Home | About | Donate

Vote Recount vs the Media Consensus


Vote Recount vs the Media Consensus

Robert C. Koehler

The impatience across much of the media is palpable.


Oh groan. That’s not going to change the election results. The consensus “truth” writhing just below the surface of the mainstream, eyeball-rolling disapproval of Jill Stein’s call for and financing of a presidential vote recount in Wisconsin (and perhaps in Pennsylvania and Michigan) is that the political and media consensus has already established who the next president is. Like it or not.


Media killed the voting booth star...

(apologies to the Buggles)


Just as in those sports where the use of particular drugs can enhance performance -- where random drug testing is used to inhibit cheating -- there should be random recounts for all elections; and thus the conditions, in all cases, that would allow certainty of the detailed and verified recounts, such as paper ballets, fully auditible machines and felony laws for officials failing to pass such recounts.


In addition to the sports analogy, we should take a building code standards approach.

For example, with welds a specified percentage of welds are tested and if any of those do not test OK, a specified additional percentage are tested.

There are plenty of models that can be applied to testing elections. Unfortunately there are too many people profiting from crooked elections.


No voting machine or mechanism should be allowed that does not have a verification system attached to it that can be examined by hand. "Trust but verify" is not a liberal cry. It came from the lips of Ronald Reagan. We would be wise to make a verification system part of the election law in this country.


It bears repeating that the USA is NOT the oldest democracy on the Planet.

Once the people start divorcing themsleves from that myth they might better realize it not really a Democracy at all.


Lawrence Lessig is correct. Electors should use their own judgments in assessing this election and the obvious results. Clinton will have a 3+ million voting advantage in the final totals. Palast says there's 4-5 million spoiled ( ? ) or provisional ballots which will be tossed into the dustbin of tilted history. End this charade. " We was robbed! " is the truth in this election.


Can we do this in four years?


Article on target!!


How about an honest recount of the primaries. Bernie would be leading Hillary by way more than 200,000 votes if the votes of all states were combined.


No, he wouldn't. He came in well behind both Clinton and Trump.


And that goes all the way back to who the nominees were.


It's an oldish shout out from a fixed heavyweight world boxing match. Since the sports analogy has overcome, and undercut, much more serious matters of import I thought I'd keep the ball rolling, so to speak.


Of course in YOUR mindset Bernie came in "well behind both Clinton and Trump, but what whim do you base that upon? We can argue back and forth like little kids, but the crimes committed by the Hillary campaign, the DNC, and the Mainstream Media against the American PEOPLE and the voting process were like professional hits, leaving lots of "smudged fingerprints", so to speak, but no smoking gun for a jury to touch and sniff. What we DO have is that Bernie chalked up something like 22 clear and substantial victories, he raised huge sums from small contributions like no one else ever has, his speaking engagements were jammed with people who had waited hours, even in the rain, his facebook and internet support totally eclipsed hers, the Wikileaks emails proved massive DNC efforts to discredit him, and Hillary even hired a team of Internet LIARS (for something like a million bucks) to try to extinguish the pro-Bernie sentiment. Election expert Greg Palast (who proved the George Bush election heist of 2000) found eleven more Primaries where the Official Totals failed to match the exit polls, which is the accepted world wide best indicator that election fraud has happened. Palast also found that the older, more hack-able voting machines in poor precincts had the greatest discrepancy between the exit polls and the "official' tally, and the official tally ALWAYS swung in Hillary's favor. When Bernie took the stage at the Democratic Convention, the crowd cheered THREE MINUTES BY THE CLOCK, before he could even speak, and when the Bernie people walked out of the corrupt convention hall, leaving it less than half full, Hillary put ads on Craigslist offering to hire seat fillers in order to hide visual evidence of her lack of support.

In spite of substantial evidence otherwise, some people still believe the world is flat. Some still believe that a small group of camel-drivers dropped THREE big WTC buildings with two flying aluminum "pop cans" and a few gallons of kerosene, and some believe that Hillary won the Democratic Nomination fair and square. I find it easier to believe in the Tooth Fairy.


So, ironically, Trump´s reticence in agreeing to respect the results of the election was, despite all the outrage, justified. Interesting.


I said a real, honest recount. You are still going by the propaganda that the media gave out.
Look how many voters were not able to vote in just New York alone, How about all the independents that were not allowed to vote in the primaries that most likely would have voted in favor of Sanders?


The US is full of racism, but criticism of Obama is not racism:



What a crazy broken system that now has the venerable Mr. Kohler in agreement with the likes of Jon Rappoport and even Alex Jones, on the EXACT SAME TOPIC, fingering the exact same mainstream media front corporation. Wow.

Rappoport report from October: http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/10/17/fakery-major-media-preparing-to-steal-election-night-outcome/

Jones from August: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDe33D6geoo