“As a result, we believe our elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective.”
Jill Stein’s credibility seems to be sinking fast as both the Obama administration and the Clinton campaign have released statements this morning indicating they’ve failed to uncover a single shred of election hacking evidence. The Obama administration confirmed their confidence in the election results via comments made to the New York Times saying that the election was “free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective” and that votes “accurately reflect the will of the American people.”
The Obama administration said on Friday that despite Russian attempts to undermine the presidential election, it has concluded that the results “accurately reflect the will of the American people.”The statement came as liberal opponents of Donald J. Trump, some citing fears of vote hacking, are seeking recounts in three states — Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania — where his margin of victory was extremely thin.In its statement, the administration said, “The Kremlin probably expected that publicity surrounding the disclosures that followed the Russian government-directed compromises of emails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations, would raise questions about the integrity of the election process that could have undermined the legitimacy of the president-elect.”That was a reference to the breach of the Democratic National Committee’s email system, and the leak of emails from figures like John D. Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman.“Nevertheless, we stand behind our election results, which accurately reflect the will of the American people,” it added.The recount efforts have generated pushback by experts who said it would be enormously difficult to hack voting machines on a large scale. The administration, in its statement, confirmed reports from the Department of Homeland Security and intelligence officials that they did not see “any increased level of malicious cyberactivity aimed at disrupting our electoral process on Election Day.”The administration said it remained “confident in the overall integrity of electoral infrastructure, a confidence that was borne out.” It added: “As a result, we believe our elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective.”
The statement from the White House was followed by a statement from Hillary’s general counsel, Marc Elias, who confirmed that they too “had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology.”
Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides. If Jill Stein follows through as she has promised and pursues recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan, we will take the same approach in those states as well. We do so fully aware that the number of votes separating Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the closest of these states—Michigan—well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount.
Of course, while Stein reiterated numerous allegations of foreign
hacking that were well circulated, yet never officially linked to a specific source, before the election, her petition didn’t offer a single shred of actual, tangible evidence that the election results in Wisconsin were in anyway tampered with.
hacking that were well circulated, yet never officially linked to a specific source, before the election, her petition didn’t offer a single shred of actual, tangible evidence that the election results in Wisconsin were in anyway tampered with.
In August 2016, it was widely reported that foreign operators breached voter registration databases in at least two states and stole hundreds of thousands of voter records.Around that time, hacker infiltrated the e-mail systems of the Democratic National Committee and a campaign official for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. These e-mails were then published online.On October 7, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security issued a joint statement regarding these breaches. The statement reads, in pertinent part, as follows: “The U.S. Intelligence Community (USCI) is confident” that there have been “recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations.” It also states that “[t]here thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process” and that “similar tactics and techniques [have been used] across Europe and Eurasia…to influence public opinion there.” In the statement, DHS urges state election officials “to be vigilant and seek cybersecurity assistance” from that agency in preparation for the presidential election.In Wisconsin, there is evidence of voting irregularities in the 2016 presidential election that indicate potential tampering with electronic voting systems. Specifically, there was a significant increase in the number of absentee voters as compared to the last general election. This significant increase could be attributed to a breach of the state’s electronic voter database.The well-documented and conclusive evidence of foreign interference in the presidential race before the election, along with the irregularities observed in Wisconsin, call into question the results and indicate the possibility that a widespread breach occurred.
Even her so-called “computer science expert” offered up nothing more than baseless theories on “plausible” explanations of how the Wisconsin results may have been hacked. Sure, because it’s just so impossible to believe that a flawed candidate with multiple ongoing FBI criminal investigations may have simply lost the election.
So, the question becomes how will Jill Stein respond now that the establishment seems to be turning on her and what exactly will happen to the $5.8mm she raised if recount efforts are suspended? Somehow we suspect the disaffected Hillary donors won’t simply get their money back.
* * *
As an update, after coming under attack from almost everyone today for her unfounded recount crusade, Jill Stein has lashed out against her critics with a tweet storm of her own. Among other things, Stein vowed to file recount petitions in any state where the applicable deadlines had not passed and lashed out at the other parties for not participating amid “so many questionable results.” Might we respectfully suggest, Ms. Stein, that more people may take an interest in your efforts if you could offer up a single shred of evidence to support your wild accusations.
Has anyone wondered why no other campaign has requested a recount with so many questionable results? #Recount2016
I will do a recount in any state where the deadline has not passed. Help my staff find state deadlines: ceimn.org#Recount2016
Apparently, suggestions that Stein is merely serving as a pawn of the Clinton campaign also struck a nerve.
Why would Hillary Clinton—who conceded the election to Donald Trump—want #Recount2016? You cannot be on-again, off-again about democracy.
Why would Hillary Clinton—who holds "public" and "private" positions—want to engage in something as transparent as #Recount2016?
Finally, perhaps the following tweet sums up the whole ludicrous situation the best:
