You know what the Trump campaign and Republicans have been out there doing as Trump’s poll numbers have continued to slide over the last two weeks? Rather than trying to broaden their coalition by reaching out to young voters and undecideds, Trump has launched yet another divisive attack down the same old racist warpath. There is little historical evidence that this strategy will do anything other than cost him votes on the margins with the independent and suburban voters Trump needs to secure a lead over Vice President Kamala Harris and possibly extend it.
Thank you! The best comments are always the ones that seek solutions, not just new ways to express complaint.
I don't see any legal path to heading this off (but I'm not a lawyer; perhaps others have ideas) so it seems to me the next best thing is for the Democratic Party to have an army of lawyers ready to file suit the minute these treasonous assholes refuse to certify. It's not like we don't know where to expect it!
It has to be litigated, and as Lucian has pointed out, the election itself creates the most crucial, most fundamental evidence: votes and thus voting totals.
The aftermath of the 2020 election took law-abiding officials and much of the legal profession by surprise. "Won't get fooled again" is the watchword here. Many, many individuals and organizations are now on the alert, like Marc Elias and Democracy Docket. As Richard Turnbull points out, "It has to be litigated" -- we saw from the 2020 aftermath that the right files suits with only the sketchiest of evidence.
What concerns me most is that the intimidation of election workers has had its effect. Election integrity across the country depends on thousands of them, often volunteers, and often "older" (like me). The persecution of Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss in GA made an impression on all of us, even those of us in blue states. Ditto the armed men who showed up at various polling places. Will there be enough election workers *who take election integrity seriously* to do the job, or will 2020 election deniers and MAGA types have to be recruited to take their places?
Some one wrote to we need to examine our ballots before we vote. Any marks on the ballot including check marks render the ballot invalid. Take the tie to look before you vote!
It depends on several factors, like whether the ballots are counted by hand or by machine. In my town (I'm an election worker), any ballot the machine rejects is then counted by hand. Stray marks and the use of checkmarks are common reasons. However, I'm in a blue town in a blue state, and election officials aren't looking for reasons to exclude ballots, so if you've got any doubts about election integrity in your district, be very, very careful to follow the rules.
The last thing this nation needs is a contested election involving multiple states and counties. A President must be sworn in at noon on 20Jan after the Oath is administered. A sitting President's term ends on that day and hour. Congressional terms end before noon on the 3rd.
People mucking with a result best consider everything must fall in their favor. Emphasis everything and on the strict dates/timeline laid out in the 2nd Constitution. There is no provision in the 2nd Constitution for a re-vote. So, bon chance to those who think and believe they can come up with a perfect plan that can sustain all scrutiny every step of the way and at all levels.
A paper plan w/o a series of test runs including all the what next and what ifs ain't going to succeed. Rs/cons don't adhere to red-teaming their ideas or plans. They are the jamokes who say sounds good to me the first time they hear it. And have the biggest mouths when secrecy is required.
Have much confidence in the DD folk. Have very little in Rs/cons. Most of all have the highest confidence in the countless "old-timers" involved in the ballot to tallying process all around the country. They know when something is off from doing it so many times. Me-Mum worked elections, from local to state to national for >3decades. There are 10s of 1000s of Mums and Grandmothers just like her around the country. And the last person to try to fool is a Mum or Grandmother no matter the subject. They've seen and heard it all.
Something that puzzles me: so many have been manipulated into believing that all news is "fake" news, regardless of evidence. Assuming that many of these same people are devout Christians -- aren't they sort of required to believe that a lot of things are true -- without any factual evidence?
They're supposed to "have faith."
Ever since someone told me that four people could be witnesses to the same car crash and come up with four different stories. I've had trouble with the New Testament.
The entire Maga narrative relies on "belief" rather than facts, what they term as "alternative facts."
The Believe that the election was stolen, therefore it was. As for Christians the four gospels each have varying accounts about Jesus and the differences have never bothered them because they have faith.
I think you're on to something there, Marjorie.I wonder if that blind faith without "concrete evidence" causes some psychological quirk in their mental make up that caused them to belie Trump months before the last election repeating over and over that that the election would be rigged (only if he lost of course :)
They ignore all the contradictions in the bible, like 'you must believe this and that in order to be saved and have eternal life.' Yet it also says 'By your works you shall be known, and faith without works is as tinkling bells' (In other words belief is not enough.
So many smile and nod to each other on Sunday morning and tell the minister wa great sermon it was, then all through the week forget all about the sermon telling them to love one another, be kind, generous hearted, gentle of spirit, etc., etc., etc., as they cut people off in traffic; yell at their employees and/or spouse; over indulge in certain activities and substances when out of town at conventions, when away from home and so on. Or in the case f Marjorie Taylor Green. Vent anger hate and resentment on a daily basis (and she is always saying she is a Christian). I know people of no religious faith or of other faiths, some Jewish, who are just naturally spiritual in many ways, just decent nice people. If there's a heaven I want to be where they are , not in the Christian heaven with a bunch of bigoted, exclusionary often nasty people like MTG, a CIRO (My term for Christian in Name only.
