Patterico's Pontifications

1/31/2022

Trump: Pence Should Have Overturned the Election

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:29 am



This surprises exactly nobody paying attention, but deserves mention just because it seems like it ought to qualify as news when the last president bemoans his vice president failing to overturn the presidential election on his behalf.

I know some believe that repeating things like this constitutes playing into his hands. But that’s a game of its own. If you spout insane things so often that the Smart Set believes it’s pointless to criticize your insanity, you’re either a dirty hobo or you have a good chance of being the next president of the United States. If you’re the latter, it seems to me your insane ramblings are news.

111 Responses to “Trump: Pence Should Have Overturned the Election”

  1. I think it’s a litmus test. To separate the merely credulous Trump supporters from the blithering idiots. To better focus the donations requests. Nigerian Princes do the same thing. Their letters are deliberately “inartfully” drafted to sift out the intelligent.

    nk (1d9030)

  2. Reposting my comment from the open thread:

    Watch for Trumpers to say:
    “He didn’t really mean ‘overturn.’ That was an inelegant way of saying ‘halt the process until the results could audited and the fraud exposed.’ You’re all in a lather just because Trump doesn’t talk pretty.”

    And:
    “Heck yeah, he could and should have done whatever it takes to defeat the leftist scum!”

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  3. Oh, dang. I thought I could be the first commenter this time, by nk slipped in under the wire.

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  4. To separate the merely credulous Trump supporters from the blithering idiots.

    What’s worse is that some diehard Trump defenders are not idiots. At some point, they threw themselves into the cult, and they’ll do whatever it takes to avoid admitting that the critics had a point.

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  5. reposting from previous thread:
    I just hope that someone tries to convince Trump that he’d have more of an influence in politics, if he doesn’t run again.

    Because, if he does run, one of two things happens:
    1) He gets elected, but it’s a repeat of his first term as the media, the courts and the bureaucratic state works double-time against him. Rendering him impotent and damaging his family’s brand.

    2) He loses again, which would definitely irreparably damage his family’s brand.

    If he doesn’t run, at least he’s on the peripheral, attending his rallies to stoke his ego and will have waning influence to the GOP party. But, at least his brand (ie, Trump property, former President, etc) remains solid.

    I don’t have any hope in this. It appears to me that he’s running again.

    whembly (3bda0a)

  6. reposting from previous thread:
    I just hope that someone tries to convince Trump that he’d have more of an influence in politics, if he doesn’t run again.

    Reposting my response:

    Trump isn’t interested in political influence, he is interested in power (and self-aggrandizement).

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  7. We can thank Donald for giving Congress even more valid reason to reform the ECA of 1887.
    Merrick Garland and the Fulton County DA can also thank Donald for adding another exhibit to their cases.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  8. Trump isn’t interested in political influence, he is interested in power (and self-aggrandizement).

    Exactimento. Or as David French put it:

    Trumpism has never been an ideology. It’s the ambition and hubris of a deeply corrupt man.

    He might have a few preferences that align with a carefully considered ideological program, but in the end, what really matters to him is ego-service. It’s baffling that this most obvious trait of his somehow eludes so many, including people who really aren’t idiots.

    It’s also baffling that anyone could ascribe a deep, unalloyed patriotism to someone who says things like “our country and our elections are corrupt.”

    He’s got a shallow, ostentatious sort of “patriotism” that’s essentially adversarial and rooted in an “I win, you lose” philosophy of life. When he was campaigning in 2016, he said: “My whole life I’ve been greedy, greedy, greedy. I’ve grabbed all the money I could get. … But now I want to be greedy for the United States ….”
    That wasn’t a confession, but a boast. Those aren’t the words of someone with a selfless love of country, or someone who suddenly stopped being personally greedy to become a self-sacrificing patriot. Those are the words of someone who saw the presidency as the biggest possible stage for self-promotion.
    “Make America Great Again” was always a way of saying “Put me in charge, and then it will be great.” When he’s not in charge, America is a laughingstock. When he doesn’t get his way, America is corrupt.

    It isn’t hard to see, for those willing to see it.

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  9. failing to over the presidential election on his behalf.

    … failing to overturn the presidential election on his behalf.

    That claim is not false It’s frivolous. It’s unconstitutional in any reasonable interpretation. It would be a horrible way for things to work.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  10. Either way, Trump’s stupendous level of demonstrated ignorance and willful defiance of the U.S. Constitution should make every patriotic American turn their back on him, full stop. There can be no more excuses. What he freely represents and espouses is a full break from the rule of the law and norms. This is so dangerous and makes clear that not only does he loath Pence -who followed Constitutional procedures – and will work against any future political plans Pence has (because he will never, ever forgive him for such a betrayal), b) he rallies his loyal base in advance of the midterms and 2024 by continuing to publicly insist that he was cheated out of a victory and that the election was rigged. Nothing has changed. So, if he runs in 2024, we are assured of repeated tumultuousness, lies, unrest, and a debasing of the Founders’ principles and the Constitution. This is indefensible at every level.

    Yesterday, in response to the news that Trump said at his rally that if he were to run for president and win in 2024, he would pardon people charged with criminal offenses in connection with the deadly Jan. 6 assault by his supporters on the U.S. Capitol, I said that it was really dangerous rhetoric because it signals that Trumpers charged with future criminal offenses done on his behalf would be let off the hook. This is more of that same dangerous stuff because as we already know, far too many Americans choose to place their loyalty in Trump rather than the Constitution.

    I think Rep. Kinzinger nails it:

    “He could have overturned the election.” This is an admission, and a massively un-American statement. It is time for every Republican leader to pick a side… Trump or the Constitution, there is no middle on defending our nation anymore.

    I think this goes for all Americans.

    Dana (5395f9)

  11. The whole Electoral Cpunt act of 1887 may be unconstitutional. But what do you do if there’s a controversy?

    It could be you rely entirely on the Elector Pretenders. But that’s not a good system. Somebody has to certify them as chosen. And who can decide but Congress ince things have reached that point?

