Election Results

[wmLambert]

Where are the 'conservatives' or Republican supporters decrying this?  Where are the Trump supporters calling on the president to do the right thing?  What is this - cowardice? Hypocrisy? Ambivalence?  Or do you actually support threatening people with death in support of your policy preferences and or in the service of protecting 'your guy'?

Seriati, William, Lloyd... where'd they all go?

Where did we go? Are you kidding? It's like hitting your head against a concrete wall. You seem incapable of looking at any views outside of Democrat talking heads. We will continue to make the effort, but you must open your brains a bit to get rid of the conspiracy chatter by the Democrats. There have been no FBI investigations announced by the FBI on anything or anyone. The truth is out there, but you will not admit how egregious the Democrats have been. At the press conference today. Ask yourselves why? The lawsuits filed so far have been civil lawsuits, and the FBI doesn't do civil investigations. Yet your headlines sounds like the Trump cause is lost.

The MSM did not show any of Trump's 45 minute press conference today. Explain why. The evidence has been introduced, and the eye witnesses are believable and honorable. A NY truck driver with a tractor trailer full of 288,000 ballots disappeared from where he left it, and showed up three states over in Pennsylvania. No coincidence. The Democrats have orchestrated this and you all blow it away. The Dominion system is connected to the internet and able to be hacked remotely. The actual data has been captured. Want to go out on a limb and pretend there was no conspiracy? Newsmax and OAN carry the news - but no one else. Where do you see and hear the eye witnesses?

[Aris Katsaris]

Where did we go? Are you kidding? It's like hitting your head against a concrete wall. You seem incapable of looking at any views outside of Democrat talking heads. We will continue to make the effort, but you must open your brains a bit to get rid of the conspiracy chatter by the Democrats.

Not a single other Trump voter here has said they believe what you're saying either, wmLambert. It's not a Democrat vs Republican thing. It's a you-vs-everyone thing.

But hey, if anyone of the Trump voters here indeed believe you that there were raids in Frankfurt and Spain and a firefight between the DoD and "Cia mercenaries" let them say so here.

Tell you what. I'll give 100 USD each to a charity of the choice of any regular here (other than you) who swears on their honour that it's their honest belief they think it at least as likely as not (i.e. assign at least 50% probability) that these supposed raids happened. (offer valid up to a total maximum of 2000 USD, and for a person to count as 'regular' they must have posted at least two comments in the last two months)

The MSM did not show any of Trump's 45 minute press conference today. Explain why.

What is there to explain? That the MSM don't want have to broadcast someone ranting about how the MSM are part of an evil conspiracy? That seems pretty self-explanatory to me. They don't like Trump because Trump bashes them.

Want to go out on a limb and pretend there was no conspiracy?

So, let's summarize, the conspiracy you're claiming so far includes (besides the Democrats):
-Venezuela
-China
-Iran
-The Dominion company
-The Republican governor of Georgia
-The CIA
-All the MSM (including Fox News).

[TheDrake]

Tell you what. I'll give 100 USD each to a charity of the choice of any regular here (other than you) who swears on their honour that it's their honest belief they think it at least as likely as not (i.e. assign at least 50% probability) that these supposed raids happened.

Talk about an integrity check. Let's see, my honor versus giving some food to homeless people...

I'll get back to you once I've worked through the various ethical frameworks. 

You left out George Soros, BTW.

[DonaldD]

Where did we go? Are you kidding?

OK, so you responded - yet ignored the substance of the post.

Trump's lawyer, Joe diGenova, has publicly called for the murder of a former intelligence official - Former Cybersecurity Chief Chris Krebs - for stating that the election was secure.

Read that again.  Digest it.  Somebody working for Trump has called for a former government official, one recently fired by the president, to be murdered.  The president has not fired diGenova.  He hasn't even acknowledged the statement.

Why are you not calling on trump to fire him?  Why are you not calling on the DoJ to open an investigation?  Why has not a single conservative on this site had the integrity to unequivocally state that an employee of the president publicly calling for a US citizen to be murdered is unacceptable?

[yossarian22c]

... The lawsuits filed so far have been civil lawsuits, and the FBI doesn't do civil investigations. Yet your headlines sounds like the Trump cause is lost.

Every state Trump was contesting has now certified their votes and the EC meets in under two weeks to finalize the procedure. I can't imagine why the headlines would make it sound like Trump winning is a lost cause. I'm sure Trump will still take your money. He has a lot of debt coming due in a couple years. I'm sure you don't mind if instead of lawsuits he uses his pac money to support his floundering businesses.

The MSM did not show any of Trump's 45 minute press conference today. Explain why. The evidence has been introduced, and the eye witnesses are believable and honorable. A NY truck driver with a tractor trailer full of 288,000 ballots disappeared from where he left it, and showed up three states over in Pennsylvania.

