‘Russian Talking Points’ Look an Awful Lot Like Well-Documented Facts

(CN) — Things aren’t looking great for the Democratic establishment, which recently admitted that it stacks its primaries against progressive candidates and is currently engaged in a desperate, hail Mary lawsuit against WikiLeaks for its factual publications about the party. So of course you know what that means. That’s right! It’s time for Democratic pundits to begin down-punching Jill Stein. […]

Senate Investigation of Jill Stein for Collusion With Russia Slammed as ‘Absurd’

(ANTIMEDIA) —  Photos of former Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein with Russian President Vladimir Putin during a December 2015 dinner have made the rounds on the internet over the past year, but now it’s a bit more serious.

The Senate Intelligence Committee is now investigating Stein for possible “collusion with the Russians.” The committee members are not only probing for ties between the former presidential candidate and the Kremlin, but they are also actively investigating an accusation that the Clinton campaign paid for research that went into the Steele dossier alleging Trump engaged in an “extensive conspiracy” with Russia during a 2013 trip to Moscow.

According to Stein, in December 2015, she and Michael Flynn were invited to attend a dinner celebrating the 10th anniversary of RT, Russia’s state-owned English-language news outlet. At the dinner, Stein and Flynn were seated at the same table as Putin. While in Moscow, Stein agreed to take part in a panel of foreign policy experts at a forum organized by the news network.

Dennis Trainor Jr., a former Stein campaign employee, believes the committee is interested in “vilifying anyone who’s ever appeared on or talked with anyone on the RT network.”

The committee’s chairman, North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr, was asked Monday what the committee could be looking for from the Stein campaign. He responded, “collusion with the Russians.”

Jill and our campaign will not be intimidated by this BS. https://t.co/jfYFaS6Opy

— Ajamu Baraka (@ajamubaraka) December 18, 2017

Earlier this year, investigative journalist Abby Martin was mentioned in a report by the Director of National Intelligence. A paragraph criticizing RT called Martin’s show, which aired on RT two years prior, a “propaganda vector marking the beginning of the Kremlin attempt to subvert American democracy.”

Recently, press credentials of RT America journalists on Capitol Hill were revoked following the forced registration of RT as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

Complying with Senate Committee request, Jill Stein urges safeguarding elections from interference – while cautioning against the targeting of political opposition pic.twitter.com/YuHsBWJA0Z

— Dr. Jill Stein (@DrJillStein) December 19, 2017

On Monday evening, a statement appeared on Stein’s website expressing her intent to comply with the investigation but cautioning against sensationalized media reports that undermine credible journalism.

Her supporters voiced their opinion on Twitter:

It’s really incredible that @DrJillStein has spoken publicly, in-depth about every possible aspect of her Russia trip and the RT dinner w Putin and Flynn and a lot of media outlets still act like it’s a huge mystery and Stein hasn’t been forthcoming. She has been.

— jeremy scahill (@jeremyscahill) December 19, 2017

I met with Jill Stein in 2016. She never spoke in Russian, not even once

Other things she didn’t do:
Make me want to vote Trump
Force HRC not to go to Wisc/Mich
Collude w/DNC & Superdelegates pic.twitter.com/CCkYWYcgJE

— MiamiGator (@GeoffMiami) December 18, 2017

Absurd targeting of Jill Stein once again shows that a central aim of the "Russia investigation" has always been to constrict the range of what is seen as acceptable political opinion: classic dissent-stifling tactic

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) December 19, 2017

Since sitting at the same table with Putin makes Jill Stein a Russian agent, gues who else is a Russian agent: pic.twitter.com/F3ei7abLIW

— Amir (@AmirAminiMD) December 19, 2017

Creative Commons / Anti-Media / Report a typo

 

Paul Craig Roberts: De Facto Travel Restrictions Now Exist For Americans

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

Dear Friends, I apologize for dumping this on you at Christmas, a time for peace and joy. But these are the facts. We can ignore them only at our peril.

Green Party presidential Candidate Jill Stein is being investigated by the Senate Intelligence (sic) Committee for “Russian connections.”