    The Electoral Count Act of 1887 tilts the balance heavily in favor of the presumed electors. (a decision, though, becomes unavoidable if there are two or more semi-plausible groups of people claiming to be the Electors from a certain state.)

    To reject a slate of Electors, there must be prepared written objections from at least one member of each House and both must vote by a majority to uphold the rejection. Senator Susan Collins and others want to make t harder to start a debate by requiring more members of Congress to sign an objection. So far, except for the Election of 2020, it’s been prevented by prevailing on all 100 Senators not to object. There are some other changes they also want to make.

    Now, theoretically, the vice president could challenge the Electoral slates (not their votes) in the same way members of Congress could and maybe you could require a majority of both houses to overrule the chair. I don;t know what John Eastman was hoping for. (on top of everything else, Trump didn’t have the votes in Congress he House did not uphold any objection.)

    But involving the vice president in any discretionary act would be contrary to the rules of Congress, (as established by the Electoral Count Act. Yes, a law can be passed that establishes a rule of a house of Congress, at least until that House changes it. The Budget Act that created the reconciliation process does such a thing.)

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  12. The New York Times has as its lead news story today efforts (by various partisan Republicans in various places) to get involved in counting the vote.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/30/us/politics/election-deniers-secretary-of-state.html

    Nearly two dozen Republicans who have publicly questioned or disputed the results of the 2020 election are running for secretary of state across the country, in some cases after being directly encouraged by allies of former President Donald J. Trump.

    Their candidacies are alarming watchdog groups, Democrats and some fellow Republicans, who worry that these Trump supporters, if elected to posts that exist largely to safeguard and administer the democratic process, would weaponize those offices to undermine it — whether by subverting an election outright or by sowing doubts about any local, state or federal elections their party loses. …All told, some 21 candidates who dispute Mr. Biden’s victory are running for secretary of state in 18 states….Many of the election deniers are running in solidly red states where it is less likely that their actions could tilt a presidential election. But several others, who have formed a coalition calling itself the America First slate, are running in states won by Mr. Biden in 2020, including in the crucial battleground states of Michigan, Arizona and Nevada….They are in strong position to win Republican primaries in those battleground states, as well as in somewhat-bluer Colorado and heavily Democratic California.

    Their chances in November, should they succeed in the primaries, could rest heavily on how well Republicans fare in the midterm elections, given voters’ tendency to vote for down-ballot candidates such as secretary of state from the same party as their choices for governor or senator….

    …Had secretaries of state taken their cues from Mr. Trump in the last election, they could have put their thumbs on the scales of fair elections by forcing the closure of polling places, removing ballot drop boxes or withholding other resources that could make voting easier in heavily Democratic precincts. Worse, critics say, they could have raised doubts about, or even refused to certify, Mr. Biden’s victories….

    …The powers of secretaries of state to subvert elections vary from state to state and are largely untested in court….in states where secretaries of state have the power to certify elections, the refusal to do so could be a vital step in overturning one. In a presidential election, state legislators and the governor hold the power to approve an alternative set of presidential electors, and refusing to certify could boost such an effort….

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  13. Yeah, I find it extraordinary that Democrats haven’t spun up a ECA reform bill to render the VP’s role as ministerial and to raise the threshold to object. They *will* get enough GOP votes to pass it.

    whembly (ce5f56)

  14. That the law in any state will be changed before the presidential election to give the state legislature the job of certifying the winner can be pretty much ruled out.

    The two dangers are: (besides the relatively minor one of trying to affect turnout)

    A) Litigation creating an opportunity, under the Act of 1845, for a state legislature to declare a failed election and then the legislature quickly passing a law (requires 2 houses except in Nebraska, and the governor’s signature now also in North Carolina) giving itself the power to choose the Electors and then choosing them.

    All this must be done in six days, unless they start changing the law right after the election. (not quite as simple as the New York Times article says. It’s never been done.)

    B) Partisan election officials giving a false result. But all states allow that to be challenged in court so we’re back to A, except that with B, A becomes more likely. (like the New York Times article said)

    A could only happen in a heavily Republican state. But this could become critical in a 3-way race, or if public opinion changes markedly in the two years since most of the state legislature or the Governor was elected. A party split..

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  15. What would James Matoon Scott say?

    Kevin M (38e250)

  16. Yeah, I find it extraordinary that Democrats haven’t spun up a ECA reform bill to render the VP’s role as ministerial and to raise the threshold to object.

    Especially since they would want any impediment to the “Popular Vote Compact” eliminated. I know I’m strident on that topic, but I just cannot see how people can ignore an open conspiracy while seeing Trumpian conspirators under every bed.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  17. That the law in any state will be changed before the presidential election to give the state legislature the job of certifying the winner can be pretty much ruled out.

    Why not? It already has been in my state and yours.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  18. A could only happen in a heavily Republican state.

    Why? Are Democrats never suspect of wanting to change votes?

    Kevin M (38e250)

  19. Trump or the Constitution

    if he gets elected, you can finally loosen your grip on those pearls

    maybe get the next collusion narrative fleshed out before the campaign starts rolling

    don’t rely on a fake dossier this time, but you probably still have several DOJ folks in your back pocket

    JF (e1156d)

  20. 1) He gets elected, but it’s a repeat of his first term as the media, the courts and the bureaucratic state works double-time against him. Rendering him impotent and damaging his family’s brand.

    It depends. Given the lack of depth on the other side, he might win convincingly and have Congress, too. If so, and being Trump, I think he’d go Andy Jackson on the lot of them. You know, Army troops clearing out East L.A., just as Andy did with the Cherokee.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  21. @18 see Bush v. Gore in 2000.

    whembly (3bda0a)

  22. Mitch McConnell is in favor of changing the Electoral Count Act to prevent any such scenario as happened last year. This is still mostly a bipartisan effort, and the leading Democrats still want to try to bias the results. If they give up on their voting bills, or try only for preventing gerrymanders after the next Census, it might become law – and there are members of Congress who have a sense of urgency in changing the Electoral Count Act before the 2024 Election.

