Potential November Scenario for Bush to legally "steal" the election

[Walt Starr]

In late October, "terraist internet chatter" results in the homeland Security Threat Level going "Orange".

Late on November 1, Homeland Security Chief, Tom Ridge, takes the "unprecedented move" of raising the threat level to "Red" in specific areas rather than nationwide. These areas are large metropolitan areas in states like Florida, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Iowa, and New Hampshire. Only those states are now at "Code Red".

In the interest of securing the elections, those State Legislatures hold emergency sessions on November 2nd in undisclosed locations. They determine that due to the imminent threat of terrorist attack, electors cannot be chosen on the day specified by law in Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 1 of the United States code. They vote to hold elections within the state legislatures at some specified later date but within the required timeframe for electors to vote. The state legislatures themselves will decide who gets the electors.

All of these states are leaning Kerry right now and have Republican controlled legislatures. This would hand the election to Bush on a silver platter.

Be afraid. This would be a 100% constitutional and legal manner in which to steal the election.

[ewagner]

1. The more I think about it

The more I think you are right on target.

The problem is that it will be 100% legal.

[Walt Starr]

2. I think this has been the plan for some time now

Probably since about September 12, 2001.

[Jim Sagle]

6. More like December 13, 2000.

[Spazito]

3. One question I have re Title3 Section 2 is...

It specifies "Whenever any State has held an election..." so wouldn't they have to have held an election in order to invoke the rest of the Section?

[Walt Starr]

17. All that must happen is for the polls to open on November 2

The state legislatures can determine that due to the imminent threat of terrorist attack, the elctors cannot be chosen in compliance with Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 1.

[Spazito]

22. Thanks Walt, for responding

That was where my thoughts were going after I posted my question. It is the difference between adhering to the "letter of the law" as opposed to the "spirit of the law". Scary.

[Cobalt Violet]

4. And the people will buy into the need to do this

Just as they bought into the need to go to war in Iraq.

Maybe 3 1/2 yrs. later they will finally get a clue but by then it will be way too late.

[KurtNYC]

16. Polls leading up to the Iraq War

showed most people did not support it. The numbers went above 50% for support only AFTER the war began.

[truthspeaker]

48. And I'll be 2000 miles from here eating Tim Horton's donuts

[tinrobot]

5. Legislatures?

Let the legislatures pick the president? Interesting scenario, but I don't think the people would stand for that. It's way too blatant. If people aren't allowed to cast a vote, they're going to be very angry.

If Bush steals the election, it's going to have to be on the sly. Not sure how, but people are already very aware of Diebold and felon lists, so the Bushies are going to have to think up some new ways.

[buycitgo]

8. if you recall, the fla legislature said they'd

send their own slate of electors if Gore won the recount

the EXCOTUS reinforced the legal opinion that the state legislatures have final say in who gets the electoral votes--the only ones that matter--negating completely the popular vote

strict construction of the constitution allows for this

meaning, taken to extreme, we may as well not vote at all

lots of people think this section of the constitution very badly needs amendment

like anybody who realizes what the ramifications of the EXCOTUS's decision on Dec 12 was

they were discussing this on CSPAN the other day

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

7. Jesus.

Umm... ya.

That would require:

1) Compliant state legislatures
2) State governors to pass legislation which will probably write their political death warrants.
3) States to modify their constitutions in many cases.
4) Complicity of the public.
5) Gigantic balls.

Not gonna happen.

[buycitgo]

9. all it needs is number 1, which means

is pug legislatures

see my post above yours

[buycitgo]

12. check this out

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/dec2000/elec-d07.shtml

it already happened, and is the template for this year

The Republican leadership of the Florida state legislature is convening a special session on Friday, December 8 to discuss appointing a slate of 25 presidential electors. The extraordinary decision was announced Wednesday evening by Florida Senate President John McKay and Florida House Speaker Tom Feeney.

This action is an unprecedented and unconstitutional attempt to overturn the decision on presidential electors made by Florida's voters on November 7 and to intimidate the Florida Supreme Court. It amounts to a threat to impose electors for Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush in defiance of the will of the people and regardless of the legal findings of the state's highest court.