That's an insane story. Why does a NY truck driver have 288,000 Pennsylvania ballots? Why is he not in Pennsylvania? Why do you find these people so believable?

Is Kreb's, hired by Trump, believable and honorable? How about AG Barr? They are both in a position to know all this stuff and say there is no evidence of wide spread fraud.

Have you considered the MSM has made a deliberate decision to minimize the spread of Trump's baseless and dangerous claims. Giving a megaphone to a man shouting fire in a crowded theater, when there is no fire is unethical.

No coincidence. The Democrats have orchestrated this and you all blow it away. The Dominion system is connected to the internet and able to be hacked remotely. The actual data has been captured. Want to go out on a limb and pretend there was no conspiracy? Newsmax and OAN carry the news - but no one else. Where do you see and hear the eye witnesses?

The actual data has been captured by whom? The CIA, operating out of Germany and breaking the law by spying on American elections? The Army who would have been breaking who knows how many laws and treaties by conducting a raid on a CIA facility to seize servers because ..., really not sure why the Army would need to do this since Trump is the head of both organizations. Think about this, if you really, truly believe the CIA and Army are intentionally shooting at each other in Germany what does that say about the government under Trump. He is head of both those organizations, if things have gotten so bad they are killing each other we should demand he leave office immediately and let Pence serve out the last 60 days.

[Grant]

Tell you what. I'll give 100 USD each to a charity of the choice of any regular here (other than you) who swears on their honour that it's their honest belief they think it at least as likely as not (i.e. assign at least 50% probability) that these supposed raids happened.

This just screams "Grant bait" all over it. 

I swear ::snerk::
on my sacred ::snort:: honor ::snerk snerk::
sorry...  HONOUR, with a ::snort:: extra U for virtue ::snerk::
that there is at least a 50% channnnnce ::wheez::
Lizardmen
in concert with the CIAYYYY ::snerk snerk snerk::

Can't do it. 

[TheDeamon]

The actual data has been captured by whom? The CIA, operating out of Germany and breaking the law by spying on American elections? The Army who would have been breaking who knows how many laws and treaties by conducting a raid on a CIA facility to seize servers because ..., really not sure why the Army would need to do this since Trump is the head of both organizations. Think about this, if you really, truly believe the CIA and Army are intentionally shooting at each other in Germany what does that say about the government under Trump. He is head of both those organizations, if things have gotten so bad they are killing each other we should demand he leave office immediately and let Pence serve out the last 60 days.

You clearly haven't watched enough Stargate: SG1 in your lifetime.

Or a number of other shows that involve government spooks. =P

[yossarian22c]

The actual data has been captured by whom? The CIA, operating out of Germany and breaking the law by spying on American elections? The Army who would have been breaking who knows how many laws and treaties by conducting a raid on a CIA facility to seize servers because ..., really not sure why the Army would need to do this since Trump is the head of both organizations. Think about this, if you really, truly believe the CIA and Army are intentionally shooting at each other in Germany what does that say about the government under Trump. He is head of both those organizations, if things have gotten so bad they are killing each other we should demand he leave office immediately and let Pence serve out the last 60 days.

You clearly haven't watched enough Stargate: SG1 in your lifetime.

Plenty . Clearly it was the Air Force conducting the raid. The servers aren't public yet because the CIA controlled by the Ga'ould encrypted the drives at last minute and we're waiting on the Asgard to break the encryption and save the country. Clearly Biden's longevity is a result of him being a host. I could go on. Sadly I don't think I'm getting any further from reality in this digression.

Or a number of other shows that involve government spooks. =P

Not sure if that's the analogy wm wants to go with. The politicians in those shows (SG1 included) are rarely portrayed positively.

[DonaldD]

The MSM did not show any of Trump's 45 minute press conference today. Explain why.

More than 3100 people died from the pandemic yesterday - that's more than a 9/11 attack worth of dead people.

And what was the president doing while these people were dying?  He was repeating lies about the election, the same lies he's been repeating daily since he lost the election.  That's not news.

What is news is the president wasting 45 minutes self-publishing conspiracy theories instead of doing his actual job, while more people are getting sick, being hospitalized and dying than at any other time during the pandemic.  And yes, the media is covering that.

[wmLambert]

Like I said, which exposes your gullibility, go watch the actual witness testimionials  I know Newsmax is rebroadcasting the President's speech at 3:00 PM, which was not carried by any MSM source. The Michgan coverage of the eyewitness reports are scattered all over YouTube. In the Michigan presentations to the lawmakers, the witnesses are believable and the hard evidence provided. The Democrat lawmakers make you all look despicable with their Gestapo-esque behavior. The facts are there, you were not.

