Fox News Host Chris Wallace Interviews Jill Stein

Disgraceful US Anti-Semitism Awareness Act
December 4, 2016
A NYT Opinion I Agree With
December 5, 2016
Fox News Host Chris Wallace Interviews Jill Stein
by Stephen Lendman
My comments follow at the end.
WALLACE: A look outside the beltway at Des Moines, Iowa, where President-elect Trump is set to take his thank you tour next Thursday.
Well, the election cycle that seemed like it would never end technically still hasn’t. A recount is currently underway in Wisconsin, with additional challenges in Michigan and Pennsylvania. 
Joining us now to discuss her push for the recounts is Green Party presidential nominee Dr. Jill Stein.
Dr. Stein, you say that your goal here is not to change the results of the election, but to ensure the accuracy of the count. My question is, why then did you choose three states that Mr. Trump won narrowly but not a state that Secretary Clinton won much more narrowly, New Hampshire, which she won by only 3,000 votes?
STEIN: We didn’t go into New Hampshire mainly because the deadline for filing a recount had passed. But, in fact, at the time that we launched the recount, two of the states had gone to Donald Trump. 
Michigan was still uncertain as to which direction it would go. And as far as I’m concerned, if we do find evidence that there’s a systemic problem here with these machines, which are extremely unreliable, prone to error, and — and human error and machine error, as well as to hacking and security breaches, if we find evidence that there is a systemic problem, we need to expand the recount, in my view. That’s what the American voters are calling for, an election result and a voting system that we can have confidence in.
WALLACE:  Let me ask — let me ask you a question, Dr. Stein. Do you know the largest switch of votes in a recount in American political history?
STEIN: Well, I can tell you one, for example, in Toledo, in 2004, there were 90,000 votes that were marked blank, which were discovered actually not to be blank at all. And those — when the — when a hand recount was done. 
That would have been enough to have changed the outcome in Ohio. Unfortunately, that wasn’t found until after the election was already called.
WALLACE:  But — but let me tell you the — the — the — the biggest actual switch of votes in any election in U.S. history was back in 2000 when roughly 1,200 votes were switched from Bush to Gore. 
We’re talking about three states, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, that Donald Trump won by more than 10,000 votes. So there’s not a chance in the world here, Dr. Stein, that the — that the vote change is going to — that the vote is going to change in those three states.
STEIN: Actually — actually, in Michigan — Chris, actually, in Michigan, there are 75,000 votes which are blank, which are sky high compared to all other past elections. They are concentrated in Detroit. That’s 75,000 votes which may very well be machine error or human error. 
That is about seven times the margin of difference in Michigan. So these results could, in fact, change the outcome, but we don’t know that until we actually examine the evidence. That means a hand recount of the ballots. That is going forward in Wisconsin —
WALLACE:  But it’s never — it’s never happened. There’s never been a 70,000-vote switch. The most there’s ever been is 1,247.
Let me ask you —
STEIN: That — that’s actually not true. If the recounts were done in time, they could affect 90,000. And, in fact, in Detroit, there could very well be 75,000.
WALLACE:  I’m — I’m asking — I’m talking about — look, I’m talking, Dr. Stein, about recounts that actually happened, not ones that could have happened.
STEIN: That’s because we don’t — that’s because we don’t do them. And, in fact, we should do them. That’s how we ensure that we have a system we can trust. And right now, as you know, Chris —
WALLACE:  Let — let me ask you, Dr. Stein —
STEIN: Cynicism and distrust is running wild. We need to address the fundamental concerns that the American voters are expressing.
WALLACE:  Dr. Stein, let’s talk about what a lot of people think is the real point here, and that is, let’s take a look at how much money you raised in your presidential runs. 
In 2012 you raised $893,000 in your presidential campaign. In 2016, $3.5 million. But for this recount, you’ve raised more than $6.5 million from almost 140,000 donors. Isn’t that what this is really about, Dr. Stein, using the recount it raise lots of money and build your list of supporters?
STEIN: Let me be very clear, this money is going strictly into a segregated account which can only be spent on the recount. So this — this money is entirely — will be completely used, and we’ll be lucky if we can cover the cost at the rate that there is a bait and switch going on here. 
