Something isn't right

[angrychair]

Nothing I'm saying is fringe or conspiracy but just the mechanics of how it works. TSF appears to be barely trying. I'm starting to agree with Joy Ann Reid that he realizes he doesn't have to try, the fix is already in with those county election officials.
They, the election officials, don't even have to win. They just have delay things past the safe harbor date. Once they do that, Republicans can just vote for trump to be president, 26 Republican state delegations vs 23 Democratic state delegations.

My question is do we honestly think that would happen? I just don't think, at the end of the day, that all 26 Republican delegations works vote for TSF. I mean do they realize what would happen to the country? Are they really willing to do that? To to keep that narcissistic asshole out of prison? I just don't think all of them are.

[yourout]

1. They need to be told in no uncertain terms that failure to certify without court admissible evidence will...

Result in immediate incarceration for engaging in an attempted coup and subject to 20 years in jail.

[ariadne0614]

6. Who is responsible for ensuring they're officially on notice?

[yourout]

11. It's a federal election so I would think the federalys should have some say in it

[pat_k]

42. State law governs

Secretaries of State are responsible. And to a degree, attorneys general. All well and good in MI, where they are being very proactive about putting folks on notice. Unfortunately, there are Secretaries of State who may not be election deniers themselves, but have little interest in mounting a concerted, proactive effort to put county official and state election boards on notice.

[BrianTheEVGuy]

45. Federal law also governs

And those who violate it face the prospect of a free trip to Club Fed.

[wnylib]

67. The federal government can get involved.

Mark Elias has already put them on notice that they will face legal consequences if they follow their plan to disrupt the election process.

The ABA has an "army" of lawyers across the country who are ready to step up to deal with this election fraud plan.

[pat_k]

68. Do you know if there has

been a challenge to the recent GA state board rule changes? I've poked around and can't find anything.

And unfortunately, since 2000, when the five black robed traitors stopped the vote count in Florida, and therefore rendered that election a violation of Florida law, and the appointment of electors pursuant to it illegitimate electors that Congress should have tossed out, I don't have great trust in good results in anything that gets appealed all the way to our current SCOTUS.

[wnylib]

69. I don't know of any challenges to the Georgia law.

I agree that the corrupt MAGA SC cannot be counted on to protect the country from a MAGA coup. If they attempt to enable the coup with their rulings, then IMO, president Biden and Harris-Walz, plus Dems in Congress (and any Republicans who agree with them) would be justified in defying the court ruling based on their oaths of office.

[pat_k]

70. As Breyer put it in his dissent to Bush v. Gore,

SCOTUS actually had no place in overriding constitutional state recount law and that it was now up to Congress to fulfill its duty to judge the electors. Basically, all Bush v. Gore did was render the election incomplete and therefore unlawful.

As antiquated as the electoral count act is, it does provide a back stop to rejecting electors from a state that has corrupted its election when courts have failed to prevent the corruption (or have contributed to it) -- that is, if Congress actually fulfills its duty to honestly judge the legitimacy of the electors.

[wnylib]

71. But when members of Congress are part of the coup,

there is no check on fraudulently overturning an election. That's why I think that members of the federal government, i.e. Biden, Harris-Walz, and members of Congress who are not part of the coup would be justified in defying a SC ruling that would favor the coup plotters. It is a very grave and serious thing to do to defy a ruling from the highest court, but in the face of a coup to launch a revolution against the govt, it would be justified by their oath of office.

[Emile]

37. Garland?

[bucolic_frolic]

10. Maybe if Biden replaces Garland Nov 6.

[Frasier Balzov]

40. Ha ha, you're not wrong!

[Fiendish Thingy]

32. Here are the actual state laws and consequences:

https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/ElectionCertificationUnderThreat.pdf

[Fullduplexxx]

2. Biden has a lot of immunity now

[angrychair]

4. Good point

Not sure how he would use it but he is definitely smarter than I am

[FalloutShelter]

13. THIS

Joe is not running for anything ever again, nothing to lose and no fucks to give.

[shelshaw]

14. And NOTHING to lose

[Beetwasher.]