When this is over, I fully expect to see Trump sworn in, and many Democrat criminals indicted. Why are you so defensive?. You should be outraged by your champions' behavior.

[yossarian22c]

Like I said, which exposes your gullibility, go watch the actual witness testimionials  I know Newsmax is rebroadcasting the President's speech at 3:00 PM, which was not carried by any MSM source. The Michgan coverage of the eyewitness reports are scattered all over YouTube.

Your unassailable truth is "scattered over YouTube." Think about that for a few minutes.

In the Michigan presentations to the lawmakers, the witnesses are believable and the hard evidence provided. The Democrat lawmakers make you all look despicable with their Gestapo-esque behavior. The facts are there, you were not.

What hard evidence? You keep saying words like evidence and proof, but its like you don't know what they mean. Your "evidence" of the Germany army raid was a long retired air force general. Your "evidence" of voter fraud isn't a court case put forward by the president's lawyers but videos scattered over YouTube.

Pick a state or county and explain specifically what the level of fraud was and how these witnesses give hard evidence of the fraud.

When this is over, I fully expect to see Trump sworn in, and many Democrat criminals indicted. Why are you so defensive?. You should be outraged by your champions' behavior.

I'm sure Aris will be willing to give you any odds you want on a bet of Trump being sworn in. Along with the Democrats being indicted are we rounding up the entire Republican leadership in Georgia? How about the Michigan lawmakers who according to you are ignoring all the evidence by certifying the election?

Whose behavior am I supposed to be outraged by? Bannon calling for Fauci's head on a pike? Bannon for defrauding conservatives donating to build the wall? Trump's lawyer calling for Kreb's to be shot, drawn and quartered? I'm outraged by all that.

[DonaldD]

Like I said, which exposes your gullibility

Either you don't know what the word means, OR you are the least self-aware person on the planet.

BTW, how is it going with you chastising Trump for not firing diGenova for publicly calling for the murder of Trump's former cybersecurity chief?

[msquared]

And his 46 minute speech was not covered since it was a taped event that was released on YouTube.  My guess is he did not want any one to ask him to give proof of his claims and interrupt him.  I bet it took longer than 46 minutes to film that thing. There were so many cuts. I wonder how many takes he had to do.

[Grant]

You know,  I hate sensationalism and hyperbole in politics, but I had a thought that may scoot up to the edge. 

Basically, I'm thinking that the only thing that is keeping a "coup" from occuring is the fact that L'agrippeur doesn't have his own private paramilitary force, like the SA or SS, and the dedication of the general officers in the US Army.  That's kind of a thin thread. 

I mean, the guy seems to generally believe that he won, and that the election is being stolen from him, and that he's the victim of an illegal conspiracy etc.  Maybe he's faking to get more money, but after watching that Youtube speech, I just can't tell. 

If he generally believed this, why wouldn't he instigate martial law and have the Army occupy Washington and start arresting Congress and the Supreme Court?  I don't think that the Army is going to go with that, but now your entire system is dependent on the Pentagon.  I mean, I guess it's always been like this, but has it ever been so needed as today?  Has anybody else had supporters that were actively calling for martial law to reverse certified election results?  Is this going to be a problem in the future? 

I mean, that's it.  The entire thing hangs on the officer corps of the US Army.  How many bad apples would it take to cause a problem?  This isn't necessarily a new problem.  It was addressed during the Constitutional Convention and debates.  But at that time we didn't have a standing army of such power and had something still resembling a functional militia system that was directly under the authority of the states.   Don't have that now. 

Of course, there is a big difference between having enough to cause problems, and enough to make it work/stick.  It's one thing to seize DC, and another to keep everybody else coming after you. 

I don't know.  I never thought he was that crazy.  I scoffed at the idea.  Still do because I don't think there is anybody in the US Army right now that would listen.  But the extent he's pushing this fraud thing is unexpected to me.  Unless he's just trying to get more money.  That's completely within character. 

[rightleft22]

And his 46 minute speech was not covered since it was a taped event that was released on YouTube.  My guess is he did not want any one to ask him to give proof of his claims and interrupt him.  I bet it took longer than 46 minutes to film that thing. There were so many cuts. I wonder how many takes he had to do.

Trump campaign is reported to have received 100+ million since the election. Money he gets to use as he see fit. This election fraud stuff is making him a lot of money
3 hundred mil more and he can pay off the upcoming debt coming due

[TheDrake]

Basically, I'm thinking that the only thing that is keeping a "coup" from occuring is the fact that L'agrippeur doesn't have his own private paramilitary force, like the SA or SS, and the dedication of the general officers in the US Army.  That's kind of a thin thread. 

Well he's got all those yokels in the pickup trucks with their body armor and AR-15s. He might just be dysfunctional enough to think they are an army. That's basically what the Islamic State was, right? And the Somali warlords.