The Republican leaders announced the session on the eve of a hearing before the state Supreme Court on Vice President Al Gore's suit seeking to compel the counting of 14,000 votes in Miami/Dade and Palm Beach counties which both parties expect would tip the Florida vote total to the Democratic candidate and give him the presidency.

The ballots remain uncounted one month after the election. On Monday, Leon County Circuit Judge N. Sanders Sauls issued a harshly worded decision rejecting a bid by the Gore campaign to count these votes and upholding in every respect the position of the Bush campaign, which sought to deprive Gore of his right to contest the certification of the Florida vote. Lawyers for the two candidates are to present oral arguments to the state Supreme Court at 10 a.m. Thursday in Gore's appeal of Judge Sauls' ruling.

The Republican Party, with a 77-43 majority in the lower house and a 25-15 majority in the state senate, is threatening to intervene and give its sanction to the Bush slate if the state Supreme Court upholds Gore's appeal and orders a more extended recount.

[LizW]

13. Why would it require compliant state legislatures?

As I understand it, Code Red allows roads to be closed, public buildings to be closed, etc. by federal order without any state action. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong about that.) Those two things alone would be enough to disrupt voting, without postponing or cancelling the election at all.

For that matter, just a couple of well-placed power grids going down would do the trick, wouldn't it? I mean, my mom can't get her car out of the garage if the power is out, because she can't manually lift the garage door.

I'm just saying'.

[DarkHorse]

20. You are right

You are right. I wouldn't happen.

[Walt Starr]

21. All it requires is Repuke State legislatures

willing to do it.

It requires NO governors under the constitution and Title 3.

If you recall, the Florida legislature was prepared to do just this if gore won the recount.

[genius]

10. According to John Dean, it won't legally happen.

He is going to be speaking about it to Court TV today and writing a column about it this week.

They couldn't pull it off during the Civil War and they won't be able to pull it off legally this time.

[buycitgo]

15. oh yeah?

more from that article, the nut of the case:

The implications of this position are truly staggering. Under Scalia's theory, any state legislature in the country would be entitled to disregard the vote of the people and award its state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate of its choice.


you think they're not capable of at least trying to pull that off?

what are the makeups of the legislatures in the blue states?

or red, for that matter?

could it possibly come down to a matter of each state going through its legislature to select the electors?

is their any more compelling reason to get RID of the fricking electoral college ASAP?

talk about needed constitutional amendments, instead of this insane marriage bullshit.........

[Stuckinthebush]

11. I think that this would trigger havoc in the streets

It is too brazen of a move and too transparent.

I'm not saying that it couldn't happen, I'm just saying that if it did, the country would become an inferno.

[proud patriot]

14. darnit

:scared:

[ElementaryPenguin]

18. Attempting this WOULD trigger another American Revolution!

And another bloody Civil War that the outnumbered evil Bushevik party would lose badly. They are losing the military, they have lost the CIA - they will not get enough help to survive. This simply would NOT be tolerated! The media might also find itself overthrown in this scenario! (Could this be the very type episode that Jefferson prescribed/predicted?)

[Dhalgren]

35. I disagree that it would cause a Civil War.

There would be a small percentage of people who would go underground and start up groups like the Weathermen, but I am convenced that the majority of citizens would just roll over and let it go. They'd tune into Fox or NBC and if these fine examples of modern media said everything was fine - it would be fine. I don't think there is enough combined courage left in this country to launch a civil war from the left - maybe from the right, but not the left.

[Walt Starr]

36. I agree with you because there would be an endless stream of

"This is how it was supposed to happen in this sort of circunstance under the constitution and the law. This demonstrates our constitutional form of government works and works well even in the face of extreme threat!"