What has brought Russiagate to Jill Stein? The answer is that she attended the 10th Anniversary RT dinner in Moscow as did the notorious “Russian collaborator” US General Michael Flynn. RT is a news organization, a far better one than exists in the West, but if you were one of the many accomplished people who attended the anniversary dinner, you are regarded by Republican Senator Richard Burr from North Carolina as a possible Kremlin agent. 

What is going on here? Stein sums it up: “we must guard against the potential for these investigations to be used to intimidate and silence principled opposition to the political establishment.”

Here I sit considering two interesting invitations.

One is to speak at the main Plenary Session of the Moscow Economic Forum in April.

 

The other is to speak at the Summit for Global Challenges in the former Soviet Republic of Kazakhstan in May.

The very minute I accept, the NSA will notify its mouthpieces, the New York Times, PropOrNot’s promoter the Washington Post, Senator Burr, and Special Russiagate Prosecutor Robert Mueller. Would I be renditioned to Israel or Eqypt or Saudi Arabia and tortured until I confessed that I was a member of the Trump-Flynn-Jill Stein Kremlin spy network?

As the United States is no longer a free country governed by a Constitution that protects civil liberty, that possibility cannot be discounted. What is for sure is that if I accept these invitations, the US Establishment will discredit my voice when I write about US/Russia relations. Indeed, that was the intention of the PropOrNot Washington Post story that attacked 200 truth-tellers as “Russian agents/dupes.” Many of those so attacked have experienced slower growth in their readership. After all, Americans and Europeans are insouciant. They are actually sufficiently stupid to believe what governments and print and TV media tell them.

I, too, was invited to RT’s 10th Anniversary celebration in Moscow. Imagining the celebration would be grand balls in palaces and myself, decked out in white tie with my French Legion of Honor dancing with those beautiful RT women, I almost accepted. But I learned in time that the event was conferences and speeches and decided to forego a Moscow winter.

Otherwise I would be in the dock with Trump, Flynn, and Jill Stein and whomever the Washington Gestapo settles on next.

Russiagate is an orchestrated hoax. That has now become so aparent that even insouciant Americans are catching on, even those low IQ ones who sit in front of TV news. I often disparage Congress, but here is a member who is admirable, Republican Representative Jim Jordan from Ohio.

Watch the short video and delight in the power and force with which Rep. Jordan goes after the piece of crap US deputy attorney general the Twitter President has in office. When the President of the United States has to rely on a congressman to call out the Justice Department and the FBI for its criminal actions and for its treason to overthrow both democracy and the elected government of the United States, you know we have elected a president who is too scared to defend himself. Roger Stone is correct, if Trump were a real man, Mueller, Comey, Hillary, Obama, and the rest of the criminal scum would be arrested, prosecuted and sentenced for their vast crimes, crimes that exceed those of anyone in prison today.

But Trump is nothing but talk. No action.

How much longer can I give interviews to Russian and Iranian media before the Washington Gestapo gives me a midnight knock on my door.

Whatever America is, it is not a free country.

If Trump wants to make America great again, he must shatter the CIA, FBI, NSA, and media into a thousand pieces. The concentrated power that President Eisenhower warned Americans about in 1961 is far too great for liberty to survive.

Instead, the weakest president in American history actually read the speech handed to him by the ruling neocon military/security complex and declared Russia and China inimical to Washington’s interests.

Americans are too insouciant to understand it, but this was a declaration of war against two countries, which when combined are more than a match for Washington.

Neither Russia nor China, much less an alliance between them, will accept Washington’s hegemony.

If the hubris-crazed fools in Washington persist, we are all going to die.

Susan Sarandon: Hillary Clinton Would"ve Been "More Dangerous" Than Trump

In an interview with the Guardian published Sunday night, actress Susan Sarandon – a noted anti-war and climate progressive – described her former friend Hillary Clinton as “very dangerous” in response to an interviewer’s question about why she supported Green Party candidate Jill Stein.

Furthermore, Sarandon, who has been the subject of vicious and persistent attacks by leftists for supporting a third-party candidate that many blame, wrongly, for throwing the election to Trump. She said she had to change her phone number because – get this – angry Clinton supporters left a torrent of death and rape threats on her voicemail.

