and that is if she wants to mess around with the election results.

    Ask the people in Aleppo how well Hillary’s “help” went for them. The incredible destruction and death and carnage in that city alone should be on every news channel every night like Vietnam. But it is not. Mr Trump’s expected withdrawal from funneling aid to ISIS is probably the best possible move in this situation. Now it is an ugly thing that will make Russia look like the bad guys on Western Press, but we should look in the mirror even Liberals and recognize we really messed up big time there.

    Bush might have made huge blunders but Obama and Hillary did too. I guess it is bad when neither party seems to have a grasp on a rational foreign policy.

    We will have to see what Trump comes up with. It can’t be much worse than what we have seen unless he is just going to push the button. But if that were the case, the Russians would not have been supporting him would they?

  15. Mahatma
    November 25, 2016 at 21:23

    This is complete madness, Trump Derangement Syndrome, by the left.

    Please please let’s really really piss off every Trump voter who happens to also be the common man the left claims to support.

    Let’s get warmongering lying Clinton in no matter what. First Warren, then Sanders now Stein each in turn capitulating to the status quo Neoliberal power structure and still trying to install Queen Hillery. It is Bizarre the left cries please give us back TPP until WE abolish it, give us TTIP to destroy ourselves (but we couldn’t and the ugly guy could) NO NO NO to peace with Russia give us our rightful Commander in Chief bombs away – thank god we got rid of the pu**y grabber.

  16. John
    November 25, 2016 at 20:48

    It’s a big money jew thing citizens….The jews want to rule the world because Yahweh gave it to them …. Stein, Sanders, Soros, along with the jewish cartel that owns the MSM….You people are F*#king Thick….Keep on being politically correct while they suck the blood from your children in their WAR AGENDA….I’m not talking about regular every day jewish people……I”M TALKING ABOUT THE RADICAL JEWS WHO PRACTIALLY RUN THE ENTIRE PLANET…..They raised 2.5 million in less than 12 hours….mercy !!!

  17. Bart Gruzalski
    November 25, 2016 at 20:26

    Berry Friesen,

    You are still in YO-YO land. This will only discredit the Green Party because the only beneficiary of a recount are the warmonger neoconservatives, and EVERYONE KNOWS THAT. Whatever the result of the recount, the Green Party goes down in flames to satisfy the DYING POLITICAL EGO of JILL SHAME.

    Jill Shame’s complete lack of integrity continues to amaze me. Confirming that lack of integrity, here’s Jill Shame’s most recent tweet:

    BREAKING: We’ve filed in Wisconsin! #Recount2016 will begin next week. Volunteer to help:

    Notice the “WE’VE” filed bit. Totally misleading. Here’s the headline from CNN:

    “Green Party files for Wisconsin recount, audit”

    There needs to be legal action by the Green Party on this one. The best would be to evict Jill Shame from the party for undermining its democratic processes and potentially destroying its reputation as a party that has principles for world peace. If there’s no “rule” in place, the acting executive committee must act: spell out a rule, pass it (amongst the members present), then evict Jill Stein and issue a press release. To do this is absolutely necessary if the Green Party is to survive Jill Shame’s Hopalong Cassidy solo jaunt into the sunset.


    • November 26, 2016 at 10:30

      Bart, you’ve raised an important issue. I just visited the Green Party USA website (again) and see nothing there about this. The implication is that the same debate we’re having here is going on within the Party structure and hasn’t been resolved.

      So your condemnation of Stein strikes me as premature, to say the least.

  18. backwardsevolution
    November 25, 2016 at 15:24

    “Judas Goat Jill Stein, Following in Sanders’ Footsteps

    Her campaign to recount votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin exposed her phony progressive credentials – showing she’s for Hillary, not peace, equity and justice.

    Who ever heard of a progressive supporting a war goddess, Wall Street tool, racketeer, perjurer – dirty business as usual, not beneficial social change?

    She’s Sanders with a gender difference, otherwise just the same – a con artist, Hillary supporter, indifferent about using her medical skills to help heal a sick nation, how I mistakenly described her political mission.

    She double-crossed me, fooled me, suckered me, betrayed me and 1.2 million + voters supporting her. She changed me from ally to adversary, never again backing her for any public position.”

    • November 25, 2016 at 17:15

      Steve, you obviously expect the recounts to occur, demonstrate a Clinton victory in all three states, and put Clinton in the White House. That’s one scenario, but at this point rather unlikely. Far more likely is that the recounts will occur, resulting in correction of vote totals from numerous voting machines and the indictment of persons responsible for the cheating, but not enough correction to change the winner in all three states, thus confirming Clinton has no claim to the White House.

      And from such a scenario would emerge election system reform, a chastened Trump Administration and a strengthened Green Party.

      Not so bad, eh? .

      • Gregory Herr
        November 26, 2016 at 13:58

        Well, I wish…if this scenario is correct, why did Jill use the “foreign agents” thing?

  19. backwardsevolution
    November 25, 2016 at 15:09

    “Jill Stein has just raised more money in 24 hours for her WI, MI and PA recount initiative than she did for the entire duration of her 2016 Presidential Campaign. Think about that. Where is this money coming from? It sure isn’t her campaign supporters.”

    This guy says that last night he stayed up and watched the money pour into Jill Stein’s site. It came in at a consistent rate of $160,000/hour, even in the dead of night when almost all Americans would be sleeping. He thinks a bot was set up to fake her getting donations from multiple people. He predicts she will have enough money between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. tonight. He predicts they couldn’t get to the electors, so they are going to steal the election.

    If he’s even remotely correct, this is tantamount to a coup.

  20. peter johnson
    November 25, 2016 at 12:45

    Having been on conference calls daily over the last five days, and having perused but not read all of these comments, the motivation for this is that the exit polls (which are really exit surveys) are advertised by Edison Research to be within 3%. They are off by miles…8.5% in Ohio. There is no explanation. You can float theories (that about a million people lied to the surveyors about who they voted for etc). Election integrity activists working since 2004 are very much aware that our elections are hackable. It has been said over and over, all summer long, by Trump, by the government. Our motivation is to get it right. Yes we would have loved to have support from Hillary Clinton, but just as Kerry ducked his responsibility in 2004, so is Hillary. We wish George Soros would help, but he won’t. We are asking for $27 from people for no other reason than to get it right. We also need hand counted paper ballots in the future. This means voters can cast a vote ON PAPER, send it thru an Optiscan machine for quick results, and then count the paper at the precinct level overnight/next day. Pennsylvania votes (80%) on DRE machines with no paper trail at all. Read Jon Simon’s “Code Red”. #recountnow

    • L
      November 25, 2016 at 23:17

      How pathetic…..Where was the furor when Obama stole 2012?

      #recountnow is part of the “Purple Revolution” operation designed to sew chaos
      which is the strategy of the globalist oligarchy you are supporting….

      Itching for war with Russia eh….. Enjoy the rape of Libya, Syria, Yemen and the Ukraine
      and now you want more….along with riots in the U.S.

      At least conceited egotistical princess Jill ‘The Shill’ Stein is demonstrating her true colors as did Bernie The Fake….momsers is what they are

      And yes most assuredly Soros and Clinton are pushing this big time through their proxies, dupes and plenty of ill gotten money to grease the Jacobin wheels….

    • Gregory Herr
      November 26, 2016 at 13:50

      If what you say is true, and the funding is legit, then why not also check into Minnesota or New Hampshire and others?

  21. Not Sure
    November 25, 2016 at 12:43

    I’m a little confused as to why there is so much surprise and speculation over the Green Party’s decision to challenge the questionable results in these three states. As far as I can tell, this is in keeping with their past practice, having also led the charge over the disputed Ohio election in 2004.

    It’s unlikely, it seems to me, that the Democrats and the Greens are colluding on this, since the Democratic Party as a whole despises the Green Party and does not seem to acknowledge the right of third parties to even exist, much less compete on an equal footing. There is also no love for the Dems on the part of the Greens.

    The idea that this is a Soros-funded conspiracy to whip up riots and halt the Electoral College vote on Dec. 3 also doesn’t make a lot of sense, being predicated on the assumption that Americans can be effectively mobilized to take meaningful action on any issue at all. While there is of course activism and agitation on any number of issues, the United States hasn’t seen any truly destabilizing mass action since the 1960s.

    Anyway, it seems to me that many people on this thread are probably over-thinking this whole thing. More than likely, this recount effort is what Jill Stein claims it is — an effort to ensure the integrity of the vote (okay, and perhaps maybe a publicity stunt) — and all this speculation about Democratic-Soros-Green Party collusion is just absurd.

    • Brad Owen
      November 25, 2016 at 14:24

      To me, what is telling about all of this uncalled-for vitriol, Not Sure, is that the Greens must have really struck a nerve this time. Maybe they did WAY better in the vote-count that the freaked-out Establishment wants to let go unchallenged. A political tectonic shift is underway in our Country and the World, and everywhere the criminal Neoliberal Establishment is in desperate retreat, flailing about desperately for a way to hold on to the power that is slowly slipping from its’ grip. The Oligarchy’s two-faced Establishment (with an R-Party face and a D-Party face) is slowly breaking up, and the Greens, the Sandernistas, and lots of Movement folks, are around to organize the people for a “take-back” of our Country from a criminal Establishment. MONEY, in SMALL donations from MILLIONS of people, is the fuel for the “take-back”. I give ten bucks a month to Green Party U.S. for this very purpose. It’s a beautiful thing to behold. Imagine 20 million people doing the same thing; THAT is real people power.

  22. Bill Bodden
    November 25, 2016 at 12:35

    BREAKING NEWS: I had a dream last night in which Kim, Jong-Un began a story of how Jill Stein’s campaign is being funded. I was fascinated, but as happens so often with us senior citizens nature interrupted and I had to make a pit stop. If Jong-Un returns tonight and shares the nitty gritty I’ll let you know tomorrow. Stay tuned.

    • Bill Bodden
      November 25, 2016 at 13:31

      PS: Dennis Rodman accompanied President Kim. He told me to not pay any attention to all those anti-Jill Stein trolls.

      • Bill Bodden
        November 25, 2016 at 17:11

        Now that I’m getting up there in years I find I need a nap after lunch. Believe it or not, but my dream with Kim, Jong-Un and Dennis Rodman resumed from the point it was interrupted last night. Lots of interesting points. President Kim told me he does business with the same weapons makers supplying the US military and NATO and that one of their lobbyists informed him it is not George Soros who is funding Jill Stein but our own military-industrial-complex. Apparently, they believe the best they can hope for out of Trump is a war with Iran; whereas, with Hillary and her neocon friends running the show there will be much, much more business. I asked what’s the deal with Jill Stein? Dennis explained to me she gave up on the American people continuing to go for the lesser evil even when there is no lesser evil as far as Clinton and Trump are concerned. So, she concluded, if you can’t fight them then join them. And that’s the truth. You can count on it.

        • backwardsevolution
          November 25, 2016 at 19:20

          Bill – time to increase the meds.

          • Bill Bodden
            November 25, 2016 at 23:14

            backwards: I didn’t mean to upset you, but if you believe an increase in meds will help take what you need.

          • backwardsevolution
            November 25, 2016 at 23:34

            Bill – I was just joking, sorry. That is one wild dream.

    • Hillary
      November 26, 2016 at 07:05

      Bill your controversial posts are genius …. my dream was that I had all my rejected posts reinstated …..

  23. Nancy
    November 25, 2016 at 12:28

    Whatever Stein’s motive(s) it is regressive not progressive. Done with the GP and it’s $7M blunder.

  24. Charles
    November 25, 2016 at 12:22

    Joe Lauria says “Is there some collusion between the Democratic Party and the Greens? Are they a Trojan horse for Clinton who can stay above the fray while getting the recount that some of her supporters have called for?”

    Oh, come on. This is conspiracy theorizing and does not belong on Consortium News. The Greens have long been the only party that paid any attention to the possibility that voting could be hacked.

    Are Clinton supporters funding the recount effort in part? It wouldn’t exactly been surprising. People worked their hearts out, were told that Hillary had an extremely good chance to win, and then suddenly Trump ekes out a bare electoral vote win while losing the popular vote badly. Wouldn’t you be p–sed?

    $7M represents 140,000 contributions of $50. There were something like 64 million people who voted for Hillary. Two people in a thousand upset enough about the result to kick in 50 bucks. Invoking wealthy donors or Hillary herself as the force behind this effort is way, way beyond the facts.