In Wisconsin, we just saw this cost triple. So, to my mind, it’s — it really underscores why we need a fundamentally secure voting system that has built-in safeguards that should have automatic audits, recounts. 
We need to get rid of these voting machines, these electronic touch screens which have been proven highly vulnerable to tampering, to hacking, to human and machine errors. This is an — this is an abuse of the American vote.
WALLACE:  So — so the fact that you have 140,000 donors is purely coincidental, Dr. Stein?
STEIN: Well, put it this way, the American people have made it very clear what they want done here. Chris, coming out of this election, 80 percent of Americans —
WALLACE:  I — wait, wait, wait, I don’t think the American people —
STEIN: Eighty percent.
WALLACE:  Wait, where do you — where do you get off saying the American people —
STEIN: Eighty percent of Americans said they were disgusted.
WALLACE:  Where do you get off saying that the American people are calling for this? I think the vast majority of the American people think we should accept the result of the election.
STEIN: Eighty percent of Americans said that they were disgusted with this election —
WALLACE:  I don’t think that was — I don’t — it may have been the choice they had. I don’t think it was the system that the — or a demand for a recount.
STEIN: And we know that about 90 percent of Americans do not have faith. This is a time that people do not have faith — this is a time that people have an entire loss of faith in our political institutions. The way that the money is coming in from small donors makes it very clear. And, in fact, poll. A poll just last week showed the American people support the recount and that they feel that if Donald Trump was in the reverse position, he would be doing exactly the same thing. Remember, he said that it was a rigged system and that he was not going to accept the result.
WALLACE:  You’ve — I mean that —
STEIN: So he has articulated what many Americans feel. It’s time to respect the views of the American voter and ensure that we have a voting system that we can trust.
WALLACE:  Well, some would say that the views of the American voter were that Donald Trump was elected president. You’ve now decided to —
STEIN: Well, remember what the voters said by the Electoral College, not by the national popular vote.
WALLACE:  If — if I may ask my — if I may ask my question — if I may ask my question, Dr. Stein, you’ve now decided to go to the federal court to try to get a recount in Pennsylvania after the state court said that you would have to post, or your supporters would have to post a million-dollar bond and you said they can’t afford that. 
You’re going to hold a news conference tomorrow in front of Trump Tower. What’s he got to do with it?
STEIN: We want to hold this conference where America will see that we are standing up for everyday Americans who do not have confidence in this election system, who have lost confidence actually in our political system. And we’re standing up loud and strong to say that we will not be intimidated, we will not be frightened by having to jump through all these legal hoops. We say, what is Donald Trump frightened of because he is obstructing —
WALLACE:  Well, wait — wait —
STEIN: He is delaying these cases where the decisions have already —
WALLACE:  He got — he got — how many votes did you get in — Dr. Stein, how many votes did you get in this election?
STEIN: Excuse me — excuse me, how many votes did Donald Trump get? He got about 2.5 million less votes —
WALLACE:  He got — he got 62.5 — he got 62.5 million votes.
STEIN: He got about 2.5 million less votes than Hillary Clinton.
WALLACE:  He got 62.5 million votes. How many votes did you get, Dr. Stein?
STEIN: So I think the American people are owed an actual explanation here —
STEIN: Of what is going on.
WALLACE:  Dr. Stein, could you answer the question?
STEIN: And you do not know until you look at the evidence.
WALLACE:  How many — how many votes did you get?
STEIN: I am not the — I am not going to be the beneficiary of this one way or the other. That’s why I can do this because I’m a non-partisan in this fight.
WALLACE:  But he got 62.5 million votes. How many did you get? I mean the question really is, who’s speaking for American voters, him or you?
STEIN: It’s not about me. This is about — this is not about — this is not about Donald Trump. It’s not about Hillary Clinton. It’s not about my campaign. It’s not about Gary Johnson. This is about the American voters who deserve to have a voting system we can trust. When something like 75,000 votes in Detroit may, in fact, be an error because they are — why would people come out in Detroit, fill in all the other positions but not vote for president?