Sarandon, who fist became involved in activism as a young woman when she became an early and vocal proponent of the anti-War movement in the late 1960s and early 1970s, even suggested that Clinton might’ve been “more dangerous” than Trump.

Did she really say that Hillary was more dangerous than Trump?

 

“Not exactly, but I don’t mind that quote,” she says. “I did think she was very, very dangerous. We would still be fracking, we would be at war [if she was president]. It wouldn’t be much smoother. Look what happened under Obama that we didn’t notice."

Though she supported Clinton’s first bid for the senate in 2001, Sarandon said her support for Clinton evaporated when the then-senator voted in favor of the war in Iraq.

It is often overlooked that in 2001, Sarandon supported Hillary Clinton’s run for the Senate. There are photos of them posing chummily together, grinning. Then Clinton voted for the war in Iraq and it all went downhill. During the last election, Sarandon supported Bernie Sanders, then wouldn’t support Clinton after she won the nomination, and now all the moderates hate her, to the extent, she says, that she had to change her phone number because people she identifies as Hillary trolls sent her threatening messages. “I got from Hillary people ‘I hope your crotch is grabbed’, ‘I hope you’re raped’. Misogynistic attacks. Recently, I said ‘I stand with Dreamers’ [children brought illegally to the US, whose path to legal citizenship – an Obama-era provision – Trump has threatened to revoke] and that started another wave."

 

Wait, from the right?

 

“No, from the left! ‘How dare you! You who are responsible for this!’"

In a jab at her critics on the left, Sarandon said she isn’t worried about the threats or the criticism from people who bizarrely blame her for throwing the election to Trump. Instead, she’s worried that the left’s refusal to reckon with the true nature of the problem – that the DNC rigged an election to favor a flawed, unpopular candidate - will harm progressive causes in the long run.

“Well, that’s why we’re going to lose again if we depend on the DNC [the Democratic National Committee]. Because the amount of denial ... I mean it’s very flattering to think that I, on my own, cost the election. That my little voice was the deciding factor."

 

Is it upsetting to be attacked?

 

“It’s upsetting to me more from the point of view of thinking they haven’t learned. I don’t need to be vindicated."

 

But it’s upsetting that they’re still feeding the same misinformation to people. When Obama got the nomination, 25% of [Hillary’s] people didn’t vote for him. Only 12% of Bernie’s people didn’t vote for her."

 

But she didn’t advocate voting for Hillary! Come on.

 

“Hmm?"

 

Didn’t she advocate voting for Jill Stein?

 

“I didn’t advocate people voting for anything. I said get your information, I’m going to vote for change, because I was hoping that Stein was going to get whatever percentage she needed – but I knew she wasn’t going to make the difference in the election.”

Luckily, Sarandon said her friends have stood by her, at least.

Has she lost friends over all this? “No. My friends have a right to their opinions. It’s disappointing but that’s their business. It’s like in the lead-up to Vietnam, and then later they say: ‘You were right.’ Or strangely, some of my gay friends were like: ‘Oh, I just feel bad for [Clinton]. And I said: ‘She’s not authentic. She’s been terrible to gay people for the longest time. She’s an opportunist.’ And then I’m like: ‘OK, let’s not talk about it any more.’"

 

Still, I think while there was vast political error on both sides, the inability of Sarandon and her ilk to embrace the lesser of two evils permitted the greater of the two evils to rise. And yet I like Sarandon. It takes real courage to go against the mob. Her inconsistencies are a little wild, but in the age of social-media enforced conformity, I have never met anyone so uninterested in toeing the line.

When it comes to deportations, Sarandon said a hypothetical Clinton administration probably have continued with Obama’s strategy of “sneakily” deporting immigrants.

Given his record on immigration and extrajudicial drone-enabled murder, Sarandon said she was shocked that he won the Nobel Peace Prize.

It seems absurd to argue that healthcare, childcare, taxation for the non-rich wouldn’t be better now under President Clinton, and that’s before we get to the threat of deportation hanging over millions of immigrants. “She would’ve done it the way Obama did it,” says Sarandon, “which was sneakily. He deported more people than have been deported now. How he got the Nobel peace prize I don’t know. I think it was very important to have a black family in the White House and I think some of the stuff he did was good. He tried really hard about healthcare. But he didn’t go all the way because of big pharma."