    I am worried about Consortium News. I used to think that just the comments were goofy and that the great journalism of Robert Parry and the principled decency of Ray McGovern spoke for themselves. But this story is not great journalism. It’s ridiculous. The editor should have done some editing.

    Ahem, Mr. Parry.

    • Joe Lauria
      November 25, 2016 at 12:55

      Joe Lauria also asked these questions, which you conveniently left out: “Or are the Greens sincere in wanting voting irregularities exposed? One theory is that the recount will expose cheating by both the Republicans and Democrats – and thus reflect badly on the two-party system which has marginalized the Greens and other third parties.

      “There’s also the mystery of why one Stein quote mentions ‘foreign agents’ while another doesn’t. In the waning days of the campaign, Clinton and her surrogates attacked Trump by suggesting Russian agents were conspiring to install him in the White House. Why did Stein, at least briefly, pick up that Clinton theme even though DNI Clapper had distanced himself from the accusation?”

      Are these conspiracy theories too or just legitimate questions that need to be asked?

      • exiled off mainstreet
        November 26, 2016 at 01:05

        First of all, let me voice my appreciation for this article. As for your response, these are legitimate questions. If this was a real test of close votes, they would include New Hampshire, which went by a lower per centage margin, and Minnesota, which had a suspiciously large majority in several counties. My guess is that the “foreign agents” quote and the massive Soros money reveals the reality of the situation and exposes the feet of clay of Stein, whom I recommended that people vote for. Frankly I did vote for Trump and now am glad I did because I knew that the harpy was a war criminal and, through her advocacy of confrontation with Russia on behalf of el qaeda a serious threat to civilization itself and I thought that, even though in California, where my vote would count, the harpy had it in the bag, that I should vote for Trump because it was important that, if possible he get more popular votes. I actually thought he was likely to win. In any event, this action, particularly since other Green stalwarts like the virtuous Ms. Flowers oppose it, and since the official “Russia” accusation was used, exposes the bogusness of Ms. Stein, just like the fawning toadyism of Sanders despite the proof emerging that the nomination had probably been denied him on the basis of fraud exposed his true nature as a sheepdog for the establishment. It is all depressing, but at least nuclear war has become more unlikely in the meantime since I don’t see how leads of greater than one per cent, such as in Pennsylvania can be reversed, nor do I see how a paper ballot 11,000 vote lead can be reversed either. Palast should also investigate the accusations brought forward by O’Keefe and the Veritas films of voters using dead peoples’ identities, and bringing in fraudulent voters on buses, etc. Meanwhile, as other commenters have noted repeatedly, the facts Clinton is a war criminal and threatens civilization, are salient and render all of this immaterial and counterproductive. The unlikeliness of this amounting to anything reveal it to be just another Soros effort. It seems to me that the Attorney General Designate Sessions has his work cut out for him to go full-on after the Clintons and to look into Soros, whose actions funding these demonstrations stink of sedition. Normally I would favor those suspected of sedition but, in this instance Soros and the Clintons stink of odium, corruption, and dangerous criminality.

    • Kiza
      November 25, 2016 at 19:55

      Yes, people like I are spreading on this zine the “fake-news” that your kind is trying to censor. Unfortunately, you cannot censor us and this makes you “worried” for the zine, that is frustrated. There must be no contrary opinion or information on the zine because it is all conspiracy theory and fake news, only the “official DNC truths” are permitted here. The good thing about your comment is that it gives us a fore-taste of what would come under Hillary as President.

  25. Joe Tedesky
    November 25, 2016 at 11:06

    Mr Lauria, please stay on this if you can. The intrigue in all of this is crying out for exposure, and you are just the man to reveal it. Nice work.

  26. Stu from New Jersey
    November 25, 2016 at 10:15

    Ballot access is behind this. The major parties enact laws keeping minor parties from the ballot unless they garner certain percentages of the vote, then throw their votes away.
    The fundamental problem (other than the dictatorship of the two parties) is their complete monopoly of poll observers and poll workers. Here in NJ I had to create a big scene in order to watch the vote being downloaded from a machine even though I was one of the candidates. (BTW: In order to run I had to get 20 times as many petition signatures as the major party candidates.)
    They suspect – as I do – that the phenomenon of votes cast without a presidential choice is partly explained by the discarding of minor party votes.
    The only other time the Greens had the money for this was in Ohio in 2004 (which was one of the more corrupt elections lately), and resulted in prosecution of poll workers and the imprisonment of at least one.
    The whole thing could be avoided if there were impartial election judges in the US instead of only GOP and Democrats.

  27. Brad Owen
    November 25, 2016 at 08:06

    While I donated to Jill Stein 2016, their mailing address was Madison Wisconsin. Wisconsin is home of Joe McArthy, BUT is also home to Bob La Follette Sr. and Jr, a population split between strong left-wing leanings and right-wing leanings. The folks were madder-than-hell about their Gov. Walker (the La Follette constituency no doubt) and tried hard to recall him. I find it easily believable that thousands of Wisconsin citizens stepped up to the plate and donated for this effort.

    • backwardsevolution
      November 25, 2016 at 14:19

      Brad Owen – well, let’s see a listing of the donors and how much each gave. As falcemartello said above, (or George Soros) provided “the bulk of the funds”. Maybe Soros provided her with some campaign contributions (through, and she is now reciprocating. Who knows. Sounds like she is acting on her own, not through the Green Party. This might pose a problem.

      • Brad Owen
        November 26, 2016 at 08:07

        She is yesterday’s newspaper anyway. The election is over. She is done. The Green Party U.S. is still here with us, like it has been for decades now. Funding it with our own $mall donations KEEPS the Soros’s and Goldman Sachs banksters from getting their nose under the tent,along with Green Party’s continuing vow to not take corporate bribes (AKA speaking fees, donations, etc…probably WHY Green Party U.S. didn’t sanction this op, because of corporate stench on the funds being used.

  28. MarkU
    November 25, 2016 at 07:35

    So Jill Stein is a closet Hillary Clinton supporter? Or maybe she thinks a nuclear winter will counteract the greenhouse effect.

  29. Brendan
    November 25, 2016 at 06:32

    Some people read too much into the fact that the exit polls differed from the actual election results. Those differences can be explained by the fact that exit polls are not anonymous. They’re face-to-face surveys where some people might be embarrassed to admit that they voted for Trump, who had been constantly demonised in nearly all of the media.

    Trump’s defeat was also incorrectly predicted by pre-election polls, which were mostly conducted by telephone, and therefore not very anonymous either.

    The anonymous online polls by the LA Times, on the other hand, correctly predicted Trump’s victory.
    “At the end of the summer, FiveThirtyEight identified that Clinton’s lead over Trump was wider in telephone surveys but couldn’t be sure why.

    The USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll was an outlier among other polls, consistently placing Trump in the lead. It relied on an ongoing internet survey. As an LA Times reporter put it on election night:

    “Trump voters were notably less comfortable about telling a telephone pollster about their vote. Voters who backed a third-party candidate were even less comfortable responding to a poll. Women who said they backed Trump were particularly less likely to say they would be comfortable talking to a pollster about their vote.”

    The feeling of anonymity offered by online, as opposed to phone, interviews allows for more honest revelation of a Trump vote. One less easily imagines someone judging them for violating the social norm.”

    • Wm. Boyce
      November 26, 2016 at 01:32

      So Trump supporters, unlike every other person who answered exit poll pollsters, are uncomfortably shy about their support for him, while his supporters promise “civil war” if he is not installed.

      What crap. Exit polls are an internationally recognized measure of voter’s intent, and in at least four swing states , the exit polls did not match the “tabulated” results. More crap, bearing auditing.

      • Brendan
        November 26, 2016 at 15:55

        Misleading opinion polls (including exit polls) are nothing new. In the past the phenomenon has been given the name ‘the Bradley effect’, or in the UK ‘the shy Tory effect’. What we’ve seen recently could be the shy Trump effect. Some voters can be unwilling to admit that they voted in a way that is seen as politically incorrect or socially unacceptable.

  30. Brendan
    November 25, 2016 at 05:30

    As mentioned already, only the web page with the appeal for money contained the accusation against “foreign agents” hacking computers.

    Since yesterday, however, that page has been edited to remove the foreign agents accusation.

    Compare to same page, archived yesterday, 24.11.2016 :

    • Joe Lauria
      November 25, 2016 at 13:22

      A ha…I figured they would do that. Thanks for pointing that out and for providing the archived page. I had made a pdf of the page yesterday in anticipation of them doing that…..

  31. November 25, 2016 at 04:25 has provided the bulk of the funds. It is a front organisation of well known zionist George Soros. U can check those facts from the RT america interview 2 days ago with Stein, has admitted to it . The establishment will not take this loss they will try until they die. Hopefully they will die. Just like the airforce attacks on Turkish soldiers yesterday SAAaf and RUaf have denied that they had anything to do with it. Smells like one big rat infested story .

  32. backwardsevolution
    November 25, 2016 at 02:56

    Joe Lauria – thanks for spelling out what is going on. Very good article.

    • Joe Lauria
      November 25, 2016 at 11:32

      Thank you.

      • Bart Gruzalski
        November 25, 2016 at 20:12

        JOE LAURA,

        Yes, your article was very good (I’d submitted one on the same topic but you are welcome to the material in any of my comments, including the first which shows the remarkable hypocrisy.

        In line with that lack of integrity, here’s Jill Shame’s most recent tweet:

        BREAKING: We’ve filed in Wisconsin! #Recount2016 will begin next week. Volunteer to help:

        Notice the “WE’VE” filed bit. Totally misleading. Here’s the headline from CNN:

        “Green Party files for Wisconsin recount, audit”

        There needs to be legal action by the Green Party on this one. The best would be to evict her from the party for undermining its democratic processes and potentially destroying its reputation as a party that has principles for peace. If there’s no “rule” in place, the acting executive committee must act: spell out a rule, pass it (amongst the members present), then evict Jill Stein and issue a press release. To do this is absolutely necessary if the Green Party is to survive Jill Shame’s Hopalong Cassidy solo jaunt into the sunset.


  33. Bill Samuel
    November 25, 2016 at 00:11

    This is not a Green Party effort. Stein brought this idea to the Green Party Steering Committee, but failed to win support for it. She is defying the Party by doing it anyway using the Green Presidential campaign logo, which is misleading people including the media into thinking it’s connected with the Party..

    There is false reporting here in the link which alleges to be to the GP home page. It is not. Google the Green Party. Its home page says nothing at all about this recount effort. The link is in fact to Jill’s campaign Web page. Since Jill is defying the Party in this, the campaign operation has effectively left the Green Party.

    • backwardsevolution
      November 25, 2016 at 00:27

      Bill Samuel – good post, and it makes sense. So she is going rogue in order to help what big money? Who is Jill Stein beholden to?

      This is not about the truth. This is about overthrowing the election. This is dangerous.

      • Joe Tedesky
        November 25, 2016 at 02:17

        Next Jill will be up in Alaska shooting moose.

      • Stu from New Jersey
        November 25, 2016 at 10:43

        No. It’s about ballot access for minor parties being stolen by the major parties.

    • Joe Lauria
      November 25, 2016 at 10:47

      Bill Samuel. Thank you pointing this out. Indeed the Green Party website says nothing about the recount. I will clarify this in my story.

  34. Bill Bodden
    November 25, 2016 at 00:10

    Has there ever been a post on Consortium News that has stimulated as much speculation as this one? Speculation and facts frequently have nothing in common.

    • Joe Tedesky
      November 25, 2016 at 02:19

      We are all a result of our news intake environment…please proceed and don’t disturb the patients.

  35. Stance Lane
    November 24, 2016 at 23:03

    I know it is hard to believe that there may be sincerity in politics but Jill Stein wants the truth! She is not helping Clinton or Trump, no ulterior motives, just the love of truth. Just honesty in politics. What a novel idea . . .

    • backwardsevolution
      November 25, 2016 at 00:24

      Stance Lane – I highly doubt it. If she was so into the truth, she would have screamed at the top of her lungs about the Clinton Foundation, about the emails. She is another Bernie, an arm of the Clinton’s.

  36. November 24, 2016 at 22:29

    I voted for Green/Baraka along with 1.3 million others. This morning I contributed $100 to this recount initiative. If I am at all typical, then there are about 40,000 contributors who have chipped in so far.

