Count those votes
I guess Bush v. Gore was not considered applicable case law.
First, newly-discovered votes WERE counted by elections boards in other counties in WA; and many of them were for the GOP candidate (and not challenged by the Dems);
Second, these votes not illegal or flawed, they were set aside because a computer error said they might be invalid and thus were never inspected - not opened or looked at.
For people who freak out over hand recounts, think of it this way. You get your bank statement and you're missing $5,000. You gonna call the automated teller and leave a message? You gonna send an email? Of course not. You want a human being to get on the phone with you and look at your account and figure out what happened.
Which is the same premise behind the manual recount.
I don't know how it's going to go, no-one does. Currently WITHOUT those votes the Dem is winning by 8 votes. She has stated that she'll be bound by the results of the recount no matter how it comes out. It could well be that these vote tip in the GOP favor. We shall see. But at least we shall know for sure who won, whether or not we like it.
And here's a little more from the PI:
"Harry Korrell, a lawyer for the Republican Party, countered that state law does not grant King County the right to add new ballots to the recount seven weeks after the election. Korrell said counting those votes would cause irreparable harm, but justices questioned who would be hurt.
"You're looking at it from the point of view of the winner or the loser - shouldn't we be looking at it from the point of view of the voter?" asked Justice Susan Owens.
The lawsuit was brought by King County, the state Democratic Party and the office of Secretary of State Sam Reed, a Republican."