    If the Democrats gain control of Congress in the November 2022 elections, they might try to use that sense of urgency to push through other stuff, so they might want to wait.

    Congress has waited before. The 12th amendment, after the Election of 1800, was only sent to the states on December 12, 1803

    At that time Congress assembled in December (although in 1803, it assembled on October 17, 1803)

    The 12th Aaendment was ratified July 27, 1804.

    But the whole thing could fall through, with people saying there’s only one or two states where election officials might do something wrong.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  23. @20 Kevin, Trump has never shown the ability to pick the right people for the job. He’s largely failed miserably on that, and I don’t see that changing.

    The next GOP President needs to exact an massive PURGE in government. Several layers of leaderships in the Military and executive agency needs to be fired or reassigned to junk positions. And Trump won’t do that.

    whembly (3bda0a)

  24. Trump’s stupendous level of demonstrated ignorance and willful defiance of the U.S. Constitution should make every patriotic American turn their back on him, full stop.

    He still doesn’t know how the Supreme Court works.

    What he freely represents and espouses is a full break from the rule of the law and norms.

    His “intellectual” defenders like to say that his willingness to defy “traditional norms” is a virtue — it means he could get things done, not be hobbled by red tape or political correctness, etc. They haven’t acknowledged that he doesn’t respect rules and norms — or laws — that they might actually think are important.

    His understanding of right and wrong, true and false, rests finally in what’s good for him. He has demonstrated again and again that he doesn’t recognize a higher standard that could ever make his own desires wrong.

    How could that feature of his extreme narcissism be hidden from some people who are smart enough to see it? It’s as if they delude themselves to be in sync with Trump’s own pathological delusions.

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  25. Thank you, Patterico. Thank you, Radgunda. Thank you, Dana.

    What you say is obvious, but, as George Orwell once wrote: “Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious.”

    Thank you all for doing your duty.

    (Orwell quote context.)

    Jim Miller (edcec1)

  26. Trump or the Constitution

    JF: “maybe get the next collusion narrative fleshed out before the campaign starts rolling….don’t rely on a fake dossier this time”

    I guess we can put you down for Trump then

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  27. don’t rely on a fake dossier this time,

    Neither the Mueller Report nor the bipartisan Senate committee relied on the Steele dossier. It was not the predicate for either investigation. And it was always understood to be raw data, not confirmed fact.

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  28. I like how Trump supporters completely ignore that Trump himself publicly made these statements. They are not filtered, nor skewed by an evil media outlet. The man himself has made these declarations. But instead of acknowledging them as the awfulness that they are, they choose to rationalize, ignore, sputter about dossiers, and basically throw the kitchen sink at it in an effort to do anything but admit that Trump has foisted a big lie on Americans, continues to do so, admits that he tried to overthrow an election, and strongly implies that he would do the same thing if he lost in 2024.

    Dana (5395f9)

  29. Trump has never shown the ability to pick the right people for the job. He’s largely failed miserably on that, and I don’t see that changing.

    And there should be a bunch of contenders making just that point, as in:

    “Look, I support Donald Trump’s goals and the need to return the power in this country to its working men and women, but I can do a much better job of it that President Trump did because I understand how this system works, and what parts of it need to be nuked from space!”

    Kevin M (38e250)

  30. If the Democrats gain control of Congress in the November 2022 elections, they might try to use that sense of urgency to push through other stuff, so they might want to wait.

    Hunh? They have control now.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  31. Trump’s stupendous level of demonstrated ignorance and willful defiance of the U.S. Constitution should make every patriotic American turn their back on him, full stop.

    Why? What gives you the idea than most (or many) Americans have any effing clue about the Constitution. It’s over a hundred years old, you know.

    I see no evidence that Congress knows either.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  32. Trump’s stupendous level of demonstrated ignorance and willful defiance of the U.S. Constitution should make every patriotic American turn their back on him, full stop.

    He still doesn’t know how the Supreme Court works.

    See, I think he *does* know how the Supreme Court works, but he doesn’t care. He believes that his role as a sitting president allows him to supersede and alter any institutions/policies/procedures/protocols that are in place because he is Donald Trump. About all of the norms he is turning over, he is also trying to redefine the scope of presidential powers and rule. How this isn’t a red flag to every American is beyond me. Trumpers may applaud this defiant rule-breaking in their guy, but what happens if a Bernie Sanders-type gets in the Oval and employs the same illiberal strategies based on the same delusional beliefs?

    Dana (5395f9)

  33. I see no evidence that Congress knows either.

    I’ll admit you have a point there. Sadly.

    Dana (5395f9)

  34. That the law in any state will be changed before the presidential election to give the state legislature the job of certifying the winner can be pretty much ruled out.

    Kevin M (38e250) — 1/31/2022 @ 10:37 am

    Why not? It already has been in my state and yours.

    The state legislature hasn’t given itself the job. Just created an alternative secondary method of choosing electors for that state, other than the popular vote using the general ticket system, that is supposed to kick in if certain circumstances exist.

    There’s a big big problem if that (the winner of the national “POPULAR VOTE”) is undetermined.

    It’s not even clear that you could say it was a failed election because a failed election applies when there is a popular election oonfined to that state.

    The Democrats go in a lot for unsound law and wild legal theories. Not so far for openly discarding an election.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  35. His understanding of right and wrong, true and false, rests finally in what’s good for him.

    In petty matters this is obviously true. But it’s hardly why he ran for the office — I can think of nothing he could have done (other than shooting someone on Fifth Avenue) that would have been worse for the Trump brand and business than his term as president.

    No, to understand Trump you have to know the macro motivations along with the micro, and not conflate them as you do. I believe that he seriously intended to “fix” the “problems” that infest talkradio, and hired the people he thought could do the job. Then he got in their way, let his venality overrule his mission, and tried to micromanage people with lots more experience and a 50 IQ point advantage.

