Trump's Coup d'état.

[AnonyMoose]

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Sure, a key first step would be controlling the military. Of course, there are many other steps he must take and many people have to cooperate with him to do so, none of which is very clear right now. He certainly has some full support, and some carefully worded support from a lot of people. At the same time, does anyone not see a world where Trump starts to demand an arrest warrant for Joe Biden and some of the GOP goes along with it?

No need to control the military. No need to arrest Biden. No need for any of that.

You guys are making the mistake of using prior history of banana republic examples of what a a coup d'etat looks like. But that doesn't have to be the case here. All the GOP has to do is 'prove' that Trump was the true winner of the election and not Biden. Cast a wide swath of doubt about the election results, and they've got the ball rolling.

The more important question is how they go about establishing their 'evidence' of a fraudulent election giving the win to Biden.

A coup d'etat is nothing more than an illegal stealing away of an existing legitimate government. Nothing more, nothing less. How one goes about doing that is neither here nor there.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

For the fear mongerers that keep suggesting state legislators are possibly going to overturn their own state's vote and send in either faithless electors, or simply call the state for Trumpy...

Fearmongers such as the Jones Day lawyer on Team Trump whom Axios has on background:
https://www.axios.com/trump-electora...a62fe5149.html

[cosmicaug]

Originally Posted by sackett

Somebody on FacePie opines that Donnie is bringing in Rent-a-Lackeys to destroy files. That sounds more likely than anything as manly as a coup.

That seems to be Asha Rangappa's take on it.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Fearmongers such as the Jones Day lawyer whom Axios has on background:
https://www.axios.com/trump-electora...a62fe5149.html

I'm not suggesting for a minute anyone in this thread made this stuff up. Absolutely the media has been hyping these scenarios in multiple publications. All of them explain in tedious hypothetical detail how it is possible. And here's another one that names no states or anyone actually plotting to carry it out.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I'm not suggesting for a minute anyone in this thread made this stuff up. Absolutely the media has been hyping these scenarios in multiple publications. All of them explain in tedious hypothetical detail how it is possible. And here's another one that names no states or anyone actually plotting to carry it out.

Pretty sure Axios said precisely who is plotting.

Quote:

Trump and his team could try to block secretaries of state in contested states from certifying results. That could allow legislatures in those states to try to appoint new electors who favor Trump over Biden.

Also, it's not hypothetical. They are quoting someone from inside the team itself.

[dirtywick]

Originally Posted by AnonyMoose

No need to control the military. No need to arrest Biden. No need for any of that.

You guys are making the mistake of using prior history of banana republic examples of what a a coup d'etat looks like. But that doesn't have to be the case here. All the GOP has to do is 'prove' that Trump was the true winner of the election and not Biden. Cast a wide swath of doubt about the election results, and they've got the ball rolling.

The more important question is how they go about establishing their 'evidence' of a fraudulent election giving the win to Biden.

A coup d'etat is nothing more than an illegal stealing away of an existing legitimate government. Nothing more, nothing less. How one goes about doing that is neither here nor there.

Well he's already ******* that up pretty bad

[The Great Zaganza]

I think Trump is convinced that the Military will overthrow him, and his loyalists will prevent that/ give him time to go into exile.

Sounds like something he would worry about.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Pretty sure Axios said precisely who is plotting.

Also, it's not hypothetical. They are quoting someone from inside the team itself.

Which states? Where is the evidence it is more than hypothetical pondering?

I get it there is a path for Trump to do this. That doesn't take it past hypothetical.

[PhantomWolf]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

When facism comes to America it will be holding a Bible and humping a flag. Or however the saying goes.

And the 2nd Amendment "I need to have guns to fight the tyrannical Government" nuts will be standing beside it cheering it on.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Did they in Germany?

Yes, certainly. Eight million Germans were signed up members of the NSDAP multiply that by three members per household and you can see how H built his base.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Yes, certainly. Eight million Germans were signed up members of the NSDAP multiply that by three members per household and you can see how H built his base.

Fortunately, Trump's base is shrinking, not growing.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Fortunately, Trump's base is shrinking, not growing.

How do you calculate that?

By my reckoning, he got several million more votes than in 2016, which would tend to indicate more people like him now than 4 years ago.

I'd call that growing rather than shrinking.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Fortunately, Trump's base is shrinking, not growing.

Hmmm...I wish that were true.

2016	2020
62,984,828	72,349,962 (and counting...)

[Ladewig]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

I think Trump is convinced that the Military will overthrow him, and his loyalists will prevent that/ give him time to go into exile.

Sounds like something he would worry about.

I was going to point out that his helicopter and airplane are piloted by the military. So, they wouldn’t fly him anywhere.

But then I realized that the Saudis or Russians could have a medium sized jet fueled and ready to take off. His limo driver is not military, so he’s got that option. And all he really has to do is get to the foreign embassy. He can then be loaded into a car with diplomatic plates and driven anywhere. Having the ambassador himself riding shotgun would ensure no interference from any US government or military personnel.

But this is all supposition based on other suppositions.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

How do you calculate that?

By my reckoning, he got several million more votes than in 2016, which would tend to indicate more people like him now than 4 years ago.

I'd call that growing rather than shrinking.

It was a Reuter's poll: 40% of Republicans and 70+% of everyone in the US thought it was over, he should step down.

The links are from multiple sources.

It doesn't matter how many votes he got. You are drawing an unsupported conclusion that voting for Trump means one is a Trump sycophant. They are not.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Hmmm...I wish that were true.

2016	2020
62,984,828	72,349,962 (and counting...)

You're doing the same thing as TA, assuming voters for Trump equate to being in the cult. They're not.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

It was a Reuter's poll: 40% of Republicans and 70+% of everyone in the US thought it was over, he should step down.

And polls have been proven accurate time after time...

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

It doesn't matter how many votes he got. You are drawing an unsupported conclusion that voting for Trump means one is a Trump sycophant. They are not.

Ah, gotcha.

When you quote numbers, they mean what you want them to mean.

Sounds legit.

(Sychophants have nothing to do with it - the question is supporters, and voters clearly support him. Do you even know what sychophant means? It seems not, because you brought the term in, and it's simply straw.)

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

You're doing the same thing as TA, assuming voters for Trump equate to being in the cult. They're not.

At this point, I'm not sure whether there's a significant difference between Trump voters and cult members.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

It was a Reuter's poll: 40% of Republicans and 70+% of everyone in the US thought it was over, he should step down.

The links are from multiple sources.

It doesn't matter how many votes he got. You are drawing an unsupported conclusion that voting for Trump means one is a Trump sycophant. They are not.

Watch that number shrink and approach zero over the coming days and weeks.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Sure, a key first step would be controlling the military. Of course, there are many other steps he must take and many people have to cooperate with him to do so, none of which is very clear right now. He certainly has some full support, and some carefully worded support from a lot of people. At the same time, does anyone not see a world where Trump starts to demand an arrest warrant for Joe Biden and some of the GOP goes along with it?

Let me be clear, I don't think any coup is being planned or will happen, this will s merely a FYI post.

Many coups have happened without the military being part of it, what often happens is the military is "confined to barracks" whilst the political coup happens, that avoids the issue caused by telling citizens to fire on fellow citizens.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

You're doing the same thing as TA, assuming voters for Trump equate to being in the cult. They're not.

Okay, please present your figures.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Which states? Where is the evidence it is more than hypothetical pondering?

https://www.wfmz.com/news/state/penn...e79350866.html

[The Great Zaganza]

It has been pointed out that a Coup usually requires the support of the Military.

So this would be more like a Putsch.

[alfaniner]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

It has been pointed out that a Coup usually requires the support of the Military.

So this would be more like a Putsch.

I'd say he's more of a Putz.

[Crossbow]

I am surprised that the stupid, idiotic, lying, POS Trump has not yet claimed that there is not some sort of 'Deep State Conspiracy' which made him lose the election.

After all, since Trump has claimed that he is a very "stable genius", then he is quite unable to admit the simple fact that he ever did anything that is wrong.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

You're doing the same thing as TA, assuming voters for Trump equate to being in the cult. They're not.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that every Biden voter is a steadfast, staunch, resolute Trump opponent if Trump takes control of the armed forces.
Did you notice how easy it was for guys like Graham and Cruz to change their attitudes to Trump once it became clear that he was in charge of the Republican Party?