This isn’t the first time Sarandon has suggested that Clinton could be a greater national security risk than Trump. She made similar comments in June 2016, just as Clinton was clinching the nomination. At that time, Trump’s “America First” foreign policy pledge – which was based on a philosophy of noninterventionism – was arguably more dovish than his rival.

Of course, Trump has pivoted away from that stance since taking office, authorizing more troop deployments in Afghanistan and threatening North Korea with nuclear annihilation, chagrining many of his early supporters.   
 

After Move To Canada, Wayback Machine Launches Trump Video Library, Complete With "Fact Checks"

Back in November we noted that the Internet Archive (Wayback Machine) had announced plans to move their servers to Canada out of fear of censorship under the new Trump administration, saying "on November 9th in America, we woke up to a new administration promising radical change."  The decision struck us as somewhat odd at the time given the website"s seemingly innocuous content. 

That said, the decision is becoming much more clear with today"s announcement that the company will launch a "Trump Archive" with 520 hours of Trump-specific video including 700 televised speech and intereviews from the 2015/2016 campaign cycle.  And wouldn"t you know it, many of the videos in the archive will come with convenient "fact checks."  Per The Hill:

The Trump Archive houses more than 520 hours of video of the president-elect, including more than 700 televised speeches, interviews and debates, according to an announcement on the Internet Archive’s website.

More than 500 of the Trump videos link to fact checks evaluating the veracity of the televised statement.

In the announcement, Nancy Watzman, the managing editor of the Internet Archive’s television section, said that the archive is inviting journalists and researchers to help suggest additions to the online Trump library.

Yes, and we"re sure the "fact checks" will be completely "fact based."

Perhaps the Internet Archive could have their fact checkers provide a quick assessment of the following video...we"re sure it"s completely accurate but just would like a second opinion.

* * *

For those who missed it, here is what we previously wrote about Wayback"s move to Canada.

Before November 8th a whole host of celebrities vowed to leave the United States if Trump won the presidency (see "These Are The Celebrities Who Vowed To Leave America If Trump Wins").  As far as we know, George Lopez is the only one to subsequently confirm that he will actually be leaving the country despite numerous offers of free private planes and chefs to Lena Dunham to follow through on her pledge...unfortunately she still hasn"t taken the bait.

That said, it looks as though Trump"s victory has claimed one other defector: The Wayback Machine.  The webpage archiving site has announced that after waking up on November 9th "to a new administration promising radical change" they have decided to move their operations to Canada.

So this year, we have set a new goal: to create a copy of Internet Archive’s digital collections in another country. We are building the Internet Archive of Canada because, to quote our friends at LOCKSS, “lots of copies keep stuff safe.” This project will cost millions. So this is the one time of the year I will ask you: please make a tax-deductible donation to help make sure the Internet Archive lasts forever.

On November 9th in America, we woke up to a new administration promising radical change. It was a firm reminder that institutions like ours, built for the long-term, need to design for change.

For us, it means keeping our cultural materials safe, private and perpetually accessible. It means preparing for a Web that may face greater restrictions.

It means serving patrons in a world in which government surveillance is not going away; indeed it looks like it will increase.

Of course, the announcement also came with a plea for donations:

You may not know this, but your support for the Internet Archive makes more than 3 million e-books available for free to millions of Open Library patrons around the world.

Your support has fueled the work of journalists who used our Political TV Ad Archive in their fact-checking of candidates’ claims.

It keeps the Wayback Machine going, saving 300 million Web pages each week, so no one will ever be able to change the past just because there is no digital record of it. The Web needs a memory, the ability to look back.

If you find our work has been useful to you, please take a minute to donate whatever you can afford today. Help ensure the Internet Archive lasts forever.  I promise you—It will be money well spent.

But don"t worry, we"re sure this isn"t just another Jill Steinesque fundraising scam to take advantage of disaffected Hillary supporters who will give money to almost anyone who opposes Trump....so go ahead and donate away young snowflakes.