    Trump is manifestly unfit for office, but that does not mean that his platform has no legs. People who ignore that are making a mistake.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  36. Nearly two dozen Republicans who have publicly questioned or disputed the results of the 2020 election are running for secretary of state across the country, in some cases after being directly encouraged by allies of former President Donald J. Trump.

    Kinda like Soros and Co. supporting far left candidates for DA positions who show no desire to prosecute crimes. At least not crimes perpetrated by the left.

    Hoi Polloi (7cefeb)

  37. Kevin M (38e250) — 1/31/2022 @ 10:55 am

    Hunh? They have control now.

    Not to pass most bills. Manchin and Sinema won’t vote to get rid of the filibuster, and even where the filibuster doesn’t apply (the Build Back Better bill) they won’t vote for the bill itself, as currently constituted.

    One thing the Democratc leadership is not trying to do is to pick off a few Republican Senators, like Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Rob Portman. That might work so as to make it harder to write legislation behind closed doors.

    Come to think of it, they won’t have 60 Senators after the November 2022 election, but they might have enough to change the filibuster rule.

    Selling it as only a partial change. (the “talking filibuster” is one idea, or requiring 41 Senators to vote against cloture. Another idea is to make an exception for bills that deal with elections.)

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  38. There’s a big big problem if that (the winner of the national “POPULAR VOTE”) is undetermined.

    Take the election of 1960, for example. Or even the elections of 2016 or 2020 if you want to see how easy it is to contest a vote counted with utterly no common rules. At the very least you will see a race to the bottom as far as “expanding” the franchise or the ease of voting, with little attention to provenance or validation.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  39. Not so far for openly discarding an election.

    If my state votes one way, and the EVs go another, they have quite openly discarded the election in my state. How can you say otherwise?

    Kevin M (38e250)

  40. I like how Trump supporters completely ignore that Trump himself publicly made these statements. They are not filtered, nor skewed by an evil media outlet. The man himself has made these declarations.

    It’s pretty obvious at this point that Trump just wants another term in the White House to enrich himself and boost his ego. Frankly, that’s all he wanted from his first term. Which while unsettling in the least, was a lot better than a psychopath hell bent on world domination.

    That anyone at this point actually thinks Trump is about America speaks more to their mental instability than Trump’s.

    Hoi Polloi (7cefeb)

  41. 36. There’s also an organization that claims to be enumerating and encouraging opposition to all Republicans who might want to do bad things in elections:

    https://statesuniteddemocracy.org/resources/replacingtheref

    With the DAs, they’re coming at destroying crime fighting from a number of different directions. It’s not just defunding the police. It will probably require spending a lot of money to undo it.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  42. I think he *does* know how the Supreme Court works, but he doesn’t care.

    With Trump, it’s hard to figure out if he knows certain things to be true but says otherwise for self-serving reasons, or if his extremely self-centered worldview makes him unable to recognize the difference between what’s good for him and what’s true. He has said that if you tell people something enough times, they’ll start to believe it. Maybe that’s how it works with his own self-boosting fictions. Or is he believes that what’s objectively true or false simply doesn’t matter.

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  43. See, I think he *does* know how the Supreme Court works, but he doesn’t care. He believes that his role as a sitting president allows him to supersede and alter any institutions/policies/procedures/protocols that are in place because he is Donald Trump.

    And what happens if he wins 60-40, with a mandate for transformative change? THIS is the real danger. I think that the danger of him stealing his way in is far less than that of him getting a coronation. Because with a weak mandate (or even a phony one) he will have little real power. With a Reagan- or LBJ-level of mandate, he’ll have the Democrats acting the the Republicans do now.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  44. *Democrats acting LIKE the Republicans do now.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  45. That the law in any state will be changed before the presidential election to give the state legislature the job of certifying the winner can be pretty much ruled out.

    Why not? It already has been in my state and yours.

    Really? State legislatures certify election results. In most states, including New Mexico, it is the Secretary of State that certifies election results, not the legislature.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  46. Kevin M (38e250) — 1/31/2022 @ 11:10 am

    If my state votes one way, and the EVs go another, they have quite openly discarded the election in my state. How can you say otherwise?

    They haven;t discarded the result after the fact. What they propose to do is use a different electorate. It’s a ticking time bomb, but it’s not come into effect.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  47. If my state votes one way, and the EVs go another, they have quite openly discarded the election in my state.

    When did that occur?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  48. It’s pretty obvious at this point that Trump just wants another term in the White House to enrich himself and boost his ego

    No, it is not. Those may be goals of his, but that’s not why he’d run, nor is it why he ran the first time. Stop deluding yourself. He sees himself as Augustus.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  49. When did that occur?

    Rip, read back. PVC.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  50. They haven;t discarded the result after the fact.

    How does that matter? Because it’s an open theft as opposed to a hidden one?

    Kevin M (38e250)

  51. 29

    Trump has never shown the ability to pick the right people for the job

    That;s one thing he generally – only generally – did right.

    They often worked around him,

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  52. Really? State legislatures certify election results. In most states, including New Mexico, it is the Secretary of State that certifies election results, not the legislature.

    And if they certify the votes based on some other metric than who won the election in New Mexico? Does it matter that they announced they’d do that ahead of time? Suppose there’s a quesiton about that other metric? How does the Secretary of State for New Mexico certify the election in Florida?

    Kevin M (38e250)

  53. 50. Yes. It’s determined by rules made before the election (or supposed to be)

    It’s being ignored because nobody expects the PVC to go into effect soon. (if it does it can create chaos)

    You pointed out how, under its terms, a state could expand its electorate (possibly in a bad way) in an effort to help one candidate win making the choice of voters there matter more.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  54. Trump has never shown the ability to pick the right people for the job.