[dann]

Originally Posted by Crossbow

I am surprised that the stupid, idiotic, lying, POS Trump has not yet claimed that there is not some sort of 'Deep State Conspiracy' which made him lose the election.

That is what he is claiming. The Deep State Conspiracy is a conspiracy of Democrats, Biden, Soros and Antifa.

[dann]

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Sure, a key first step would be controlling the military. Of course, there are many other steps he must take and many people have to cooperate with him to do so, none of which is very clear right now. He certainly has some full support, and some carefully worded support from a lot of people. At the same time, does anyone not see a world where Trump starts to demand an arrest warrant for Joe Biden and some of the GOP goes along with it?

Does anybody put up much of a protest when people are being escorted out of their offices right now?

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

It has been pointed out that a Coup usually requires the support of the Military.

So this would be more like a Putsch.

Not really, having the courts is a popular alternative to military backing, though it seems like he is having trouble finding lawyers willing to push the right narrative hard enough. They seem to be a bit afraid of perjury charges though to make a good go of it.

It seems like they are going through the motions with out a lot of commitment

[Cavemonster]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

It was a Reuter's poll: 40% of Republicans and 70+% of everyone in the US thought it was over, he should step down.

The links are from multiple sources.

It doesn't matter how many votes he got. You are drawing an unsupported conclusion that voting for Trump means one is a Trump sycophant. They are not.

I've been watching a few "conservative" discussion spaces.

Around when media started calling it, the prevailing narrative was that Trump had lost and should step down. Most of their posts were cheap digs at how they thought liberals would burn down cities if it had gone the other way, but they acknowledged the result.

That would explain a ~40% or so figure acknowledging the loss.
But those same spaces started shifting DRASTICALLY once Trump's campaign and lawyers and twitter started pushing the fraud narrative hard. The same group of people who initially thought it was over switched back to "Fight the liberal attempt to steal this election!" within a couple days.

They only conceded at the beginning because they hadn't received their strong marching orders to do otherwise.

I can't say what percentage is on board at this point, but I watched the shift happen in real time. The major conservative hubs onr reddit which were 100% "Guess we lost this one" are now 100% "Fight the democrat fraud!".

[JoeMorgue]

Yeah it's why all the Trumpers here went silent after Trump lost and only a few have started sticking their heads out from under the rocks in the political threads (despite being active in other threads.)

Because they hadn't yet been told what the narrative was gonna be and they can't come up with it on their own.

They were waiting for Trump to tell them why he hadn't lost after he had obviously lost.

[varwoche]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I think ww are into Disaster Porn here.

Am I correct in assuming we agree that...?

• Trump would steal the election if he could get away with it.
• Trump is indeed trying to steal the election.
• His many minions are playing along.

That impresses me as a good reason to be concerned.

I take solace knowing they would need to flip three states.

[carlosy]

If we have learned anything during the past 4 years, it should be that if Trump accuses anyone of anything, it's pretty sure that he is the one doing it himself.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by varwoche

Am I correct in assuming we agree that...?

• Trump would steal the election if he could get away with it.
• Trump is indeed trying to steal the election.
• His many minions are playing along.

That impresses me as a good reason to be concerned.

I take solace knowing they would need to flip three states.

And the question is how far they will go and who will put a stop to them. It feels more performative than seriously planning on having the election results thrown out, of course that doesn't stop these things from resulting in a real overthrow of the government.

The total farce of the lawyers saying that they have no evidence for the legal claims to judges is at least comforting as many seem to be unwilling to be the first to cross the Rubicon.

[CORed]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Which states? Where is the evidence it is more than hypothetical pondering?

I get it there is a path for Trump to do this. That doesn't take it past hypothetical.

I'm pretty sure that preventing states from certifying is part of the plan. This could conceivably work for him either by getting a Republican legislature to choose electors for him, or preventing certification in enough states to prevent Biden from having an electoral majority, and putting the election into the House of Representatives, where, because the Constitution requires voting by state, Trump would likely win. In order to do this though, he is going to have to get lawsuits in multiple states that are not dismissed on first hearing. I think his chances of actually accomplishing it are pretty slim. I'm not sure what he will do once states have certified and the electoral college has voted. What I'm hoping for is that either he ends up getting dragged out of the White House in handcuffs on Jan. 20. I could see staff, cabinet, etc. humoring him right up until that moment, then all saying, "sorry, you're not the president any more."