    My reasons: (a) elevate the visibility and stature of the Green Party; (b) legitimize the serious questions of those (such as Greg Palast) who have identified significant gaps between exit polls and vote totals; and (c) encourage a measure of humility within an electorate schooled by its leaders to think of the USA as “exceptional” and “indispensable.”

    • backwardsevolution
      November 25, 2016 at 00:23

      Berry – so what’s your objective, to overthrow the election, hand it over to Clinton? Why is Greg Palast so keen on looking into voting irregularities just now? I wonder, if Clinton had won, whether he (or Jill Stein) would be doing this. I highly doubt it. Something is afoot. And you think that 40,000 people paid $100 each for this recount? Think again. You are not typical. There’s big crooked money behind this, and you just helped them. Way to go.

    • Joe Tedesky
      November 25, 2016 at 02:14

      After we recount Hillary’s presidential race results, can we then move on and recount Bernie’s primary race results, as well since we are all into righting a wrong? Ask Jill.

    • Stu from New Jersey
      November 25, 2016 at 10:37

      I voted for them, too, and I suspect that there were a heck of a lot more than 1.3 million others. I’ll bet it was double that, and if the recount shows it, then I hope we’re going to see some Republicans and Democrats headed for a jail cell.

    • Stu from New Jersey
      November 25, 2016 at 10:40

      And, I should note, I donated to the recount effort, and, far from being a Democratic Party supporter, I have not voted for a Democrat since 1971. I just want the minor party counts to be honest, or poll workers to go to prison. I’m tired of having my vote stolen.
      And BTW, for several of the commenters, I am not a “leftist”. I’m a Green, and it is a distinct point of view. Our world is too complex to be described by two points of view.

  37. Mahatma
    November 24, 2016 at 22:18

    This is a really really stupid idea. Just how isolated and irrelevant does the left intend to be? What else can it possibly do to alienate tens of millions of people – who’s interests they claim to support no less? Oh, by the way TPP has been killed and TTIP is going down along with TiSA I hope and the rest – the left hates that because the ugly guy did it and not Amy Goodman. An easing of tensions with Russia in the cards – the left won’t have it – preferring war to Trump I guess.

    • Wm. Boyce
      November 26, 2016 at 01:27

      Thank you for the view from the right.

  38. elmerfudzie
    November 24, 2016 at 20:56

    This is a silly waste of time, effort and money. The GREEENS would be more appealing if they directed that (estimated) six million bucks towards eliminating the Electoral College. Why bother polling the Jury’s final decision, now that Hitlery Clinton is sentenced to the political gallows? How can we explain a Trump victory? Perhaps the citizenry at large came to some semblance of agreement; Over twenty long years of war mongering has brought us nothing but disaster on all fronts, economic, political and moral. Once again, the public drew from that, so called, Washington DC “the best and the brightest” lot but what did our citizens get from all their high brow symposiums, advanced degrees and multilingual representatives of the United States Foreign Service?, in a word, war, endless war with Clinton at their helm and disaster for Libya! Thus, the idea of a “Trump” began to evolve, a tycoon, a nobody in beltway circles. Disappointments with our entire political system welled up within, and to such an extent that, I debated between watching (another) god awful movie by Ed Wood or follow CSPAN’s election night. Well, it turns out that, eventually Ed Wood won. The flick “Plan 9 From Outer Space”, still carried some (social) worth, when early on- the film narrator Criswell said something very apropos here. Quote “There comes a time in every man’s life when he just can’t believe his eyes” ..bulls-eye, I mumbled to myself, after realizing that the seat in the Oval Office will be occupied by the likes of a Trump!

    • Bill Bodden
      November 24, 2016 at 21:28

      The GREEENS would be more appealing if they directed that (estimated) six million bucks towards eliminating the Electoral College.

      If the Greens come up with indisputable evidence the system is irrevocably flawed that would be a major argument for getting rid of the Electoral College. Perhaps this evidence might even wake the pathetic and apathetic majority of Americans into finally doing something about this monstrosity.

      • backwardsevolution
        November 24, 2016 at 22:44

        Bill Bodden – the Electoral College is NOT a monstrosity. Read up about it; it is representative of the WHOLE country.

        • Bill Bodden
          November 25, 2016 at 00:17

          I’ll have to try to figure that one out. The whole country gave Clinton a majority of the popular vote, but the electoral college gave the presidency to Trump who had two million votes less than Clinton. Before you jump to some conclusion that I’m saying that as a Clinton supporter, take my word on this: I’m on record many times on this website with statements similar to “as far as Clinton and Trump are concerned there is no lesser evil.” I voted “none of the above” in the form of a vote for Jill Stein.

          • backwardsevolution
            November 25, 2016 at 02:27

            “Yes, I said democracy is ultimately tyrannical — because it is.

            America is not a Democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic. This is very important; in a democracy 50%+1 can render the 50%-1 slaves by mere vote. Those who are in the minority in a democracy have no rights at all. Democracy is best represented by two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.

            We are all minorities in some form or fashion. If you’re gay, black, yellow, male, female, whatever — all it takes is some other set of groups to get together and decide to oppress you, and in a democracy you’re ****ed.

            America’s founding fathers put in place two systems to prevent this. The first was the bicameral legislature; a House elected by the people at large and a Senate elected by the State Legislators. This structure guaranteed that a landmass that amassed 50%+1 of the population (not even in the same state or states!) could not band together and shove down the throat of the States any policy measure because you needed the concurrence of more than half the state legislatures, where each were delegated but two votes to their Senators who were accountable to said legislature, to pass anything at all.”


            As Kiza said, it’s to protect the “minorities”.

          • Bill Bodden
            November 25, 2016 at 20:19

            America’s founding fathers put in place two systems to prevent this (oppression).

            America’s founding fathers made sure that oppression of slaves would continue under their version of the Constitution which was stacked to have a new government of and for elites. Fortunately, unlike today, a sufficient number of the American people had the integrity and guts to rise against the new government to add the first ten amendments – the Bill of Rights – to the Constitution.

            The form of government – bicameral, parliamentary, whatever, – is of limited relevance. If the people elected or appointed to government are corrupt then the government will be corrupt unless, as cited in the previous paragraph, the people are vigilant and have the integrity and guts to rise against the government.

            Given that all but a small percentage of voters cast their ballots for Clinton or Trump it appears reasonable to conclude that a corrupt government is not a major concern for the vast majority of the adult population. As the old saw goes, “A nation gets the kind of government it deserves.”

        • Bill Bodden
          November 25, 2016 at 00:49

          How to Scrap the Electoral College by John Laforge –

        • Bill Bodden
          November 25, 2016 at 00:55

          The Electoral College Revisited by Tony Wolk –

        • Wm. Boyce
          November 26, 2016 at 01:25

          Yes, the support of slavery was very important in the Electoral College’s creation.

      • Kiza
        November 25, 2016 at 01:42

        Is it not just impressive how the leftists want low/no taxes for the poor and boosted opportunities for the minorities, but when equal opportunity in the electoral system endangers their rule – then it does not apply any more. Why should the city voters majorize (overrule) the rural voters? There is no perfect electoral system, but the US Electoral College was an attempt to maintain united United States through rebalanced participation. Why not change the Congress and Senate representation as well, why only Presidency?

        The Democrats are very much like the gunslingers playing poker under the clearly set rules of the game, but when losing they stand up, overturn the table and start shooting the winners.

        • backwardsevolution
          November 25, 2016 at 02:37

          Kiza – bang on! The left is so busy fighting for their “rights”, they develop a kind of self-centeredness, tunnel vision, only seeing “their” rights. They’re more than happy to run roughshod over everybody else’s, though.

        • b.grand
          November 25, 2016 at 18:14

          Yes, Kiza, exactly!

          Why don’t these haters of Electoral College complain that Wyoming has just as many Senators as NY?
          Thanks for the reminder of the deliberate structure of our government.

      • Bart Gruzalski
        November 25, 2016 at 07:38

        Bill Bodden,

        You know my opinion of the shamed Jill Stein. As far as coming up with money to fix something, what should be fixed is computerized voting. It is unconscionable that these machines, which have been proven easily hacked, are used. The way to fix them is to insure that people vote with paper ballots and these ballots can then be counted by the machine but are there for a “recount.” Where only machines are used and NO paper ballots, the recount is a joke—press the “total” button again and get the same total.

        Allowing computerized voting and computerized vote counting is a huge problem. There are ways that the machines can be used to use paper ballots (as happens in my Florida precinct and in Humboldt County, CA) so that there can be a real recount.

        Also, the “codes” for the machines are currently in private hands (Soros owns the majority of the machines). The codes should be held by the government only and under careful scrutiny.

        How Trump squeaked out a victory against such a powerful opponent is itself a miracle. Let’s keep the miracle going!

        Those who are unfamiliar with Trump’s policies, foreign and domestic, can for $4.95 purchase my book on Amazon. You won’t find a better deal financially. The book begins “The Moral Imperative…”

        The second one I wrote is permanently out of print but the message is in the first one: vote for Hillary and you get the likelihood of nuclear war; Trump is the peace candidate.

    • Bill Samuel
      November 25, 2016 at 00:14

      Don’t blame the Greens. Stein proposed this to the Green Party, and they did not approve it. She refused to accept the Party’s democratic process, and went ahead anyway, using the Presidential campaign logo and failing to provide a disclaimer that this was not supported by the Party. Prominent people in the Party, like Maryland Senate candidate Dr. Margaret Flowers, have clearly stated they do not support what Stein is doing. This is a Jill thing, not a Green thing.

      • backwardsevolution
        November 25, 2016 at 01:55

        Bill – I find what you are saying very interesting. Who is behind Jill Stein? Someone is. She would NOT have done this on her own.

      • Bart Gruzalski
        November 25, 2016 at 07:51

        Bill Samuel,

        Thank you for that clarification. The Greens need to issue a statement to that effect. Currently Jill Stein is sullying the Green mantle with shame. It is VERY IMPORTANT that the Greens issue a clear statement and get it out there in as many venues as possible. I didn’t know this and I am politically well read AND I was a Green for a time when I lived in California.

        I wonder if there’s a way the Greens can so distance themselves from this that Stein (ugh) cannot pretend to be doing this as a candidate and so the whole recount business gets thrown out? I suspect not but I sense there might be a way—can a Green candidate reject the Green platform and still be a Green candidate? Shamed Stein has certainly rejected the Green Platform.

        This FACT puts Stein in a much worse light. She is a pampered (born with the silver spoon) egotistical (most need some of that to run—not all, e.g., Gandhi) pile of human SHAME.

        Bill Samuel, thank you for your comment and I hope you can try to do something from within the Greens to make it plain that Stein has violated the Green’s democratic processes and doesn’t speak with any validity as a Green candidate.

        • John Cerve
          November 25, 2016 at 13:06

          If Jill Stein (whom I voted for) is so concerned about the integrity of the voting process, she should demand a recount of all close election results, including those that Clinton won. To demand a recount of crucial election votes in only states that Trump won shows an obvious bias and stinks to high heaven.

          Can Democrats cheat? They certainly did during the primaries. And this is another form of cheating, regardless of what the Republican did.

          • Joe Lauria
            November 25, 2016 at 17:24

            Stein was asked in the video she later put out why she chose those three states, MI, PA, WI–which were all won by Trump. If they all flip Clinton becomes president. She said because the results were close in all three. True. But they were also close in Minnesota, New Hampshire and New Mexico–three states won by Clinton. It would look better if she chose two close states won by Trump and two close states won by Clinton if she wants to expose problems with vote counting. So why hasn’t she?

            ANSWER: Because she would probably not have been able to raise the money she needs to do the recounts. She needed Democratic donors. Now $5m in 48 hours and counting.

          • Joe Lauria
            November 25, 2016 at 17:31

            In the video that came out after I wrote this article, Stein revealed her motives. She says this has nothing to do with helping Clinton or hurting Trump and she said she does not believe the recounts will change the outcome of the election. She said her only motive is to expose hacking and other problems with the electoral counting systems in those three states. Whether one believes that’s all that’s going on is up to the individual. I’m prepared to believe her and that she chose these three states because she knew it was the only way she’d get the money (largely from Clinton supporters) to pay for the recounts. It may be naive of her to say though that it has nothing to do with helping or hurting any of the candidates, whether that is the intention or not.

          • backwardsevolution
            November 25, 2016 at 18:36

            On recounts for New Hampshire:

            Any person for whom a vote was cast may apply for a recount.

