The Michigan federal court dismissed the Stein suit that requested a hand recount of the entire state, agreeing with the State Court of Appeals that Stein is not an aggrieved person.  In plain English, this means that Stein has no chance of winning the Michigan election, so why bother doing a recount?  If Hillary wanted a recount, then she should have requested it.

This means that with Michigan finished, there is no chance for Stein to overturn the election.  It is over.  She should drop her ridiculous suit in federal court in Pennsylvania, scheduled for a hearing on Friday, December 9.  She has no evidence of fraud and is not an aggrieved person.  The court should sanction her with court costs and award counsel fees and costs to Trump’s attorneys and any other defendant for defending this frivolous suit.

Stein had originally filed suit claiming that the voting machines could have been hacked because someone had hacked the emails of the DNC and John Podesta.  There was no evidence alleged that the machines were hacked, only the possibility.

But Stein’s website that asks for money raised the race card as the basis for the recount:

“We are fighting Trump and the Michigan GOP in a battle that goes to the very heart of the struggle for voting rights in communities of color. Donate now to stand up for election justice and integrity.

The attention brought by the recount campaign in Michigan is already raising red flags for the widespread disenfranchisement of voters of color in what amounts to a modern Jim Crow-type election system.

At stake are over 75,000 “undervotes” -- ballots that are filled out except the vote for president -- many of which are concentrated in communities of color in the Detroit area.

This unprecedented number of blank ballots may actually represent errors in the optical scanners that count the votes. According to a U.S. Civil Rights Commission report, voters of color are 900% more likely to have their votes misread or simply tossed out by human error or by badly maintained and poorly calibrated machines in underserved communities.”

Thus, in court, Stein argues that “someone” hacked the voting machines.  But to raise over $7 million, Stein argues that the voting machines do not properly read ballots of “persons of color.”

The question for Stein is, how does the voting machine or a person counting the votes know the vote was cast by a “person of color”?

If Stein were truly concerned with voter fraud, then she should support photo voter identification for all voters that verify that the voter is a U.S. citizen.