Any thought about what happens if Trump invalidates an election against him or invokes martial law?

[kurtcagle]

My concern - one of two scenarios occurs: Trump writes an executive order pre-emptively canceling the election, or Trump refuses to recognize the legitimacy of an election against him?

Ordinarily, I couldn't imagine either of these scenarios happening, but given everything I'm seeing, I'm not going to rule either of these possibilities out.

If so, what happens then?

[7wo7rees]

1. It's really not either/or.

He appears to be setting it up now. Election fraud, invalidate election, declare martial law/national emergency......... history......

[Drum]

9. Indeed: the complete co-opting of depts of Justice and State nt

[Grasswire2]

2. precisely why he must be stopped prior to the election

We cannot risk waiting. Comey, Coats, Mueller, Wray all told us UNDER OATH it's already rigged "as we sit here."

Must stop him now. But no resignation with a "deal" that absolves him. No pardons, no deals. There's enough evidence already to force him out and charge him with crimes.

[sandensea]

3. He'll probably try to invoke Continuity of Government

Dubya reportedly considered doing the same when he thought Ken Blackwell's Ohio heist in 2004 might just not work.

[tritsofme]

8. Is there any credible reporting on that story?

That would be some pretty major news...it just doesn’t sound...very true.

[sandensea]

10. Bush wasn't about to admit that in public as you can imagine

I remember hearing it on the news at the time. After what had already done, I don't doubt he at least considered it.

[tritsofme]

17. Ah, that's what I thought, CT.

[sandensea]

25. You have a lot more faith in the Shrub that I do

Congratulations.

[tritsofme]

29. CT nonsense is still nonsense, regardless of the subject.

[murielm99]

4. Each state is in charge of its own election.

I don't think the blue states will allow this. They will go ahead and hold the elections.

What I worry about is pressure being applied so that Congress refuses to certify the election in the event of a trump loss.

[elleng]

5. 'The election' takes place in 50 states, DC, and elsewhere,

no ONE can 'invalidate' or cancel it/them.

He may or may not 'recognize' election legitimacy, the Constitution does it; he's OUT, when the 'next' president is sworn, and if necessary Secret Service will carry him off.

Martial law: 'In United States law, martial law is limited by several court decisions that were handed down between the American Civil War and World War II. In 1878, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids military involvement in domestic law enforcement without congressional approval.' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law#United_States

[durablend]

22. So cute

That "Constitution" that he (and Barr) wipe their asses with. As if that would make a difference.

[VarryOn]

6. Not worried...

I just dont think this one will be close. The winner will be apparent to all, even more so than last time.

[tritsofme]

7. An executive order would be meaningless. The process moves completely independently of

the incumbent president.

Elections are run by the states, the federal government can’t just “cancel” them.

And even if Trump doesn’t like the results, Congress will still certify the electoral votes, and the process moves forward. His current term expires on 1/20, aside from winning reelection, nothing can change that, not even a big temper tantrum.

[NCLefty]

13. I agree. EO isn't going to work here. Martial law? Madness.

Nothing would mobilize the sleepy middle faster than a dramatic power grab. Trump-loving Republicans (of the kind that would want him to be our dictator) are a MINORITY in this country and we have more guns than people. Lots would die but he will lose in that scendario. I do not think this military would follow him to the grave. He's been bad for them too.

[kurtcagle]

11. I'm not arguing that it's illegal

I see no legitimate way that he can do either, but legitimacy has never been much of an issue with Trump. I'm looking more for opinions about what should be done if a constitutional crisis is forced. Remember what's at stake for the Republicans:

* Redistricting that will restore what ten years of gerrymandering has put into place.
* Historically red states going blue as younger urbanites replace aging rural populations (TX, CO, AZ, GA, FL, SC, NC)
* The general aging out of their primary support base for younger people who rely primarily upon the Internet and broader information gathering
* Signs of an impending recession that will likely hit before the election
* The decline of the primarily religious population in the US.
* Control of the judiciary
* A political scandal that will continue unfolding and taking in both senators and representatives.
* Political extinction

Yes, something will eventually rise (the growing differences between progressive and centrist Democrats most likely will be a part of it) but I'm not expecting that to be a factor until the early 2030s at the earliest.

