So pardon my simplistic view and basic knowledge of the US system, but when the Cheeto man loses the election, couldn’t NY state (or whoever has outstanding charges against him) issue arrest warrants then have the secret service or FBI execute same? Like how can that ass clown flaunt the law?
I hope he tries to stay in the White House. That way we can forever have the image of this buffoon leaving office in handcuffs like the criminal he is.
Hypothetical, even Trump isn’t this crazy (?), but if he loses could he go all scorched earth/salting fields on Biden and start a war or something prior to Jan 20? Are there any limits on an outgoing president’s power? Would people obey in any case?
You have definately just hit on the scariest and most dangerous part of 2020. The rest of this s*** is just the minor leagues compared to that baffoon not even needing to pretend anymore.
Hypothetical, even Trump isn’t this crazy (?), but if he loses could he go all scorched earth/salting fields on Biden and start a war or something prior to Jan 20? Are there any limits on an outgoing president’s power? Would people obey in any case?
Nothing seems to be too crazy for Trump if it makes him feel better about himself or makes him more rich. I'm not certain about any limits to a president after they're voted out during the last two months in their role. You'd imagine that logically, it would make sense to enact additional checks and even restrictions in that scenario, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's nothing for this. Don't forget that the House already tried to limit Trump's power to strike Iran without approval from Congress and even got some Republicans to cross over and support the bill in the Senate, but unfortunately not the 2/3 required to override any veto from Trump which he predictably did in short order after the resolution.
Read the article that lays out the road map for Trump to maintain power after losing the election. All of those machinations take place before the new congress is sworn in, hence the current congress casting the supporting vote.
Just finished reading the article.
The article assumes that electoral votes are counted on the date states certify them.
However, 270toWin points out that Congress counts the votes on January 6th, 2021. The new Congress is sworn in on January 3rd, 2021.
From Wikidpedia
Quote:
Each state's electors meet in their respective state capital on the first Monday after the second Wednesday of December to cast their votes.[7] The results are counted by Congress, where they are tabulated in the first week of January before a joint meeting of the Senate and House of Representatives, presided over by the vice president, acting as president of the Senate.[7]
So pardon my simplistic view and basic knowledge of the US system, but when the Cheeto man loses the election, couldn’t NY state (or whoever has outstanding charges against him) issue arrest warrants then have the secret service or FBI execute same? Like how can that ass clown flaunt the law?
If he loses the election, he's still President until January 20th, 2021. So it would have to be after Biden (so whomever else is elected) is sworn in.
I once heard a story where Nixon was on Air Force One (which is a call sign and not a specific plane) when Ford was sworn in. The moment Ford was sworn in, the pilot radioed air traffic control and changed their flight number (as it was no longer Air Force One).
__________________ "Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Maritime Q-Scout For This Useful Post:
"The investigation is intended to tick down the clock toward December 14, the deadline when each state's Electoral College electors must be appointed. This is the very issue that the Supreme Court harped on in Bush v. Gore in ruling that the election process had to be brought to a close, thus forbidding the further counting of Florida ballots."
"The issue goes up to the Supreme Court, which unlike the 2000 election does not decide the election in favor of the Republicans. However, it indicates again that the December 14 Electoral College deadline must be met; that the president's national security powers legally authorize him to investigate potential foreign country intrusion into the national election; and if no Electoral College slate can be certified by any state by December 14, the Electoral College must meet anyway and cast its votes."
This is before the new congress gets sworn in, hence any action taken will be with the current congress in place. I understand what you are saying about the new congress and the usual process, but the intent of the article is to show how unusual circumstances could change the process, the election stolen, and democracy drown in the bath tub that Grover Nordquist metaphorically railed over for years.
Which means that it should be the new Congress that holds the contingent election, not the current one.
That said the 117th Congress could yield a very similar vote to the 116th.
Given the Democratic majority I don't see how the Republicans could pull a McConnell and make stuff up to hold the contingent election early.
It doesn't matter whether the vote happens with the old or new congress. It's one vote per state, and unless it's a landslide there's still a chance the Republicans win more (small) states while the Democrats rack up huge wins in bigger states. I haven't looked at scenarios but guarantee Barr has
(Just looked it up. 2016 election it was 30 states for the GOP but after midterms were 26-23-1 )
He already looks wrecked and mentally checked out. I suspect by the time the election actually roles around he'll be happy to have a good excuse to roll over like a river log(waltz!) and get outa there.
It doesn't matter whether the vote happens with the old or new congress. It's one vote per state, and unless it's a landslide there's still a chance the Republicans win more (small) states while the Democrats rack up huge wins in bigger states. I haven't looked at scenarios but guarantee Barr has
(Just looked it up. 2016 election it was 30 states for the GOP but after midterms were 26-23-1 )
Oh I'm not saying a new Congress is necessarily different, just that its an unknown and not a certainty.
