Two weeks after Election Day, top computer scientists are urging Hillary Clinton's campaign to demand a recount in three key states due to an alleged pattern that may point to voter manipulation.

A source "with knowledge of the request" told CNN that the experts believe vote totals in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania have been "manipulated or hacked." The group of experts—which, includes voting-rights attorney John Bonifax, as well as J. Alex Halderman, director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society—presented this research to top aides John Podesta and Marc Elias during a call on Thursday.

Reportedly, according to the group, Hillary received 7% fewer votes in counties that primarily used electronic voting machines in Wisconsin, which could have been a result of hacking. This could have resulted in her losing up to 30,000 votes (she lost Wisconsin by 27,000).

It's important to highlight that the group has not found direct evidence of hacking or voter manipulation; rather, they believe the pattern they found deserves thorough investigation. However, other experts are doubtful of the theory's relevance, such as FiveThirtyEight's editor-in-chief Nate Silver. In a tweetstorm on Tuesday evening, Silver's "very quick analysis" suggests the claim is "probably BS":

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Run a regression on Wisc. counties with >=50K people, and you find that Clinton improved more in counties with only paper ballots. HOWEVER: pic.twitter.com/4swuU70NaY — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 23, 2016

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

...the effect COMPLETELY DISAPPEARS once you control for race and education levels, the key factors in predicting vote shifts this year. pic.twitter.com/NYOINx9lEz — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 23, 2016

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Maybe a more complicated analysis would reveal something, but usually bad news when a finding can't survive a basic sanity check like this. — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 23, 2016

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Nothing in Pennsylvania, either, whether or not you control for demographics. pic.twitter.com/25moBhv3Zm — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 23, 2016

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

And Michigan has paper ballots everywhere, so not even sure what claim is being made there. pic.twitter.com/4YKrZEhTJl — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 23, 2016

"Maybe a more complicated analysis would reveal something, but usually bad news when a finding can't survive a basic sanity check like this," Silver tweeted. Big words coming from a man who called 49 of 50 states correctly in 2008 and all 50 in 2012. But then again, he gave Trump only a 32.1% chance of winning this year, so perhaps this theory has some credence.

Hillary's campaign is running out of time to challenge the results; according to New York Magazine, the Wisconsin deadline to file for a recount is Friday, while Pennsylvania's is Monday, and Michigan's is next Wednesday. A senior Clinton adviser told the magazine that the White House doesn't want Hillary to challenge the result, as they're focused on a smooth transition.

(H/T New York Magazine and CNN)

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io