    I have a different take on this. He’s consistently had people who picked the law or Constitution over Trump’s wishes. Generals Kelly, McMaster, and Mattis are good men who helped keep the train on the track. Same goes for Sessions, Tillerson, and Haley. Perfect? No. The problem is that we are down to not just the 3rd stringers but the back-benchers who may not have the same integrity and character….yes-men who understand that their position is to do Trump’s bidding…..kind of like Bill Barr until it went too far…or Giuliani, who hasn’t hit that wall yet. At this point, good people know how they will be treated if they work for Trump (Christie appears to finally have gotten it)…..everyone understands that rules and norms are all optional….things to be tested and pushed. Too many view this as entertainment…just another version of Apprentice. Just cancel this show

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  55. Kevin M (38e250) — 1/31/2022 @ 11:19 am

    He sees himself as Augustus.

    Even if he doesn’t. he could damage the ability to hold future fair and open elections.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  56. If you spout insane things so often that the Smart Set believes it’s pointless to criticize your insanity, you’re either a dirty hobo or you have a good chance of being the next president of the United States.

    Indeed! 😉 :

    https://nypost.com/article/worst-joe-biden-gaffes/

    https://thefederalist.com/2021/12/16/12-times-joe-biden-completely-made-up-stories-lied-or-said-something-crazy/

    https://defconnews.com/2020/12/28/brain-farts-and-diarrhea-of-the-mouth-95-crazy-things-joe-biden-said-in-2020/

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  57. Really? State legislatures certify election results. In most states, including New Mexico, it is the Secretary of State that certifies election results, not the legislature.

    Here’s a better question:

    Suppose that, under the PVC, the electoral vote is changed from one side to the other, but the US Supreme Court declares the Compact illegal (as it is illegal). In some PVC states, the Secretaries of State refuse to alter their certifications, and empanel now-disputed electors.

    What then?

    Kevin M (38e250)

  58. Rip, read back. PVC……

    And if they certify the votes based on some other metric than who won the election in New Mexico?….

    I see. You are on your PVC hobby horse again and predicting the future.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  59. 51. Kevin M (38e250) — 1/31/2022 @ 11:26 am

    And if they certify the votes based on some other metric than who won the election in New Mexico? Does it matter that they announced they’d do that ahead of time? Suppose there’s a quesiton about that other metric? How does the Secretary of State for New Mexico certify the election in Florida?

    It goes to court.

    In one sense the problem may be avoidable some years since all he or she has to do is say who won the most votes nationwide, not by how much. This will only matter in a relatively close election but that;s when ouu get chaos..

    It may be that, one year, if it looks like this is about to happen, one state or more will back out.

    But then you have the issue of encouraging faithless electors.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  60. No, it is not. Those may be goals of his, but that’s not why he’d run, nor is it why he ran the first time. Stop deluding yourself. He sees himself as Augustus.

    Kevin M (38e250) — 1/31/2022 @ 11:19 am

    Yet he really didn’t rule like Augustus, or any other emperor. I know the left likes to say we lost a lot of rights under Trump, but did we?

    Hoi Polloi (7cefeb)

  61. Kevin M (38e250) — 1/31/2022 @ 11:31 am

    Suppose that, under the PVC, the electoral vote is changed from one side to the other, but the US Supreme Court declares the Compact illegal (as it is illegal).

    It’s not illegal – it’s just not a compact. Not binding. And a state legislarure cannot bind a future legislature not to change a law.

    In some PVC states, the Secretaries of State refuse to alter their certifications,

    Or suppose some do.

    and empanel now-disputed electors.

    What then?

    January 6 2021 on steroids, although maybe without the riot.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  62. you have to know the macro motivations along with the micro, and not conflate them as you do

    I don’t think I conflate them. It’s a question of what is most important to him. I said above:

    He might have a few preferences that align with a carefully considered ideological program, but in the end, what really matters to him is ego-service.

    That is, there are certain policies he thought would be good for the country. But he can’t imagine that what’s good for the country might not align perfectly with what’s good for Donald Trump. (For example, people at State were puzzled when he undermined his own sanctions against Iran in order to benefit a Turkish bank, and the only plausible explanation they could see was Trump’s business interests in Turkey.)

    I can think of nothing he could have done (other than shooting someone on Fifth Avenue) that would have been worse for the Trump brand and business than his term as president.

    Do you seriously believe he would have run for president if he expected it to harm his brand or his business? People who know him well said he didn’t expect to win –and wasn’t prepared for it when he did — but knew that being a presidential candidate would boost his status.

    We also know that he was seeking to monetize the presidency from the beginning, when he doubled fees at Mar-a-Lago. And when he refused to divest from his business. And when, on inauguration day, he had his limo stop right before he got to Trump International Hotel so he would be filmed walking past it. Big players foreign and domestic got the clue: If they wanted favors from a Trump administration, they should spend money at his properties. And they did.
    Trump also charged the taxpayers a handsome price to have the Secret Service stay at his properties the many times he visited them.

    He told the rubes that he was funding his own campaign, when he was only loaning money to it.

    As for hurting his brand: He became a cult hero, with his (glorified) image emblazoned on giant flags, and people chanting “fight for Trump” and saying they trust him more than anyone else, and politicians with Ivy League degrees falling over themselves to demonstrate how much they love him. If there’s anything that Trump cares more about than wealth, it’s ego (which is why he lies about his wealth).

    It strains credulity to suggest that Mr. Me Me Me “All my life I’ve been greedy” intended to sacrifice anything for the good of America.

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  63. I still look forward to the Popular Voter Compact going into force and awarding California’s electoral votes to a conservative Republican. Given that only 16 states have approved the compact, and swing states are unlikely to support a compact that reduces their influence, Republican dominated states would be required for adoption, an unlikely prospect.

    Be careful what you wish for.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  64. @43. And what happens if he wins 60-40, with a mandate for transformative change? THIS is the real danger.

