Well, here it is. The loudest democracy in the world has an infantile celebrity refusing to concede the presidency.
In his final weeks in office, Donald Trump is acting more and more like a tin-pot, banana-republic strongman: stacking key departments, sacking his defence secretary, replacing staff with loyal acolytes, hiding in his palace and refusing to allow the machinery of democracy to work.
But does it amount to a coup, or is this no more than a case of being a sore loser?
Put a fork in them, the election is almost done.
Understand what happens next with our best ever discounts.
Fear-mongering or crucial coverage?
The Washington Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan questions how media organisations are supposed to cover whatever it is that’s going on in the White House.
How do you cover something that, at worst, lays the groundwork for a coup attempt and, at best, represents a brazen lie that could be deeply damaging to American democracy?
Dangerous is right. As Barton Gellman writes in The Atlantic:
Our electoral system was not built to withstand a sustained assault on its legitimacy. We are capable of defending it, but that is a collective enterprise.
Autocracy by any other name
Borrowing teachings from Hungarian sociologist Bálint Magyar, The New Yorker columnist Masha Gessen describes Trump’s behaviour in three stages: autocratic attempt, autocratic breakthrough, and autocratic consolidation.
Trump’s current “attempt” stage means autocracy is still preventable or reversible, by electoral means.
A breakthrough occurs when it’s no longer possible to reverse autocracy peacefully because the structure of government has been transformed.
These changes usually include packing the constitutional court (the Supreme Court, in the case of the US) with judges loyal to the autocrat; packing and weakening the courts in general; appointing a chief prosecutor (the attorney-general) who is loyal to the autocrat and will enforce the law selectively on his behalf; changing the rules on the appointment of civil servants; weakening local governments; unilaterally changing electoral rules (to accommodate gerrymandering, for instance); … For all the apparent flailing and incompetence of the Trump administration, his autocratic attempt checks most of the boxes.
Gessen’s colleague David Rohde agreed, writing:
The president’s actions since election day are unprecedented … His chances of succeeding appear low, but it is important to state that the president of the United States is attempting to carry out a coup.
Without precedent
If Trump attempted to overturn Biden’s win, it would be a historic move, historian Sean Wilentz told The New York Times.
It would be an act of disloyalty unsurpassed in American history except by the southern secession in 1860-61.
Similarly, Harvard historian Serhii Plokhy, again speaking to The New York Times, said the move put Trump in poor company.
Trump’s behaviour is without precedent among leaders in Western democracies … Even in military dictatorships, the dictators more often than not honour the results of elections and they retire if they lose them.
Speaking to The Guardian, University of California law Professor Richard Hasen said any attempt to ignore the result of the election would be “a naked, anti-democratic power grab”.
Could it be a legal coup?
In Meanjin, Alistair Kitchen outlines how using legal recourses can still constitute a coup.
When the Bolivian military ‘asked’ Evo Morales to resign, no law was broken. When Jeanine Áñez, a lowly politician from the Bolivian hard right, stepped into the vacuum and took control of the country, no law was broken. Nonetheless, it was a coup — a coup overturned only by a mass political movement of socialists who forced a new election to be held a month ago, and then won in a landslide. The lesson of history is simple: it is in the spaces between the law that democracy can seep away.
Speaking to The New Daily, University of Melbourne’s US political analyst George Rennie was a little more optimistic.
I don’t doubt if Trump could, he would mount a coup … The truth is he can’t. For all its flaws, the US is still something like a nation of laws. The system of checks and balances is still in place … The armed forces, the secret service, are beholden to the constitution.
Hasen continued:
If the country continues to follow the rule of law, I see no plausible constitutional path forward for Trump to remain as president barring new evidence of some massive failure of the election system in multiple states.
Passivity supports a coup
Other analysts stressed lawmakers must step up to prevent any coup attempts, with Yale University history professor Timothy Snyder writing:
Poorly organised though it might seem, it is not bound to fail. It must be made to fail. Coups are defeated quickly or not at all. While they take place we are meant to look away, as many of us are doing. When they are complete we are powerless.
You need supporters … and competence … for a coup to occur
A lack of intervention could cause a coup — but first, you’d need to have a team of supporters willing to ignore, or support, the autocratic regime.