However, given all that, I absolutely expect that the Republicans will be willing to embrace a dictatorship rather than cede power. Maybe I'm wrong, but I also believe in having contingency plans in case that does happen.

[Hoyt]

12. No, because it won't happen. Get out the vote, trump's gone.

[onenote]

14. My thought: another post that reflects a misunderstanding of martial law.

Per Supreme Court precedent:

"If, in foreign invasion or civil war, the courts are actually closed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice according to law, then, on the theatre of active military operations, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish a substitute for the civil authority, thus overthrown, to preserve the safety of the army and society; and as no power is left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule until the laws can have their free course. As necessity creates the rule, so it limits its duration; for, if this government is continued after the courts are reinstated, it is a gross usurpation of power. Martial rule can never exist where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction. It is also confined to the locality of actual war."

[Kaleva]

15. How can he do that when the states run the elections and select the electors?

[malaise]

16. Stop over-rating this fool please

He will soon be gone

[DinahMoeHum]

27. "he will soon be gone". . .One way or another. . .

fair means or foul.

[lark]

18. SCOTUS goes along with him and our country as we knew it is over.

We will be in an effective dictatorship where the law is only valid if it's a Democrat or minority who is breaking it. There will be no/little healthcare for those who aren't rich and social security, Medicare and Medicaid will be voided or decimated quickly. This will happen quickly. Next I expect all workplace rules are voided and ruled socialist and not allowed - including 40 hour work week and OT. American workers finally wake up and riot and are killed on the street by military. Some military people defect, but most stay and shoot. America becomes No Ireland back during the Troubles, with everyone who isn't a trumper subject to being jailed, or shot in the street or at their homes Everyone with money and resources flees our now outright facist country.

Sorry for the dark view, but I'm very pessimistic about our survival if he steals another 4 years (or more). If we can't stop him from stealing the election, I don't see any hope for us as a country - and I pray I'm wrong.

[sarisataka]

19. Isn't this the same sort of speculation

We ridiculed RW types for saying when Obama was in office?

[uponit7771]

21. False equivalency

[First Speaker]

24. Are you comparing Obama to Trump?

[sarisataka]

30. Only insofar as

Attributing powers to the Office of the President that exist only in the imagination.

[onenote]

31. Yes it is.

Sorry, but it really is nonsensical crap.

[uponit7771]

20. *** The house can refuse to certify his election***

[First Speaker]

23. I think this is unlikely, though he might fantasize about it. What does worry me...

...is a 2000-style theft of the election, on a massive, utterly shameless scale. Say that Joe Biden gets six million more votes than Trump, and wins the Electoral College, oh, say, 297-242. But a switch of 200,000 votes in a few key states will give Trump an Electoral College win. Immediately, Trump declares the election illegitimate, claims voter fraud, and says he's the winner. He *will* do this. The question is, could he get away with it? The GOPers in Congress and Fox "News" fall into line, and open attempts are made to steal the Electoral College. Could the Dem Congress be enough to stop this? Trump says openly he's not going anywhere. And his judges control the judiciary--including, of course, the Supreme Court. Throw in another "Brooks Brothers" riot or two. Remember--that has *already happened*, in 2000. It's not a paranoid "conspiracy theory". And the Roberts Court makes the Rehnquist Court look positively sane by comparison. The election of 2020 could be--indeed, I predict will be--as grave a constitutional crisis as 1860 or 1876, and we'd better get ready for that fact. The GOP will do anything to hold onto power.

[Takket]

26. There is no legal mechanism for a president to cancel and election

State’s certify them so he can’t stop that.

[jmowreader]

28. Trump would quickly learn America is no place for dictators

Pence envisions a Future in Politics, as do our Congress Members. They are not going to stand by while Trump turns America into a communist country.

As to the “martial law” thing, that would fall into the “illegal orders” category. The generals are duty bound to tell a president who tries to impose it to go to hell in a hand basket.