    Danger? You should revisit the hand-wringing angst and writings in the media from the conservative right when FDR was elected and went to work. Shake off the attic dust from time and you’d be surprised to read how similar the railing echoes are from back in the day. He certainly sees Biden as Nero, but doesn’t see himself as Augustus- nor, for that matter, Caligula. More like Caesar — and we know how that night of the long knives ended. But to him- in the end he gets a palace, a casino, all you can eat buffet and Mariah Carey in residence doing shows nightly– w/Katy Perry on occasion. 😉

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  65. The problem is that we are down to not just the 3rd stringers but the back-benchers who may not have the same integrity and characte

    Doesn’t ahve to be 3rd stringers. Here’s some 1st and 2nd stringers who would work just fine for Mr Trump

    Ted Crux, VP
    Josh Hawley, AG.
    Allen West, SecDef.
    Tom Cotton, SecState
    Jim Jordan, FBI director
    Louie Gohmert, Speaker of the House
    Paul Gosar, Sec of Interior
    Marjorie Taylor Greene, Sec HHS
    Lauren Boebert, Sec of Education
    Rand Paul, Sec of Labor

    Kevin M (38e250)

  66. He sees himself as Augustus

    Cite your sources, or what credentials give you the most accurate insight into Trump’s motives, such that those who have a different perception must be deluding themselves.

    And what are the chances that he has the foggiest idea what Augustus did, aside from getting himself crowned emperor and an impressive-sounding name?

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  67. A Democratic Vice President will be presiding over the Electoral Vote Count on January 6, 2025, comrades.

    And a male nurse (or a very big and strong female one) over a paretic Trump.

    nk (1d9030)

  68. Given that only 16 states have approved the compact

    195 EVs so far.

    States that might pass it in the next decade:

    NV (6)
    ME (4)
    VA (13)
    MN (10)
    MI (15)
    PA (19)
    AZ (11)

    for 273 votes. Need 270.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  69. And what are the chances that he has the foggiest idea what Augustus did, aside from getting himself crowned emperor and an impressive-sounding name?

    He needs more? And you’re probably right. Maybe just “Caesar”

    Kevin M (38e250)

  70. But it is manifestly untrue that he ran for President for venal or egotistical reasons. You don’t get that kind of visceral connection to the mob like that. His failure was due to ignorance, incompetence and the inability to let his appointees do their jobs.

    Now, the people around him, particularly family members, WERE venal and it would be great to be running a hedge fund with that level of inside info. Day-trading made easy.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  71. He needs more? And you’re probably right. Maybe just “Caesar”

    Nah, he’ll just think of Trump Grill NYC where they, of course, make the most beautiful Caesar salad…

    Dana (5395f9)

  72. Noted narcissist and sore loser continues to behave accordingly at events with his fans. Untold thousands remain deeply concerned.

    steveg (e81d76)

  73. @54. Too many view this as entertainment…just another version of Apprentice.

    More like ‘Dallas.’ Never forget: in this era, Americans don’t want to be governed; they wish to be entertained. That hasn’t changed. Just check the numbers on what draws clicks and eyes these days for news and entertainment– including professional “sports.” Secrets of Playboy? Basketball? CNN? Tucka???

    https://www.tvguide.com/galleries/most-popular-tv-shows-of-all-time-ranked/2/

    $5/lb., hamburger, $5.50/gal., gas; $4 gal., milk; $10 lb., London Broil; 7% inflation, empty shelves, endless booster shots, open borders, chaotic retreat, looming war and a fella who can’t walk up stairs; forgets where and when he parked his 18-wheeler and says Delaware 7-11’s are run by New Delhi ex-pats. ‘The Joe Show’ has a lousy story line and poor ratings, AJ, and is gonna get cancelled– as America returns to ‘Dallas.’ They do love to hate that JR. Because it’s entertaining. 😉

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  74. Trump is not as bad as Caligula. Closer to the incompetent ones or the distracted ones like Tiberius or Commodus, or the ego-drven nutbars like Constantine..

    Kevin M (38e250)

  75. I enjoyed a nice two-fer last night: the NFC championship game and kabuki mask theater.

    The camera at several instances showed all of LA and Hollywood’s most famous enjoying the Rams v 49ers without masks. Whether sitting close to someone or rubbing elbows in a luxurious suite with other liberal bigwigs.

    Hoi Polloi (7cefeb)

  76. NV (6)-Passed in 2019, vetoed.
    ME (4)-Failed in House of Representatives 2019-20 session
    VA (13)-Passed House of Delegates in 2020, Died in Senate committee
    MN (10)-Passed in House of Representatives, died in conference
    MI (15)-Passed in House of Representatives 2007-08; Died in Senate committee
    PA (19)-Not previously considered
    AZ (11)-Passed House of Representatives 2016, died in Senate Committee

    Source

    For most of the above there are bills pending in committee, but the table shows there is a long road to hoe.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  77. 6 out of 10 republicans say biden illegally stole the election. ( I thought it was higher ) 8 out of 10 republicans would vote for trump in 2024 with another 1 percent undecided. The republican party belongs to trump not you. Move on.

    asset (e09418)

  78. #78.

    The republican party belongs to trump not you. Move on.

    That isn’t bad advice. I’ve taken it. It’s still depressing.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  79. 1/31/2025. Today 330M Americans were asked if they could still hear the voices crying out against Trump from the wilderness

    99% Responded “huh?”
    Less than 1% answered yes
    0.1% answered by listing their medications

    steveg (e81d76)

  80. @78. The Republican Party belongs to Trump not you. Move on.

    Given the ever-growing number of indies, an increasing number of the electorate has ‘moved on’ from both major parties. Yet they have rigged and financed the system from the ground up for decades, spit out the same D or R party-backed hacks as ‘choices’ and leave little opportunity for alternatives. It’s a familiar habit to fellas overseas…

    … and Putin smiled.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  81. But it is manifestly untrue that he ran for President for venal or egotistical reasons.

    No, it is not manifestly untrue. A person with a long history of manifest egotism and venality doesn’t turn into a self-sacrificing patriot when he’s approaching 70.