[ElementaryPenguin]

42. You both should've been in L.A. for the Rodney King riots!

White America may roll over at first - but Black America...they were targeted by BushCo once already - and I am SURE these people are NOT going to complacently sit by and let ANYONE turn the clocks back on them!! AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN QUIETLY!!! No fucking way! Way too much RAGE to tap into out there - rage that will make the taunting of the Coulters, Hannity, Limbaughs, Georgie Poorgies, Cheney look like NOTHING!

[Walt Starr]

43. Well this white man would do the following

{Redacted by the Department of Homeland Security}

[fob]

19. Walt you have painted a truly horrifying picture. It's true horror lies

in it's plausibility and that it's constitutional. But I have a reply to your scenario; You recall from 2000 and the opening sequence in F911 of the CBC objecting and unable to stop the process because not ONE Senator would sign on to their objection. This time we have 2 Senators on the ticket and several who are not seeking re-election (Fritz Hollings comes to mind).

If what you describe above happens, at least ONE Senator WILL rise to object this time. This puts us at Check. Your (hypothetical) move.

[Walt Starr]

24. The choice now goes to the House of Representatives

Each state has a single vote.

Overwhelmingly Repuke numbers now.

Bush/Cheney wins.

Checkmate.

[fob]

33. Just wanted everyone to see the whole process and how it could go.

That was a damn scary experiment.

What do you think will be the reaction of the electorate along the way from the challenge on to the HoR selection? This would be the second "selection" in a row were it to pan out this way. Would our increasingly fragile republic survive?

As a fine point to your above post, doesn't the House select Pres and the Senate select VP? Or vice-versa. Any chance a unity call could be made for a bush*/Edwards or Kerry/cheney* result?

[Walt Starr]

34. They will fall asleep to the tune of,...

"and everything about this decision is 100% within the law under the constitution and the Federal Election LAws." being droned on and on by the corporate whore media, of couorse.

[Raven]

23. All they need to do is to declare an emergency in one swing state...

to swing the election but I doubt they will get away with it. Take NH, where I live, "large metropolitan areas" are few and far between. I guess that would be Manchester and Nashua. The rest of the state is really comprised of small towns. They would have to imply that no voting place is safe and I don't think people will buy that. I'm going to pull an absentee ballot just in case.

[Walt Starr]

26. If my scenario is correct, watch for the follwoing trial balloon:

August xx, 2004 - Washington - Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge took an unprecedented step today, declaring a "Code Orange" state of alert exists in the following states:

New York
California
Illinois
Ohio
Texas

"We have credible evidence of potential attacks in those states. Rather than increase the state of alert in the entire nation, we felt it prudent to concentrate on those areas where we have specific credible evidence.", said Secretary Ridge in a news conference.

<snip>

Two days later, Ashcroft announces capturing "terraists" in at least one of those states, lending credibility to the claims.

Bingo Bungo, it's all over but the code Red in specific states.

[Raven]

27. Why doesn't someone propose that the whole country

vote by absentee ballot? Why wouldn't that work? Each city and town can send ballots out to everyone on the voting list. I'm serious...why wouldn't that work? Bush would have to declare a country-wide, national emergency to shut down the postal service and even if he did, the ballots would eventually show up.

[Walt Starr]

40. Aaropn Brown sort of suggested that last night

He suggested the entire nation go to the Oregon model.

Problem is, there is not enough time to get anything in place to change existing law prior to November 2nd.

[MallRat]

25. Individual states determine electors based on their laws & Constitutions.

The Florida legislature could name a slate of electors completely independent of the popular vote, but that's not necessarily the case in the other states you mentioned.

I think some states absolutely require a popular vote to be held. IIRC, some states may even have Presidential elections mandated by their state Constitutions. No election, no electors. Period. These legislatures cannot simply stand in for the will of the people unless state law allows it.

If it really came to postponing elections in some states, the more likely scenario is 2000 all over again. While the suspended states figure out what should happen, the Senate postpones the reading of the electoral results. In the worst-case scenario, if the election isn't resolved by Inauguration Day, Bush must step down since he was not "re-elected," and Cheney is sworn-in as interim President.