WALLACE:  Let me — Dr. — Dr. Stein, let me ask you —
STEIN: This is a little bit suspicious. We deserve to know what’s going on because that, could, in fact, change the outcome of the vote in Michigan.
WALLACE:  In the third presidential debate, Dr. Stein, I asked Donald Trump whether he would accept the result of the election and the principle of the peaceful transfer of power. Here’s what he said.
WALLACE:  Are you saying you’re not prepared now to commit to that principle?
TRUMP: What I’m saying is that I will tell you at the time. I’ll keep you in suspense, OK.
HILLARY CLINTON, D-FORMER PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Well, Chris, let me respond to that, because that’s horrifying. You know, every time Donald thinks things are not going in his direction, he claims whatever it is, is rigged against him.
WALLACE:  Dr. Stein, at that time, a lot of liberals’ heads exploded because Donald Trump wouldn’t accept the results of the election. Aren’t you doing precisely that right now? Aren’t you doing exactly what Hillary Clinton called “horrifying”?
STEIN: I am not here to help Hillary Clinton or to express her point of view. In my view, the recount should have happened in the Democratic primary as well, where there were also very suspicious results, where voters appeared to be stripped from the rolls in Brooklyn, where hundreds of thousands of votes went uncounted in California. 
This is not about helping Democrats. It’s not about helping Republicans. It’s not about helping Green. I — you know, this is the question, though, that the Americans care about.
WALLACE:  I didn’t ask you that. I asked you what — I — that’s not the question asked you, Dr. Stein. I asked you, why not accept the results of the election because what you’re going is exactly what Hillary Clinton said was horrifying?
STEIN: I’m not — I don’t care what Hillary Clinton thinks about this and I don’t care — I care what the voters think about this, not what the politicians or the pundits or the party operatives think about this. This is about responding to the American voters who are standing up and saying, we deserve an election system that we can trust and that is accurate, that is secure against hacking, against human error, against machine error, and that in which the votes are being counted, because right now it’s not clear that all the votes are being counted. We deserve that so we can go forward with an election system that we can trust.
WALLACE:  Dr. Stein — Dr. Stein, thank you. Thanks for joining us today. And we’ll stay on top of the recount.
My Comments
Throughout her campaign and on Fox News Sunday, Stein’s comments rang hollow. She’s in bed with the devil, her recount scam an attempted coup to deny Trump the presidency he won, wanting it handed to Hillary, despite her claim otherwise.
Saying “we deserve some confidence in the outcome of this election” misses the key point. Hillary as president and commander-in-chief of America’s military risks possible cataclysmic nuclear war with Russia.
Trump’s election dodged a bullet, providing he follows through on normalizing ties with Russia, both countries cooperating in combating terrorism.
Stein knows nothing about real democracy, nothing about America’s political system, nothing about its deplorable history from inception – nothing about fantasy democracy, duopoly power, a one-party state with two right wings, we the people entirely left out, a system too debauched to fix.
Scores of Green Party members oppose her recount scam. A letter they wrote said in part “(w)hile we support electoral reforms, including how the vote is counted, we do not support the current recount being undertaken by Jill Stein.”
“The decision to pursue a recount was not made in a democratic or a strategic way, nor did it respect the established decision making processes and structures of the Green Party of the United States (GPUS).”
“(S)tates chosen for the recount are only states in which Hillary Clinton lost. There were close races in other states (she) won, but which were not part of the recount.”
Stein’s scam tarnished herself irreparably, her credibility destroyed, her political career ended.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at
His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
Visit his blog site at

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
Stephen Lendman
Stephen Lendman
Stephen Lendman was born in 1934 in Boston, MA. In 1956, he received a BA from Harvard University. Two years of US Army service followed, then an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 1960. After working seven years as a marketing research analyst, he joined the Lendman Group family business in 1967. He remained there until retiring at year end 1999. Writing on major world and national issues began in summer 2005. In early 2007, radio hosting followed. Lendman now hosts the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network three times weekly. Distinguished guests are featured. Listen live or archived. Major world and national issues are discussed. Lendman is a 2008 Project Censored winner and 2011 Mexican Journalists Club international journalism award recipient.