As Gellman writes in The Atlantic: “Trump will use every means at his disposal to maintain a grip on power.” That qualifier, “at his disposal,” is important.
It marks a distinction between wishes and commands that Trump can expect to be carried out … To move the government, Trump needs to know where the levers are and how to control them. In practice, this means persuading other people to operate the machinery on his behalf. Some of those people would balk at certain kinds of orders … The ultimate check on Trump’s power to meddle in the election is the same as it has been throughout his term in office: whether he can bend subordinates and institutions to his will. The record on that is mixed.
As Ross Douthat in The New York Times writes (unkindly but perhaps not incorrectly):
Our weak, ranting, infected-by-COVID chief executive is not plotting a coup, because a term like ‘plotting’ implies capabilities that he conspicuously lacks.
Or, as talk show host Jimmy Kimmel put it:
We may soon find out the answer to the question: can a coup be pulled off by people who spell it c-o-o?
Leave a comment
The U.S is in turmoil and no one knows who is who in that zoo. Trump was never a rational person and he has other psycophants believing in him.
The country needs to realise that at present it is a ongoing joke within the rest of the world a easy mark for those to wish it harm.
China and Russia will be doing what they do without cheks and balances whilst the U,S is drifting without anyone at the helm
Waylaider is only half right when stating that the US is at present an ongoing joke. The only ongoing joke is the 70 odd million vacuum flasks who voted for the pathological narcissist Trump. They have had front row seats to Trump’s overseeing of almost 250,000 American deaths and to his sowing the seeds of division and violence within American society to further his crazed drive for power.
These mindless automatons have permitted Trump to take their loved ones before their time via his do nothing attitude to COVID19 and turn American against American, Too blind to see that it is they who are being sacrificed for Trump’s preservation of power. Too blind to see the obvious that Trump’s squeals of election fraud are really a call for them to mobilize and tear down the democratic institutions and process that the USA is founded. In other words they are to be the sacrifice at the altar of Trump’s power grab.
But it is also key that they must be paying victims by making a contribution to meet Trump’s likely future expenses should all go pear shaped. In other words they have allowed themselves to be used as a means for Trump’s ends and their inability to reason all this out makes them the real fools of this story. Without them Trump would be shown to be what he really is a pathetic little man.
One may also surmise that there must be some deep underlying malaise within American society for so many too be suffering from this same sickness.
The productive and military capacity of the USA will remain dominant for some time (just in terms of nuclear toys). Domestically, foreign policy is not of significance; rated at about 1% of the polls that I made mention of.
To this end, the USA is not an ‘easy mark’ and what the world thinks (even when Obama was president) is an irrelevance to domestic and foreign USA politics.
Equally banal are the assessments in regard to C-19; at least as a whole. I have provided rates of infection and rates of death for EACH State. Those who remember will also remember the considerable variation for each State.
As to the sociology of the USA, a visit to an academic library would be worthwhile. As for foreign policy read something from John Mearsheimer (the principal sabre rattler – who is influencing Pompeo over Taiwan – and thus goading the PRC ) and something from his detractors.
It will become only too obvious that the polarised society cannot be reduced to what other countries think of or the rendering of an inconvenience by a virus within an environment where freedom (however perceived) comes first religion as second in the context of the numerous amendments to the Constitution.
Thank you to Erasmus for the contribution to my comments. Unlike Erasmus I do not think that the whole COVID19 issue is a banal one. Rather in my more lucid moments I feel that referring to Trump supporters as vacuum flasks is both too much of a cop out and knee jerk reaction to explain their position as much as it is an insult to vacuum flasks.
My final paragraph was more likely the insightful one. That 70 million persons align themselves so fanatically to Trump in spite of what appears his total inability/ suitability for such a high office with its attached obligations to the common good and growth of democracy show a societal issue rather than an individual one.
While I have not viewed the COVIT19 data for each state I would hazard a guess that it is most severe in the least socio-economically advantaged states than the most advantaged. COVID19 as most natural disasters tend to show impact the greatest on the most vulnerable. The rise of someone like Trump is more likely in highly unequal societies than more equal ones. With a Gini Coefficient value (a measure of inequality) of around .40 the USA sits at the more unequal side of most comparable European nations, in particular the Nordic states. Perhaps Americans should have a good hard look at the kind of society that they have allowed to develop since the 1980’s under neo-liberalism. I have always believed that inequality is a choice a society makes and perhaps now we see the USA paying the price for that choice.