[msquared]

And the WI SC told Trump to follow the rules and start at the lower courts and not at the top, like he wants.

[TheDeamon]

The MSM did not show any of Trump's 45 minute press conference today. Explain why.

More than 3100 people died from the pandemic yesterday - that's more than a 9/11 attack worth of dead people.

And in 2017, the most recent year google is giving me numbers for, on average 2,353 people died from heart disease on a daily basis(and another 401 from strokes). Which is awfully close to a "Pearl Harbor" attack(2,403) on our population on a daily basis.
source: https://professional.heart.org/en/science-news/heart-disease-and-stroke-statistics-2020-update

Only in the cases of the covid19 deaths, and the CVD(Cardio-Vascular Disease) death counts, there isn't large scale property destruction to go along with it. And based on earlier stats involving co-morbidities and Covid, chances are Covid19 is making an odd contribution to the CVD numbers this year and the next several following years, as many of the deaths associated with Covid are very likely to involve that pre-existing condition.

It'll be interesting to see what the numbers look like once people stop throwing around raw data numbers and look at the underlying numbers. As some of the early reporting indicated, and likely still holds true now. A majority of those who are dying from this had other health conditions that were likely to kill them "soon enough" anyway. Yes, there are the outliers, and the Media is putting those events under a magnifying glass "to raise awareness" to demonstrate "it isn't just an old/infirm person concern" but those cases are still comparatively rare.

The situation is grim, people have not been doing enough to protect the most vulnerable, while simultaneously doing perhaps too much to protect everyone else.

[TheDeamon]

Trump campaign is reported to have received 100+ million since the election. Money he gets to use as he see fit. This election fraud stuff is making him a lot of money
3 hundred mil more and he can pay off the upcoming debt coming due

Actually he can't. Campaign contributions cannot go into personal accounts. Closest he can get to doing that is "donate it to a charity" which he/his family controls at the end of things and try to expense the money back to himself from there and hope that he doesn't get prosecuted for it.

Alternately, he can forward the money on to another campaign organization, but that still doesn't get the money into his personal pocket book. And honestly, your harping on the several hundred million dollar loan that Trump has outstanding is almost on par with wmLambert's postings.

[msquared]

It is not going to a campaign fund though.  It  is going to a SuperPac.  Even a previous head of the RNC says it is a grift of before unknown proportions.

[TheDeamon]

It is not going to a campaign fund though.  It  is going to a SuperPac.  Even a previous head of the RNC says it is a grift of before unknown proportions.

Pretty sure the SuperPac's likewise end up being subject to many of the same campaign finance laws. Although the SuperPac probably doesn't have to dissolve at the end of an election cycle. The money either remains under the SurperPac and is subject to the relevant oversight laws on how it spends its money, or the money is sent on to another Campaign Organization or Charity. The Donald Trump Self-Enrichment Fund is not on the list of legally available options.

I mean sure, they could assign themselves large salaries/payouts, but they'd have to be able to justify those payments if challenged in court.

Edit: Of course, I guess when it comes the charitable entities, I guess Trump could borrow a page from the Clinton Foundation on that front.

[yossarian22c]

Trump campaign is reported to have received 100+ million since the election. Money he gets to use as he see fit. This election fraud stuff is making him a lot of money
3 hundred mil more and he can pay off the upcoming debt coming due

Actually he can't. Campaign contributions cannot go into personal accounts. Closest he can get to doing that is "donate it to a charity" which he/his family controls at the end of things and try to expense the money back to himself from there and hope that he doesn't get prosecuted for it.

Alternately, he can forward the money on to another campaign organization, but that still doesn't get the money into his personal pocket book. And honestly, you're harping on the several hundred million dollar loan that Trump has outstanding is almost on par with wmLambert's postings.

That's why Trump set up his Save America PAC. The PAC can hire his family as consultants, host events and fundraisers at his properties. If the Trump foundation is any indication they will find ways to get the money into their personal or business accounts.

Why is being concerned about a 400 million dollar loan on par with crazy conspiracy theories?

[msquared]

If Trump announces he is running again in 2024, he can call all of his travel "campaign" funds and not spend a personal dime for 4 years.

The grift is he is telling his supporters that the money is going to fight for him in this election, and most of it is not.

[DonaldD]

Success!  Evidence of vote fraud, or at least an organized attempt, facilitated by a political operative, even!

Florida attorney under investigation for registering to vote in Georgia, encouraging others to do the same

Oh wait, those are Republicans publicly discussing how to illegally register to vote in the Georgia runoff... sorry, carry on.

[TheDeamon]

Why is being concerned about a 400 million dollar loan on par with crazy conspiracy theories?