Jill Stein for Hillary

(image: Bill Pugliano/Getty, Drew Angerer/Getty)

Shameful! What’s going on? Why did her campaign announce its “intent to file for a recount of votes in the battleground states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, leading a multi-partisan effort to check the accuracy of the machine-counted vote tallies in these states in order to ensure the integrity of our election?”

Did she forget Hillary criticizing Trump’s possible refusal to accept electoral results when asked, calling it “a direct threat to our democracy?”

Does she support what war goddess, racketeer, perjurer Hillary stands for? Does she oppose Trump wanting normalized relations with Russia – crucial to prevent the threat of possible nuclear war with Hillary empowered as US military commander-in-chief.

Many times in articles I called Hillary the most ruthlessly dangerous presidential aspirant in US history. Does Stein support her? Want the election reversed in her favor? Why else would she want recounts in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin? Outrageous!

Interviewed by Sputnik News, she said she raised over $3.7 million dollars so far, aiming for up to $7 million to cover all costs, and complete the task by filing deadlines – Nov. 25 in Wisconsin, Nov. 28 in Pennsylvania, and Nov. 30 in Michigan.

A pre-Thanksgiving Day article asked if Hillary intended to challenge the electoral results. In my judgment, Trump won because deep state power brokers jettisoned her as damaged good, too scandal-ridden to serve effectively, choosing Trump instead.

Neither snow nor rain nor gloom of night nor Stein’s misguided effort will change the electoral results – just stir the pot disruptively for some days, accomplishing nothing but shaming herself.

Claiming “we deserve some confidence in the outcome of this election” misses the crucial point. Hillary as president risks possible cataclysmic nuclear war with Russia.

Trump wants normalized ties, both countries cooperating in combating terrorism. That’s the core issue aside from all others – including the nonexistent integrity of America’s electoral system.

Failure to understand it shows poor judgment on Stein’s part at the least – recklessness at worst. And why did Sputnik News publicize her effort? Surely it knows Putin prefers Trump over Hillary. So do I.

Will recounts be held in the three states in question? Doubtful but we’ll see. Either way won’t matter. On January 20, Trump’s inauguration will proceed as scheduled.

Jill Stein’s Post-Election Fundraising May Not Go for Recounts

(image: Justin Sullivan/Getty)

She’s raised millions of dollars from naive donors, most of it likely dirty money from anti-Trump dark forces, her goal $7 million for recounts in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Her scheme is a ruse, a cruel hoax to undermine Trump’s election, steal it for Hillary, wanting her as America’s 45th president, not him – underhanded tactics OK, under the phony guise of assuring “election integrity.”

Individuals duped to donating should demand their money back. Dark forces have plenty to spread around for toxic purposes. A scheme to install Hillary as president instead of Trump is despicable enough. Here’s another reason.

According to lawnewz.com, familiar with “the fine print” of Stein’s fundraising, a clause states:

“We cannot guarantee a recount will happen in any of these states we are targeting. We can only pledge we will demand recounts in those states.”

“If we raise more than what’s needed, the surplus will also go toward election integrity efforts and to promote voting system reform.”

Without explicit elaboration, it’s unknown what she means. Will she hold onto some or all funds raised, keep them for future campaigning, or use them for purposes other than her stated intentions?

Betraying supporters shows she can’t be trusted. Shun and denounce her instead as a duplicitous fraud, unfit for any public office.

Chances for overturning Trump’s triumph for Hillary are virtually nil. Recounts remain to be seen. The Wisconsin Elections Commission said it’s “preparing to move forward with” one, calling a federal December 13 deadline a challenge to finish on time. No word yet from Pennsylvania and Michigan.

In her petition for a Wisconsin recount, Stein disgracefully joined the chorus of Russia bashers, citing DHS and media scoundrels, exposed liars, wrongfully claiming “well-documented and conclusive evidence of foreign interference…call(ing) into question the results” – her words.

She may be devious and self-serving, but she’s not stupid. She’ll have millions of dollars at her disposal, raised virtually overnight, far more than donor amounts during months of presidential campaigning.