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Fearmongers such as the Jones Day lawyer on Team Trump whom Axios has on background:
https://www.axios.com/trump-electora...a62fe5149.html

Key quote from that article:

Quote:

To date, Biden's status as president-elect is rooted in media projections based on raw vote totals reported by individual states.
Those totals don't become official, though, until states certify them. The Constitution prescribes that those official results will be used to apportion electors who officially pick the president.

According to Ballotpedia:

Quote:

As of November 12, 2020:

Election result certification dates had passed in seven states
Election result certification dates had not passed in 43 states

If you scroll down to the table of deadlines, one can see the deadline for Certification Dates are anything between now and 3 Dec 2020.


So, on or after - whichever is sooner - if there is to be a coup d'état, we can expect Trump to tweet the following:


'I WIN! THIS IS A COO! BIG PRESS CONFERENCE 11:00 FOUR SEASONS HOTEL'


This will be amusing and will generate no end of twitter memes. However, as much as Trump is portrayed as an idiot, there is also a sinister element to this, which I think insiders are taking very seriously, whilst feigning nonchalance.

[CORed]

Originally Posted by varwoche

Am I correct in assuming we agree that...?

• Trump would steal the election if he could get away with it.
• Trump is indeed trying to steal the election.
• His many minions are playing along.

That impresses me as a good reason to be concerned.

I take solace knowing they would need to flip three states.

That is the difference between this election and 2000. In 2000, one state needed to be flipped, and the margin was less then 600 votes. Gore was right to want a recount. Where I think Gore screwed up was by trying to cherry pick precincts to recount. This undermined his credibility. Had he asked for a recount of the entire state, he would have looked less like he was trying to steal the election and still would very likely have won. In this election, it's at least three states all with margins of 10's to 100's of thousands of votes. It is unlikely in the extreme that Trump can get court rulings to flip or prevent certification in all of them (or any of them, really). I am concerned about what else he has up his sleeve. I don't think we should underestimate Trump. Though I like to refer to him as a moron or an idiot, I think he is actually fairly intelligent, though that intelligence is largely negated by ignorance and narcissism. However, he is not hampered by anything remotely resembling ethics.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

And the question is how far they will go and who will put a stop to them. It feels more performative than seriously planning on having the election results thrown out, of course that doesn't stop these things from resulting in a real overthrow of the government.

The total farce of the lawyers saying that they have no evidence for the legal claims to judges is at least comforting as many seem to be unwilling to be the first to cross the Rubicon.

.....yet

[Cain]

Originally Posted by Cavemonster

I've been watching a few "conservative" discussion spaces.

Around when media started calling it, the prevailing narrative was that Trump had lost and should step down. Most of their posts were cheap digs at how they thought liberals would burn down cities if it had gone the other way, but they acknowledged the result.

That would explain a ~40% or so figure acknowledging the loss.
But those same spaces started shifting DRASTICALLY once Trump's campaign and lawyers and twitter started pushing the fraud narrative hard. The same group of people who initially thought it was over switched back to "Fight the liberal attempt to steal this election!" within a couple days.

They only conceded at the beginning because they hadn't received their strong marching orders to do otherwise.

I can't say what percentage is on board at this point, but I watched the shift happen in real time. The major conservative hubs onr reddit which were 100% "Guess we lost this one" are now 100% "Fight the democrat fraud!".

I do wonder about that ecosystem. Observers often say the "leaders" take their cues from the rabble (especially Rush Limbaugh). Or, "Trump's a symptom, not the cause," but there are all kinds of complicated feedback loops.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I'm not suggesting for a minute anyone in this thread made this stuff up. Absolutely the media has been hyping these scenarios in multiple publications. All of them explain in tedious hypothetical detail how it is possible. And here's another one that names no states or anyone actually plotting to carry it out.

I agree we live in an age where too many articles are just breezy nothing burgers, rather than any real research or analysis, but that one isn't too bad, albeit irritatingly familiar in style.

Headlines that are posed as a question (for example, 'Why does it matter?') and/or contain the word 'could' or a disguised similar word, can be safely disregarded in my experience. I almost invariably avoid even clicking on them.