            There are no specific grounds in the code.

            Filing deadlines
            The petition for recount must be filed with the Secretary of State within five days after the election.”


            Five days after the election was November 13th. They couldn’t do it now if they wanted to.

          • backwardsevolution
            November 25, 2016 at 18:38

            On recounts for New Mexico:

            Any candidate has standing to obtain a recount of a federal election.

            A recount must be based on the grounds of error or fraud.

            Filing deadlines
            The recount must be requested within six days after the completion of the canvass.”

            Six days after the election was November 14th. That date has already passed.

          • backwardsevolution
            November 25, 2016 at 18:43

            On recounts for Minnesota:

            “Privately Initiated Recounts
            Minnesota has no provision for an administrative recount of a federal election. The only recourse is to contest the election and obtain a recount as a remedy granted by the court (see section on Privately Initiated Contests). If the court orders a recount, it also details the process by which it is to be conducted. For the 1986 recount of a House of Representatives race between Collin Peterson and Arlan Stangeland, the court issued detailed procedures, which are available for reference from the Secretary of State.

            Privately Initiated Contests
            The following apply to both primary and general elections unless otherwise noted.

            Any eligible voter, including a candidate, may contest.

            The contest may be brought over an irregularity in the conduct of an election or canvass of votes, over the question of who received the largest number of votes legally cast, or on the grounds of deliberate, serious, and material violations of the Minnesota election law.

            Filing deadlines
            Primary: Notice of contest must be served and filed within five days after the canvass.
            General: Notice of contest must be served and filed within seven days after the canvass.”

            Seven days after the election was November 15th. That date has already passed.

      • Stu from New Jersey
        November 25, 2016 at 10:29

        I’ve been a Green candidate on two occasions and believe me, I would have liked to have had a recount.
        They keep us off the ballot by saying we need so many votes, and then throw the votes away.
        The number of ballots cast without a presidential choice can just as easily be explained by precincts not reporting votes cast for minor party candidates.
        If serious discrepancies appear, then the GP should sue for automatic ballot access across the country on the basis of their vote count being trashed by GOP and Democratic poll workers.

  39. Realist
    November 24, 2016 at 20:51

    How do we know there won’t be cheating now?

    • Kiza
      November 24, 2016 at 21:09

      Joe Stalin: “it is not who votes the who counts (or recounts) the votes”.

      • backwardsevolution
        November 24, 2016 at 22:41

        Realist and Kiza – yes, this is really beginning to stink. From Paul Craig Roberts:

        “Did Donald Trump win the election because he is a racist and misogynist and so are the American people?

        No. That’s BS from the Oligarchs’ well-paid whores in the media, “liberal progressive” activist groups, think tanks and universities.

        Did Trump win because he stole the election?

        More BS. The Oligarchs controlled the voting machines. They failed to steal the election, because the people outsmarted them and told the pollsters that they were voting for Hillary. This led to the presstitutes’ propaganda that Hillary was the certain winner, and the Oligarchs believed their own propaganda and didn’t believe it necessary to make certain of their victory.”

        The Oligarchs will make sure they don’t make a mistake this time (on the recount).

        • Brad Owen
          November 26, 2016 at 08:34

          The Oligarchs fell asleep at the wheel and forgot to rig their machines for the outcome that they want, because they rely on PEOPLE telling them what they’re going to do?? That strains my credulity. My whimsical notion that Coyote Trickster owns these election results makes more sense. Otherwise, the Oligarchs got the outcome that they wanted; a fellow billionaire “wanna be” who can be seduced into the “respectable, Davos/Mt. Pelerin/Bilderberg” billionaire’s club through his narcissism and immature personality. That’s probably what the billionaire oligarchs are thinking anyway, but Coyote Trickster will find the way for them to eff up their own op, and lose their billionaire mark to the people. That’s the way of Coyote Trickster; eff-up after eff-up, but still landing on His feet and smelling like a rose, uncovering Wisdom in the whole clownish process.

  40. Bill Bodden
    November 24, 2016 at 20:30

    The Greens’ vice-presidential candidate was a Black supremacist.

    From the Institute for Policy Studies:

    “Ajamu Baraka was the Founding Executive Director of the US Human Rights Network (USHRN) from July 2004 until June 2011. The USHRN became the first domestic human rights formation in the United States explicitly committed to the application of international human rights standards to the U.S. Under Baraka, the Network grew exponentially from a core membership base of 60 organizations to more than 300 U.S. – based member organizations and 1,500 individual members who work on the full spectrum of human rights issues in the United States.

    “Baraka has also served on the boards of various national and international human rights organizations, including Amnesty International (USA) and the National Center for Human Rights Education. He is currently on the boards of the Center for Constitutional Rights; Africa Action; Latin American Caribbean Community Center; Diaspora Afrique; and the Mississippi Workers’ Center for Human Rights.”

    According to this excerpt from IPS Mr. Baraka doesn’t appear to be a “black supremacist.” Do you have any evidence to support your accusation?

  41. Fergus Hashimoto
    November 24, 2016 at 18:38

    The Greens’ vice-presidential candidate was a Black supremacist. What right do THEY have to call Trump an “extremist”?

  42. ignasi orobitg gene
    November 24, 2016 at 17:50

    And that the citizenship knows other players in the Voting

  43. Akech
    November 24, 2016 at 17:08

    Isn’t it ironic that team Clinton, MSM and their surrogates are now having difficulties accepting the November 8, 2016 presidential election results and are now trying to device every method through which the outcome can nullified!

    During the last debate, Chris Wallace directed the question of respecting the election results for smooth transition of power! That question was directed squarely at DONALD J. TRUMP and NOT Hillary Rodham Clinton! Watch this debate exchange:

    Is this not an amazing double standard or something?

    • Kiza
      November 24, 2016 at 20:52

      Every method through which the outcome could be nullified – start from Clinton winning the popular vote versus the Electoral College vote. This is so illustrative – it is like we have the established rules of the political game, but we respect them only if we are winning the game. If we are losing, we stand up, overturn the table and start shooting at the opponents – a typical scene from a Western saloon for all of us non-Americans.

  44. rosemerry
    November 24, 2016 at 15:59

    Don’t be ridiculous;she is the ONLY candidate (perhaps Bernie in early days) to support the Palestinians.
    How pathetic to write about signs, too.

    • Bart Gruzalski
      November 24, 2016 at 19:41

      rosemerry, your comment is ridiculous. Even if she were a saint and supported every “good” cause on the calendar, from third term abortions to special bathrooms for transvestites, that has nothing to do with what she has just done. She has violated every principle she ever stood for. As for Palestinians, what would happen to them under a Clinton presidency? Clinton is lockstep with Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians and gets only cheers from the AIPAC (American Israeli PAC).

      You should look at the pettiness involved in stealing signs and take it as a sign that you are in yo-yo land.

  45. Bill Bodden
    November 24, 2016 at 15:13

    The move by the Greens raises many questions. At face value, they say the integrity of the electoral system is the only thing at stake. But the Greens must know that the recount effort could only help Clinton and hurt Trump.

    If this exercise by Jill Stein and the Green Party provides more evidence that elections are still rigged then let’s go for it. If the Democratic and Republican party oligarchs plan to keep it that way then the next move is up to the American people – if enough have the integrity to rise to the occasion of really cleaning the swamps in Washington and all 50 states.

    Greg Palast (dot com) and the Liberty Tree Foundation (dot org) are on board this project.

    The Green Party may have only gotten around one or two percent of the vote on November 8th, but seeds tend to start small.

    • backwardsevolution
      November 25, 2016 at 01:52

      Greg Palast who believes the official 9/11 story. A so-called investigative journalist, and he believes the government line?

      • Wm. Boyce
        November 26, 2016 at 01:23

        What exactly has that to do with the present subject? If even you are to be believed.

      • backwardsevolution
        November 26, 2016 at 06:01

        Wm. Boyce – it’s just that anyone who wholeheartedly believes the official story of 9/11, in my opinion, is someone who doesn’t want to face the truth, doesn’t want to see. Therefore, he’s not someone I’m going to take seriously.

    November 24, 2016 at 14:41

    For starters, Trump was NOT “elected”. He was chosen by political stooges, NOT the county’s voters.
    Everything else follows from that and is irrelevant, as the entire political establishment is criminal, representative and supported/financed by a profiteering system closely representative of national commercial fascism, NOT representative of the people – the voters of theU.S.
    This country is failing with every passing day, and we hold a major responsibility for it as we have been asleep at the wheel, poisoned by our politicalized media that demands our ignorance.
    The fix can only be made by an informed public who takes responsibility for it’s own education, it’s own informed understanding and world view.

  47. Brad Owen
    November 24, 2016 at 14:12

    This is reassuring that many citizens are also donating $ to the Green Party U.S. I donate monthly 10$ (20$ for Dec. because of articles smearing Greens for causing Dems to lose. My opinion is Dems no longer deserve to exist; same with R-party). I see a lot of character assassination attempts here to do in the Greens. Good. The Greens must be on the right track. I’ll keep donating. Eventually, millions of citizens will do likewise. The Greens are famous for NOT accepting any corporate bribes. The only way the citizens will find their way out from under the thumb of Oligarchy and their two Parties (D and R), is for the citizens to pay for and OWN their own Party. The Greens are it; there, in place, already organized and ready for action. Thank you Green Party U.S. for being there all these decades. Sorry I’ve been so tardy in rallying under the Green Banner.

    • Stephen Sivonda
      November 24, 2016 at 23:27

      I’m in with your opinion that both parties should self destruct and new ones come out to replace them But I think the rotten insiders in both the RNC and the DNC would still be entrenched in those “NEW ” parties. Think of how a party will run a …I’ll call them a double agent, in states that have seats from Governor on up just to get what is called a DINO or RINO . these are “Democrat in name only” and then ” Republican in name only” The citizens get screwed …thinking they’ll get a champion for their causes. Much like BO …lot’s of big promises and very little to show for . It’s really a minefield….and it will take some reliable progressive to flush the crap out.

      • Brad Owen
        November 25, 2016 at 07:25

        It all turns on whether or not they take any large donations not from people. Like Bernie’s average donation was $27. I sent Dr. Stein $27 a month when Bernie sided with Oligarchy. The Day after the election (Nov. 9th) I started sending the Green Party U.S. $10 a month, on the 9th of every month. As soon as I find out that Goldman Sachs or some other corporate oligarch is paying a Green candidate hundreds of thousands of $ for a “speech”, then it’s time to bug out of a party in the process of being captured. But it is the only way for the people to have a people’s Party; they must OWN it and pay it dues so it has CLEAN citizen’s money to run ops (such as this one to show up the phonyness of our election process) and campaigns. I’m tired of sitting on the sidelines and clucking about how everything is corrupted, and I’m not much of an activist (working for my family is full-time activity for me), but I sure-as-hell can afford ten bucks a month to support those professional activists in the Green Party, and if millions more people get the same idea, they’ll have plenty of money for ops and campaigns and the people will OWN the Party. We may have to move on one day. That day isn’t here yet.

        • Brad Owen
          November 25, 2016 at 07:28

          P.S. BO was supported by Wall Street big money from the git-go. Nobody thought too much about that then. We now see the whole story is told by WHERE THEIR MONEY COMES FROM.

          • backwardsevolution
            November 25, 2016 at 17:37

            Brad – yes, and Obama paid back Wall Street by bailing them out, didn’t he? And the Attorney-General that Obama appointed (Eric Holder) sent none of them to jail. In fact, this whole money-giving travesty has been really laid out on the table since Obama came to town. Hard to hide much now, what with the Internet. The media kept a lid on as much as they could, but the beans have been spilled with the leaking of information.

            Big money IS very dangerous. If while you’re calling for a recount you’re not screaming for big money to be stripped from paying off politicians, then you’re just spinning in one spot. Big money IS running the U.S., not the people. Is this okay?

    • Charles Fasola
      November 25, 2016 at 13:30

      Typical libetard. Why don’t you just wipe your ass with that ten monthly and flush it? You’ll get the same results. What a moron you are!

      • Brad Owen
        November 25, 2016 at 14:01

        Oh I am so deterred from donating to the Green Party U.S. by your insightful commentary. Actually thanks. Now I know I’m on the right track. Come on people; Charles Fasola inadvertantly shows the right way to go. Ten bucks-a-month times 20 million people = an annual $2.4 Billion war chest for the Green party. It is doable, and worth doing.