You do realize Trump is a multi-billionaire? You also realize that the illegally leaked Tax Documents disclose very little as to the status of that $400 million dollar loan, and the claims about the Trump Business unit "losing money for most of the past 20 years" is also bogus because their business is Real-Estate and prior to tax laws signed into law by Trump in 2018, Real Estate companies could do a thing called "loss carry-over" almost indefinitely and against 100% of all income earned. Assuming they took a big enough hit at some point(Which Trump is known to have sustained in the 1990's and again in the recession at the end of 2008). Post-Trump reform of 2018, any losses sustained after 2018 can only be recovered over 20 years, and can only be claimed against 80% of income, but losses prior to then are grandfathered.

So the Trump Organization may be losing money, or may not be losing money. While it is claiming losses on its taxes the leaked documents tell nothing about when those losses actually happened. And then that circles us back to Trump and 400 million dollar loan, where I'm unclear on if it is him or his company holding that debt. Trump isn't shy about declaring bankruptcy and "reorganizing" debts that are inconvenient to him for starters, for another, $400 million is less than 1/6th of the most recent estimate of his net worth according to Forbes. So while paying it might be unpleasant if his finances are bad(which isn't supported by available evidence), it certainly is within his means to do so. Although I would agree he'd be a fan of getting others to pay that debt for him, or creating other potential sources of income.

That said, the continued harping on "the $400 million outstanding loan that comes due soon"  always seems to have nefarious airs of conspiracy attached to it, where the only conspiracy that exists regarding it at present is the matter of how the New York Times managed to get their hands on the documentation about it in the first place.

[NobleHunter]

It was reported that Trump is personally liable for that money. He apparently does not have a giant pile of equities or similar assets that he could easily sell off in order to cover the debt. Given how strongly the value of his brand affects his net worth,  selling off major pieces of property to cover his debts would be very bad for him. Nor does he appear to have the cash flow to make refinancing an attractive prospect.

[Grant]

Well he's got all those yokels in the pickup trucks with their body armor and AR-15s. He might just be dysfunctional enough to think they are an army. That's basically what the Islamic State was, right? And the Somali warlords.

Yeah, but I'm not sure those cats could even knock over the Capitol Police.  Maybe if you got 2000 pickup trucks worth, but by that point you need to start thinking that 2000 pickup trucks worth of Trumpinistas can't just teleport into DC.  All McConnel would need is a 12 hour head start and Cocaine Mitch would very probably have Trump castrated. 

[rightleft22]

That said, the continued harping on "the $400 million outstanding loan that comes due soon"  always seems to have nefarious airs of conspiracy attached to it, where the only conspiracy that exists regarding it at present is the matter of how the New York Times managed to get their hands on the documentation about it in the first place.

Sorry I forgot harping and conspiracies' are only valid when engaged in by Trumpers

[NobleHunter]

I know it's a failure of imagination on my part but I can't figure out how a violent coup could be successful in the US. Even if a President had complicit military power and seized control of Washington DC. What do they do next? Sure states favorably inclined towards the President's party might accept the power grab but what about the other half of the country? Even if the whole of the US armed forces went along with it, you can't occupy more than a fraction of the US. Civil war seems inevitable or at best a fracturing of the country.

A coup d'etat works because most if not all the power is physically centralized so that controlling a small area means controlling most of the political power in the country, either by taking office holders hostage or by installing loyal minions in those officers. But controlling Washington doesn't appear to give you a lot of control over New York or California or Texas. A President installed by force might only be President of the land his troops occupy. That seems like a poor prize to wager your life over.

[Aris Katsaris]

I'm sure Aris will be willing to give you any odds you want on a bet of Trump being sworn in.

Indeed.

Though I'll want to define the terms of that bet carefully, just in case Trump decides to do a private 'inauguration' ceremony, or something, and then keep pretending he's still the president of the USA. (I certainly don't think he will, mind you, it makes much better sense for him to just announce he'll run for president in 2024.)

The terms of that bet would probably specify that if on January 21st there's still more than one person claiming themselves the current president of the USA, for the purposes of the bet the actual president of the USA will be considered to be the one of those who is photographed sitting on the presidential chair in the Oval Room of the White House, Washington DC, any time after that date (from January 22nd onwards).

[Grant]

I know it's a failure of imagination on my part but I can't figure out how a violent coup could be successful in the US.

It's more likely a failure of imagination on my part in thinking it through.  But then again, most stupid things happen when people don't think them through or don't understand the repercussions of their actions. 

I wasn't really calculating on whether such a coup could be "successful" in the end or not, ie if said individual or group could remain in power.  It was more from the standpoint of if they could toppled the constitutional government, at least temporarily. 

