Jill Stein's Presidential recount scheme has been dismissed by some as "nothing more than an expensive political stunt" and a "gimmick to promote Stein and the Green Party."

But leftists are experts at deploying deception and chicanery to achieve their ends by whatever means necessary.  And the serial offender Democrats by any name are up to no good on this one.

Consider the plot developed so far:

• A "group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers" claims to have "found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked."
• Said group claims that "in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots."
• Said group "has not found proof of hacking or manipulation," but claims their "statistical analysis" indicates that "Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000."
• Said group holds a "conference call with Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and campaign general counsel Marc Elias to make their case."
• Recounting and overturning the results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania would, coincidentally, flip the presidential election to Hillary Clinton.
• The Clinton campaign and the Obama White House are at first said to be reluctant to pursue the issue.

And then the plot thickens:

• The Wisconsin recount request is filed just before the Friday afternoon deadline, with the Stein operation noting that their 1.04% candidate is "standing up for an election system that we can trust," adding that their Green Party also advocates "an end to voter ID laws and voter suppression." 
• Wisconsin agrees to undertake the recount, which they have until December 13 to complete, according to a "federal 'safe harbor' law" that "requires presidential recounts to be completed within 35 days of the election," as reported by USA Today.
• The Wisconsin recount operation will involve 72 county clerks and 1,854 municipal clerks.
• Michigan spent two weeks after the election counting ballots, with 83 county clerks posting certified results this week from 1,521 cities and townships.
• Michigan uses paper ballots, hence the justification for a recount: "a huge difference between pre-election polling and the actual result."  Hmm.
• The Los Angeles Times, concerned at the time about Donald Trump not accepting election results, posted a column on October 20 regarding the complications of a Pennsylvania recount:

But in the event of a disputed election, this battleground state – one of the few that relies almost entirely on computerized voting, with no paper backup – could end up creating a far bigger mess.

… Computer experts says the old electronic voting machines have a hidden flaw that worries them in the event of a very close election. The machines do not produce a paper ballot or receipt, leaving nothing to be recounted if the election outcome were in doubt.

The author of a report on the subject adds that "[t]he nightmare scenario would be if Pennsylvania decides the election and it is very close. You would have no paper records to do a recount."

• The Pennsylvania filing deadline is Monday, and Michigan's deadline is Wednesday.
• The Stein recount web page said over $5.9 million had been raised as of late Saturday, with up to $7 million needed to cover filing fees, legal fees, and observer costs for the three recounts.  Ms. Stein raised only $3.5 million for her entire presidential campaign.  Aren't we popular all of a sudden?
• The Stein web page also states that "Our effort to recount votes in those states is not intended to help Hillary Clinton."  Mm-hmm.
• A Fox Business report discusses that "speculation that Stein's push for a recount is actually part of a plot by the Clintons to contest the election results without having their names associated with it[.]"
• The Clinton campaign said on Saturday that it "will participate in the Wisconsin recount," saying it "ha[s] largely found no evidence to conclude that the election was sabotaged" but adding "that the campaign is committed to helping ensure a fair recount process."
• The Clinton campaign says further that it will participate in the Pennsylvania and Michigan recounts if they come to pass, although "the margins in the three Midwestern states are larger than any that has been reversed by a recount."

Zerohedge has posted an analysis from ibankcoin, a financial news and commentary site, of the Stein recount fundraising rate over the Wednesday through Saturday period, showing an interesting pattern:

In summary, Jill Stein raised an enormous amount of money in the opening hours of her campaign to recount the votes in the all important swing states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Although she claims her fund raising efforts were entirely grass roots, the facts suggest otherwise. By what I'm seeing here, big donors stepped in early to put her over the top – then the grass roots plebs stepped into the toss nickels at her – with donations shrinking from $4,800 per minute to just over 40 bucks now. Interestingly, the rate by which she's raised funds have an inverse correlation to the amount of press she's been receiving.

In other words, none of this makes any sense. Where did all of the early money come from?

Even Slate seems to be annoyed at the tactics Ms. Stein has employed, complaining about the increasing fundraising targets and the lack of solid evidence and lamenting that "Stein doesn't actually want to help Clinton":

After all, during the campaign, Stein made clear she didn't prefer Clinton over Trump and has now said that the way Clinton has stayed out of the recount fray only shows the Democratic Party is corrupt.

Yes, even Democrats stumble upon the truth occasionally.

As the Democrats flail away at their lost electoral cause, therightscoop  notes the irony:

This is one of the most delicious stories this Thanksgiving – Jill Stein has been blamed by liberals for screwing over Hillary in the election, and now they're accusing her of scamming money for a recount!!!

Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway cut to the chase on Saturday:

What a pack of sore losers.  After asking Mr. Trump and his team a million times on the trail, 'Will HE accept the election results?' it turns out Team Hillary and their new BFF Jill Stein can't accept reality.

And President-Elect Trump:

This recount is just a way for Jill Stein, who received less than one percent of the vote overall and wasn't even on the ballot in many states, to fill her coffers with money, most of which she will never even spend on this ridiculous recount.

While it appears to be highly unlikely that the Stein recount operation would be able to overturn margins of 68,000 votes in Pennsylvania, 27,000 votes in Wisconsin, and 11,000 votes in Michigan, the process of recounting 6.8 million votes in Pennsylvania, 2.9 million votes in Wisconsin, and 4.8 million votes in Michigan will be complex and difficult at best, creating "numerous challenges and significant frustration."

If the Stein recount comes to fruition in all three states, Democratic media that hunger for a story to cast a pall over the Trump transition will look to fuel a vote count controversy, sowing further division and discord after an election they can't get over losing.

Saul Alinsky rides again.