      • Wm. Boyce
        November 25, 2016 at 16:46

        This comment should be flagged – it’s got no place in this discussion.

        • backwardsevolution
          November 25, 2016 at 18:00

          Wm. Boyce – lighten up. At least Charles Fasola was colorful! Every time Brad comes on this site he’s dropping the “you can give $10.00 every month to the Green Party like I do” business. Brad, are you Jill?

          Really, Mr. Boyce, if Brad is only concerned about the recount and NOT about big money strangling the country, then where’s the integrity there? I must have missed the Green’s screaming about election fraud BEFORE the election; I didn’t hear it.

          Electronic ballots? No voter I.D.? What? The time to correct this is now, but not to overturn the election (as many here secretly want, recount aside), but to correct it so that the next time there is fairness for all to see.

          • Wm. Boyce
            November 26, 2016 at 01:22

            ” I must have missed the Green’s screaming about election fraud BEFORE the election; I didn’t hear it.”

            Why would they before the election? If they, and you had been reading Greg Palast’s blog, you and they might have been less surprised. I admit that I heard on the radio that Palast was predicting the stealing of the election last summer – I simply didn’t get it. I do now.

          • Brad Owen
            November 26, 2016 at 08:00

            Not everything can be done at once, Backwards, ESPECIALLY with very little $ to fuel the efforts, HENCE the great need for millions of citizens with $10 bills in their little hands giving to the Greens. The $ is the very beginning of activism, lawsuits, investigations, exposures, campaigns local and national, Green funded social work activity to directly relieve the suffering of citizens while working to remove the two dead obstacles that prevent relief for the citizens; R-Party and D-Party. IT ALL STARTS WITH CLEAN $. Why are YOU pretending to be so blind and backwards Backwards. I seriously doubt your sincerity about seeing progress for the people, really. In fact I suspect you’re just a tool for The Establishment, trying to throw cold water on the struggling little flame of activism. The more opposition I see to the OBVIOUS solution of citizens directly funding THEIR OWN political party, the more convinced I become that I’m on the right track.

  48. WG
    November 24, 2016 at 14:10

    from the Green Party contribution page:

    “You can donate up to $22,700 per person by contributing up to $2,700 on this page PLUS $10,000 to each of the following state Green Parties that have allowed contributions to kickstart the recount initiative”

    Sure sounds like they’re going for grassroots support… (sarcasm). I know when I contribute to a cause my first issue is how do I give more than $2700 to it…

    The behaviour of Bernie Sanders and now Jill Stein call into question whether there are any actual honest and independent progressives.

    • Bill Bodden
      November 24, 2016 at 16:13

      The donation page I looked at had options ranging from $2700 down to five bucks.

      • backwardsevolution
        November 25, 2016 at 01:50

        Bill Bodden – let’s have an accounting of who gave money. How much do you think was from $5.00 donations? Millions within hours? Uh-huh.

      • Brad Owen
        November 25, 2016 at 07:08

        The assassins are out in force aren’t they?

        • backwardsevolution
          November 25, 2016 at 17:25

          With so many naive people out there, they have to be.

      November 25, 2016 at 04:46

      Interesting that the suggested donation of $2,700 is 100x the average donation to Bernie’s campaign. I’m looking forward to disclosures of names of post-election donors to the Green Party and amounts contributed. Or, are the $10k donations to EACH state Green actually going to PACs?

  49. jaycee
    November 24, 2016 at 13:53

    Trump’s designation as President-elect has placed the entire neo-liberal globalization project in utter disarray. It would be beyond ironic if, through a Green Party initiative, the results flipped to Clinton and suddenly neo-liberalism, the TPP, and the Syrian no-fly zone were all back on!

    • backwardsevolution
      November 24, 2016 at 14:01

      jaycee – it would be catastrophic.

  50. Wm. Boyce
    November 24, 2016 at 13:50

    “On Tuesday it was reported that a group of U.S. professors – computer scientists and elections lawyers – had held a conference call with the Clinton campaign to ask it to file for an audit in the three states. They said that actual results differed from exit polls and that Trump had done considerably better in areas where electronic voting machines were used. Clinton did better where paper ballots were used.”

    This is all you have to know to ask for an audit/recount. Exit polls are an internationally recognized standard, and they differed in at least four swing states from the outcome. It doesn’t matter who is favored or not, will we have elections that reflect the voter’s intent, or not?

    • Gregory Herr
      November 25, 2016 at 10:12

      Exit polls showed Kerry won Florida in 2004. Few flinched.

  51. Yuri
    November 24, 2016 at 13:38

    Now the “Greens” are doing exactly what democrats were saying that Trump would do if he lost. How ironic, and moronic at the same time!

    • Mahatma
      November 26, 2016 at 06:04

      So glad to find someone else on the left who agrees. Amazing that the “establishment” left (Amy Goodman, Paul Jay, Jill Stein, Naomi Kline…) have sided with the establishment over the insurgency. First Warren, then Sanders now Stein is there nothing they will not do to get the warmongering TPP supporting Clinton in the White House? Please please, do not support peace with Russia fight for war and continued US belligerence and aggression better war than Trump.

      Left and right are dead, the center has been shattered the terms have no meaning now. We are in a new political circumstance where its not left/right it is insurgency or Neoliberal establishment – take your pick. Stine and the rest have chosen the Neoliberals – they are wrong.

  52. Lisa
    November 24, 2016 at 13:05

    Who is paying her campaign these extra millions, which she has so quickly gathered? Clinton Foundation or Soros?
    Sorry for nasty suspicions…

    And how can people be sure that the second count is more trustworthy than the first?

    The accusation “Russians did it” is absolutely ridiculous and borrowed directly from Clinton’s campaign speeches.

    • Bart Gruzalski
      November 24, 2016 at 21:39


      Your suspicions are not nasty. This is not “Green”-derived money. It’s either Soros or Hillary’s unhappy supporters. Soros is there and he will insure that the recounts happen since his pockets are much deeper than the little required here. Don’t forget that Soros was funding these “spontaneous” demonstrations that were happening in cities across the USA, most violently in Portland.

      The money is not Clinton Foundation money. Clinton gave no money of any significance to her campaign. She’s fully indebted to the moneyed interests, including Soros, who finance her. (She keeps her money for herself.)

      Jill Stein has overturned all her so-called “principles.” If you look at my first comment above you see the list. In most things regarding the military, she was on the same page as Donald Trump (close foreign bases, defense of USA happens in US soil, no wars where there’s not an obvious threat that ordinary people understand, friendship with Russia, world peace). Now she’s in Clinton’s camp. Clinton and her neoconservative allies will re-ignite wars in Afghanistan, Yemen, Iraq; will put gasoline on the fire in Syria; will militarily come to blows with Russia. Clinton has said as much and its in her platform.

      Jill Stein has shamed herself much worse than if her bowels gave way during a speech. This is a deep shaming for which there is no clean-up and no remedy, not even suicide.

      • Lisa
        November 25, 2016 at 15:16

        I came across this intriguing explanation regarding the money flow to Stein campaign. It is taken from the website “” on Nov.24th. Anyone who knows about the credibility of this site?


        A bot is pulling cash from a central fund, and giving it out at a pre determined rate.
        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. I watched this yesterday and last night carefully, and noted that at night, when 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. LAST NIGHT IT SHOULD HAVE SLOWED DOWN. IT DID NOT. IT JUST MARCHED RIGHT TOWARD THE FINISH LIKE AN OBEDIENT SOLDIER. It went straight to 2.65 million by six AM. I can calculate: IT WILL GO TO 4.5 MILLION IN 28.125 HOURS. Oh, a few people will pitch in for real, so I’ll say 27 hours.”

        Is there any way to get a list of the donors? It cannot be Green Party supporters, for what I can recall, the total donations to her presidential campaign did not amount to this much.

        One more odd detail, a bit off-topic here, but still relevant to the total popular vote. A Swedish newspaper, heavily supporting Hillary otherwise, disclosed a funny observation on the California vote count, progressing unusually slowly. A much greater part of ballots than normally (the paper ballots from early voters etc.), were difficult to read because of stains from coffee and jam.

        Now how can you explain this? One evil explanation visualizes a large room, offering drinks and sandwiches, and the room is filled with illegal immigrants, who willingly do the paperwork of signing ballots, already marked with a certain candidate.
        This is just a wild guess, but please note that the huge lead Hillary has in popular vote comes mainly from California.

        And finally, of course Clinton’s campaign could not officially originate this recount drive, remembering her horrified objections to Trump’s possible non-acceptance of the election results. “No respect for our American democracy!”

        If the recount gives another result than the original count, how on earth can we know which of them is correct? Only if two separate counts give the same result, the result is somewhat trustworthy. Simple book-keeping practice.

        By the way, the comments section to this article had disappeared for at least 12 hours on my screen. Did anyone else notice the same?

        • Lisa
          November 25, 2016 at 15:30

          Now I saw that the same info about the bot payments, in a more complete form, was posted by “backwardsevolution” further down this thread.

  53. Alex T
    November 24, 2016 at 12:58

    I’m sure Bernie will come out from his Clinton paid for vacation home to support his fellow tribe member Stein.

  54. Pablo Diablo
    November 24, 2016 at 12:51

    I would put my money on the FBI hacking into Hillary’s email. Many don’t like her. MANY. Possibly, don’t like Comey either. Possibly just stirring up the “shit”. Interesting that no government agency has said definitely that the Russians were behind the hacking (let alone to claim they did it to get Trump elected). While the media has been pushing that line. Another smokescreen so that the public is deflected from the content of the emails. Talk about “shit”.
    It may be that actually more people liked Bernie (if all the votes were counted and “super delegates” disbanded). It may be that actually people weren’t happy that the DNC screwed Bernie. It may actually be that “We came, we saw, he died, HaHaHaHa” disgusted people (it did me), It may actually be that not all women are war mongers that have caused hundreds of thousands of deaths in foreign countries. It may actually be that “There’s a special place in Hell” for Madelen and Hillary. It may actually be that Hillary has one pitch for Wall Street and a different one for “the people”. It may actually be that the Clinton Foundation has taken $2.2Billion from special interests. It may actually be that environmentalists, labor leaders, and peace activists are being murdered in Honduras by the coup Hillary orchestrated. I could go on for hours but you get the point. All the media could do was tear down Bernie and say we should vote for Hillary because she is a woman, while accusing anyone who voted for Trump as a “sexist”.

    • Bart Gruzalski
      November 24, 2016 at 20:30

      Pablo Diablo,

      That would be a good exercise—check the vote counting at the primaries and also the coin tosses (Clinton won a statistically impossible number if their were random).

      Sanders would have been the Democrat nominee and would have almost certainly beaten Trump. Clinton cheated then and she’s cheating now—having Jill Stein give up on the principles she’s held for years in order to give Clinton a shot at the White House. Shame shame shame shame.

      If you look me up on Amazon you’ll find two books I’ve written on Trump, though only one’s available. I’m the only Ph.D. I know who is still active in his/her profession and who supported Trump. You might enjoy the book (it’s only $4.95).

      • Joe Tedesky
        November 25, 2016 at 11:02

        The real crime, was committed during the Democrate’s primary.

  55. Joe Tedesky
    November 24, 2016 at 12:44

    If there ever was a better example of how politics makes for strange bedfellows, this is it. I like Jill Stein, and if her motives for this recount are on the upside, then I applaud Jill’s efforts to make this 2016 presidential election have an honest outcome. On the other hand I just don’t get it. Listening to Jill’s rhetoric on the stump during her run for president I always thought that Jill Stein worried a little more about Hillary over the unproven Trump. So, why now would Jill Stein sponsor a recount of votes, which could no doubt help Clinton?

    Under most circumstances I would be all for a recount, but realizing who may benefit from this recount is not a happy thought to nest inside my brain. Consider how this recount could very possibly put Hillary into the Oval Office. Does anyone really want that? It’s possible that we may regret having Donald Trump as our forty fifth president, but it would be beyond regret if Hillary were to suddenly replace the orange man who won the Electoral College vote.

    As a side note; I noticed how Stein is finally after all these months getting aire play on the cable networks, and find this disgusting after how badly Jill was ignored by these same media propagandist when she ran for the presidency. I picture that somewhere in a few places in America viewers are for the first time seeing the Green candidate and remarking to her appearance, as who is Jill Stein, I didn’t know of her…seems like a nice lady. It is just disgusting, but then again this is American politics, so what are you going to do about it?