What will she do with what’s not spent? Lots of money may remain in her possession. Her explanation doesn’t wash. She’s not legally bound to use funds raised for her stated purpose, nor return amounts unspent.

Is dirty money from dark forces rewarding her for supporting Hillary? Is the DNC involved in the scheme covertly?

It reeks of deception and fraud! Spread the word! Don’t let her get away with it! Fight back! Denounce her! Exposure her as a dirty self-serving politician like all the rest!

George Soros Backing Stein’s Recount Scam

(image: Reuters)

International con man Soros-connected attorney Marc Alias represents Hillary and the DNC. Earlier The NYT reported “Soros…agree(ing) to put as much as $5 million into (lawsuits) which Democrats hope will erode restrictions on voter access…”

Alias is leading the litigation. Soros said he’s “proud” to be part of it, according to The Times. Last summer, the Washington Post profiled Alias, calling him “a Democratic superlawyer with multimillion-dollar backing,” saying:

“With a multimillion-dollar commitment from liberal mega-donor George Soros, Elias is challenging laws that, he argues, diminish the impact of important Democratic Party constituencies of African Americans, Latinos and young people.”

“While Elias will not discuss the funding for his project, Soros’s spokesman Michael Vachon said Elias approached them with a set of proposals for challenging state restrictions that would be helpful ‘up and down the ballot.’ “

“That was appealing to Soros, who began his political giving with voter mobilization efforts, Vachon said. And they agreed with Elias that there was work to be done beyond what the civil rights groups, to which Soros also contributes, were doing.”

“Soros has given $5 million to the trust that funds the litigation, Vachon said, and Elias said he has picked his shots with an eye toward ‘protecting the Obama coalition’ of African Americans, Latinos and young people.”

A previous article discussed a group led by voting rights attorney John Bonifax and University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society director J. Alex Halderman, calling for recounts in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, states Trump won, alleging “manipulat(ion) or hack(ing)” despite no evidence proving it.

Bonifax is founder and general counsel for the National Voting Rights Institute (NVRI), web site documents showing “generous foundation and institutional support,” including from Soros’ Open Society Institute.

Is Stein wittingly or unwittingly in bed with international con man Soros? Either way shows her despicably betraying supporters.

Note: On November 27, former congresswoman, 2008 valued ally and friend Cynthia McKinney tweeted:

“I never thought I’d see the day: Green Party standard bearer standing shoulder to shoulder with a war criminal…”

Stein’s Recount Scam Imploding

(image: Gage Skidmore, Wikimedia Commons)

Stein’s largely Soros funded ill-conceived scheme to undermine Trump’s triumph for Hillary is heading toward failure as expected.

Days earlier, a Wisconsin judge ruled against her hand recount request. She alleged state voting machines may have been hacked, despite no evidence suggesting it.

Her lawsuit to force a hand recount fell flat. Wisconsin Elections Commission administrator Mike Haas said state voting machines are federally certified and field tested for accuracy.

On December 1, Pennsylvania Judge Bernard A. Moore dismissed recount petitions of voters in 78 precincts because no evidence suggests they’re warranted.

According to the Montgomery County Times Herald, elections board solicitor Nicole Forzato said “Montgomery County takes great, great pride in being concerned about its infrastructure for IT generally, and they have gone through a vigorous process to make sure our technology general, including voter services technology and the voting machines are safe and secure to use.”

Forzato stressed no evidence suggests voting machines were hacked or otherwise tampered with – nor were Stein’s recount petitions correctly filed along with proper fees paid.

While admitting no evidence of fraud, Stein hasn’t so far ended her recount scam. It’s being judicially ended for her.

Oh By the Way… Trump Won Wisconsin AGAIN in Recount: “Net 162 Votes” More

This article was written by Tyler Durden and originally published at Zero Hedge.

Editor’s Comment: So, that plan didn’t work. But are they done trying to stop the Trump presidency? Of course not. There is currently an effort underway to indoctrinate electors from the electoral college an intelligence briefing claiming that Russia interfered with the elections in order to install Trump… thereafter, they are hoping to stop the electoral college rubber stamp and have Congress select someone else altogether.