Not that it is appreciated, I do have a fetish for detail. What follows are the stats (as of today – Google “covid deaths in the usa by state” – less the quotes) of infections and deaths by State I have selected
(somewhat arbitrary) the top and base dozen or so by Total Infections.
State Total Deaths
Texas 1,083,727 20,035
California 1,028,490 18,259
Florida 875,088 17,488
Illinois 574,548 11,170
NewYork 561,308 33,477
Georgia 407,596 8,729
Wisconsin 323,604 2,748
NorthCarolina 310,872 4,800
Tennessee 300,186 3,841
Ohio 298,096 5,722
NewJersey 281,075 16,566
Arizona 275,523 6,302
Oregon 56,018 760
Montana 47,158 525
RhodeIsland 41,529 1,254
WestVirginia 33,659 582
Delaware 28,803 736
Alaska 23,029 92
Wyoming 22,494 144
D.C. 18,977 660
Hawaii 16,619 221
NewHampshire 14,311 499
Maine 8,944 165
Vermont 2,889 59
Just for giggles I undertook a regresson on the data with the result
Deaths = 0.021 Infections + 577.1
(which is in the form : y = mx + b that some wil recall from school).
As an aside the ‘noise factor’ is not all that high with the constant being rather small (given the median case value by state)
If I find time later today I might fit a ‘Pearson’ over the top with regard to the population of each state. Incidentally, the death rates are among the elderly; this issue is not all that scio-economic (but the link that appears does prove the info that you require (as to
subdivision of State).
Note the coefficient of 2.1% which is what Lancet (and others) predicted as the death rate from C-19 with regard to a given infection.
Compared to the centre column the column on the right is rather small and compares (in order of magnitude) with traffic deaths and is very much less than deaths from cancer or other diseases combined. The matter is a non-issue.
As to the Gini Coefficient take a look at the trend for Australia over the last 50 years. During the 70s it was much less than the USA but now it is comparable. The Gini has INCREASED under ANC rule! ho hum. politics! According to that statistic the place was better off (surprisingly) under the former system.
As to your egalitarian sentiments, Lionheart, (I’m far from unsympathetic but I don’t consider them as realistic) consider the attitudes of (even) tradesmen circa 1900. Almost all considered the given social order as ‘correct’, where one’s duty was to die for one’s country (to the benefit of the ruling class); that races were not equal any more than were people and where what constituted a legal marriage required no
explanation.
One one argue that there exists a yearning, by a fair number of electors, for former times.
My thanks to Erasmus for providing the statistical information regarding COVID19 and I note the reference to the vast majority of deaths being among the elderly. However, the socio-economic link would remain even if we removed all those deaths from say above 70 yrs of age from the data set. My main point is that stats can be used to provide self-serving answers to very difficult sociological questions. The COVID19 outbreak has merely brought into sharper focus the inequality that presently exists in the USA. I also beg to differ with regard to the Gini Coefficient in Australia being comparable to the USA. At present The United States is a far more unequal society post taxation.
However, the issue at hand remains why almost 70 million Americans gave their electoral support to Trump when he consistently under-performs, his key concern is with the wealthy and promotes social division and conflict. If as Erasmus suggests all or many of his followers believe that the current social order is correct then as a group they are suffering from what Marx termed a sense of ‘false consciousness’. Something we term to-day as under the thrall of the dominant or hegemonic ideology whereby the many are led to believe that the current social order is the best one for all. In fact it is best for the wealthy elite and those in power who justify it under the twin falsehoods of meritocracy and equal opportunity.
The above has I believe been coupled with a loss of faith or trust in the current political establishment to improve the lives of the least advantaged. Trump emerges as what you may term the ‘anti-politician’ who will radically improve their lives. Also Trump’s demeaning attitude towards ‘political correctness’ with its anti women’s rights and racist overtones appeals to white males who may feel that their sense of power over certain groups has been restricted by trendy lefties. Patriotism or nationalism now provides them with the excuse that what they do towards previously subjugated groups, in particular African Americans and others of different cultural background may now be viewed in a more positive manner. To be seen these days as racist is a negative so far better to be seen as a patriot with simplistic catchcries as ‘Make America Great Again’. This permits or justifies the continuation of a sense of power via a belief in racial superiority under the more acceptable ‘Make America Great Again’. This sense of power means much to those white persons who feel that they presently lack power and control over their lives.