It seems to me, that all the President would have to do is arrest or detain any opponents of his in Congress and in the Supreme Court and you then take impeachment and checks off the table.  The President has some pretty wide powers on declaring national emergencies.  Army Officers are legally bound to obey legal orders.  They can only resign on the spot.  The primary check on the President is Congress.  Once Congress is out of the picture, what can you do?  You can't impeach the President anymore.  Maybe governors rise up, or whatever, but at that point the Constitution is out the window and we're off the edge of the map with the monsters. 

I don't know if it would work or not.  I really don't want to peek down that rabbit hole because it just seems too ridiculous.  But if one branch of government knocks off the other two, then the government has failed.  The only branch that remotely has that level of power is the executive, and that's always been known. 

[TheDrake]

You're mistaking a coup attempt with a successful one. Those dudes in Wisconsin were essentially planning a coup of the state government, just really badly with no real end game. The ETA didn't really come close to occupying Spanish territory either, but they sure caused a lot of problems for forty years.

The Trump parade most definitely would not defeat all the law enforcement in DC. They could, however, occupy some stupid symbolic city hall or just get a lot of people shot. I don't think Trump would order it or anything, but those guys "standing by" might take matters into their own hands after the EC takes their vote.

I know that wanders a bit from the original premise, but were talking worshippers of the Orange God here with delusions of grandeur in His image. They are talking regularly about the need to overthrow the government, and it is starting to move away from just talk.

[Grant]

You're mistaking a coup attempt with a successful one.

Depends on what you are measuring.  Measuring keeping somebody as the head of state for as long as they wish, I'd say it would not be.  But I'd say it would be very successful in toppling the Constitutional government. 

To get back to the original point, I was never concerned with the pickup truck army.  My entire point was that all Trump would need would be a few Generals who could round up some troops to make something work.  A BCT or ACR would probably be all you would need to seize Washington.  As long as it came with a logistics base, you're pretty well entrenched.  What is Texas going to do?  Attack Maryland?  With what?  It would turn into a civil war within the Army with everybody else getting chopped up.  Who would be the legal civilian authority?  If there is none, I doubt even the other Generals would do anything. 

Once the Constitution is thrown out the window it's a free for all.  We're back to a state of nature.  State vs state.  With a huge military going "what now?".   What are the National Guards going to do? 

I'm still not saying this would happen.  I'm just saying that maybe it could happen.  But only if a President could find enough Army general officers to back his play. 

Even then, in all honestly, and given though, I don't think that any unit could move fast enough unless they've been prepped.  Prepping may give away the game.  Hell, the closest real combat units are in North Carolina and upstate New York.  And they're not even heavy units. 

[TheDrake]

You're mistaking a coup attempt with a successful one.

Depends on what you are measuring.  Measuring keeping somebody as the head of state for as long as they wish, I'd say it would not be.  But I'd say it would be very successful in toppling the Constitutional government. 

To get back to the original point, I was never concerned with the pickup truck army.  My entire point was that all Trump would need would be a few Generals who could round up some troops to make something work.  A BCT or ACR would probably be all you would need to seize Washington.  As long as it came with a logistics base, you're pretty well entrenched.  What is Texas going to do?  Attack Maryland?  With what?  It would turn into a civil war within the Army with everybody else getting chopped up.  Who would be the legal civilian authority?  If there is none, I doubt even the other Generals would do anything. 

Once the Constitution is thrown out the window it's a free for all.  We're back to a state of nature.  State vs state.  With a huge military going "what now?".   What are the National Guards going to do? 

I'm still not saying this would happen.  I'm just saying that maybe it could happen.  But only if a President could find enough Army general officers to back his play. 

Even then, in all honestly, and given though, I don't think that any unit could move fast enough unless they've been prepped.  Prepping may give away the game.  Hell, the closest real combat units are in North Carolina and upstate New York.  And they're not even heavy units.

I'll go along with your thought experiment.

Except he won't. His treatment of Kelly, Mattis, and others helps guarantee that. Then there's the fact that Generals also have a command structure that isn't set up to obey unconditionally. Do you think a General's staff are going to go along with that? Plus you'd have to get exactly the right general. You can have CENTCOM in your hip pocket and that won't matter. Air Force Generals, retired or not, won't cut it.

Let's look at something really clear. When troops were mobilized to DC recently, it was the 82nd airborne. Out of NC, as you point out. I guess that could have been a dry run for a coup. I'm not sure how even 700 airborne soldiers are going to knock off the DC police before reinforcements could be called. They are militarized after all. It also isn't exactly going to be a secret.

Let's also understand that to be a cohesive unit, you need to have them all join in. What happens if your radio man is a Democrat? What if a platoon leader takes his oath to the Constitution seriously? Then you got the marines that are around Trump regularly. You going to get them on board?

