More examples of blatant GOP hypocrisy.
Hey Newt, go back and check your voting record during the Clinton impeachment.
To me, such a move puts us one step from Civil War- the last line would be ballot box. If that line gets breached, then we will have to fight for democracy and the rule of law, and hope the military understands its oath.
I do think it Trump does this- enough folks will get scared that something will happen. Trump’s hardcore base is deluded enough to be all for it though- which means they will be part of the problem.
We already had one election that appears to have been tampered with. If he is still in office after firing Mueller, there’s no way you can assume the next won’t be outright rigged.
Tampering is one thing, I don’t think there was a statewide effort to truly steal votes that were cast (voter suppression is another thing). I don’t think tampering would have changed the outcome of 2016.
What I’m talking about is openly changing election results, or blatantly lying about vote totals (this one would be obvious since it would have to be done on a state level and some states will be honest)
But the way the electoral college is set up, it only takes a small number of votes to create a huge shift in influence.
His is a hilarious must-see. TheHill: Trump lawyer spars with Fox News host
Fox News’s Chris Wallace interviewing member of Trump’s legal team Jay Sekulow who repeatedly states that Trump is not under investigation, then repeatedly says that he doesn’t know if he is, then says that he is under investigation, then gets angry when Wallace points this out and accuses him of putting words in his mouth. Wallace: “Oh boy, this is weird.”
Oh my god, this one is equally great. Tapper says, “So the President said ‘I am under investigation’ even though he isn’t under investigation?” and Sekulow tries to deflect by blaming the Twitter character limit.
Won’t repeat my comments, since you moved the post, but how weird is it to see a Fox anchor be so biased AGAINST Trump…
Sorry about that, I tripped over the threads again, there.
It’s painful watching Sekulow try to explain Trump’s tweets.
The thing is, he probably is under investigation. That will be made public eventually. Why spend so much time denying it? I’m guessing he was ordered to by Trump.
I watched him on Meet the Press and Fox News Sunday. At one point Wallace hammered him just to punish him for being so ridiculous.
I don’t know if the Trump ordered him to go on the Sunday shows to counter punch, but it makes absolutely no sense for them to try and defend Trump’s tweets.
If Sekulow is Trump’s top lawyer he could be in trouble, even if he did nothing wrong.
My understanding is Sekulow is the weakest of the three. Kasowitz also really has no business being there, but the only one with experience for this sounds like the newest guy they hired.
It was funny watching a Fox recap of it later. I don’t know who the host was, but she (and the writers) had clearly not figured a way to spin the Wallace/Sekulow interview.
The level of cheating I’m referring to would require a larger shift in votes. If Trump is losing by 7% nationally- multiple states will have to be swung, in some cases with large numbers.
And how easy is it to first off correctly gauge the initial votes so that your votes are enough to make the difference?
We don’t vote nationally, and a national vote % lead is irrelevant. We vote by precinct, by county, and by state, that is all that matters. This election was won by less than 1% margin in 3 or 4 states, so all the little things make a difference. Voter suppression, fake news, voter apathy, targeted ads, voter roll purges, polling place changes, early voting rules, absentee and provisional vote counting, all of it is a thumb on the scale.
Yep, that also means rigging will be done in a few states. With polling data and a clear favorite- it will be fairly easy to spot where rigging is likely, even if we don’t know how it was rigged.
If by “rigging” you mean manipulating tallies so they no longer accurately reflect the ballots cast, I don’t think it’s possible to do so on more than a negligible scale. Vote counting is a very localized and idiosyncratic process. It would be like trying to simultaneously tamper with all the Homecoming Queen elections across the nation.
Thus varies a lot state-to-state. Local election officials depend heavily on state officials for things like IT support on computerized ballot machines. The voting machines themselves aren’t connected to the internet, but they do get connected to other systems that could be compromised. It’s easy to imagine an advanced persistent threat actor with a targeted attack being able to affect a significant percentage of voting nachines in a state.
Which, when you see the recent reports on the (lack of) information security for many states. How they were compromised, and the passwords and information for many local officials potentially lost to outside actors?
Far more plausible than perhaps we like to admit.