Furthermore, Wilkinson & Pickett describe Trump as a pathological narcissist and argue that Trump’s incessant tweeting suggests a personality dominated by ‘self-grandiosity, callousness, poor sense of self-control’ among others. They also contend that narcissists ‘tend to be regarded as effective leaders probably because of the confidence they exude’. However, they argue that narcissists become increasingly unpopular as their ‘arrogance and aggression come to the fore’.
Hence, one needs to be an active and informed citizen to be able to see beyond the facade that Trump displayed to the world. It is to the credit of the American people that enough were able to see the real danger Trump posed to democracy and a civil society and properly consigned him to the dust bin of history.
Of course much of this is conjecture in terms of the ‘why do they’ question.
It is clear that you have done some reading and have made some interesting points. However, let’s take a look at Sweden.
“deaths by age covid-19 sweden” or 3w dot statista dot com and search for that text. As of 3 Nov we have:
AGE # DEATHS
< 29 11
30-39 17
40-49 46
50-59 166
60-69 415
70-79 1,279
80+ 4,061
We could plot it and the plot would look a but like a ‘right triangle but, visually, the trend of the data is clear. Two things to note : the order of maginitude changes at age 50 (not a lot of difference between 17 deaths and 46 deaths from a population of 10M) Then the order of maginitude increases again at age 70. That is the point Lionheart.
> My main point is that stats can be used to provide
> self-serving answers to very difficult sociological
> questions.
There is scientific fraud as there is corporate fraud; no argument there. However, speaking for myself, I am much more interested in eliminating scientific fraud (or misrepresentation) than I am as to who happens to be the “honcho” of a particualr country or State.
> I also beg to differ with regard to the Gini
> Coefficient in Australia being comparable to the
> USA.
I have included Sweden as an illustration and %dff refers to Oz .v USA. The data (from Wikipedia) taxes and transfers (indicated as “before” and “after”
Country b/fore after
Australia 0.468 0.336
Sweden 0.426 0.250
USA 0.486 0.345
%diff 3.8% 2.7% (USA & Oz)
For a difference to be statistically significant (that is unlikely to have occurred by mere chance) the difference has to be close to (debatable – a huge literature) 5%. While there is some debate on that number (i.e.) 5% there is also broad (professional)
agreement. Clearly, it can be said that the Gini values (pre and post transfers) of Australia are comparable to those of the USA!
The ‘Gini’ is not the only measure. In another life I taught this stuff. Take a look at the “List of countries by inequality-adjusted HDI” on Wikipedia.
“However, the issue at hand remains why almost 70 million Americans gave their electoral support to Trump when he consistently under-performs, his key concern is with the wealthy and promotes social division and conflict. ”
With all due respect, Lionheart, such is the Reader’s Digest’ version of USA domestic affairs. As I have pointed out (at length elsewhere) the place is entirely polarised. Trump, will come to be replaced by another ‘Trump figure’.
For the nth time, Trump is NOT an aberration but
idiosyncratic of a big part (circa 50%) of the perspectives of the population. The “Trump” factor exists for a myriad of obvious reasons that are susceptible to research. Rundle has come close.
“If as Erasmus suggests all or many of his followers believe that the current social order is correct then as a group they are suffering from what Marx termed a sense of ‘false consciousness’. ”
Quite. Ditto for religion (and the source of the remark by Marx) and a theme taken up by Sartre about 70 years hence.
“The above has I believe been coupled with a loss of faith or trust in the current political establishment to improve the lives of the least advantaged. ”
Actually not the case Lionheart. There is no messiah for capitalism but there is (or rather was) benefits afforded by increases in productivity. Some research is required, but until circa the 70s there was a clear transfer from productivity to wages and salaries from WW2. After that, for varying reasons, the CEO brigade got the lion’s share. A component is this situation is the ‘flat wages phenomenon’ that has been in existence for this century (and another subject which is beyond the writers for Cky).