After a near death type experience over fifty years ago I came to the conclusian that there may be more to what we consider reality that is generally believed. But if there is, it is (based on my experience) nt exactly as generally i understood and taught. On accasion I have had to opporunity to talk to a priest or a Rabbi on two occasions, and they have told me they know more about this stuff than they dare let on to their congregations. They would be fired if they departed from the traditional message. Their flock are far from ready to depart from a lifetime of dearly held beliefs. Isn't it exactly the same with all Republicans? If you depart from the party line you are a RINO and sent to outer Siberia :) And the fact that they have no shame, quite willing to cheat as Lucian says in his most comprehensive eye opening article, in order to "win" the election. How Christian is that?
We should be referring to these Christian Nationalists as ‘Moonies” or followers of Jim Jones or Scientologists (who follow the BS myths created by L Ron Hubbard who was a science fiction writer). It seems that all of these cult members are trying to fill a yearning for any implausible answer to fix how they feel. Evidence is NOT part of their concern and a practiced con artist poses as their righteous leader despite tons of evidence that proves how misled they are. They will believe any lie repeatedly told and already think the election will be stolen. They will go ahead and create chaos no matter what. We need to pull out the stops to win this thing by many millions and specifically hundreds of thousands in the swing states.
They are all brainwashed into unquestioning belief of whatever they are told. I still cannot believe that these churches get tax exempt status. I think this is something to take on after the election. But still, there are people who no longer believe Trump's lies because the courts have spoken. Here is a playlist of 5 Republican Voters Against Trump saying they won't be voting for him. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?app=desktop&list=PLPbECI-Q45WdmDcEglQaPrsKqqZibDZTi
And this is recent. I found another one before Harris was the candidate which had 18 RVAT saying they would not vote for him but Biden instead.
However, my concern with the election denying is that I see Alito and Thomas on SCOTUS which is where things will reach just making up a reason to give the election to Trump. That is my concern, is that I have no faith in SCOTUS.
SCROTUS is pretty scary these days. Another reason we have to win by enormous numbers. Numbers that make it completely impossible for those motherfucker right wing assholes to LOSE and FAIL.
One advantage Democrats have if the Republicans use the approach of not certifying elections is the sitting president is Joe Biden. If he were to pass an executive order stating all of the parameters needed to certify an election and make it illegal to not certify an election when all of the parameters have been met, then, all of those required to certify the election will realize it is their ass on the line for any resistance to certify if all of the parameters have been met. That may make them think twice. As long as the executive order is in place before the election.
Surely the list of the parameters required to certify an election are in place and well documented, so this executive order is doing nothing more than making those desiring to not certify any election for nefarious reasons, answer for their actions.
AND the Supreme Court just ruled that the President has immunity for all official acts. Biden issuing Executive Orders to ensure that all ballts cast in the 2024 election are counted, and that election results based on the factual vote tallies must by law be duly certified, is the *essence* of an official act.
Biden may have immunity from prosecution for crimes he might commit but that does not give him any additional authority. So this whole business that he can pass whatever EOs he wants without any consequences is wrong and ridiculous. Passing an executive order is not a criminal act. The courts can still reverse his EOs.
it is true that the courts can reverse them. But it will look pretty silly to try to do so when all they are doing is having the same effect as a writ of mandamus, a request for which Dems in every swing state should have ready, already printed, waiting for signature in every possible location a refusal to certify is possible. I suppose what he COULD do with his core powers is declare a state of emergency and send out the national guard to arrest every clerk down to the precinct level who refuses to certify.
Again I don't think there is any penalty for refusing to certify. This is part of the checks and balances our government is built on. What you are describing is something even Trump wouldn't try, certainly not Biden.
It is definitely a plus that a Democrat is in office at this time -- so the question is, will he and his entourage have the will power to carry out the law despite the intimidation and legal machinations sure to be also in play? Drumpf and his cadre in 2020 didn't seem to know how to exercise their (presumed) power enough to forestall the certification of election results nationwide, or in the end they lacked the will to force a constitutional crisis like we haven't seen since 1860. Will things be different in 2024-25?
Exactly, Biden can list the existing procedures and stipulate that, if the procedures are met and certification is not made then they are in violation and subject to charges. (Possibly treason?) He would not be reversing anything, simply accentuating the penalty for not certifying a perfectly certifiable election count.
I don't know if there is a penalty for not certifying an election under any circumstances. I think that would end up being something the Courts would decide. And I doubt the individuals who did not certify the election would be in criminal jeopardy, certainly not treason.
You'd need to look at the oath of office they took, it might even outline a penalty for intentional malfeasance. But not treason, at least not on the local level and not a national stage, where a whole process of wheeling out legal machinery gives the accused an opportunity to defend themselves.