The rogue general (and you wouldn't really need a general as you point out, a colonel would probably be quite sufficient) would have to somehow move the troops on some false pretense and give them a false story, but eventually that would break down when you gave them the order to do - what exactly?

I don't think even Tom Clancy could come up with a plot to make this scenario work.

[Grant]

I don't think even Tom Clancy could come up with a plot to make this scenario work.

I dunno.  I think you have to stretch pretty hard here and there.  The whole point is that if he had a few general officers he could do it.  You're saying that's impossible, and I'm pretty much with you, regardless of how he treated Mattis and Kelly etc.  But the whole point was that that was all that was standing in the way over a short period of time. 

So let's go with the worst case scenario and say that for some ungodly reason, the Commander of XVIII Corps decides to back His Orangeness.  Maybe the JCS have already resigned.  Maybe USNORTHCOM was bypassed.  I have no idea.  It doesn't really matter. 

Commander XVIII Corps is going to know who he can get to make this happen on Bragg.  First seize control of the class V and class VII depots.  Then follow through with everything else.  All he needs is a single Brigade Commander with him at this point.  The Brigade Commander only has to make the pitch to his officers after he already has a security team that he probably already knows and trusts.  Anybody who decides to not follow the "legal orders of the commander in chief during a crisis" will be quietly placed under house arrest.  This is probably going to cover you all the way down to company level.  He doesn't need everybody.  He only needs maybe 1/3 of the officers and NCOs and 1/2 of the enlisted.  Impossible?  Maybe when it comes to the officers.  I don't think it would be hard to get 1/2 of the Snuffys. 

After you seize control of the base you break out your message to the rest of commanders, but you don't even really need to go into a bunch of details.  You can just tell everybody else that they have orders to stand to and stay put.  You don't have to go into detail on what you are doing. 

The best part of having a light unit is that you can easily load them onto FMTVs with tac gear and roll out to DC.  You don't need as much logistical tail.  You can pick up fuel at Shell.  Then you got a 6 hour drive to DC.  If General Ripper can take control of the base overnight and have the first BCT at 50% strength rolling towards DC by morning, troops can be in DC by noon. 

You don't really need everybody to agree to it.  Certainly not the company grade officers and every single snuffy.  You just need enough of the NCOs to sign up at that level.  82nd Airborne troops may not have IFVs, but they have enough LMGs to outgun the Capitol Police.  The Capitol Police know this and are not going to put up a huge fight.  They're not supposed to be doing that sort of thing.

So there is your very worst case scenario, and all it took was a single three star to side with Hiz Orangeness.  How realistic?  I don't know.  That would be the basic plan.  I guess it also depends on getting 50% of your NCOs and troops to follow, but they're pretty well conditioned to follow orders.  Trump starts relieving other commanders or they resign after refusing to obey illegal orders and you're kinda screwed.     

So there's my premise.  It all hangs on those people.  The whole enchilada.  I suppose it always has but it's something you don't think about often. 

Could it actually happen?  I dunno.  Seems like fantasy. 

[LetterRip]

I suppose a coup could seize the nukes and hold the country hostage.  Wouldn't require very many people to cooperate.

[TheDeamon]

It seems to me, that all the President would have to do is arrest or detain any opponents of his in Congress and in the Supreme Court and you then take impeachment and checks off the table.  The President has some pretty wide powers on declaring national emergencies.  Army Officers are legally bound to obey legal orders.  They can only resign on the spot.  The primary check on the President is Congress.  Once Congress is out of the picture, what can you do?  You can't impeach the President anymore.  Maybe governors rise up, or whatever, but at that point the Constitution is out the window and we're off the edge of the map with the monsters.

Actually partly wrong, and this applies to the enlisted as well. Their oath, and legal obligation is to "uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic." They have an obligation to obey "the (lawful) orders of those lawfully appointed over me." And at least when I joined up just over 20 years, it was hammered home that "I was just following orders" when it comes to following illegal orders is not an excuse.

Because one of the really "fun" things to remember is that the United States Constitution places itself as the highest law of the land so far as Government is concerned.

Which means a LOT of what happens quite literally comes down to how the rank and file members of the United States Military choose to interpret their orders under the auspices of the Constitution.

And for those that fear "a military coup" in January, they need to look at what the Constitution says about that process. The Electoral College votes, Congress receives the votes and Congress is the final Constitutional arbiter of who becomes PotUS. So whatever Congress decides to do, that'll be the decision the military backs. Things only get weird if Congress decides not to make a decision for whatever reason and things run past January 20th. In that case, we're in completely uncharted territory.... As the Military could then consider Congress to be in violation of their constitutionally assigned taskings, and thus a domestic enemy of the Constitution.

I don't know if it would work or not.  I really don't want to peek down that rabbit hole because it just seems too ridiculous.  But if one branch of government knocks off the other two, then the government has failed.  The only branch that remotely has that level of power is the executive, and that's always been known.

