Green Party candidate Jill Stein wants a recount of votes in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. She would have you believe that it’s just because she wants integrity in elections. According to a Green Party spokesman, “There’s no smoking gun here, but we’re saying the American public needs to have it investigated to make sure our votes count.”

Stein has now hit her fundraising goals for recounts in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

Stein appeared on CNN Thanksgiving morning, with wide, oh-so-innocent eyes, telling the anchor that all she wants is to make sure that all votes were accurately counted. Because, you know, hacking. When the anchor pushed back and insisted there was no evidence of tampering, Stein told her that we shouldn’t “have to prove that there’s been fraud or tampering.”

Right. Sort of like our criminal justice system in which the accused is innocent until proven guilty. Stein would flip that on its head as regards voting.

So why is Jill Stein so concerned about vote tampering when there is no evidence that such a thing happened? Furthermore, even if — and that’s a big IF — there was fraud in those states, statistically it would not flip the election. Donald Trump would still be the victor in the Electoral College.

There may be two possibilities here, and they both stink.

• Follow the Money. Stein originally had a fund-raising goal of $2.5 million to launch a recount. Suddenly it jumped to $7 million. Lawyers’s fees, she claims. Or is it shipping and handling? On her website she talks about “election integrity efforts.” Whatever that is. I think the promotion here is less integrity and more promoting Jill Stein and the Green Party. Or maybe the Clintons?? Hmm.

• Follow the Clintons.  New York Magazine reported on Tuesday that a group of computer scientists and attorneys (always attorneys) informed the Clinton campaign that they found evidence that election results in the three named states “may have been manipulated or hacked.” One of those scientists, J. Alex Halderman, contended that the article “includes some incorrect numbers,” and that he did not claim definite suspicious vote counts existed. But could the Clintons have their squalid hands all over this recount ploy, using Jill Stein as a patsy, in order to disrupt the election outcome?

I wouldn’t be surprised. Not one bit.

We all remember the election of 2012, when many of us were gobsmacked by the re-election of Barack Obama over Mitt Romney. I recall seeing many articles being posted on social media coming from rather dodgy websites claiming voter fraud in Obama’s re-election. However, those notions died a swift death. No one in the Republican party insisted on recounts. The party moved on.

What is it about Democrats and losing elections they think are owed them? I was never a big Trump supporter, but as far as I’m concerned, January 20th can’t come soon enough.