15. Joe Would Sacrifice his Life for Democracy

Just saying. They are underestimating Dark Brandon. As usual.

[Fiendish Thingy]

31. Immunity does equal impunity

Any illegal (immunity doesn’t make anything he does legal) order Biden might give would require the cooperation of dozens, if not hundreds of people who would all be criminally liable.

[rzemanfl]

3. You can bet they have not made arrangements for stealing in what they thought

were reliably red states. Every state is in play in this election. The new Congress will take over on January 3rd.

[Think. Again.]

16. They've made arrangements to throw everything into chaos BEFORE any new Congress is seated....

...possibly delaying the seating of that new congress.

We must expect and prepare for, AND IMMEDIATELY RESPOND TO, every possible contingency, starting now.

And I'm sorry to say we can not rely on the justice authorities for this, we will be needing the American Bar Association quick response team, Marc Elias, all the non-profits that are gearing up, any and every honest state and district official, everyone.

[wnylib]

19. The newly elected members of Congress will not be seated if their votes are not certified.

[Fiendish Thingy]

29. Enough will be seated to elect Jefferies the new speaker

And then Jefferies would be next in line for the presidency.

[wnylib]

43. That's a relief.

[rzemanfl]

46. Doesn't that apply to the re-elected as well?

[wnylib]

48. I think it would apply to any persons whose win would be challenged MAGAs. by

[rzemanfl]

49. I would think certification applies to everything on the ballot, not races they cherry pick.

[wnylib]

55. But each certification is done separately.

The presidential certification of electoral votes is separate from the certification of votes for other offices which are determined by popular vote.

[rzemanfl]

57. Not at the county and state level.

[wnylib]

59. They are certified separately at the state level.

Paragraph 5 in the following link states that separate certifications are given by the states for the president than for the members of Congress. So a state might certify the election of a Republican House member, but refuse to certify the election of a Democratic president. Or any possible combination of those separate certifications.

If a Democrat wins a seat in the House or Senate, the state might refuse to certify that election result but certify the state's EC votes for the Republican presidential candidate. Wyoming would be an example where a very red state would certify its citizens' choice of Trump, but could separately refuse to certify the election of Democratic Senator Tester. I am NOT saying that they would do that, only that it is possible due to the certification of Congressional offices at the state level being different from the process of certifying presidential EC votes.

https://www.democracydocket.com/analysis/after-election-day-the-basics-of-election-certification/

[rzemanfl]

60. I was unaware of the "ascertainment" wrinkle.

What you suggest is certainly possible, despite its being illogical and fraudulent.

Thank you for the information.

[wnylib]

61. Unfortunately, MAGAs are very much aware of this possibility and plan to make use of it

to create chaos in the election results. It is indeed fraudulent, as you said. Election fraud is a felony.

[rzemanfl]

62. In this election, all the states are in play.

Losing some red states would probably defeat their evil plan.

[anciano]

5. I don't know how this will play out,

we are in uncharted waters.

[Fiendish Thingy]

26. Unprecedented perhaps, but not totally uncharted

Here’s one excellent “chart” on how these situations have been handled previously m and how they will be handled this year:

https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/ElectionCertificationUnderThreat.pdf

[servermsh]

7. Trump is doing the best he can

He's old and tired and crazy. They thought they'd be campaigning against someone else who wouldn't have a lot of energy.

[brewens]

8. Fortunately, Joe is President. Anything that really stinks won't fly. In a legitimate coup attempt, Biden can do exactly

what MAGAts hoped Trump would do for phony reasons.

Especially if we're looking at the blue wave I'm hoping for. A few key states can't just say they don't care who won and give it to Trump.

[Think. Again.]

20. I suspect they plan to put the Blue Wave in question, we might not have any idea of what the final numbers are.

[bucolic_frolic]

9. Yes, he's very smug. It's either Blitzkrieg in October, or exactly as you say

He is devious, but everything about him has been in your face. Would he be capable of nefarious acts, of quelling his ego and bluster in furtherance of a sinister plot? I suppose so, look at what he did post election 2020.