    • Bart Gruzalski
      November 24, 2016 at 20:21

      Joe Tedesky,

      Nice commenting on a comment by you after all this time. Check out my Amazon book on “America First.” Maybe eventually we will be able to communicate directly.

      What am I going to do about it? If you see my comments above, that’s what I’m doing about it. This middle-aged lady who was slipping into the oblivion of a once-run-on-Green-principles ex-candidate, has suddenly sold her soul. The only changed outcome would be a Clinton presidency which would put the neocons back in control, escalate the wars in Afghanistan and Yemen and Iraq and Syria, and likely lead to a military war with Russia. For Jill Stein to open the door to these possibilities is horribly shameful given her “principles” which she has just reneged on.

      Pointing this out in every corner of the internet, and on Facebook if one can (my wife’s area of Facebook is so pro-Clinton that no one shares the views that we are sharing)… in fact, I’m posting this article on Facebook. Robert Parry why don’t you publish the article I submitted? Obviously your readers are in sync with it (Joe, how have I offended him?)

      • Bart Gruzalski
        November 24, 2016 at 20:46

        Joe, adding to my comment, I DID like Stein in 2012 and wrote over a dozen articles either supporting her or slamming Obama or both. After the election, in which she got less than 5% of the vote (to my shock), I suggested to the campaign workers for Jill that we look at what we did well and what we could have done better. Forget it was the response.

        The 2012 election was the only occasion in recent history where a Green could have done well enough to get into the Electoral College. Obama at that point was very unpopular and had broken every one of his 2008 campaign promises. His opponent Mitt Romney was a verified loser especially with his crazy running mate, Paul Ryan. Yet Jill didn’t break into the bottom of the big time. The 2016 election had to be just an ego-trip for Stein. She had no chance to do anything, which is what he did: zip, nothing, Nada.

        I don’t like this woman at all anymore, even before what she pulled with the recounts. That revealed a woman who, like Hillary, has no principles. All she has left now is her SHAME.
        I have posted this to Facebook with the following comment:
        “I’m posting this for the comments which almost universally see Jill Stein as giving up all of her so-called “principles” to make a way for a Clinton presidency that will ignite all the wars we are currently in as well as bring on a likely war with Russia. Jill Stein will be known as a turncoat and a shameful hypocrite and the Green party, what’s left of it, will suffer for decades. Read the comments after the article and add your own.”

        • Joe Tedesky
          November 25, 2016 at 10:57

          Bart, nice to see you commenting here again. Time tells a story. I recall you writing here about the Green Party experience you had from the past. At the time there was no way for me to reference what you had complained about…I believe you had an idea for celebrity endorsement or something like that. Right before this past election I thought of you when discussing Stein’s poor performance in the polls, and I commented to my wife about what you had commented on regarding the Green Party….suddenly you made sense when reminiscing about your encounter with how the Green’s promoted their candidate. It’s always nice to be included in the truth tellers club, and you made it there. Well done!

          If there were to be a recount it should be done in all fifty states. Not that I think we need one, but if I were the Trump people I’d start checking into the California votes, California does have a Democratic governor…just saying.

          So right after Trump says he will not pursue going after Clinton for her various crimes, then Stein comes forward with this craziness. I’m not sure what a Trump administration may do, but I shudder to think of what a Clinton house of thiefs may try and pull off. Stein just doesn’t make sense promoting this recount after everything she said out on the stump.

          Also I will be sure to read your book, and yes it would be nice to communicate directly. Good to see your back on this board. Take care.

      • Joe Tedesky
        November 25, 2016 at 22:00

        What country before ever existed a century & half without a REBELLION? & what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time of resistance? Thomas Jefferson, 1787

        Bart I just received my copy of your book “America First”.

        Thanks for letting me know about it.

        • Joe Tedesky
          November 26, 2016 at 01:19

          Hey Bart Gruzalski I’m at the part of the your book where you are about to explain the thirteen reasons why not to vote for Hillary Clinton….& then bingo, I remembered we were all writing on this post.

          Thinking about what you wrote, and without giving any of the book away, I would like to mention a couple things…in conversation not critical terms.

          Atheists would love to stay out of war, because if you believe that you return to nonexistent matter…then yeah, who wants to die in a war. Why do we grunts always have to fight for the oligarchs? Next war let them hide down behind a concrete wall…& the enemy has rocket launchers, really. So if I’m here for a once go around, I sure as hell don’t want to fight in any war.

          “So, in that spirit, I’m wishing Donald Trump luck. And I’m going to give him a chance, and we, the historically disenfranchised, demand that he give us one too. Thank you very much.”
          Dave Chappelle on SNL

          I’m pretty much where Dave Chappelle is at with his SNL closing comment with monologue. Yes I’m nervous with some of Trumps picks, or applicants, but I’m not jumping to any conclusions.

          Let’s just say Trump makes a lousy president. That the next four years will be like an extended 2006 when everybody was really starting to hate George W. Bush. Here is where good thinking people, like you, since reading your book, could come to the table. Yes, a woman like Tulsi or (in this scenario Ivanka would be ruled out…because her dad is screwing up at being president) or any woman would slide in there easily. A Gay person with a partner would fly in there. Americans have made up their voting minds to continue kicking bums out until they get the right one. Simple math, is always the best.

          Let’s both hope the Donald does a Beautiful job, and America loves him.

          I’ll continue, but right now I got to go pet this little puppy over here….

          • Joe Tedesky
            November 26, 2016 at 02:10

            I’m back. Had to give my sons little dog a pet under the chin. This little twenty five pound mutt just turned one human years old recently. One day I looked at the rascal and said to him, how him and me were going to get old together….three fortune tellers years ago said I would live to be 80, so that’s about fourteen years from now, and mongrels have about that as their life span, I guess, so I really like my son’s little pup.

            Now this house dog kind of depends on us owner humans to be good and caring for it. We dog owners have a responsibility too these owned animals. Picture FDR, Teddy even, or maybe in ideological ways a JFK, picture these men being our owners (yes we are dogs) but think in history when one of them reached down to help one of us by taking our hand, and by lifting us they lifted all boats, as the say…but this is most of the time when change happens nonviolently. Every single time that change comes up through the roots there is always violence. Castro had to fight, Mandela was met with violence and confinement, and MLK paid the altimate price due to violence….so when one of them reach down look both ways and reach up.

            We should tell our grandchildren to go play with the Rothschild’s grandchildren, and start the next generation off on to having a good sense of communication. If only the people had a seat at the table…what a wonderful beginning that would be.

    • Realist
      November 24, 2016 at 20:34

      Yep, she sounds like she’s allowing herself to be used as a tool of Clinton. Think of the turmoil that will result if the result is flipped. Almost like someone wants civil war in America.

      • Bart Gruzalski
        November 24, 2016 at 20:52

        And we know who those someones are. The main driver of this is Soros, who has organized all the “spontaneous” demonstrations that have been occurring across the country and especially in the North West. Clinton could have stopped those demonstrations but they fit her dark ambition to be president. This will end well ONLY if the recount is denied by some court OR if there is no change in the outcome. Both of these are likely. The article explains well the so-called anomaly of more electronic rural voters being for Trump.

      • Joe Tedesky
        November 24, 2016 at 22:53

        Realist I have the same fear. Right now this country needs United. Yes I’m okay with people expressing themselves by protesting, but I’m not okay with a George Soros lead revolt.

        Trump may have left Hillary off the hook due to his own legal problems, but he could have also had eased up on her hoping to relieve some of the tension that is being felt in this country as well. What Jill Stein is doing makes no sense at all, and don’t give me this patriotic bs that she is doing this to strengthen democracy, I’m just not buying it. There are forces moving inside this recount that are desperate for power, and nothing more. Besides why give Hillary the cheater a fair deal. Those who live by the sword die by the sword. Jill should smoke a doobie and jam with her band, and forget Hillary Clinton. I’m sure that both the Democrate’s and Republicans may have cheated in this past election, but hey they are the ones who made these screwy rules, so Hillary live with it…you loss!

  56. Bill Cash
    November 24, 2016 at 11:36

    Your speculations sound far worse than the people who think Russia did the hacking. Security experts have said it was Russia. Yes, the Greens could come up with money quickly because many of us believe hacking the voting machines is very possible and all the suspected hacking has favored Trump as well as the fbi which favored Trump. I donated and spread the word as much as I could and I suspect many others did also.

    I think this will reflect favorably on Jill Stein. She will verify whether our system is working or not.

    Curious how this site and its commenters pretty blindly believe in Russia’s motives but not Stein’s.

    • Bart Gruzalski
      November 24, 2016 at 19:35

      Bill Cash,

      What planet are you on? Every one of the comments above pointed out, in one way or another, that Stein was abandoning her principles to risk millions of lives by creating a way for Clinton to be president. Forgot motives for a minute and look at Jill Stein’s public comments:

      In her interview with the Washington Post, Jill Stein criticized NATO for violating international law in Libya and for being part “of a foreign policy that has been based on economic and military domination.” In the same interview, Stein made plain that, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, NATO violated its stated policy not to move “one inch to the East.” Stein’s platform, like Trump’s, called for the closing of overseas military bases. This is the woman who told the New York Times’ board that the US should get involved militarily only when there is “good evidence that we are under imminent threat of actual attack.” This is the same Jill Stein who condemned Hillary Clinton for wanting a no-fly zone over Syria because that would likely lead to war with Russia.

      When you rejoin our planet, you’ll see that everyone here accepts Jill Stein’s words and knows that her motives are obscene. There is no reason for such a minor candidate, who didn’t win over 1.2% of the vote in any of these three states, to ask for a recount. She’s lap-dogging for Clinton and Soros. And that’s where the money is coming from: disgruntled Clinton supporters and the infinitely deep pockets of Soros.

      • Kiza
        November 26, 2016 at 18:49

        There is a “conspiracy theory” that George Soros is a Rockefeller front man, who works together with the Deep State CIA (not the CIA bureaucracy) to pursue the Rockefeller political agenda of borderless one-world “open-society”. Soros has been helped with the right information by the CIA to become rich and he has been paying his eternal debt ever since.

  57. Helga Fellay
    November 24, 2016 at 11:27

    Something does not smell right here. Why would such a large sum of money simply flow to the Greens after they lost so badly in the election? If the Greens had wanted to donate that much, they would have donated it to help the underfunded campaign, not after the election. There is little doubt that this is Clinton Foundation money. I am disappointed that Stein would lend herself to such a gimmick, especially reiterating the false claim by Clinton that the Russians are somehow involved. I had voted for Jill Stein, but it appears that by allowing the DNC to use the Green party in this manner, they show that they are not that different. How very disappointing.

    • Bart Gruzalski
      November 24, 2016 at 19:29

      Helga Fellay, you are 100% right. This doesn’t even pass the “smell at 100 yards test.” This is horrifically shameful—and Jill Stein’s actions risk the lives of millions of people, including ours if Clinton wins and begins a war with Russia which is likely (see an earlier article by Robert Parry on Clinton and the neocons).

      This is Soros and Clinton successfully motivating Jill Stein to do a 180 degree turn and repudiate in action everything she’s been preaching. Actions in this case do speak louder than words. Whenever the poor lady comes to her senses, she’ll need a bunch of anti-depressants to keep her from killing herself. I know I’d be tempted if I reneged on my cherished values and probably you would too. We live but one life and what we stand for, especially if we’ve taken stands, becomes more important as we age. Stein is no old lady but she’s old enough to awake in horror and shame at what she’s done.

    • Kiza
      November 24, 2016 at 20:35

      Yes, exactly the same thing happened to Sanders voters, when this gentleman endorsed Hillary Clinton after he was blatantly cheated by DNC in several ways. It shows total lack of any principles by both demagogue Sanders and puppet Stein, the swamp critters.

    • Steve Naidamast
      November 26, 2016 at 16:31

      Has anyone considered the possibility that someone has threatened Jill Stein’s family if she didn’t do this?

  58. Brendan
    November 24, 2016 at 11:21

    It’s only the web page with the appeal for money that accuses “foreign agents” of hacking. Jill Stein might be cynically aiming that message at Clinton supporters who think they were robbed of the election.

    Clinton supporters are far more numerous, and many have much deeper pockets, than the average Green voter. Many Clintonites believe that the leaking of hacked communications had enough effect to swing the election result. The foreign agents scare would be an easy to way to tap them for donations to the Green Party.

