The federal judge who had initially ordered Michigan to begin a ballot recount at the request of left-wing Presidential candidate Jill Stein ordered the recount to be stopped late Wednesday.
“U.S. District Judge Mark Goldsmith agreed with Republicans who argued that the three-day recount must end a day after the state appeals court dealt a blow to the effort. The court said Stein, who finished fourth in Michigan on Nov. 8, didn’t have a chance of winning even after a recount and therefore isn’t an “aggrieved” candidate.” — FoxNews.com
U.S. District Judge Mark Goldsmith agreed with Trump lawyers who argued that the Michigan statute requires a candidate to show an aggrieved status meaning the candidate calling for the recount may have actually won the race.
Stein only received a disappointing 1.07% of the votes in Michigan, and a recount would in no way change the outcome of the election in her favor.
Judge Goldsmith stated in his ruling that the plaintiffs hadn’t shown an entitlement to a recount.
Goldsmith further noted that Stein’s attorneys had not presented any facts or demonstrated voting irregularities only offering “speculative claims” about the possibility of irregularities.
Goldsmith’s ruling reads in part, “To date, plaintiffs have not presented evidence of tampering or mistake. Instead, they present speculative claims going to the vulnerability of the voting machinery — but not actual injury,” Goldsmith wrote, adding the potential for fraud is not enough to continue to allow the recount to proceed.” — freep.com
Stein has one more course of action, but it is a long shot. She can petition the Michigan Supreme Court asking for the recount effort to be reinstated.
Most who are familiar with the court and the laws of the state seem to believe if Stein takes this route, it will be denied.
The Michigan elections board voted 3-1 early Wednesday that if Judge Goldsmith rescinded his previous order, they would end the recount.
“This was a fishing expedition from start to finish” one source noted. “Stein admitted on numerous occasions that she was unaware of voting irregularities stating that we wouldn’t know if there were unless we look for them” the source continued.
“If you look at a recount in the same way a judge issues a search warrant he is going to ask you for evidence. And you better have some evidence of wrongdoing or irregularities or you will be laughed out of his chambers” a legal expert noted.
Judge Goldsmith also noted the request by Stein and her legal team was both unusual and unprecedented explaining that a recount to test the integrity of the entire voting system “has never been endorsed by any court.” — FoxNews.com
A roadblock was erected last week in Pennsylvania when a judge ruled that a one million dollar bond was required by the petitioners in order to begin the recount effort in that state. A hearing is scheduled for Friday to try to overturn the ruling.
Ironically, the Wisconsin recount, which began last week, has found more votes for Trump increasing his margin of victory securing the ten electors who will cast their lot for the President-elect on Dec. 19 when the electoral college meets.