[cyclonefence]

12. A couple of days ago, NPR reported

on the ABA's plan to protect the vote:

https://www.npr.org/2024/08/12/nx-s1-5059183/american-bar-association-creates-rapid-response-teams-ahead-of-election-day

Read the interview--it heartened me.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

17. Yes, the ABA, Marc Elias and hundreds, if not thousands, of lawyers to counter the RW attempt

a coup through lawsuits.
They've got this and are ready to do battle with these RW MAGAt's.

[Beetwasher.]

18. Trump is the Most Intensely Surveilled Individual on Earth

Whatever they are planning, Dark Brandon will be ready. Old man Dark Brandon, with no fucks left to give.

[madaboutharry]

21. I disagree with Joy.

These election officials will lose in court long before any safe harbor date passes. There is no way a court, and that includes the SC no matter how corrupt they are, will allow it. This is a still a democracy not a tin pot banana republic. If Kamala Harris and Tim Walz have won the election that election will be certified. Election officials are scorekeepers and nothing more. They have lost in court when they have tried to withhold certification and they will lose again.

I can guarantee that all of the law suits are already being prepared to immediately file by the time the courts open the morning after election day.

It isn't that this should not be a concern. There are bad actors intent on disruption. But make no mistake, there is an army of lawyers ready for them. Marc Elias has been saying all along, he has sued election officials when they have tried this stunt and he has won every time and will win again.

I will also add that it seems to me that the American people have had enough of Donald Trump and his psycho bullshit. I think he is destined for an overwhelming defeat that is going to shut any asshole election officials down before they open their traitorous mouths.

[angrychair]

25. That part I get

But laws are only effective if people follow them.
A court can order an election official to certify a vote, even put them in jail but they can't force them to certify. Not a lawyer so I have no idea how that would work.
This is the kind of shit that goes through my head every night as I try to go to sleep if I don't smoke some weed or use an edible.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

39. In my state of AZ, if an election official refuses to certify,

the court can remove them and appoint a new election official, and I know NV has the same provisions to remove them.

[CanonRay]

22. Welp, personally, I won't stand for that.

I took an oath to defend the Constitution, and I will. Not sure what that means, but I don't have too long to live anyway.

[Demobrat]

23. That could be part of it.

But this is a man who runs on adulation, and he’s not getting it. And his opponent, someone he would never have deigned to take seriously in a million years, is.

She pulled the rug out from under him and he is lying on the floor blubbering, and he can’t get up.

Every time he tries he falls flat on his face again.

It’s gotta be exhausting. Remember, he’s an old guy. They get tired.

[Fiendish Thingy]

24. Non-certification of votes doesn't trigger a contingent election in the house

It would mean the non-certifying states would forfeit their slates of electors, which would reduce the total electors, and thus, the number needed for a majority to win the presidency.

That’s never happened before- the only contingent elections have been when all states sent in electors, but because 3-4 candidates won EV’s, nobody had a majority.

I suggest reading the constitution, specifically Article II, clauses 2&3, then read the revised Electoral Count Act, which provides for a thre judge panel to take over authority from the state and appoint electors themselves.

Then, go read the excellent, thorough report from CREW on all the laws and consequences regarding non-certification of election results in the swing states.

For the CREW report, go here:

https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/ElectionCertificationUnderThreat.pdf

Hopefully, all this information will enlighten you and reduce your anxiety.

[angrychair]

30. I appreciate the information

And I will look at it but until I see VP Harris sworn in as president Harris, I am going to be an anxious mess

[Fiendish Thingy]

33. At least now you will be anxiously well informed. Nt

[Hugin]

47. That's my understanding of the process as well.

Given Trump’s simplistic “they keep counting votes until the white male (him) they want is ahead” I can believe he feels it’s in the bag. That seems to be conventional wisdom among the low brows.

It’s a long shot at best and something similar worked out for him once before. But, that’s back before they knew they couldn’t control him. Do enough know that now? Is that why Vance is there?