If there is one thing I have come to realize in the Trump era, it's that the constitution is vague in many areas. Of late, the GOP tends to exploit those vague areas and play it to their advantage. Essentially this is what Lucian's column is about. when the founders spoke of certifying an election they probably made an assumption that those individuals certifying the election were honest. Jump to 2024 and it may not be true. There are surely reasons to not certify an election that are valid, like counting mail in ballots that were unsigned or received late. But there is a process to deal with the mass of votes cast to determine if the election should be certified. If that is not followed then whomever is to certify the election is responsible. Maybe treason is the wrong term, but if the intent is to overthrow a fairly conducted election it is certainly a chargeable offense.
After reading Robert Hubbell today I am less worried about Republicans stealing the election through their officials and even the Court than I am about voter suppression. Thom Hartmann has written about an investigation in Georgia by Greg Palast that's really scary. Any citizen can request that voters be dropped from the rolls, and voters' Social Security numbers and driver's license numbers were leaked the other day. Once people have that information they can remove anyone they want. Georgia Democrats must check and recheck their registration.
That’s a two way street. If the democrats decide to play nasty they could threaten to do the same thing. Fight fire with fire. Although I’m not really quite sure that the Democrats have learned how to use a match yet.
"The evidence in elections is votes. " Let us hope this prevents the crazies from gumming up the works. I am bone tired of the Trump crackpots thinking they can do whatever they want. Also that the object of their affection is such a sleazebag. Do these people think he's going to give them all pots of money? Actually, it seems they are unable to think.
Margo, I am bone tired as well. Hard time in prison for all of these traitors as a corrective measure. Make examples of every one of them. No more Merrick Garland fecklessness.
I sure hope that President Kamala will replace Garland and many others. I'm not sure she can replace Dejoy, but she should look into it. Several others come to mind.
Where are the counties with election official who are also pro-Trump election deniers? Check this interactive map we created with the data from Rolling Stone.
That's useful info. As I pointed out elsewhere, election integrity depends on the integrity of election workers -- and the thought that what happened to Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss could happen to any of us is sobering enough to those of us who live in blue states and likely chilling to those who don't.
Maybe we can look at that as an opportunity to dream about the USA in November 2024 and right through January, as showing the world how to fight this kind of stuff out in the courts of law, and not via violent coups?
“The thing about Donald Trump is that he has believed all his life that he can control outcomes using corruption.” And this time around he is likely to be abetted by the most corrupt Supreme Court in American history. That condo in Vancouver is looking more inviting than ever.
And we can further combat their BS by making sure we have a Democratic house in place on January 6, 2025. That would be a perfect way to turn their own tables on them.
So glad that you are highlighting this issue just as with Project 2025. Once the bright lights come on they tend to run back into the shadows. SCOTUS has ruled POTUS has absolute immunity for official acts. Joe will still be President on Election Day and after. Hoping there is some mechanism/path where this can be used to deal with skullduggery around certification of the vote!
Please stop! You're spreading disinformation. The president has limited immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. It gives him zero additional authority. So there really isn't anything he can do unless he wants to commit federal crimes. Is that what you're suggesting?
He's pointing out that OFFICIAL ACTS, such as those crafted to protect valid election results are absolutely immune from second-guessing and/or reversals via prosecution.
The text posted below is taken directly from Chief Justice John Roberts majority opinion No 23-939, July 1, 2024, Page 1:
"Held: Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority."
So I fail to see how MY statement: "SCOTUS has ruled POTUS has ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for official acts." can be construed as "spreading disinformation".
Furthermore nowhere in my comment do I suggest that Joe Biden commit a Federal Crime. What I AM suggesting is that every means possible to protect the integrity of the election process that falls under a Presidential Official Act be considered: Can Joe order that resources for Homeland Security to protect/monitor the election be increased? Can he order that these resources be made available to State and Local election officials? Can he order that resources to the Justice Department related to election integrity be increased? Can he order that these resources be made available to State and Local election officials? Etc. Etc. Are these considered OFFICIAL ACTS???
I don't know the answer to those questions but I sure as hell hope somebody is looking into every possible thing that Biden can do to push back on what's coming on Election Day.
In addition, all those questions you asked are valid, but the answers to each of them would be the same whether Biden had immunity or not. The entirety of my objection to what you are saying concerns the inclusion of immunity into this process when it should have nothing to do with it unless he is going to commit crimes.
So my question to you would be, what possible connection could there be between Joe Biden having absolute immunity for official acts and preventing what you called skullduggery around certification of the vote? You don't seem to realize that immunity only protects Biden from prosecution for crimes he might commit. There is absolutely no reason to even bring up immunity if you aren't suggesting Biden should commit crimes in the process of protecting the integrity of the election.
What I saying is that if Joe Biden does undertake Official Acts in an attempt to prevent Republican undermining of the election he does NOT need to be concerned about lawsuits or other legal actions that could or would be attempted in the future. When Donold Trump declares that he will seek "retribution" on his political enemies (including the Clinton's and Biden's) it might be wise to take him seriously
And I really don't take this whole business of retribution by Trump, in the unlikely event he should ever haunt the halls of the White House again, in the form of criminal prosecution seriously. And I think Biden himself takes it even less seriously.
The important thing is Biden was not given any additional authority by this decision, only protection.
