When a president goes rogue

Washington Post ^ | June 4, 2014 | George Will

[truthluva]

I don’t think you are wrong....and we were warned.

Watch here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS8LA-5fmrs

[Political Junkie Too]

I'm not ready to go that far yet, except to say that election fraud is an attempted coup in my opinion.

That said, I don't think that the classic interpretation of a coup has happened, because we did hold elections and Obama did win.

Since winning, Obama has been increasingly usurping powers that he doesn't have, but historically that has been the case with strong president / weak Congress and vice versa, over time. Congress could stiffen up and push back in the next two years if it wanted to, so there are Constitutional means to swing the balance of power back to the equilibrium.

So I'm still sticking to the idea that the coup will happen when the Constitutionally elected president is ousted and replaced via non-Constitutional means.

-PJ

[INVAR]

You and I have a different understanding of what transpired in terms of the election.

Having come from Cook County and knowing how machine political corruption ensures the ruling class always retains power - I contend this went national in 2008. 2012 was a textbook example of how the Soviets did their national elections. The coup was simply solidifying it’s hold on power and in most nationally-impacted elections, you see the hand of the Machine ensuring the Ruling Class faces no serious ‘threats’ to itself.

I am of the opinion we have suffered a velvet coup, and that fact is becoming more self-evident every single day. I mean, while castigating the Conservative notion of an Amendment V meeting of the states to rein in the Federal Beast, Schumer introduces an Amendment to the Constitution to regulate the 1st Amendment, stating that “no right is absolute”.

This is the nature of how leaders of a coup act.

No stretch really when you consider most Republics in existence fell in virtually the same way we are.

[Political Junkie Too]

I agree with you re: the nationalization of systemic voter fraud. I would put the point at 2012.

2008 was supposed to be Hillary's year, but she lost the caucuses and won the primaries, leading to the Democrat super-delegates abandoning her due to racism charges by Barack no-middle-name Obama.

I can't see that Obama had the capabilities at this time to nationalize the Chicago machine.

The 2010 mid-term wave discredits the idea that the machine was in place even then.

That leaves 2012, where Obama running the table of every swing state is the proof, furthered by dozens of precincts with zero votes for Romney. All it takes is a few extra votes in a few key precincts to swing a state, which is what happened in toto in 2012.

-PJ

[INVAR]

What I should have said is that 2008 was our last “honest” national election, where the manipulation and systematic corruption was not enough to completely ‘steal’ a national office.

2010 was a ‘surprise’ only because the hubris of the political caste assumed that the Praetorian media still had a stranglehold on public opinion. I think 2010 pushed the Machine into overdrive.

And when I say Cook County machine - I’m simply talking about the methodology of party and system-induced corruption, not that the Daley Machine was now running the co-opting of the national election process.

2012 is indeed the proof that we went Soviet. I saw that early on in 2010 when Obama announced that he was ‘most concerned’ about Romney being a challenger in 2012. The Soviets used to do similar things by picking the weak patsy ‘choice’ for the people while the Party actually ensured their man ‘won’.

Picking the opposition’s candidate is the surest means to make the manipulation easier.

[Political Junkie Too]

I agree. And I was using the Chicago Machine as a metaphor for strong-arm politics.

Good discussion resulting from a wild insurgency take-over hypothetical "what-if" scenario.

-PJ