But without looking at the numbers, another 4 vote swing puts the one state, one vote, majority with the Dems.
Its possible Corona shifts the down ballot in the Dems favor.
Again, not saying it's going to happen, I have no idea. Just looking for certainty in process in there uncertain times.
__________________ "Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
Hypothetical, even Trump isn’t this crazy (?), but if he loses could he go all scorched earth/salting fields on Biden and start a war or something prior to Jan 20? Are there any limits on an outgoing president’s power? Would people obey in any case?
I posted this before, and hopefully it still holds true.
If Trump were inclined to overstay his term, the levers of power work in favor of removal. Because the president immediately and automatically loses his constitutional authority upon expiration of his term or after removal through impeachment, he would lack the power to direct the U.S. Secret Service or other federal agents to protect him. He would likewise lose his power, as the commander in chief of the armed forces, to order a military response to defend him. In fact, the newly minted president would possess those presidential powers. If necessary, the successor could direct federal agents to forcibly remove Trump from the White House. Now a private citizen, Trump would no longer be immune from criminal prosecution, and could be arrested and charged with trespassing in the White House. While even former presidents enjoy Secret Service protection, agents presumably would not follow an illegal order to protect one from removal from office.
"The investigation is intended to tick down the clock toward December 14, the deadline when each state's Electoral College electors must be appointed. This is the very issue that the Supreme Court harped on in Bush v. Gore in ruling that the election process had to be brought to a close, thus forbidding the further counting of Florida ballots."
"The issue goes up to the Supreme Court, which unlike the 2000 election does not decide the election in favor of the Republicans. However, it indicates again that the December 14 Electoral College deadline must be met; that the president's national security powers legally authorize him to investigate potential foreign country intrusion into the national election; and if no Electoral College slate can be certified by any state by December 14, the Electoral College must meet anyway and cast its votes."
This is before the new congress gets sworn in, hence any action taken will be with the current congress in place. I understand what you are saying about the new congress and the usual process, but the intent of the article is to show how unusual circumstances could change the process, the election stolen, and democracy drown in the bath tub that Grover Nordquist metaphorically railed over for years.
Right. From what I understand the votes are cast on December 14th but are counted on January 6th.
So let's say the votes aren't cast because a slate can't be certified, and no one gets to 270.
When Congress counts them on January 6th, and confirms this, then there is a contingent election... with the new Congress (the 117th) that was sworn in 3 days earlier.
So the timeline is:
December 14th - deadline to certify Electoral College Votes
January 3 - 117th Congress is sworn in
January 6 - the 117th Congress counts the certified Electoral Votes
January 6 - a contingent election is held if no slate reaches 270 Electoral votes.
At least that's how I understand it based in the above reading.
__________________ "Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
He already looks wrecked and mentally checked out. I suspect by the time the election actually roles around he'll be happy to have a good excuse to roll over like a river log(waltz!) and get outa there.
I imagine a somehow worse debate performance this time. All Joe has to do is resist getting angry and hurling 1920’s insults (as someone on CP once eloquently put it).
I imagine a somehow worse debate performance this time. All Joe has to do is resist getting angry and hurling 1920’s insults (as someone on CP once eloquently put it).
now you're on the trolley
__________________
GFG
The Following User Says Thank You to dino7c For This Useful Post:
The below ad from the Meidas Touch group has been playing on all the major network news shows including Hannity, Ingraham, Tucker, Fox and Friends, Cuomo, Cooper, and Lemon.
Should progressives and liberals view the Lincoln Project Republicans as full-fledged converts, or as temporary allies of convenience, or as an ideological Trojan horse virus that will co-opt the Democratic Party from within if allowed to ride anti-Trump sentiment into the party’s good graces?
...
But this has unleashed a counter-narrative: The Lincoln Project is working to insulate conservatism from blame for Trump so it can rise again. Its condemnations of Trump don’t acknowledge the GOP’s culpability for creating the conditions for his rise. Allowing the group influence over a Joe Biden presidency will cripple his ability to rescue the country.
This individual is not affluent and more of a member of that shrinking middle class. It is likely the individual does not have a high paying job, is limited on benefits, and has to make due with those benefits provided by employer.
The Following User Says Thank You to dobbles For This Useful Post:
I fully expect a walk in the park for Biden come November. Maybe even a record victory.
Any chance there is a deal made to pardon Trump of any wrongdoings to have him go quietly into the night?
I can't say there will be a pardon, but I would bet on their being no attempt from federal politicians to go after a former president. In the present political climate, that would kick off a cycle that would never end.