-MR

[Walt Starr]

29. Yep, we know Florida's laws would allow the legislature to choose

We need to examine every state's election laws. I think by looking at whose column the state is in , how their laws read, and who controls the legislature we can determine how this thing is going to go down.

[buycitgo]

31. hahahaha........how ironic is that?

cheney finally recognized officially for what he's been all the time?

[Walt Starr]

32. BTW, if the Senate cannot determine a winner, it goes to the House

Each state would get a single vote.

That would clearly be a Bush/Cheney win.

[MallRat]

37. I think that only pertains to situations where no candidate has 270 EVs.

If there ARE no EVs to count, then it's a completely different story.

-MR

[Walt Starr]

39. If there are no EVs to count

then nobody has a majority and it goes to the House.

[Dhalgren]

38. Also, and I may be wrong, didn't the SCOTUS

in its Dec. 2000 decision say that federal election laws supercede state law and that the Constitution says only that the state legislatures will authorize, or authenticate, or validate a slate of electors? I am not sure that state law can actually override the Constitution saying outright that the legislaures name the slates.

[Walt Starr]

44. Ahh, but under Bush v. Gore

it cannot be used as precedent for any other case whatsoever.

I've always wondered why.

[damnraddem]

28. If they want to launch a civil war, they might try it.

But even Republicans might have more sense than to actually go through with this.

[Walt Starr]

30. They would be acting with the authority of the law in this scenario

both the authority of the constitution and the authority granted the state legislatures under Title 3.

That's what terrifies me about this possibility.

[Wind Dancer]

41. This is the most terrifying thing I have read yet!

It seems they have the authority to do whatever they want. They control the terror threat level and could use any state they deemed necessary to carry out this scenario. They are in control of the so-called terra chatter released to the networks. The constitution gives them the legal right to do this, leaving a Bush/Cheney win.

Please let this be a nightmare.

[DoYouEverWonder]

45. Do you really think

that Kerry/Edwards will pull a Gore/Lieberschitz and just let W steal the election again? Maybe I have more faith in the current crop of Dems and folks like us, who will raise holy hell if Bu$hCo tries to pull this crap again.

In 2000 W, was an unknown. People were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and it didn't seem like there would be that much difference between him and Gore. Now it's 4 years latter, and W has proved himself to be the most hated and incompetent slug to occupy the WH in history. I am willing to bet the farm, that come Jan 2005, Bu$h will not be retaking the oath of office.

[Walt Starr]

46. Under this scenario, yes I do

Because under this scenario, the law is followed TO THE LETTER!

There's no rolling over to it. Everything is above board AND legal under this scenario!

That is why the hell I am so terrified of it!

[RandomKoolzip]

47. Well, then maybe we should delete this thread....

Bookmark it of course first...

But delete it so that no uppity freeper type decides to e-mail it to the OSP....that is, if they haven't thought of it themselves already.

[Walt Starr]

49. Do you honestly think they do not know the applicable U.S. Code?

My gosh, they were going to use a similar scenario to make certain Florida's electoral votes went to Bush, EVEN IF GORE WON THE RECOUNT!

[Jose Diablo]

50. Somewhat peripherally related

Maybe true, maybe not.

http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/

[Walt Starr]

51. I've always considered Titor to be the BEST internet hoax ever

but some of the correlations have been phenomenal!

[Walt Starr]

52. I've also been impressed about his prediction on Iraq

"Are you really surprised to find out Iraq has nukes now or is that just BS to whip everyone up into accepting the next war?"

Posted by John titor on February 25, 2001.

[bobbieinok]

53. kick because scary and important

[Walt Starr]

54. Thanks for the kick

I agree, the possibilities are endless, scary, and looking at them is important.

[Pepperbelly]

55. the Arkansas Legislature is Democratic. nt

[Pepperbelly]

56. dupe ... delete please

[robertpaulsen]

57. Join Plame thread #7 (when it happens)

It's more than just the Plame scandal, this thread is examining the effect this is having on so many aspects of political issues, including the stealing/cancellation of the election.

We'd like to welcome more minds to this think tank. Hope to see you there!