    While he was president, he loved rallies where he was hero-worshipped. He spent loads of time watching Trump-friendly TV to see what was said about himself. He hated studying up on issues, and usually preferred to wing it.

    He clearly saw public officials in his administration — even S.C. justices — as people who were supposed to work for him and be loyal to him.

    His post-presidency comments are very much focused on his personal grievances over the election and anyone who wasn’t totally loyal to him — and much less on advancing particular policies, except to say “Biden is a disaster and everything was great under me.”

    You don’t get that kind of visceral connection to the mob like that

    You’re conflating Trump’s motives with the motives of his devotees, which are not the same thing. It’s very possible for large numbers of people to project their wishes for a heroic leader onto someone who is not what they imagine.

    You’ve accused another commenter here of being self-deluding about Trump. Why is it not possible that a great many Trump loyalists are deluding themselves about him?

    A lot of Trumpers think he never lies — which is a bizarre self-delusion. A lot of Trumpers believe he genuinely cares about the average person, when the evidence suggests that he only revels in their veneration but wouldn’t cross the street to help them, or even meet them.

    The dynamics of a cult do not rely on a correlation between the motives of the cult-hero and the desires of the cult-followers.

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  82. Now, the people around him, particularly family members, WERE venal

    And it’s not possible that those family members learned their venality working for daddy?

    Or, did Trump suddenly stop being venal and self-interested when he ran for president, but the kiddos stayed venal when they worked for or otherwise supported his venture into patriotic self-sacrifice?

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  83. The local DA in Fulton County has responded to Trump’s threats.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  84. Worse than Trump/2024

    mg (8cbc69)

  85. Why don’t the complainers of orange man bad come up with a stellar candidate we can get behind?
    Because they all suk.

    mg (8cbc69)

  86. Its simple Trump hates the same people that trump supporters hate. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Republicans keep telling you this ‘but you won’t listen! What about trumpsters? Remember until the others quit trump was only getting half the primary votes. The rest of the 80% just hate the same people trump hates and are populists like him. Not free trade neo-con economic libertarian conservatives like you. Trump has not only made the republican party in his image ;but is making the democrat party too! Democrats: 2016 “when they go low we go high!” to 2020: You gerrymander texas,georgia and floriduh. We gerrymander new york califonia and illinois. Move on!

    asset (e09418)

  87. 82. Egotistical, not venal. He hurt his wealth overall (even if it was some insurance against going completely broke)

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  88. “Why don’t the complainers of orange man bad come up with a stellar candidate we can get behind?”

    Haley or DeSantis….neither perfect, but better….and won’t try to turn us into a banana republic. Why do I suspect you’ll be asking the same question next week.

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  89. But it is manifestly untrue that he ran for President for venal or egotistical reasons.

    Comedy gold!

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  90. Fulton DA seeks FBI’s aid as Trump probe advances

    Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is requesting backup from the FBI after former President Donald Trump singled out prosecutors investigating his actions and called for large-scale protests during a recent rally.

    In a Sunday letter to J.C. Hacker, the head of the bureau’s Atlanta field office, Willis urged the FBI to conduct a risk assessment of the Fulton County Courthouse and Government Center and provide other protective resources such as federal agents and intelligence. She said that security concerns were “escalated” by comments Trump made during an event in Texas over the weekend
    ………
    Trump described the inquiry Willis’ office is carrying out, as well as those overseen by investigators in New York and on Capitol Hill, as “prosecutorial misconduct” during a rally in Conroe, Texas, on Saturday.

    “If these radical, vicious, racist prosecutors do anything wrong or illegal, I hope we are going to have in this country the biggest protests we have ever had in Washington, D.C., in New York, in Atlanta and elsewhere because our country and our elections are corrupt,” Trump said.

    Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg Jr., New York Attorney General Letitia James and Willis are all Black, as is U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., who’s leading the Jan. 6 Committee. Trump did not mention any of them by name or offer any explanation for his labeling them racist.
    ……..
    (Willis) has indicated that her team is also examining the abrupt resignation of former Atlanta-based U.S. Attorney BJay Pak; a November 2020 call U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., placed to Raffensperger; and false claims made by Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani during a hearing before the Georgia Senate Judiciary Committee. The probe could also examine the 16 phony Republican electors who cast ballots for Trump in a sham ceremony in December 2020, even though Georgia was called for Democrat Joe Biden.
    ……..
    ……..Willis said that a decision on whether to bring charges against Trump could come in the first half of 2022.
    ……..

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  91. Egotistical, not venal. He hurt his wealth overall (even if it was some insurance against going completely broke)

    Whatever hit his wealth took as a factual matter (if it did — he almost certainly lies about his wealth) doesn’t demonstrate anything about what he expected to happen.

    Someone with a lifelong pattern of being “greedy, greedy, greedy” doesn’t suddenly become indifferent to wealth in his seventh decade — particularly when he has never given any indication of deciding that his priories were misplaced or that the way he took advantage of others for his own gain — e.g. routinely shortchanging contractors — might have been morally wrong.

    We know that he took specific steps to monetize the presidency before the presidency actually cost him anything. There is no plausible basis to think he willingly sacrificed wealth for the sake of patriotism — or even that he thought the boost to his ego would really cost him money. Recall that he was only loaning money to his campaign, not actually spending his own money on it.

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  92. @90. Comedy gold!

    More like Comedy brass- which in ballsy Trumpworld, passes for gold. 😉

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  93. I’ll pass on Haley. Just a matter of time before Desantis follows the republican karens into wokeytown.

    mg (8cbc69)

  94. Those who wish to credit Trump with some good motives might want to read about his “charitable” foundation.

    Washington Post reporter David Fahrenthold looked hard for Trump gifts to charities, and found almost none:

    Fahrenthold covered the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, reporting on the Donald J. Trump Foundation as well as claims Trump made as the 2016 Republican nominee that he had given away millions out of his own pocket.[14] In May 2016, Fahrenthold began an effort to verify Trump had made these personal donations. To solicit leads and for transparency, he periodically posted updates to Twitter via a hand-written list of charities he had contacted to ask whether they had received contributions from Trump, as well as the charities’ responses.[14] After four months, Fahrenthold and colleagues at the Post had contacted more than 400 major charities, with only one charity confirming they had received a personal donation from Trump between 2008 and May 2016 when Fahrenthold began publicly reporting on the question.

