Susan Rice tweets a link describing how Trump could lose election and still remain president...

[AntiFascist]

bringing the "The Plot Against America" to life.

Link to tweet

[Me.]

1. OMG, This Again?

[sheshe2]

3. I stopped reading Newsweek a few decades ago.

They are not a reliable source. Attaching Susan Rices name to it doesn't make it so.

[Me.]

4. If She Has A Chance At Veep She Needs To Be More Discerning

I can't imagine JB would welcome this theory being given any credence

[AntiFascist]

7. The opinion piece was coauthored by a former US Senator from Colorado...

and the threat taken seriously by Obama's National Security advisor. I would trust their opinions over those of anonymous posters.

[Celerity]

9. +100000

[SharonClark]

14. Agree.

[iemitsu]

2. Frightening.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

5. Reliability of the source aside, the step by step scenario seems pretty cut and dried. Has...

...has any other expert debunked this? To any degree? Either from a legal standpoint or the likelihood of certain details?

I'd say it's far-fetched but is it impossible?

[TreasonousBastard]

6. This is an horrific scenario, but it depends upon tossing the election...

to the House, where the votes are simply by state, not by rep. If it plays out that way, I'm not sure there is a good defense.

We absolutely have to get out the vote, and make sure mailed ballots are secure.

And in the back of everyone's mind is that next year is redistricting. If we get that far.

[Salviati]

8. As someone else on DU posted, it appears like the argument falls apart on step 9:

9: The Electoral College meets, and without the electors from those four states being represented, neither Biden nor Trump has sufficient votes to get an Electoral College majority.

But per the 12th amendment to the constitution (bolding mine):

The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.

If certain states do not appoint electors by the deadline, then that will reduce the number needed obtain the majority in the electoral collage. It seems that the only situations under which the election would be kicked to the house, is if there is a tie in the electoral college, or if you have a third candidate that actually prevents a majority of the appointed electors going to one of the other two.

[AntiFascist]

11. By your reasoning, if Biden wins by a small margin...

and he had won a Republican controlled state (Republican governor and Sec of State), what would prevent that state from withholding the appointments of its electors to try and throw off the election?

On the other hand, it seems that "the whole number of Electors appointed" should be interpreted to refer to the number assigned to each state, prior to the election.

[Salviati]

12. I mean at some point, the only thing that stops them is millions of people out in the street

Article 2 clause 2 seems to suggest that the appointment of electors is choosing the actual people to vote in the electoral college. So while states may have a number of electors that they are entitled to appoint, they are not actually appointed until there's a butt to go in the seat.

[AntiFascist]

13. Another problem is that the appointment of electors appears to totally depend on state laws...

In the case of Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court allowed Florida state legislature to appoint its own electors, independently of the election results.

[Salviati]

15. Like I said, at some point, the last bastion against fascism is millions of people out in the street

There is no law that we can pass now that will constrain them if they are determined to do harm.

I do hope, that when we take power again, we can rework things to not rely on the good faith of the actors participating in our government. The checks and balances set in place by the founders are no longer serving their purpose.

[AntiFascist]

19. I recall the Republican Brooks Brothers riot that affected the 2000 election...

Trump seems to be so worried and afraid of the angry Leftist mobs...

[not_the_one]

17. And the Supreme Court just recently made it clear that the states could do

whatever they damn well please. If the states want to cheat, that is fine with them, since elections are under the STATES' purview.

The only way to rectify THAT is to deal with the extreme gerrymandering of state districts for the purpose of republicans retaining the legislature, even though they received far less than 50% of the votes.

[Pachamama]

10. This article is a must read for everyone

Chilling....

Susan Rice is absolutely right - we all need to be prepared

[superpatriotman]

16. I posted this yesterday

And was swiftly scolded by pollyannas and head-in-the-sand folks who have clearly not paid attention to the dismantling of the republic over the last 3 years.

[AntiFascist]

18. I was looking for a post about this and sorry I missed your previous post...

I'm mainly worried that with Barr as AG they will try to pull something. Even if this scenario seems to be farfetched, if there is any possibility that it could happen then people should be prepared somehow, otherwise we could end up telling them "you were warned!".