[wiggs]

63. They won't just rely on the consciences of the election officials...TSF operatives will have to give them

reasons to stop the certifications. Could be planted evidence of fraud. Could be organized protests at State capitols (smaller Jan 6 without the violence perhaps). Could be that investigations are 'initiated' and time is needed to resolve. Could be demands for recounts.

Even if there are legal guardrails in place to discourage this kind of coup, delay and lawsuits and confusion and outrage should be expected. Legal challenges to the guardrails themselves should also be expected.

We should not rely on just the system to reject these efforts, and unfortunately people like Elias have to spend all their time anticipating and countering known and unknown avenues of anti-democratic offensives.

Remember, there is no bottom.

[Fiendish Thingy]

64. Read the CREW report to see what has already been done to thwart the disruptors

And what will be done by those in power to stop them this year.

While there are sure to be nuisance lawsuits that Trump will lose, the efforts by MAGA elections officials, while generating headlines, will likely come to naught, ending with either timely certification, or the removal/arrest/replacement of the offending officials.

It’s been done before, and, as the CREW report details, just about every swing state (with the possible exception of GA) is prepared to do it again.

[wiggs]

65. The CREW report recognizes that the threat exists, which is what the OP also says, and recommends

preventative measures such as:

State election boards, secretaries of state, attorneys general and local prosecutors
should explicitly advise county officials of their non-discretionary certification
duties and the penalties for non-compliance before any election, as Michigan
authorities did earlier this year.

States authorities should bring expedited mandamus litigation to swiftly resolve
certification disputes in the state’s highest court, as New Mexico and Nevada
authorities have.

States should utilize mechanisms, where available, for state election officials to
step in to certify elections in place of obstructionist county officials.

States should utilize mechanisms, where available, for state election boards or
courts to remove county officials who willfully disregard their legal duties, as
North Carolina, New Mexico and Nevada have in place.

If county officials willfully violate the law, state authorities should pursue
appropriate civil and criminal remedies. If state authorities fail to act, then
federal authorities should pursue appropriate civil and criminal remedies to
protect federal voting rights.

The report doesn't say 'don't worry about it measures are in place.' Instead it suggests ACTIONS to counter the possibility of non-compliance, four of which require State action which states may or may not be willing to do. And it cites previous actions as examples of deterrence. All these are good and should cause deniers to think twice...but the report exists BECAUSE of a real threat that should not be ignored. We well know that deniers and cult members aren't good at making wise legal decisions.

Good reference to the report though...more widely distributed the better. Thanks to the OP and responses.

I think enormous voter turn out and dem sweeps would help

[Fiendish Thingy]

66. The report also outlines what *has* already been done and has been effective in stopping disruptors

And outlines the powers each state has, including removing/arresting/replacing recalcitrant elections workers.

Indeed, the report doesn’t say “don’t worry”, it says “here’s what’s coming, and here’s how states are prepared and empowered to do in response”.

[a kennedy]

27. *Slap to your face*. "Snap out of it", (via Cher in Moonstruck)

Read again what other have written.......the Blue wave will flow so high and be so strong there won’t be any doubt Harris/Walz will win this thing. 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸

[pat_k]

28. No bets from me.

I can see a Harris victory going smoothly, with election deniers/certification refusers being compelled by courts to certify results long before any safe harbor dates are reached. I can see efforts to pull off another insurrection failing as individuals contemplate the long sentences 01/06/21 insurrectionists have received....

Or

I can see all hell breaking loose, with mobs disrupting election officials in their duty and with cases appealed and appealed until blackrobbed SCOTUS traitors step in as they did in 2000 and declare some sort of "halt" at a partial outcome that favors trump.

Or

It could end up in the house. What happens there would very much depend on how close the election appears (behind whatever chaos that put it in their hands). If it's clear Harris won and is being denied by corrupt election officials in select states, I think there would be enough of a split on the Republican side to end up with the right result (Harris). If it is very close, I can see Republicans who might do the right thing in the face of a clear victory get squirrely and use the closeness to support a Trump steal.

Of course, if vote counts and the allocation of electors favors trump, we'll still have a lot of litigation over unlawfully tossed out votes. It could still get quite messy.