Lawsuits are civil law. The Supreme Court did not give him immunity from lawsuits. I am pretty sure the president was already shielded from lawsuits long before the immunity decision. The mention of immunity implies criminal, not civil, acts.
Plan ahead. E.g. local party officials can prepare members to picket county offices where an official is refusing to certify under illegitimate pretenses. Take an oath to peaceful demonstration, and bring a tent if you can. Make signs ahead of time. If you don’t live in such a county, go to the geographically nearest derelict county office or state house, whichever is closer. Yea, I’ve merely been musing about this, but it behooves the party to think something along these lines through for the sake of the nation, Europe and struggling oppressed people around the world.
Revisit chain of custody for ballots, and shore up with legal witnesses where possible under current law. Ensure any completed tallies are communicated off-site immediately, e.g. by the kind of “observers” the Trump campaign had alleging BS (and in one case, apparently, accurate but non-consequential) process exceptions.
Have bomb squads in these ‘election denier’ counties at the ready.
I’m not saying I have the system down. I’m saying the national, state and county parties need to be going through both symmetrical and asymmetrical (e.g. anarchist) war games.
This article by our hero Lucian goes farther than many in playing out scenarios involving corrupt election officials and law suits. (Thank you sir!)
The party at all levels must prepare and stretch its imagination, toss out assumptions and the past.
It's funny that after all the various epithets applied to Trump and his cultists, "weirdo" seems to have them especially annoyed.
But I don't see what we can do beyond the usual campaign strategies. Also to take advantage of Trump blunders, like Harris stating SHE will be on stage for the ABC sponsored debate September 10, whether he shows up on not!
Among the responses to this near inevitability, Democrats *must* post credentialed individuals at *every* precinct in these states, and obtain and forward photographs of posted voting machine results.
In this way, like an audit, results can be tallied and posted independently.
In our county, it is allowed after the end of voting.
No doubt this is just part of a puzzle; it only applies to places with electronic voting. Point is to find out where election officials post results once tallied. E.g. our county clerk posts tallied results online. Have a web site per state that posts all county-posted results. If organized, it’s a visceral way to help drive public opinion against these shenanigans.
Rural America has a history of believing in the fantastical: witness talking in tongues, traveling sales physicians, even Baptist church raves. But I don’t think it has spilled over to the political arena as pervasive as it has now. Possibly because out ability to spread the “word” is so very easy now.
I’m worried that they’ll get crooked judges to certify what they want — or they’ll destroy or hide votes..
Are Democrats READY to make sure that Republicans in Red States don’t rig this? I hope so. They are already purging voter rolls, and that’s scary in itself!!
Yes, this election could indeed be very long and drawn out. If Republican officials follow through on their plan to refuse certifying vote counts, it could lead to extensive legal battles in multiple states. Each lawsuit would need to be resolved, potentially dragging the process into the courts for weeks or even months. The uncertainty and disputes could delay the final certification of the election results well beyond the usual timeline, making it a protracted and contentious process.
I believe, from reading about possible scenarios in 2021, that the Speaker of the House would assume the office of acting president. Which would suit Mike Johnson just fine. (In 2021, that would have been Nancy Pelosi, which the MAGAts definitely did not want.)
No way, with this level of unresolved chaos, BIDEN would remain in office - there's no way to transfer executive power to the Speaker of the House in this kind of fog of legal war.
I distinctly remember reading analyses in 2020-21 that if Trump refused to vacate, and Biden wasn't certified by electoral votes, the office of President still would become vacant on Jan 20 (or whenever that inauguration day fell) because the term expires whether or not there's a new president in the wings; and the law spells out that the Speaker of the House becomes acting president until it's all resolved. That meant the GOP wasn't happy in 2021 at the prospect of having Pelosi acting president and had some incentive to not push things that far then. 2025 could be a whole lot different.
So the question is: how do we head this plan off at the pass, rather than have to litigate it post election?
Thank you! The best comments are always the ones that seek solutions, not just new ways to express complaint.
I don't see any legal path to heading this off (but I'm not a lawyer; perhaps others have ideas) so it seems to me the next best thing is for the Democratic Party to have an army of lawyers ready to file suit the minute these treasonous assholes refuse to certify. It's not like we don't know where to expect it!
It has to be litigated, and as Lucian has pointed out, the election itself creates the most crucial, most fundamental evidence: votes and thus voting totals.
The aftermath of the 2020 election took law-abiding officials and much of the legal profession by surprise. "Won't get fooled again" is the watchword here. Many, many individuals and organizations are now on the alert, like Marc Elias and Democracy Docket. As Richard Turnbull points out, "It has to be litigated" -- we saw from the 2020 aftermath that the right files suits with only the sketchiest of evidence.
What concerns me most is that the intimidation of election workers has had its effect. Election integrity across the country depends on thousands of them, often volunteers, and often "older" (like me). The persecution of Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss in GA made an impression on all of us, even those of us in blue states. Ditto the armed men who showed up at various polling places. Will there be enough election workers *who take election integrity seriously* to do the job, or will 2020 election deniers and MAGA types have to be recruited to take their places?