On the off chance that any of this happens, the country would rightfully revolt and things would devolve into chaos. The system is really playing with fire in order to scare the population straight, and sooth them back into compliance and easy management. They know the herd is spooked, and the word is going around. Can this chaos be contained? Or can they benefit from circulating it into the body politic?

Trump’s Wisconsin Victory Confirmed – Gained Net 162 Votes In Statewide Recount

by Tyler Durden

It’s official… again! Donald Trump remains the winner of Wisconsin following the statewide recount demanded by Jill Stein and paid for by sad snowflakes. After counting over 3 million ballots (at a cost of $3.5 million), Trump gained a net 162 votes…

As AP reports,

Republican Donald Trump’s victory in Wisconsin has been reaffirmed following a presidential recount that showed him defeating Democrat Hillary Clinton by more than 22,000 votes.

Trump picked up a net 162 votes as a result of the recount that the Wisconsin Elections Commission certified Monday. Green Party candidate Jill Stein requested and paid for the recount that began Dec. 1.

But after recounting nearly 3 million ballots, little changed. The final results changed by fewer than 1,800 votes.

Stein has also tried to get statewide recounts in Michigan and Pennsylvania, but courts have stopped them. The federal deadline to certify the vote is Tuesday.

Wisconsin’s recount uncovered no widespread problems or hacking as Stein had suggested, without evidence, that there might be.

As The Wisconsin State Journal reports, WEC chairman Mark Thomsen said in a statement…

“Completing this recount was a challenge, but the real winners are the voters.”

“Based on the recount, they can have confidence that Wisconsin’s election results accurately reflect the will of the people, regardless of whether they are counted by hand or by machine.”

The commission originally advised county clerks to complete their recount process by 8 p.m. Monday so it could certify the results on Tuesday, the last day federal law guarantees a state’s electoral votes will reflect the popular vote when the Electoral College convenes on Dec. 19.

On Monday the Board of Canvassers in the final four counties — Dane, Milwaukee, Outagamie and Rock — certified their results.

So that was a total and utter waste of $3.5 million of Democrats’ money.

This article was written by Tyler Durden and originally published at Zero Hedge.

Click here to subscribe: Join over one million monthly readers and receive breaking news, strategies, ideas and commentary.

Please Spread The Word And Share This Post

Poll: Donald Trump Wins the Ron Paul Vote

In a recent poll conducted among visitors, subscribers and readers of the popular RonPaul.com fan site, Donald Trump achieved a decisive victory with 56% of the vote.

Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson came in a respectable second with 20%.

7% of voters declared that they will write in Ron Paul even though he is not running.

Hillary Clinton received 4% of the vote, while Green Party nominee Jill Stein was the candidate of choice for 3%.

5% of participants declared that they won’t vote at all in the election, either because they don’t want to or because they are not eligible.

A total of 3,553 voters participated from October 22 to 27.

Who are you voting for in the 2016 Presidential Election?

• Donald Trump (56%, 1,988 Votes)
  
  


• Gary Johnson (20%, 711 Votes)
  
  


• Write-in Ron Paul (7%, 238 Votes)
  
  


• Hillary Clinton (4%, 139 Votes)
  
  


• I won"t vote at all (but I"d be eligible). (4%, 134 Votes)
  
  


• Jill Stein (3%, 117 Votes)
  
  


• Darrell Castle (2%, 59 Votes)
  
  


• Write-in Bernie Sanders (2%, 59 Votes)
  
  


• I"m not eligible to vote. (1%, 41 Votes)
  
  


• Evan McMullin (1%, 40 Votes)
  
  


• Somebody else (explain below) (1%, 27 Votes)
  
  


• Rocky De La Fuente (0%, 0 Votes)
  
  

Total Voters: 3,553

 Loading ...

While Ron Paul has not endorsed any of the candidates, he did criticize Donald Trump for his opposition to free trade and small government, while praising Jill Stein on foreign policy and making fun of Gary Johnson’s “Aleppo” moment.

Many Ron Paul supporters remain optimistic that Ron Paul will issue an official endorsement before the election is over.

(If you’ve found a spelling or transcription error, please notify us anonymously by selecting the misspelled text and then pressing Ctrl+Enter. Thank you!)