VOTE!

[Superbone]

You gotta hear the end. He starts arguing with Stahl that she would never ask Biden these questions. Then a producer steps in and says they only have 5 minutes before Biden arrives for his interview. Trump says it's ok, I'm done anyway. You can then clearly hear a female voice off camera say, "I think we're ready for the next President NOW."

[Mori Chu]

I think my favorite part of the interview is the start. "Are you ready for some tough questions?" "No, I'm not." LOL.

[Indy]

You gotta hear the end. He starts arguing with Stahl that she would never ask Biden these questions. Then a producer steps in and says they only have 5 minutes before Biden arrives for his interview. Trump says it's ok, I'm done anyway. You can then clearly hear a female voice off camera say, "I think we're ready for the next President NOW."

It isn't Biden coming in next. It is Pence. They say "vice president" at the end there, not next president.

Either way, this is par for the course.

I do like how the WH bills this as an unedited version of the tape, but ~10 minutes in they stop the interview to fix a flag, but also make a comment about Trump's hair. It cuts away before you see the guy fixing his "hair" for him, then picks up again. Of all things to cut out of the tape, they cut out that and not the parts that really make him look bad.

[Superbone]

You gotta hear the end. He starts arguing with Stahl that she would never ask Biden these questions. Then a producer steps in and says they only have 5 minutes before Biden arrives for his interview. Trump says it's ok, I'm done anyway. You can then clearly hear a female voice off camera say, "I think we're ready for the next President NOW."

It isn't Biden coming in next. It is Pence. They say "vice president" at the end there, not next president.

Either way, this is par for the course.

I do like how the WH bills this as an unedited version of the tape, but ~10 minutes in they stop the interview to fix a flag, but also make a comment about Trump's hair. It cuts away before you see the guy fixing his "hair" for him, then picks up again. Of all things to cut out of the tape, they cut out that and not the parts that really make him look bad.

I like my story better!

[Nodack]

60 minutes would have edited the parts about his hair out but, maybe not now.

[Cap]

It’s true. I looked all over for info on that plane crash, and there’s nothing. Like it never even happened. The story is being suppressed by liberals to hurt Trump.

[3rdside]

Just the inevitable on its way .. is there a plan in place? Has anyone seen one talk about it ?:

[ShelC]

That's been known. He needs to stay in power to keep from being prosecuted by NY State. I'm pretty sure there are sealed indictments waiting for him. Biden and the Dems claim to have an army of lawyers ready for any tricks Trump, Barr and the GOP may try and pull but I'm still skeptical. They'll think of something, Trump's already said he's taking it to the SC if he loses and just yesterday he claimed there wasn't a peaceful transition in 2016 because his campaign was spied on, etc so why should he peacefully transfer power this time.

Here's one article

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... t-election

[Cap]

Funny guy.

[ShelC]

So he's admitting to voter fraud?

[Nodack]

Admitted he’s a dumb azz.

[Nodack]

A Day-By-Day Guide to What Could Happen If This Election Goes Bad
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... ide-430915
This year, though, there’s a potential different twist in the Electoral College: The threat of Republican legislatures replacing Democratic electors before they have a chance to vote at all. In an article earlier this fall in the Atlantic, Barton Gellman reported that Republican operatives and the Trump campaign are “discussing contingency plans to bypass election results and appoint loyal electors in battleground states where Republicans hold the legislative majority. With a justification based on claims of rampant fraud, Trump would ask state legislators to set aside the popular vote and exercise their power to choose a slate of electors directly.” Those loyal electors, chosen by the state legislature, would then presumably vote for Trump over Biden, actual results be damned.

Any such plan, however far-fetched and damaging to democracy, would hinge on (a) Trump’s losing, (b) his or the GOP’s casting enough doubt about the outcome and real vote totals that state legislators would feel OK enacting what would be a constitutional coup, and (c) the validity of those electors sustaining an inevitable court and congressional challenge. Plus, in some states, the governor might appoint his or her own set of electors, which could end up meaning that certain states present competing slates of electors to Congress on January 6. Credentials of competing elector slates would ultimately be judged by Congress, which would choose which set of votes to accept—although the process for such vetting is unclear. Some states have their own rules for how to handle a crisis like this, which themselves can be gamed: North Carolina, for instance, says that in the event of “dueling electors,” the slate chosen by the governor should be considered the legitimate one.

[ShelC]

I was wondering about faithless electors. Any which way the GOP can steal this thing, they'll try.

[Mori Chu]

I worry the election will somehow be sent to the Supreme Court and somehow decided in Trump's favor since he has a 6-3 partisan advantage.

[3rdside]

That's been known. He needs to stay in power to keep from being prosecuted by NY State. I'm pretty sure there are sealed indictments waiting for him. Biden and the Dems claim to have an army of lawyers ready for any tricks Trump, Barr and the GOP may try and pull but I'm still skeptical. They'll think of something, Trump's already said he's taking it to the SC if he loses and just yesterday he claimed there wasn't a peaceful transition in 2016 because his campaign was spied on, etc so why should he peacefully transfer power this time.