Some one wrote to we need to examine our ballots before we vote. Any marks on the ballot including check marks render the ballot invalid. Take the tie to look before you vote!
It depends on several factors, like whether the ballots are counted by hand or by machine. In my town (I'm an election worker), any ballot the machine rejects is then counted by hand. Stray marks and the use of checkmarks are common reasons. However, I'm in a blue town in a blue state, and election officials aren't looking for reasons to exclude ballots, so if you've got any doubts about election integrity in your district, be very, very careful to follow the rules.
Donate to the Democracy Docket
Thanks. Here's their take on the topic vis a vis the Rolling Stone article: https://www.democracydocket.com/analysis/what-happens-when-election-officials-refuse-to-certify-results/
The last thing this nation needs is a contested election involving multiple states and counties. A President must be sworn in at noon on 20Jan after the Oath is administered. A sitting President's term ends on that day and hour. Congressional terms end before noon on the 3rd.
People mucking with a result best consider everything must fall in their favor. Emphasis everything and on the strict dates/timeline laid out in the 2nd Constitution. There is no provision in the 2nd Constitution for a re-vote. So, bon chance to those who think and believe they can come up with a perfect plan that can sustain all scrutiny every step of the way and at all levels.
A paper plan w/o a series of test runs including all the what next and what ifs ain't going to succeed. Rs/cons don't adhere to red-teaming their ideas or plans. They are the jamokes who say sounds good to me the first time they hear it. And have the biggest mouths when secrecy is required.
Have much confidence in the DD folk. Have very little in Rs/cons. Most of all have the highest confidence in the countless "old-timers" involved in the ballot to tallying process all around the country. They know when something is off from doing it so many times. Me-Mum worked elections, from local to state to national for >3decades. There are 10s of 1000s of Mums and Grandmothers just like her around the country. And the last person to try to fool is a Mum or Grandmother no matter the subject. They've seen and heard it all.
Something that puzzles me: so many have been manipulated into believing that all news is "fake" news, regardless of evidence. Assuming that many of these same people are devout Christians -- aren't they sort of required to believe that a lot of things are true -- without any factual evidence?
They're supposed to "have faith."
Ever since someone told me that four people could be witnesses to the same car crash and come up with four different stories. I've had trouble with the New Testament.
The entire Maga narrative relies on "belief" rather than facts, what they term as "alternative facts."
The Believe that the election was stolen, therefore it was. As for Christians the four gospels each have varying accounts about Jesus and the differences have never bothered them because they have faith.
Yes.. belief not facts.. Christian Dogma 🙃
I think you're on to something there, Marjorie.I wonder if that blind faith without "concrete evidence" causes some psychological quirk in their mental make up that caused them to belie Trump months before the last election repeating over and over that that the election would be rigged (only if he lost of course :)
They ignore all the contradictions in the bible, like 'you must believe this and that in order to be saved and have eternal life.' Yet it also says 'By your works you shall be known, and faith without works is as tinkling bells' (In other words belief is not enough.
So many smile and nod to each other on Sunday morning and tell the minister wa great sermon it was, then all through the week forget all about the sermon telling them to love one another, be kind, generous hearted, gentle of spirit, etc., etc., etc., as they cut people off in traffic; yell at their employees and/or spouse; over indulge in certain activities and substances when out of town at conventions, when away from home and so on. Or in the case f Marjorie Taylor Green. Vent anger hate and resentment on a daily basis (and she is always saying she is a Christian). I know people of no religious faith or of other faiths, some Jewish, who are just naturally spiritual in many ways, just decent nice people. If there's a heaven I want to be where they are , not in the Christian heaven with a bunch of bigoted, exclusionary often nasty people like MTG, a CIRO (My term for Christian in Name only.
After a near death type experience over fifty years ago I came to the conclusian that there may be more to what we consider reality that is generally believed. But if there is, it is (based on my experience) nt exactly as generally i understood and taught. On accasion I have had to opporunity to talk to a priest or a Rabbi on two occasions, and they have told me they know more about this stuff than they dare let on to their congregations. They would be fired if they departed from the traditional message. Their flock are far from ready to depart from a lifetime of dearly held beliefs. Isn't it exactly the same with all Republicans? If you depart from the party line you are a RINO and sent to outer Siberia :) And the fact that they have no shame, quite willing to cheat as Lucian says in his most comprehensive eye opening article, in order to "win" the election. How Christian is that?
Don't Christians believe in a few unprovable assertions? They're primed.
We should be referring to these Christian Nationalists as ‘Moonies” or followers of Jim Jones or Scientologists (who follow the BS myths created by L Ron Hubbard who was a science fiction writer). It seems that all of these cult members are trying to fill a yearning for any implausible answer to fix how they feel. Evidence is NOT part of their concern and a practiced con artist poses as their righteous leader despite tons of evidence that proves how misled they are. They will believe any lie repeatedly told and already think the election will be stolen. They will go ahead and create chaos no matter what. We need to pull out the stops to win this thing by many millions and specifically hundreds of thousands in the swing states.
Just call them Fascists. Short, sweet, and to the point.