    I recall reading that and thinking that the one gift (to a New York police auxiliary, if I recall correctly) might have been a mistake by an underling.

    Here’s how Trump reacted to Fahrenthold’s reporting:

    In August 2020, Fahrentold and other Washington Post reporters published an investigative journalism piece showing that the Secret Service spent more than $900,000 at properties owned by Trump during his presidency.[23][24] After the reporting, White House spokesperson Judd Deere said the White House was building a “dossier” on Fahrentold.

    (Yes, Wiki should correct the two spelling errors.)

    Jim Miller (edcec1)

  95. Radegunda – My apologies for spelling your name wrong, in my first comment in this thread. (I’m a poor typist, and a mediocre proof reader, but I do try to get names right.)

    Jim Miller (edcec1)

  96. #23 Calling for a “purge” will remind many of us of this purge.

    (I hope that wasn’t the intent.)

    Jim Miller (edcec1)

  97. Trump/Haley 2024 wins. Darlin’ Nikki is the right gender, the right age, projects self-confidence enough to wear dresses- and looks good in them, too – a modern ethnic mix w/a great family story–and once she bobs her hair and lets a little grey streak in for gravitas, a perfect balanced draw for wary women still put off by Trump.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  98. What’s Darling Nikki’s position on Trump today? She hasn’t held onto a position on Trump for more than five minutes. Identity politics through and through.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  99. 94, which slice of woke will DeSantis simp for?

    urbanleftbehind (22515e)

  100. If Haley rises through the primaries, Ted’s going to dust off the guayabera (almost as tawdry as the silken choir robe) in desperate attempt to peel off the Florida Cubanos and his downstate Tejanos.

    I think Trump gets more out of this right shade of brown sweetie on the ticket.

    urbanleftbehind (22515e)

  101. Darling Nikki suffers from Donmentia.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  102. @101. It would warm JVW’s heart and she does have eye candy appeal– but not the breadth of experience or public exposure of Darlin’ Nikki. She did okay as governor; managed well at the UN, can tell Donald off nicely and bailed out of private sector Boeing just in time. But yes, Tulsi can grow on you.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  103. @99. Unlike the old and staid Joe and floundering, pant-suited Kamala, yes, Darlin’ Nikki’s quite limber and agile when it comes to broken field running– even in a dress.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  104. 25. Jim Miller (edcec1) — 1/31/2022 @ 10:52 am

    as George Orwell once wrote: “Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious.”

    It also wins elections. (falsely appearing to e right does also, but a more correct position can withstand some argument.)

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  105. Radegunda (e99c47) — 1/31/2022 @ 2:08 pm

    . Recall that he was only loaning money to his campaign, not actually spending his own money on it.

    He was spending money, albeit he tried to limit costs and spend mostly what he was going to spend anyway (his airplane or “rent” for his campaign headquarters.

    It was only after he won the nomination, when the money was coming from other people rather than from another pocket) that he raised the rent he charged his campaign.

    I think it’s absurd to think he ran for president to make money. That doesn’t mean the alternative is patriotism.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  106. My personal opinion on Cruz and his ambitions would be for him to realize the best he can do is to hang in there at Senate until dementia sets in then run for President.

    steveg (e81d76)

  107. The republican party belongs to trump not you. Move on.

    While I agree with this re the GOP, I think to simply say “move on” misses the point. As long as Trump hints at running in 2024, this is a problem for everyone: Republican (non-Trumper), Democrats, Independents, and those who have left the Republican Party and have no political home. Everyone would be impacted by him getting re-elected, and even if he lost, everyone would be impacted by his attempts to overturn the election. At a minimum, it would ensure chaos and calamity to the country, and heaven knows what else. If Jan. 6 is any indicator, it would be all things bad. So, moving on in one sense, yes. But in another realistic sense, move on to where?

    Dana (5395f9)

  108. I think it’s absurd to think he ran for president to make money. That doesn’t mean the alternative is patriotism.

    I never said he ran for president to make money. I only said it’s unlikely that he expected to lose money by doing so, and that he did take measures to try to profit off the presidency while in office.
    What’s absurd is thinking he set out to make some great sacrifice for love of country.

    Radegunda (e99c47)

  109. Trump says congressional investigators should examine why Pence didn’t reject electoral college results
    ……..
    In a fresh statement Tuesday, Trump offered a more nuanced take on what he would have liked to have seen from Pence, saying he “could have sent the votes back to various legislators for reassessment after so much fraud and irregularities were found.”
    ……..
    In his statement Tuesday, Trump took renewed aim at the House select committee examining the Jan. 6 insurrection, saying it was filled with “political hacks, liars, and traitors.”

    Trump said a better focus for the committee would be “why Mike Pence did not send back the votes for recertification or approval, in that it has now been shown that he clearly had the right to do so!”

    Pence’s former chief of staff, Marc Short, is among those who have testified before the select committee investigating the attack on the Capitol.

    Short appeared before the committee last week, according to people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. Pence does not plan to appear before the committee, but besides Short, Pence’s top lawyer, Greg Jacob, is expected to appear.
    ………
    Pence is expected to address and defend his decision to certify the election during a speech Friday in Florida to the Federalist Society.
    ……..

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  110. I want the committee to investigate why Trump did not pardon the 1/6 short-bussers when he could have and it would have mattered, keeping them out of jail and from going broke, instead of that he’ll pardon them if he’s elected in ’24 bullsh!t he’s spouting now.

    And you’d think he’d have learned a new tune in a year. Instead, it’s the same sad-ass “fraud, irregularities, Pence, back to the states, blah, blah, blah” refrain.

    nk (1d9030)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2838 secs.