    The only foreign agents who have been accused of hacking the Democrats’ computers are the Russian secret service, but no clear evidence has been presented for that. The idea that the Russians hacked into voting machines as well is a fantasy, since those machines are not connected to the internet. If voting machines were hacked – and there’s no reason to believe that – it would be much more likely to be an inside job than the work of foreign agents.

    • rosemerry
      November 24, 2016 at 15:57

      Greg Palast has made it cleat with evidence that local agents ie Koch -paid officials like Kris Kobach mainly in Red States have interfered with voter registration lists and numerous other techniques to reduce presumed Democratic Party votes.
      No need for the Russkies. Nativist USans can manage quite well!!

      • backwardsevolution
        November 25, 2016 at 02:13

        rosemerry – Greg Palast who believes the official 9/11 version.

    • Bart Gruzalski
      November 24, 2016 at 19:20


      Even our intelligence agencies have said that there has been no Russian interference in the election (Clinton out-and-out lied during the third debate).

      As for leaks, our intelligence agencies tell us that the email leaks came from within the intelligence agencies themselves—by people who did not think Clinton was fit to be president (her lying is deeply seated in her character… as is her lack of concern for other people, revealed by her willingness to allow top secret information be available to anyone with the minimal of hacking computer skills—this pisses off intelligence people whose colleagues get killed when things like this happen).

      As for hacking voting machines, either side could have done that. Voting with electronic voting machines is an insult to the men and women who died for our freedoms.

      • evelync
        November 25, 2016 at 09:46

        “(her lying is deeply seated in her character… as is her lack of concern for other people, revealed by her willingness to allow top secret information be available to anyone with the minimal of hacking computer skills—this pisses off intelligence people whose colleagues get killed when things like this happen).”

        Yes, and I think of Honduras, Libya, Syria, for profit prisons, 3 strikes and you’re out, welfare reform, unfair trade deals, one fabrication to pander to big donors and another to placate average people.

        I think you put your finger on what I think is impossible to deny. There’s something sociopathic even psychopathic about rising to the top of the existing system in Washington DC.

        I think, though, that finally people are on to her and the system she embraced. The endless wars and the massive financial deregulation and the failure to deal with climate change. People are finally on to it.
        That’s why I think Bernie would have won. His message resonated and people trusted him.
        I know some people who comment here would disagree with me but I don’t think Bernie betrayed what and who he was fighting for. I think the machine would have done him in if he skipped over to the Green party. He now has a lot of political capital to work with Elizabeth Warren, Nina Turner, Tulsi Gabbard, Keith Ellison, Raul Grijalva, the NNA and all the other true progressives including new people to try to shift the country onto a sustainable path……

        • b.grand
          November 26, 2016 at 20:29

          “I know some people who comment here would disagree with me….” YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN!

          Your research on our ‘political capital’ looks very uneven. Warren, for all her positive domestic economic initiative, is a miserable hawk spewing AIPAC talking points. Ellison, who’s never seen a war he didn’t like, just voted for harsher sanctions on Syria and possible No Fly Zone. And you know the drill on sheep-dog Bernie.

  59. dahoit
    November 24, 2016 at 10:57

    Did she raise 2 million for her own campaign?Very very suspicious,and yes she will pay big time.
    Another yuppie fraud loser.
    And no,he’s won PA with a 70,000 vote margin,so all this is sour grape garbage from losers.

  60. J.K.
    November 24, 2016 at 10:44

    “One theory is that the recount will expose cheating by both the Republicans and Democrats – and thus reflect badly on the two-party system which has marginalized the Greens and other third parties.”

    In addition to the duopoly which maginalizes Greens and other parties is a raft of irregularities in the election process itself: the electoral college deciding instead of the popular vote, little public financing, rigged debate protocol, the arcane hodgpodge of various state laws, super delegates (deciding the Democratic nominee), voting day set on a typical work day, not to mention the increased use of electronic voting machines which thwart varification. The fact that public airwaves have been “privatized” to handle elections and the exhorbitant cost to run ads ensures that our two-party system will remain in the pockets of the oligarchs. The Greens advocate for ranked-choice voting which solves the “problem” of more than two choices.

    I agree it’s peculiar that the Greens have come up with a ton of money for something that would only potentially help Clinton, but they are getting the publicity they deserve to be included in political conversations by this move.

    • Bart Gruzalski
      November 24, 2016 at 19:12

      J.K., I find your comment very peculiar. First, if you read both of my comments above, Jill Stein is not doing this for the Greens or for own candidacy. In the three states in which she is asking for a recount her percentage of the vote fell between 1.2% and 0.07%. This recall is only a lap dog jumping to satisfy manipulations by Soros and Clinton. Did they promise her Surgeon General? Is that plum worth throwing away the principles of a lifetime and risking the deaths of millions and millions of people (from the wars Trump would end in Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Iraq) to the likelihood of war with Russia were Clinton to be president?

      I agree with you that the Greens are finally getting the attention they deserve. I was a Green and fought valiantly with my pen to get Jill Stein over 5% in 2012 but her own people let her down (I wrote twelve articles on Counterpunch, Truthout, and other progressive sites). Green is a good idea and maybe will come back in a few decades after the shame and hypocrisy of Stein’s most recent lap-dog-for-Clinton groveling becomes forgotten in a couple of generations.

      • evelync
        November 25, 2016 at 09:12

        I had an odd experience with the Green Party in Houston decades ago….sorry can’t remember when it was.
        David Cobb hosted a meeting at a local library and maybe a couple dozen people attended. He introduced the Green platform and if I recall there was a vote on each item. Each item on the platform was well received as I recall.
        Then he mentioned a PAC without providing any detail. I was uncomfortable with that and asked a couple of questions that seemed to annoy him. He wanted to move on. Said the PAC was non negotiable. No discussion.
        I didn’t like the secretive way he handled that.
        So I left and never went back….

  61. Cal
    November 24, 2016 at 10:39

    No doubt the sudden flood of cash came from the Hillary camp.
    And Stein says ‘foreign agents”?
    Well, that ends any respect I might have had for Stein.

    • Bill Bodden
      November 25, 2016 at 11:57

      Are you buying in to some speculator’s guess or do you have evidence of where the money came from?

  62. evelync
    November 24, 2016 at 10:29

    As far as Americans trusting their elections – Jimmy Carter has refused to monitor American elections because they are not up to a standard that is trustworthy.

    Dan Wallach at Rice University is part of a team working with with the Travis County Clerk, Dana DeBeauvoir, to design a reliable voting machine with a paper trail for audit that is expected to be ready for use in Austin for the 2018 election.

    “ “I suppose they could just nuke the voter database,” said Dan Wallach, a computer scientist at Rice University. “I’m picturing in my head Vladimir Putin dressed up as the Joker.” Deleting the rolls of registered voters on Election Day would severely undermine the vote’s integrity, but Wallach was quick to add that the evidence for Russian involvement remains thin.”

  63. November 24, 2016 at 09:25

    This move won’t reflect well on Jill Stein, as it does nothing to redress the way the corporate media was so intent on Hillary Clinton being elected that it lambasted and ridiculed those intending to vote Green.

    To cast the slightest suspicion on Russians being responsible, without any evidence, shows a lack of responsibility and good judgement.

    A recount will just serve as a distraction from a system that needs a complete overhaul. If it is discovered wealthy Democrats are behind this move, Jill Stein risks losing a good deal of the credibility and support Green activists have fought so hard and long to win.

    • Bart Gruzalski
      November 24, 2016 at 19:01

      Bryan Hemming, check out my comments just above yours (in reply to kooka). It doesn’t matter what comes next, Bryan Hemming, it is at this moment too late for Jill Stein and the Greens.

      Jill Stein has destroyed herself as a principled person and is doing the bidding of Soros and Clinton. Just as Soros and Clinton were behind these so-called “spontaneous” riots, so too their hands are all over this one.

      Jill Stein could have entered the annals of history as a principled person who tried but didn’t have it (her party clearly blew it in 2012 when they had a real opportunity to make history). She’ll now enter those annals cloaked in personal shame as well as having undermined the only thing the Green Party had going for it: it’s principles of peace, environmental action, and justice for all (blacks, women, sexual preference, sexual identity).

      • Stu from New Jersey
        November 25, 2016 at 12:30

        She’s building a party, and part of that is to root out the connivance of the major parties in discarding the votes of minor parties in order to keep them from getting ballot access. The most effective way of doing this is sending some poll workers to jail and shining a light on the fact that ALL ballot results in this country are reported by members of two political parties. No independent judges.
        I once had the experience of voting for a presidential candidate (in 1976) whose vote total was reported as zero. I called around the town I lived in, trying to get some satisfaction, only to find that every person I spoke with was a GOP or Democratic hack who refused to give me my vote.
        Those two parties are equally repulsive and need to be thrown in the trash can. Hopefully this can help start that process.

        • Joe Tedesky
          November 25, 2016 at 13:11

          Stu with all due respect, where was this concern when California, Brooklyn, and Arizona among other voting locations when during the Democratic primary votes were stolen away from the Sanders Campaign. That was the time to get involved towards making our voting system work properly. This isn’t about true democracy, this is about putting Hillary Clinton in the White House. In fact, by rights Bernie should now be our forty fifth president.

          • Stu from New Jersey
            November 25, 2016 at 23:40

            Why should the Greens give a rusty nail what happens in the Democratic primary?? That is strictly an internal Democratic Party matter. If you don’t like the rigging, don’t support that party, that’s all.
            We want BALLOT ACCESS, and to get that we have to stop the major parties from DISCARDING VOTES.
            They look at a total from voting machines and then underreport this. Since they have all the poll observers, they get away with it.
            A few 5-year prison terms might help, and I don’t care if they’re Democrats or Republicans.
            Purposely misreporting vote counts is treason.

          • Joe Tedesky
            November 26, 2016 at 17:47

            Stu I hear what you are saying, and fairness is always paramount in any election, but why doesn’t Jill question the results of states where Hillary won as well as her having concern for states where Trump won. MInnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, and possibly we could throw in New Mexico are all states where Hillary won with a low margin of votes. So to be fair Jill should question these results also.

          • TS
            November 27, 2016 at 15:33

            But unfortunately, those primary elections were an internal affair of the Democratic Party, so there is probably no legal grounds for demanding a recount — and if there are, it would have to be Democrats who did so. Ask them why they didn’t

            As you say, Sanders would have been elected President if election fraud were not so widespread in the United States. (Of course, with the current Congress that would probably have not made a great deal of difference… even if he survived his term of office.)

        • backwardsevolution
          November 25, 2016 at 15:42

          Stu – when Trump won the election, I finally slept at night. I felt the world was a bit safer for my children. Not now. Do you have children? They are going to try to rig the election and hand the Presidency over to Clinton. It’s fine to want to clean up the voting process, in future have only paper ballots, proper I.D., but to do it now would a travesty.

          So you can save your “all I want is to shine some light”. Shine some light at a time when the world is not on the brink of World War III.

          Where’s all the “shine the light” people BEFORE the election? Crickets, that is until they lose.

          The future of my children is in the hands of people who say they want to “shine the light”. Great. Maybe we’ll get a great big ball of light!

          • Stu from New Jersey
            November 25, 2016 at 23:43

            Then stop supporting the exclusion of peaceful parties like the Greens and Libertarians from the ballots.
            In my long life, I have ***NEVER*** met a GOP or Democrat politician who so much as lifted a finger to make the balloting process more peaceful.

            Wisconsin’s the best target, anyway, because they insist on using machines that are known to be particularly vulnerable.

            If your frigging heroes in the GOP didn’t try rigging the game against the small parties, this would not be happening.

          • Bill Bodden
            November 26, 2016 at 00:22

            I finally slept at night. I felt the world was a bit safer for my children. Not now.

            “‘Fear of Trump’ Is Making Some Children Physically Sick, Say Health Experts: As nation braces for what life under Trump will mean, anxieties are specifically growing among those targeted by president-elect” by Jon Queally, staff writer –

      • Bessarabyn
        November 25, 2016 at 15:37

        Yeah ! Very similar to Germany . The Greens soon turn brown. NSDAP even started quite greenish : recycling, pro workers/farmers, alternatives, “equality”, “home”, “nature”, … A. Hitler was vegetarian . antismoking, and drank chamomile tea every day ( which has a contrary rebound effect furtheron ,such as temper tantrums etc.)