I really don't have any sense of how likely or unlikely this or that scenario may be. Something not yet on the radar could come into play. The only thing we can do is to do whatever we can to make the margin for Harris so large no amount of violence or corruption can overcome it.

[newdeal2]

34. What about down ballot R candidates?

Won’t they lose in that case?

[angrychair]

44. Yep

Assume they would

[liberal N proud]

35. Or at least they think they do.

Democrats had better line up lawyers like never before.

[Chakaconcarne]

36. They've seen what can happen...i dont think

they'll risk their freedumb...not only that there are alot of Republicans on our side...they want him gone.

[Jazz Jon]

38. Not Capable

My two cents is that Trump is not capable of putting up a strong campaign effort to counter Kamala. It's possible that he is too mentally out of it. We have seen this in his last two appearances. He may not be relaxing because he knows "the fix is in". He may be just to degraded to respond properly. Nevertheless, efforts to counter potential Republican cheating should be maximized.

[agingdem]

41. in 2020 Trump was confident he had fixed the outcome of the election...

Last edited Wed Aug 14, 2024, 04:56 PM - Edit history (3)

months before the election Trump knew he was going to lose ...grossly mismanaging the global pandemic, disappearing three hundred thousand covid deaths...so Trump, Bill Barr, Louis DeJoy, Steve Bannon, Rudy Giuliani, Roger Stone devised a plan to rig the election...Bill Barr publicly questioned the validity of mail-in ballots...Louis DeJoy slowed the mail, removing mailboxes and trashed sorting machines...Trump warned his rally idiots the only way he could lose is if Joe Biden and the Democrats rigged the election..Bannon, Giuliani, and Stone knew the early returns on elections night would favor Trump so they advised Trump to declare victory and demand the vote count stop (it didn't)...

the events that followed...multiple lawsuits challenging the results, fake electors, Trump inciting his followers to storm the capital...law enforcement was not prepared..but this time the DOJ/FBI/capital police/election integrity lawyers are ready...

[pwb]

51. Seems to me this kind of thing would affect pukes as well?

Individuals against the State or Uncle Sam seldom prevail. Ask Trump.

[Torchlight]

50. I firmly believe he's just calling it in at this point

and will be using the rest of the campaign deciding what his post-political career options will be reduced to (and asking for more handouts to continue paying for his lawyers' failures)

[claudette]

52. I think

he really wants to lose.

[KPN]

53. I agree. He's going through the motions knowing all thst it will take is one

County in one State that fails to certify election results prior to the day a new President is sworn in and it goes to House vote, with each State having one vote. … Have I got that wrong?

Trump’s just going thru the motions so it all looks legit, not because he’s actually campaigning.

[RidinWithHarris]

54. Trump is sure acting panicky and flustered for someone who's confident he's got the whole thing rigged

Not bothering with doing many campaign events might seem like confidence, but that could also just be a lack of energy and fear of only getting small crowds.

It could also be Trump's handlers realizing that the less the public sees of Trump, the better.

When we do get to see Trump in public, or when he's rage "tweeting" (I refuse to call it "truthing" ), he's not demonstrating self-assured poise.

To an extent I don't think it's crazy to imagine Trump has a bit of election rigging going his way, particularly corrupt election officials who are going to gum up the works by refusing to certify election results.

But it's not anywhere near enough, in and of itself, to assure victory. Harris definitely has Trump spooked.

[D23MIURG23]

56. I think Trump is just low energy, and he's also furious that he can't coast to victory...

On the "Biden is old" narrative the media crafted for him. Plus he's afraid of looking weak, because Harris and Walz are beating his crowds and people have started to notice.

He never had a good work ethic, and the things he used to enjoy doing (i.e. his red hat Nuremburg Rallies) are getting him laughed at.

Yeah, they are trying to fix the election too, but primarily he is an old, dysfunctional, mentally incompetent trainwreck. If he could win without fixing the election, I'm sure he'd prefer that.

[ecstatic]

58. If they do that, what do we do? Take it?