As Governor of MN, Tim Walz, would say..."they are weird".
They are all brainwashed into unquestioning belief of whatever they are told. I still cannot believe that these churches get tax exempt status. I think this is something to take on after the election. But still, there are people who no longer believe Trump's lies because the courts have spoken. Here is a playlist of 5 Republican Voters Against Trump saying they won't be voting for him. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?app=desktop&list=PLPbECI-Q45WdmDcEglQaPrsKqqZibDZTi
And this is recent. I found another one before Harris was the candidate which had 18 RVAT saying they would not vote for him but Biden instead.
https://youtu.be/0-Rr8UhaZ9Y?si=wI3xu4HTfZXFlYT-
However, my concern with the election denying is that I see Alito and Thomas on SCOTUS which is where things will reach just making up a reason to give the election to Trump. That is my concern, is that I have no faith in SCOTUS.
SCROTUS is pretty scary these days. Another reason we have to win by enormous numbers. Numbers that make it completely impossible for those motherfucker right wing assholes to LOSE and FAIL.
All religion is myth.
One advantage Democrats have if the Republicans use the approach of not certifying elections is the sitting president is Joe Biden. If he were to pass an executive order stating all of the parameters needed to certify an election and make it illegal to not certify an election when all of the parameters have been met, then, all of those required to certify the election will realize it is their ass on the line for any resistance to certify if all of the parameters have been met. That may make them think twice. As long as the executive order is in place before the election.
Surely the list of the parameters required to certify an election are in place and well documented, so this executive order is doing nothing more than making those desiring to not certify any election for nefarious reasons, answer for their actions.
AND the Supreme Court just ruled that the President has immunity for all official acts. Biden issuing Executive Orders to ensure that all ballts cast in the 2024 election are counted, and that election results based on the factual vote tallies must by law be duly certified, is the *essence* of an official act.
Biden may have immunity from prosecution for crimes he might commit but that does not give him any additional authority. So this whole business that he can pass whatever EOs he wants without any consequences is wrong and ridiculous. Passing an executive order is not a criminal act. The courts can still reverse his EOs.
it is true that the courts can reverse them. But it will look pretty silly to try to do so when all they are doing is having the same effect as a writ of mandamus, a request for which Dems in every swing state should have ready, already printed, waiting for signature in every possible location a refusal to certify is possible. I suppose what he COULD do with his core powers is declare a state of emergency and send out the national guard to arrest every clerk down to the precinct level who refuses to certify.
Again I don't think there is any penalty for refusing to certify. This is part of the checks and balances our government is built on. What you are describing is something even Trump wouldn't try, certainly not Biden.
well, the tongue was rather firmly fixed in the cheek, about Biden. Not about having applications for writs at the ready.
Probably not true for this supreme court. They just make ruling based on what they "believe".
Send that to President Biden!
Yes, so he can get a big laugh.
It is definitely a plus that a Democrat is in office at this time -- so the question is, will he and his entourage have the will power to carry out the law despite the intimidation and legal machinations sure to be also in play? Drumpf and his cadre in 2020 didn't seem to know how to exercise their (presumed) power enough to forestall the certification of election results nationwide, or in the end they lacked the will to force a constitutional crisis like we haven't seen since 1860. Will things be different in 2024-25?
No, that won't work. The procedures are established by law and Biden cannot reverse them.
Exactly, Biden can list the existing procedures and stipulate that, if the procedures are met and certification is not made then they are in violation and subject to charges. (Possibly treason?) He would not be reversing anything, simply accentuating the penalty for not certifying a perfectly certifiable election count.
I don't know if there is a penalty for not certifying an election under any circumstances. I think that would end up being something the Courts would decide. And I doubt the individuals who did not certify the election would be in criminal jeopardy, certainly not treason.
You'd need to look at the oath of office they took, it might even outline a penalty for intentional malfeasance. But not treason, at least not on the local level and not a national stage, where a whole process of wheeling out legal machinery gives the accused an opportunity to defend themselves.
Local officials could just be fired, though.
If there is one thing I have come to realize in the Trump era, it's that the constitution is vague in many areas. Of late, the GOP tends to exploit those vague areas and play it to their advantage. Essentially this is what Lucian's column is about. when the founders spoke of certifying an election they probably made an assumption that those individuals certifying the election were honest. Jump to 2024 and it may not be true. There are surely reasons to not certify an election that are valid, like counting mail in ballots that were unsigned or received late. But there is a process to deal with the mass of votes cast to determine if the election should be certified. If that is not followed then whomever is to certify the election is responsible. Maybe treason is the wrong term, but if the intent is to overthrow a fairly conducted election it is certainly a chargeable offense.
Of course! There might be a number of charges (election law violations, defrauding the United States) that could apply.
After reading Robert Hubbell today I am less worried about Republicans stealing the election through their officials and even the Court than I am about voter suppression. Thom Hartmann has written about an investigation in Georgia by Greg Palast that's really scary. Any citizen can request that voters be dropped from the rolls, and voters' Social Security numbers and driver's license numbers were leaked the other day. Once people have that information they can remove anyone they want. Georgia Democrats must check and recheck their registration.