Here's one article

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... t-election

Cheers - I said a while back I believe USA will get it done (getting rid of Trump) but it wasn't a confident prediction. I still think that's the case but I'm still not confident saying that. Trump's whole life has been about gaming the system so there's no one who'll be better prepared for trying to screw this end game.

[3rdside]

This is positive:

https://betting.betfair.com/politics/us ... 0-205.html

[3rdside]

A Day-By-Day Guide to What Could Happen If This Election Goes Bad
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... ide-430915
This year, though, there’s a potential different twist in the Electoral College: The threat of Republican legislatures replacing Democratic electors before they have a chance to vote at all. In an article earlier this fall in the Atlantic, Barton Gellman reported that Republican operatives and the Trump campaign are “discussing contingency plans to bypass election results and appoint loyal electors in battleground states where Republicans hold the legislative majority. With a justification based on claims of rampant fraud, Trump would ask state legislators to set aside the popular vote and exercise their power to choose a slate of electors directly.” Those loyal electors, chosen by the state legislature, would then presumably vote for Trump over Biden, actual results be damned.

Any such plan, however far-fetched and damaging to democracy, would hinge on (a) Trump’s losing, (b) his or the GOP’s casting enough doubt about the outcome and real vote totals that state legislators would feel OK enacting what would be a constitutional coup, and (c) the validity of those electors sustaining an inevitable court and congressional challenge. Plus, in some states, the governor might appoint his or her own set of electors, which could end up meaning that certain states present competing slates of electors to Congress on January 6. Credentials of competing elector slates would ultimately be judged by Congress, which would choose which set of votes to accept—although the process for such vetting is unclear. Some states have their own rules for how to handle a crisis like this, which themselves can be gamed: North Carolina, for instance, says that in the event of “dueling electors,” the slate chosen by the governor should be considered the legitimate one.

Bill Maher talked about this the other day - I can't find the clip - and if he's talking about it it's do-able.

A landslide for Biden in other words otherwise it's in play.

[Cap]

That's been known. He needs to stay in power to keep from being prosecuted by NY State. I'm pretty sure there are sealed indictments waiting for him. Biden and the Dems claim to have an army of lawyers ready for any tricks Trump, Barr and the GOP may try and pull but I'm still skeptical. They'll think of something, Trump's already said he's taking it to the SC if he loses and just yesterday he claimed there wasn't a peaceful transition in 2016 because his campaign was spied on, etc so why should he peacefully transfer power this time.

Here's one article

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... t-election

Cheers - I said a while back I believe USA will get it done (getting rid of Trump) but it wasn't a confident prediction. I still think that's the case but I'm still not confident saying that. Trump's whole life has been about gaming the system so there's no one who'll be better prepared for trying to screw this end game.

It’s a Xanatos Gambit. Even if he loses, he wins. Even if he is ultimately forced from office and indicted, worst case scenario for him is he ends up living the high life in Moscow where he delivers 40% of American minds to Putin. The greatest leader in American history, framed for crimes by a deep state conspiracy and forced to flee the country. The Democratic usurper who rigged the election is in the White House. Putin and Trump are your last chance to take down Biden before he destroys America. And a huge chunk of America, including many elected officials in Washington, will buy that hook, line and sinker.

Even in the best case scenario, we’re in for some shitty times. This is a new kind of warfare, and we don’t know how to fight it.

[Flagrant Fowl]

I worry the election will somehow be sent to the Supreme Court and somehow decided in Trump's favor since he has a 6-3 partisan advantage.

This is the long game the GOP and it's backers have been playing for the better part of the past decade. Their goal has always been to unbalance the courts by any means necessary because it would not only end things they don't like, such as the ACA and Rowe v. Wade, but it's also a tool to rig elections.

Authoritarianism, plain and simple.

[Nodack]

This doesn’t really fit here that well. I didn’t want to make another thread.

Judge orders Justice Department to verify its filings in Flynn case
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/2 ... ase-431600
The federal judge presiding over the criminal case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn has ordered the Justice Department to conduct an unusual review of its filings in the case and certify by Monday whether any have been manipulated.

The order is a signal of intense distrust between the judge, Emmet Sullivan, and the department, whose filings are typically accepted at face value. In this case, DOJ has already acknowledged that two documents it previously filed — handwritten notes taken by former FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe — were altered "inadvertently" to include inaccurate dates.

Sullivan has resisted pressure to drop the case, instead appointing an outside adviser to argue against dismissal. That adviser, former Judge John Gleeson, has accused Barr of an overtly political effort to drop the Flynn case in order to protect a prominent Trump ally. Sullivan's posture has led to contentious litigation, including a failed effort by Flynn's team to ask the appeals court to elbow Sullivan aside while accusing him of bias. In the intervening months, the Justice Department and Flynn have continued to publicly post sets of documents that Flynn's team has characterized as evidence of FBI misconduct.
Two of those documents included the notes that DOJ now acknowledges were altered, a revelation that Sullivan said last month left him "floored" and demanding answers. In his new order, Sullivan notes that DOJ did not respond to his request to authenticate all 14 exhibits it has filed in support of the dismissal motion.