The only example where something like that has happened was with Andrew Jackson, but after the events of WW2, and the change to the Oath of Enlistment/Commissioning starting in the early 1960's... The next President who tries to openly defy the Supreme Court in such a manner, even with the support of Congress, may get an unpleasant surprise.

[msquared]

And Trump's crack legal teams went 0 for 6 yesterday.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-brutal-day-court-031509280.html

[Grant]

And Trump's crack legal teams went 0 for 6 yesterday.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-brutal-day-court-031509280.html

Yes, but today investigators have released a video that I actually find very disturbing, and does in fact look like evidence of massive fraud.

[DonaldD]

If that hadn't been Rick Astley, I was gonna Rick Roll you next...

[DonaldD]

As of yesterday, states having combined electoral votes adding up to more than 270 have now certified their results.

Not that it matters, except in an observational "my God, they are still terrified of Donald Trump" fashion, but exactly 10 percent of Republicans in the senate and the house (well, 25 out of 249) would even acknowledge that Biden is the president elect.

Or 90% of them could not being themselves to accept reality.

[msquared]

Is that the fat lady singing? Or do I have to wait until Dec 14 for that?

[TheDeamon]

Is that the fat lady singing? Or do I have to wait until Dec 14 for that?

With Trump, don't be surprised if he drags it out the January 5th, but we can hope it will end on the 14th. If he's still fighting it on the 5th of January, he's possibly going to cost the Republicans at least one senate seat in Georgia.

[msquared]

As a state wide race, do you see a chance where the Dems turn one seat and not the other?  In this situation I would think it would both or none, and Trump really does not care about the two running.

[cherrypoptart]

"The next President who tries to openly defy the Supreme Court in such a manner, even with the support of Congress, may get an unpleasant surprise."

I wonder about that, for instance what if the Supreme Court finds DACA unconstitutional? Would it surprise anyone to see Democrats openly defying the Supreme Court then? After all, they have no respect for the law anyway, certainly not immigration law. It's funny seeing people say how important it is to respect the rule of law when they enthusiastically voted in a guy whose main promise was to break the law starting on Day One.

[DonaldD]

As a state wide race, do you see a chance where the Dems turn one seat and not the other?  In this situation I would think it would both or none, and Trump really does not care about the two running.

I doubt either Democrat has a realistic chance in Georgia.  Trump will have to work pretty hard to make either one competitive.

[msquared]

So you don't think Lin Woods call for Republican voters will keep people home? I mean some of Trump's team are saying Wood is actually a deep Democrat plant there to throw the election to the Dems.

[Grant]

I doubt either Democrat has a realistic chance in Georgia.  Trump will have to work pretty hard to make either one competitive.

The latest polls show the early leads enjoyed by the Republicans are starting to slip, though Loeffler seems to have a more comfortable cushion. 

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/georgia/

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/senate/ga/georgia_senate_runoff_election_perdue_vs_ossoff-7319.html

When Perdue loses to Ossoff, I'll be waiting for the blame to be placed on the lies of the MSM.  Pretty amazing.  Way to go GOP.  I feel like we're living through the defining political moment for Generation Z.  Between the 'Rona and this election, I don't see much hope for Republicans over the next 30 years.  I mean, if it weren't for all the progressives and socialists in the Democratic party, this would probably signal the complete end of the Republican Party on par with the end of the Federalist Party. 

[Aris Katsaris]

I don't expect the Republicans to lose in Georgia...

...but if they do, the Republican party certainly deserve it for putting a bloody asshat clown movie villain into the American presidency.

Or no, Trump was actually the sort of person who's so openly villainous, the very caricature of villainy, that it'd be unbelievable for a serious movie to use, unless it was a comedy. Not even a Bond villain, Trump was rather a *parody* of a Bond villain. Bond villains may have threatened to destroy nations, but they had some sort of dignity to them: Trump instead went in front of the United Nations and spoke like a 5-year old kid about "Rocket Man" -- while threatening to destroy nations. Bond villains shot people in private, Trump *bragged* about how he could even shoot a person in public and not lose a single voter. (and that's after his bragging about grabbing women by the pussy, or his earlier bragging about using his position as 'owner' of beauty contests to walk around in backstage areas where the contestants were naked/getting dressed -- of course these didn't cost him any votes either, because there's a segment of the population that decided they WANTED a despicable villain in the presidency.)

Shame on anyone who voted for him or otherwise supported him, just because they "liked his policies" (or for any other excuse), while at the same level he was damaging democracy, damaging discourse, and frankly damaging the dignity of the entire human species by his mere existence.

[msquared]

Don't hold back, Aris. Tell us what you really think.