That’s a two way street. If the democrats decide to play nasty they could threaten to do the same thing. Fight fire with fire. Although I’m not really quite sure that the Democrats have learned how to use a match yet.
Yes, some people pointed that out. What is this country coming to though?
It’s a mess.
"The evidence in elections is votes. " Let us hope this prevents the crazies from gumming up the works. I am bone tired of the Trump crackpots thinking they can do whatever they want. Also that the object of their affection is such a sleazebag. Do these people think he's going to give them all pots of money? Actually, it seems they are unable to think.
Margo, I am bone tired as well. Hard time in prison for all of these traitors as a corrective measure. Make examples of every one of them. No more Merrick Garland fecklessness.
I sure hope that President Kamala will replace Garland and many others. I'm not sure she can replace Dejoy, but she should look into it. Several others come to mind.
The porcine looking Mr. DeJoy may be on his way out -- though way too late, seeing
as how he's already effed up sorting and delivery. I don't know wat's worse: if Trump did or did not know what he was doing.
LOL
Where are the counties with election official who are also pro-Trump election deniers? Check this interactive map we created with the data from Rolling Stone.
https://thedemlabs.org/2024/08/01/map-counties-with-election-officials-who-are-pro-trump-election-deniers/
That's useful info. As I pointed out elsewhere, election integrity depends on the integrity of election workers -- and the thought that what happened to Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss could happen to any of us is sobering enough to those of us who live in blue states and likely chilling to those who don't.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
You may also enjoy this: How Netanyahu and Trump stoke hate and violence to cling to power and out of jail. https://thedemlabs.org/2024/08/03/netanyahu-and-trump-stoke-hate-violence-to-stay-out-of-jail/
Knowledge is power!
I wish I hadn’t seen this right before bedtime!
Maybe we can look at that as an opportunity to dream about the USA in November 2024 and right through January, as showing the world how to fight this kind of stuff out in the courts of law, and not via violent coups?
“The thing about Donald Trump is that he has believed all his life that he can control outcomes using corruption.” And this time around he is likely to be abetted by the most corrupt Supreme Court in American history. That condo in Vancouver is looking more inviting than ever.
And we can further combat their BS by making sure we have a Democratic house in place on January 6, 2025. That would be a perfect way to turn their own tables on them.
So glad that you are highlighting this issue just as with Project 2025. Once the bright lights come on they tend to run back into the shadows. SCOTUS has ruled POTUS has absolute immunity for official acts. Joe will still be President on Election Day and after. Hoping there is some mechanism/path where this can be used to deal with skullduggery around certification of the vote!
Please stop! You're spreading disinformation. The president has limited immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. It gives him zero additional authority. So there really isn't anything he can do unless he wants to commit federal crimes. Is that what you're suggesting?
He's pointing out that OFFICIAL ACTS, such as those crafted to protect valid election results are absolutely immune from second-guessing and/or reversals via prosecution.
That's now the law.
It is the Law - but does it apply to Democratic POTUS as well as Republican POTUS?
The text posted below is taken directly from Chief Justice John Roberts majority opinion No 23-939, July 1, 2024, Page 1:
"Held: Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority."
So I fail to see how MY statement: "SCOTUS has ruled POTUS has ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for official acts." can be construed as "spreading disinformation".
Furthermore nowhere in my comment do I suggest that Joe Biden commit a Federal Crime. What I AM suggesting is that every means possible to protect the integrity of the election process that falls under a Presidential Official Act be considered: Can Joe order that resources for Homeland Security to protect/monitor the election be increased? Can he order that these resources be made available to State and Local election officials? Can he order that resources to the Justice Department related to election integrity be increased? Can he order that these resources be made available to State and Local election officials? Etc. Etc. Are these considered OFFICIAL ACTS???
I don't know the answer to those questions but I sure as hell hope somebody is looking into every possible thing that Biden can do to push back on what's coming on Election Day.
In addition, all those questions you asked are valid, but the answers to each of them would be the same whether Biden had immunity or not. The entirety of my objection to what you are saying concerns the inclusion of immunity into this process when it should have nothing to do with it unless he is going to commit crimes.
So my question to you would be, what possible connection could there be between Joe Biden having absolute immunity for official acts and preventing what you called skullduggery around certification of the vote? You don't seem to realize that immunity only protects Biden from prosecution for crimes he might commit. There is absolutely no reason to even bring up immunity if you aren't suggesting Biden should commit crimes in the process of protecting the integrity of the election.
What I saying is that if Joe Biden does undertake Official Acts in an attempt to prevent Republican undermining of the election he does NOT need to be concerned about lawsuits or other legal actions that could or would be attempted in the future. When Donold Trump declares that he will seek "retribution" on his political enemies (including the Clinton's and Biden's) it might be wise to take him seriously
And I really don't take this whole business of retribution by Trump, in the unlikely event he should ever haunt the halls of the White House again, in the form of criminal prosecution seriously. And I think Biden himself takes it even less seriously.