Trump is supported by a good deal more than white male barely educated red-necks. The women vote for 2016 was substantial but he lost the ‘older women vote’ this time about. Had C-19 not presented itself the champers would still be flowing in the White House. Some of the black vote deserted him too despite Biden’s dictum (on a radio station in his home town) “if you don’t vote for me then you’re not black”
“It is to the credit of the American people that enough were able to see the real danger Trump posed to democracy …”
Wishful thinking, I’m afraid, Lionheart. If such were the case (as you infer) the ‘elephants’ would not have won one State. Yet the ‘elephants’ have retained the Senate since 2014 and that aspect counts for a good deal as to the sentiments of the voters (same number of Senators for each state). As to the “make ‘merica great ..” there is a realistic perception that the influence of uncle Sam has declined; the sentiment cannot be reduced to a desire to retain white (male) hegemonic influence within the society.
The ‘Asian bogey’ is deemed by some of the educated (I have met them on Ivy league campuses) as the “fall of the West” and to this extent Trump is supported in foxholes that one might not have anticipated.
What might be of interest is the likelihood of a re-run of the last Democrat as president; allowing that the last Democrat was (probably) Carter; but only at a push; see my remarks to that topic. However, the “time will tell” question is to ask Joe : “just what is THE PLAN Joe”?
I once again thank Erasmus for the detailed response.
In the final analysis our approach to the Trump phenomenon may be destined not to coincide. My reference to COVID19 was meant to serve two (2) purposes: first illustrate the life and death impact of economic inequality on the life chances of differing segments of US society. I could just as easily have decided to look at the impact of Hurricane Katrina. Second the total ineptitude of the Trump government to deal with this issue and how Trump’s attempts to justify his failure gained traction among so many in spite of the mounting death toll. Undoubtedly his anti-lockdown position in union with his blatant down-playing of the danger posed appealed to those keen to defy the ‘establishment’ and its perceived threat to their ‘freedoms’ so loudly trumpeted by Trump..
Incidentally, I generally choose not to rely on Wikipedia too much. Every source I have consulted argues that the US is the more economically unequal nation in comparison to Australia by some way. OECD data shows after tax values of 0.33 for Australia, 0.39 for USA: World Economic Forum shows 0.33 Aust, 0.38 USA. Other measures show 0.35 (Australia), 0.42 (USA). All measures show the Nordic states of Norway and Denmark lying between 0.25 – 0.28. Illustrating my point that economic inequality is a choice a society makes, in the case of both Australia and particularly the USA a bad choice.
Nor do I accept that the issue of why 70 million persons voted for Trump is a ‘Readers Digest’/ lower level, issue. That is the pivotal question not churning out a whole bunch of mind deadening statistical output. You yourself answer the question ‘the place is entirely polarized’. Really? Polarized around what?? – secure vs insecure jobs, high paying jobs with all the lurks and perks vs low paying mind numbing work; disappearing jobs vs new technological type jobs, poverty vs very well off, private schools for my kids vs public schools for yours; upward social mobility vs socially going nowhere, unable to even afford to marry in some cases, immigrants yes (for economic growth) vs immigrants no (they take our jobs work for less). I wonder how many fell to COVID19 because they were casual workers who if they did not front up for work were not paid meaning how to put food on the table, pay the rent , pay the bills? How many casuals had the luxury of being able to ‘work from home’ I wonder.
So I wonder what the odds of a Trump coming to power in any of the far more egalitarian Nordic/Scandinavian nations? These nations have had a taste of growing inequality and have not liked what they have seen and made a different choice than the ‘what’s in it for me nations’. Just note the strident opposition that Bernie Sanders policies stir in those whose vested interests he threatens. So it’s easier to paint him as a Socialist and do I dare say it only one step removed from the big bogey Communism. Don’t forget there is a nasty ‘Red’ under every bed.
A strong democracy if that indeed is to be our ideal requires active and informed citizens – a requirement easily met by the Nordic states where over 85% of eligible voters regularly turn out to vote in nations where voting is not compulsory. How does this stack up against your average US voter where for once in a long time the apathy was partially overcome and some came out to defend their democratic institutions. To assume for this to be true all the states had to turn blue is nonsense. The fact that some states returned to the blue fold and some red flipped is enough evidence of this. The Senate may yet go Democrat but even this may be a case of some voters taking out an ‘insurance’ policy in case their faith in team blue was misplaced. To me that is a secondary concern to their presidential vote.
