Now liberals claim machines were hacked.

Cardinal said:

I don't think even Haymarket claimed there was evidence of fraud. Has anybody?

Click to expand...

then why are they recounting? you were one of the people defending the recount.
if there isn't any fraud which would include hacking then the recount is nothing more than
an attempt to up end a legal fair election.

ludin said:

then why are they recounting? you were one of the people defending the recount.
if there isn't any fraud which would include hacking then the recount is nothing more than
an attempt to up end a legal fair election.

Click to expand...

If you accept that nobody's claiming to have evidence, will you stop pestering people for evidence then?

Also, where did I defend the recount, exactly?

Cardinal said:

If you accept that nobody's claiming to have evidence, will you stop pestering people for evidence then?

Also, where did I defend the recount, exactly?

Click to expand...

in every thread you have posted in. you have defended the recount
then why are they recounting if they know it is based on false allegations of cyber hacking as they are putting it?

they are making accusations people like you are defending the recount I am asking for evidence.
if you have proof that there was a cyber hack then please provide it.

Demographics, Not Hacking, Explain The Election Results | FiveThirtyEight

there you go.

ludin said:

in every thread you have posted in. you have defended the recount
then why are they recounting if they know it is based on false allegations of cyber hacking as they are putting it?

they are making accusations people like you are defending the recount I am asking for evidence.
if you have proof that there was a cyber hack then please provide it.

Demographics, Not Hacking, Explain The Election Results | FiveThirtyEight

there you go.

Click to expand...

So you accept that nobody's claiming there is evidence for hacking or fraud?

Cardinal said:

So you accept that nobody's claiming there is evidence for hacking or fraud?

Click to expand...

It is sad that you are losing every single one of these threads that you have to just make stuff up.
Ou should read why they requested a recount.

ludin said:

It is sad that you are losing every single one of these threads that you have to just make stuff up.
Ou should read why they requested a recount.

Click to expand...

Okay, so who is claiming that there is evidence of voting irregularities? Exactly: nobody.

Well it looks like the conspiracy theory was bunk after all.

Judge rejects Stein's request for hand recount in Wis.

A judge has ruled that a hand count was not required.
The computer hacks attempted to try and testify but when asked for actual evidence they all (except for 1)
Went well we don't have any.

Dane County Circuit Judge Valerie Bailey-Rihn said the effort to force the hand recount, which was backed by Democrat Hillary Clinton’s campaign, did not meet the state’s legal standard for prohibiting the use of machines in the recount, saying that the two campaigns did not show a hand recount, though more thorough, was necessary or show there was a clear and convincing evidence of fraud or other problems.

In all but one case, the experts called by Stein acknowledged that they had no evidence that any hacking had happened.

Poor stein and Clinton.

My theory is that since Hillary would appear to be a complete hypocrite by questioning the outcome due to her hysteria over Donald's refusal to state that he would unquestioningly do so, she is using Stein as her surrogate in all of this recount nonsense.

I guess we'll have to wait for WikiLeaks to find out for certain.