The important thing is Biden was not given any additional authority by this decision, only protection.
Lawsuits are civil law. The Supreme Court did not give him immunity from lawsuits. I am pretty sure the president was already shielded from lawsuits long before the immunity decision. The mention of immunity implies criminal, not civil, acts.
Plan ahead. E.g. local party officials can prepare members to picket county offices where an official is refusing to certify under illegitimate pretenses. Take an oath to peaceful demonstration, and bring a tent if you can. Make signs ahead of time. If you don’t live in such a county, go to the geographically nearest derelict county office or state house, whichever is closer. Yea, I’ve merely been musing about this, but it behooves the party to think something along these lines through for the sake of the nation, Europe and struggling oppressed people around the world.
Revisit chain of custody for ballots, and shore up with legal witnesses where possible under current law. Ensure any completed tallies are communicated off-site immediately, e.g. by the kind of “observers” the Trump campaign had alleging BS (and in one case, apparently, accurate but non-consequential) process exceptions.
Have bomb squads in these ‘election denier’ counties at the ready.
I’m not saying I have the system down. I’m saying the national, state and county parties need to be going through both symmetrical and asymmetrical (e.g. anarchist) war games.
This article by our hero Lucian goes farther than many in playing out scenarios involving corrupt election officials and law suits. (Thank you sir!)
The party at all levels must prepare and stretch its imagination, toss out assumptions and the past.
Sounds like an advanced version of resistance that began with the Freedom Rides. Nice!
This is both frightening and hopeful too. That the behavior is anticipated at least, and steps can be taken to thwart these subversives.
Every crisis is also an opportunity.
You are right of course. Can we anticipate the behavior- or better yet can we create a strategy that does more than just confound the crazies?
It's funny that after all the various epithets applied to Trump and his cultists, "weirdo" seems to have them especially annoyed.
But I don't see what we can do beyond the usual campaign strategies. Also to take advantage of Trump blunders, like Harris stating SHE will be on stage for the ABC sponsored debate September 10, whether he shows up on not!
It’s perfect, isn’t it? Because he is the epitome of a weirdo - and he suspected he was all this time.
Among the responses to this near inevitability, Democrats *must* post credentialed individuals at *every* precinct in these states, and obtain and forward photographs of posted voting machine results.
In this way, like an audit, results can be tallied and posted independently.
No photographing allowed in polling places.
In our county, it is allowed after the end of voting.
No doubt this is just part of a puzzle; it only applies to places with electronic voting. Point is to find out where election officials post results once tallied. E.g. our county clerk posts tallied results online. Have a web site per state that posts all county-posted results. If organized, it’s a visceral way to help drive public opinion against these shenanigans.
The Trump scourge will continue because the Maga Republicans refuse to acknowledge or even live in reality.
This ‘ magical thinking ‘ is not going to hold up in court.
They always have a “ boys only “ plan that foolishly ignores the truth and hopes to change it into something someone, somewhere, will believe .
Sorry Boys Your time is just about up .
Rural America has a history of believing in the fantastical: witness talking in tongues, traveling sales physicians, even Baptist church raves. But I don’t think it has spilled over to the political arena as pervasive as it has now. Possibly because out ability to spread the “word” is so very easy now.
I consider every Trump rally, a carny show.
TEMPORARY suspension of disbelief is great for enjoying films and theater, but for reality? No way!
I hope you are right. The cost of all this litigation will be astronomical.
I’m worried that they’ll get crooked judges to certify what they want — or they’ll destroy or hide votes..
Are Democrats READY to make sure that Republicans in Red States don’t rig this? I hope so. They are already purging voter rolls, and that’s scary in itself!!
Yes, this election could indeed be very long and drawn out. If Republican officials follow through on their plan to refuse certifying vote counts, it could lead to extensive legal battles in multiple states. Each lawsuit would need to be resolved, potentially dragging the process into the courts for weeks or even months. The uncertainty and disputes could delay the final certification of the election results well beyond the usual timeline, making it a protracted and contentious process.
As Lucian and others have pointed out, Jan 6 is a harsh and perilous deadline.
Leaving our government in limbo. If a new president isn't certified by inauguration day, who fills the office?
I believe, from reading about possible scenarios in 2021, that the Speaker of the House would assume the office of acting president. Which would suit Mike Johnson just fine. (In 2021, that would have been Nancy Pelosi, which the MAGAts definitely did not want.)
No way, with this level of unresolved chaos, BIDEN would remain in office - there's no way to transfer executive power to the Speaker of the House in this kind of fog of legal war.
JFC! NOT JOHNSON!!
I distinctly remember reading analyses in 2020-21 that if Trump refused to vacate, and Biden wasn't certified by electoral votes, the office of President still would become vacant on Jan 20 (or whenever that inauguration day fell) because the term expires whether or not there's a new president in the wings; and the law spells out that the Speaker of the House becomes acting president until it's all resolved. That meant the GOP wasn't happy in 2021 at the prospect of having Pelosi acting president and had some incentive to not push things that far then. 2025 could be a whole lot different.