        • Kiza
          November 25, 2016 at 20:52

          Ideologically the German Greens are very similar to the US Democrats (extreme hypocrisy), not to US Greens. But thanks to those brown “compromises” they made, the German Greens got into power in a coalition government and lost good part of their base. Some leftists call the German Green Party the new Fascist Party, therefore your mention of Hitler, a National Socialist, is appropriate.

    • Joe Tedesky
      November 24, 2016 at 22:18

      Trump by letting Hillary off the hook, is making a classic Julius Ceasar mistake. Trump will have the Clintons outward gratitude, but Trump better have good spy’s informing him of what the Clinton’s are doing behind his back, or else Trump will feel the pain as time goes by. Hillary most certainly gives the appearance that she survives only to live for another day. Trump should let the FBI do further investigations of the Clintons, and allow his justice department to prosecute them where it seems necessary. Plus, I’m tired of the no accountability precedent that is being send every time one of these crooked elites get caught with their hand in the jar. It is time to start holding some of these people’s feet to the fire, if for no other reason but to set precedent. Going easy on the Clintons will most definitely come back to haunt Donald Trump.

      • Kiza
        November 25, 2016 at 01:00

        We are in full agreement Joe, two mature people of mature understanding of politics. I thought exactly the same – I remember the same mistake mentioned even in the Chinese history. Obama let Bush The Lesser off the hook by “looking into the future”, but this was because they were both members/servants of the same “club” and were not competitors. I still believe that Trump is not a member of the same club, that Trump really wants to reduce the head-wind for the changes he wants to do and this is why he is conciliatory to his opponents. But it is obvious that his opponents do not really care about US, they only care about their own power, positions and money (as if they have not proven this a million times over by putting US into the state it is in now).

        Jill Stein wants nuclear war! was my metaphorical statement. What she is doing is initiating internal strife, internal nuclear civil war. To use your Roman analogy, Jill Stein is Nero the Fiddler, an election-system-purist at the most critical moment for internal peace, and an election-system-purist in only the four states that could put Hillary into power (why not challenge other states?). If the win was by one state, to challenge would make sense, even as an error in counting or tallying. To overturn the election results in three/four states one would need to prove a truly massive fraud, not one mistake, or to create a new fraud (they did not need such big fraud when they believed in their own polls that Hillary was winning). In other words, if the challenge were to succeed that would mean internal strife, probably similar to Ukraine, an (election) coup fallowed by a civil war. Perhaps there could even be some bad karma from what US elite did to Ukraine.

        • Joe Tedesky
          November 25, 2016 at 02:06

          I lean heavily to believe that this noble recount move is not Jill Stein’s idea. I mean why? Who benefits? I realize there are greater numbers of dissenters who are truly sincere in their protest, but then there are the NGO agents who will know how to utilize this mass of protesters, and drive a wedge into the existing establishment. What would be good to know, and add some comfort to my inquiry of all of this recounted bs is to know who’s behind Jill. Is Jill turning Democrate? I mean what is going on with Jill Stein?

          We should probably read the CIA handbook, and see if Jill’s actions fit any coup narrative there…but my cynicism is to great, and I’m probably a million miles from home, so what else is new?

        • Kiza
          November 25, 2016 at 06:46

          Probably not Jill Stein’s idea, but her own implementation, according to Bill Samuelson below, nothing to do with the Green Party. How much is green integrity worth these days, especially when packaged into “electoral purity” for the credulous tree huggers?

          Yes, there is a theory that she has been offered a position with the Democrats and Jill jumped. She would not be the first leader of a smaller party who used it as a jumping board.

          One must ask: is there anyone not rotten in the US political system? Is there anyone who would not sell America for money and privilege? We already know where the Bernie Sanders new family house is, now we can only ask where will be the Jill Stein new house, paid for by George Soros?

      • backwardsevolution
        November 25, 2016 at 01:04

        Joe – maybe the Clinton’s don’t believe that Trump is going to go easy on them. Maybe they believe that he’s just waiting until after the Electoral College vote on December 19th and until after his inauguration on January 20th, when he’ll actually be President and able to do something. Maybe he’s trying to calm people down right now. Maybe the Clinton’s and George Soros are responsible in great part for the rioting that’s been going on. You know, stir up the hornet’s nest to put pressure on Trump NOT to go after her. With neither Obama nor Clinton coming out to calm people down, this tells me that they are going after the presidency still. Jill Stein is going to help them do it.

        • Joe Tedesky
          November 25, 2016 at 01:53

          Like a political chess game is what I picture is what you are describing….good perception on your part.

        • backwardsevolution
          November 25, 2016 at 02:10

          Joe – yes, like a political chess game. The Electoral College still has to vote on December 19th. IF they see huge demonstrations, protests, IF people can get to them, implore them to change their minds (hey, they’d say, it’s for the good of the country), then maybe we’re looking at a new ball game. Trump might just be keeping his mouth shut until then.

          Now we have the other pawn, Stein, and she’s going against her party’s wishes and doing this all on her own (with the help from some big money, no doubt). Who is backing her?

          So the protests, Stein, scrap the Electoral College because Hillary won the popular vote business (“it didn’t help us, so let’s get rid of it” thinking), Obama not doing anything to calm people down. This is like a coup, another George Soros/Victoria Nuland coup.

          This is very dangerous. Just who is running the country? And if all of the above fails, just what will they do next? Because there will be a “next”.

        • Joe Tedesky
          November 25, 2016 at 02:29

          backwardsevolution Here is a disgusting thought; if what all we the general public know through what we find out through our various news gathering modes upsets us the voting citizens so much, then just think of how furiously pissed we would all be if we knew what we don’t know?

    • Peter Loeb
      November 25, 2016 at 07:29

      —late baseball catcher, Yogi Berra

      ” A recount will just serve as a distraction from a system that needs a complete
      overhaul. If it is discovered wealthy Democrats are behind this move, Jill Stein
      risks losing a good deal of the credibility and support Green activists have fought
      so hard and long to win.” Bryan Hemming, above commenter

      A Democratic supporter here was raising questions about the Electoral
      College etc. “If Hillary had won in the Electoral College, do you think
      she would have questioned it?” I asked. He agreed, sheepishly.

      The left such as Green lost. It will have to recoup and this
      is not the way forward.

      (PS I am less concerned with Jill Steins “credibility”. More
      concerned with Palestinian Human Rights, BDS (Boycott
      Divest Sanction—of Israel) BLM (Black Lives Matter) etc.)

      While it is probably the case that Blaine should not have been
      elected President in 1896 (?), (decided by a Commission),
      our efforts should be in advocating for the individual causes.

      ON THE ELECTION OF 2016:

      The fact remains that the myths and illusions of the Democratic
      Party and in particular its so-called “liberal-progressive” voices
      have not delivered equality for decades.

      Read with care:

      Louis Uchitelle: THE DISPOSABLE AMERICAN

      —-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

    • frank
      November 25, 2016 at 18:09

      Funded by #CrookedHIllary – but she proxied Jill Stein to demand recount to avoid backlash of her usual hyprocrisy.

      Accept the results like you demanded Trump should.

  64. kooka
    November 24, 2016 at 09:18

    In Germany the “Olive”greens are the biggest warmongers and Russia (= Putin) haters. Perhaps the US Greens are made of the same stuff.

    • Bessarabyn
      November 25, 2016 at 15:29

      Most probably .

      • November 25, 2016 at 18:48

        Your EDIT function simply will not permit me to put up properly spaced text…..


    • November 25, 2016 at 18:41

      FRAN & OLLIE would no doubt agree with your observation, tho confess I have not explored the “greens” here. In general, such organizations are disproportionately full of Israelis. Jill may HAVE ACTED ALONE , AND SHE MAY BE ISRAELI, but to raise $3million in that time FOR NOT ONE SINGLE REASON EXCEPT TO STEAL THIS ELECTION FOR HILLARY and the
      Democrats, is very, very highly suspect.

      USArmy Officer [Vietnam era ] ANTI-WAR–FOR TRUMP–Lieutenant Morrisseau’s Rebellion POB 177, W. Pawlet, VT USA 05775 [email protected] 802 645 9727

    • November 25, 2016 at 18:42

      FRAN & OLLIE would no doubt agree with your observation, tho confess I have not explored the “greens” here.
      In general, such organizations are disproportionately full of Israelis. Jill may HAVE ACTED ALONE , AND SHE MAY BE ISRAELI,
      but to raise $3million in that time FOR NOT ONE SINGLE REASON EXCEPT TO STEAL THIS ELECTION FOR HILLARY and the
      Democrats, is very, very highly suspect.

      USArmy Officer [Vietnam era ] ANTI-WAR–FOR TRUMP–Lieutenant Morrisseau’s Rebellion POB 177, W. Pawlet, VT USA 05775 [email protected] 802 645 9727

    • Bart Gruzalski
      November 25, 2016 at 20:18


      This has been a response to you twice. [M. Parry, there is nothing here that should cause you to delete this comment.]

      For the third time, here’s the evidence for the substantive hypocrisy of Jill Stein (now Jill SHAME):

      In her interview with the Washington Post, Jill Stein criticized NATO for violating international law in Libya and for being part “of a foreign policy that has been based on economic and military domination.” In the same interview, Stein made plain that, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, NATO violated its stated policy not to move “one inch to the East.” Stein’s platform, like Trump’s, called for the closing of overseas military bases. This is the woman who told the New York Times’ board that the US should get involved militarily only when there is “good evidence that we are under imminent threat of actual attack.”

      This is the same Jill Stein who condemned Hillary Clinton for wanting a no-fly zone over Syria because that would likely lead to war with Russia.

      This Jill Stein has just cloaked herself with shame by abandoning her “commitments” and pivoting 180 degrees to put the presidency into the hands of the very Hillary Clinton whom she condemned as a warmonger.

      The Kremlin announced that Russian President Vladimir Putin and President-elect Donald Trump agreed to work to improve U.S.-Russian relations and establish a “partner-like” dialogue. President-elect Trump is the Peace Candidate who has promised to “make America great again [and] if we do that, perhaps this century can be the most peaceful and prosperous the world has ever known.”

      Whatever motivated Jill Stein, whatever anyone has promised or threatened or told her, nothing justifies her shameful behavior that puts millions of lives at risk.

      ADD to this that the Green Party is not supporting this bizarre action and we have the grounds for a lawsuit and certainly for kicking Jill Shame out of the Greens.

      • Akech
        November 26, 2016 at 13:42

        This is a covert attempt to declare the result of the November 8, 2016 presidential election “null and void”.
        There is no logical explanation for a recount demanded by a candidate of a party that has never been allowed to appear on the debate stage by the two major party establishments .
        It would have made plenty of sense if her current fight was directed towards dismantling the monopoly of the debates by the two the party duopoly instead of recounts!
        Recount or not, Jill Stein knows that she will not prevail even if the recount is carried in every state of the union where voters were allowed to cast their ballots in her favor!!
        This recount attempt seems very similar to what Bernie Sanders pulled when he attempted to herd his flock of sheep (his ardent young supporters) towards voting for Hillary.
        Chuck Schumer and the DNC establishment are now employing the same tactics again by making Sanders their outreach guy, that is, a person used to rally certain group of citizens to the voting booths whenever more votes are needed to facilitate policies demanded by fat cats, powerful elites and donors. The issues affecting those who are manipulated into voting are immediately ignored once election are over! The self serving nature of these corporate sponsored elites and their shameless ability to marginalize other humans is mind boggling!
        The probability that this recount is being pushed by these well connected elites could be .99!

        • lynne gillooly
          November 29, 2016 at 13:42

          I am happy about the recount. Mainly I want crosschecking exposed as well as show how easy it is to flip ballot machines. Why do we allow machines to have NO PAPER BACKUP? Why is the software in these machines proprietary to the Private owners of the machines? The whole thing stinks! These issues were supposed to e resolved after the 2000 fiasco….but the GOP congress would not fund it.Read Greg Palast’s investigation of our elections and see how millions of voters have been purged by GOP operatives. Is this really something we can ignore?

    • TS
      November 27, 2016 at 15:25

      Not at all! The U.S. Green Party has clearly opposed U.S. wars and imperialism (their last Presidential candidate was the well-known anti-imperialist Cynthia McKinney) and advocated socially progressive policies. Petra Kelly would feel right at home there (if this tells you anything.)

      “Green” has not been the same as “Green” in different places for a number of years now…

Comments are closed.