A tad more counterpoint Lionheart.
> Other measures show 0.35 (Australia),
> 0.42 (USA).
Yes; different organisations have different methods. Generally the Wiki is ok because it is correctable and is monitored by (mostly) knowledgable people. However trends, rather than point-numbers are important. What is the trend with regard to the Gini for Oz & the USA and is the absolute difference = |Gini_usa – Gini_oz| diminishing?
“3 = |4 – 7|” (and not -3)
All measures show the Nordic states of Norway and Denmark lying between 0.25 – 0.28. Illustrating my point that economic inequality is a choice a society makes, in the case of both Australia and particularly the USA a bad choice.
> Polarized around what??
All of the above (that you identify). The phenomenon of USA populism goes back beyond Huey Long. One needs to be familiar with the history of populism.
I could sketch it out but not in less than 500 words.
> I wonder how many fell to COVID19 because
> they were casual workers …
Damn all Lionheart (to be candid) and see the stats that I presented for open-slather Sweden above; particularly those under 45. Driving to work would entail more risk for that age group (I could provide the stats there too 🙂 )
“So I wonder what the odds of a Trump coming to power in any of the far more egalitarian Nordic/Scandinavian nations? ”
Both Warren and Sanders, even in Canada, would appear “normal”. Neither are strangers to vested interest. The punch line was that they did not make it to 1st base. However, (ever lived there?) extremism exists in Scandinavia too; extending to a Swedish PM being knocked off while walking home) and a pollie being shot in a supermarket.
Regarding your last paragraph, you mistake me (greatly) if you presume that I “support” USA politics and I am qualified to evaluate living in a number of countries. Thus, I am able to compare, first hand, domestic proceedings in the USA (with the variations across states) and most other joints.
As to who won (USA, UK, Oz or NZ) I could not care less. The short term planning is ineffectual and their appointments are only temporary.
Something that might interest you is the reason for AZ and CO changing colour; NM for that matter too. The simple minded will shout “Biden” from the penny stalls whereas they ought to be shouting “Democrat”. Let me explain.
From circa 2010 (reason ?) millions have discovered
CA to be unaffordable and have moved to (yes) AZ, CO, WO and NM. The economies are not as strong but for qualified people the pickings are not too bad. I met dozens of such people during recent (2016, 2018) visits. As an aside, with a but more “immigration” WO will be the next state to change colour; everything else being equal. Thus, the simple minded who assert, merely, that “Trump lost” are ignoring significant changes in demographics – but such is to be anticipated for the average elector.
Coups have been surprisingly successful when the insurgents have been underestimated. Everyone laughs it off until they wake up and find the strongman in the seat of government and enough people beholden to him to keep him there. Underestimating Trump has not ended well in the past and I don’t recommend it now.
He’s running out of “beholden people” fast .
Seems the Senate races need the base to stay angry for a tad longer though.
Can’t say I’ve noticed this ‘running out. At federal and state level álmost all the republicans in government are, at the very least, doing nothing to oppose Trump’s attempts to hold on. The number that has said ‘Enough!’ can be counted on one hand.
Why would they. They won more seats under Trump.
Counterpoint: Guaido
A coup by Trump? He’s too cowardly.
Far more likely leave in a barrage of vainglorious boasting that he could have won any court battle if he had wanted to but had better things to do with his time.
There is (it seems) nothing quite like a good slab of speculation on a Friday. Let’s take a deep breath and see what occurs at 11:59:59 on 20 Jan 2021.
That seems too late to me, let’s see what the electoral college officially decides on December 14 as a starting point. There are another couple of important dates in between. I certainly don’t consider it a coup at this stage, but waiting until 21st of January, if something is afoot, probably leaves it too late to restore democracy.
A bit like a lease Keven. What the College determines is one thing but ScoMo’s mate can (unlike the PM at Downing St) hang there until January.
Great idea! Almost as brilliant as waiting to see if the planet really does become uninhabitable when we don’t limit carbon emissions.
Do you know anything about differential equations SSR? With such tools, accurately and judiciously applied, events can be quantified; i.e. predicted to within experimental (given the data) accuracy. What is being discussed here, is on a par with astrology.
I trust that you are (now) able to appreciate the inapplicability of your comparision. I am Happy to clarify (further) upon request.
Somewhere between astrology and differential equations lies the real world. Clarifying differential equations for us (or for that matter Astrology) however happily, is unhelpful right now in my opinion.
The point is, Dog, (I am sure that you agree) *is* that given the initial and boundary conditions of a D.E. the speculative content is zero.
As to the real world, you might glance at your smart phone, computer, TV, engine and transmission of your car etc. because the solutions to the d.e.s there define your very life (nowadays); me too if [if the phrase has not been hijacked] as to a consolation.
I’m with Kevin and SSR.
Given the “Million MAGA” DC demo on Saturday just announced, I could see a scenario where there’s a bit of biffo, and Donald tells us it needs a firm hand and so he’ll stay to see it through.
The hidden orders he’s given State RNC chairs: “keep the rage maintained, whilst never admitting but knowing we have lost” viz Ronna McDaniel of MI RNC about 5 min in here:
https://wwmt.com/news/nation-world/rnc-chairwoman-ronna-mcdaniel-michigan-gop-address-election-integrity
Her spiel is contradicted by her now deleted tweet:
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/525565-gop-chair-acknowledges-harris-would-be-deciding-vote-in-50-50-senate
All lead me to anticipate more dirty tricks
The only thing significant about 11:59:59 on 20 Jan 2021 to me is that IF its gone pear shaped it will be far too late by then.
Does the word ‘Treason’ come in to play with regard to Trump’s actions?
Of course not. It’s not hard to look up the law.
U.S. Code § 2381. Treason:
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
More generally, as John Harington said some 300 years ago:
‘Treason doth never prosper, what’s the reason?’
‘For if it prosper, none dare call it Treason.’
Nice indication of ”thinking” – the penalty of death or not less than 5 years imprisonment.
Talk about life being cheap.
Treason, no, but seditious conspiracy?
18 U.S. Code § 2384.Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
You could argue that this has already occurred, for example, by the barricading of the White House.
Really? Remember Trump is the president so him being in the White House, with or without a barrier, is not an issue. How does anything he’s doing resemble any of the elements of a crime in that statute?
In a litigious country like the USA, the Trump campaign’s hysterical statements alleging fraud and rigging votes would have to be considered defamatory? What might happen if the State of Pennsylvania decided to sue some of the key players following forensic investigation of the votes?
Defamatory of who exactly? There have been some attempts in some jurisdictions to extend the scope of defamation, but in general it applies only to a living natural person, not to bodies corporate, states or nations and anything similar. And even a living natural person has to convince the court they have a reputation that could be damaged.
How about the rightful government of the US, it is conspiring to disrupt the democratic process which is part of the law.
Trumps’ failure in his attempted coup, is that he has never really had the military on side. A good coup
requires military support, Trump is to stupid to grasp that.
On the contrary, the military standing aside will be enough. If my earlier post ever gets through the awaiting for approval purgatory it will say why the US military will not obstruct Trump seizing power, so long as it’s dressed up as a ‘legal’ coup.
I’m resisting the temptation to wallow in the speculation but you might be interested in the book that (Gen.) James Mattis wrote having been (1) initially loved and (2) then fired by Trump; kinda “I’m leaving : not you’re not : your fired” exchange.
Unlike other books on the matter, Mattis does not ‘rant’; it is actually quite balanced. Trump gave serving military senior civilian positions. The love disappeared, apparently, because Donald’s attention span is in the order of four to six minutes and then he needs a break. Donald deemed himself “overloaded” with detail (the briefings were NOT as he was accustomed to on TV from Fox or CNN).
It is a daily ritual for his advisers to profess their loyality to him (Trump) – mention has been made in the essays from Foreign Affairs – but the point is that Trump has a soft spot for the military and v.v. (in general)
On the contrary, the actual troops (as opposed to the wallahs in the Pentagon) appreciate their improved equipment under Trump. And they also welcome the change in focus whereby under Trump they are less likely to fight (and die) in foreign exploits for global capital and dubious alliances. Under Obama their lives were unsettled as they participated in tokenistic appearances all over the globe. Very few American boys have come home in boxes under Trump and soldiers notice this.
Your final line was profoundly poignant.