BARF ALERT:
SELECTED SNIPS FROM THE DOCUMENT LINKED ON TWITTER UNDER THE REPLY TO @3DAYS3NIGHTS BY ATVGUY
As usual the title is the OPPOSITE of reality/intentions and the whole thing would GAG A MAGGOT-and gives a glimpse into the likely game plan of the DemonRATs:
*****************************************
Preventing a Disrupted Presidential Election and Transition August 3, 2020
We also assess that the President Trump is likely to contest the result by both legal and extra-legal means,
• The concept of “election night,” is no longer accurate and indeed is dangerous.
• A determined campaign has opportunity to contest the election into January 2021
• The administrative transition process itself may be highly disrupted
It is incumbent upon elected officials, civil society leaders, and the press to challenge authoritarian actions in the courts, in the media, and in the streets through peaceful protest.
Specific recommendations include:
• Plan for a contested election. If there is a crisis, events will unfold quickly, and sleep-deprived leaders will be asked to make consequential decisions quickly. Thinking through options now will help to ensure better decisions. Approach this as a political battle, not just a legal battle. In the event of electoral contestation, sustained political mobilization will likely be crucial for ensuring transition integrity. Dedicated staff and resources need to be in place at least through the end of January.
• Focus on readiness in the states, providing political support for a complete and accurate count. Governors, Secretaries of State, Attorneys General and Legislatures can communicate and reinforce laws and norms and be ready to confront irregularities. Election officials will need political and public support to see the process through to completion.
• Address the two biggest threats head on: lies about “voter fraud” and escalating violence. Voting fraud is virtually non-existent, but Trump lies about it to create a narrative designed to politically mobilize his base and to create the basis for contesting the results should he lose. The potential for violent conflict is high, particularly since Trump encourages his supporters to take up arms.
• Anticipate a rocky administrative transition. Transition teams will likely need to do two things simultaneously: defend against Trump’s reckless actions on his way out of office; and find creative solutions to ensure landing teams are able to access the information and resources they need to begin to prepare for governing.
The Transition Integrity Project (TIP)1 was launched in late 2019 out of concern that the Trump Administration may seek to manipulate, ignore, undermine or disrupt the 2020 presidential election and transition process.
Like many authoritarian leaders, President Trump has begun to lay the groundwork for potentially ignoring or disrupting the voting process, by claiming, for instance, that any mail-in ballots will be fraudulent and that his opponents will seek to have non-citizens vote through fraud.
However, because the primary threat to the integrity of the election and transition appears to come from the Trump Administration, most of the recommendations in this memo focus on how actors committed to the rule of law can restrain or counter anti-democratic actions the Trump Administration and its supporters may take in connection with the 2020 election.
At this point it seems possible that either candidate may achieve a decisive electoral victory, but the goal of TIP’s scenario exercises was to gain a better understanding of the tests our democratic institutions could face in the event that candidates defy the norms that have underpinned American political practice for decades.
Specifically, TIP wanted to examine some of the unknowns: How far might candidates go in contesting negative electoral outcomes or disrupting the normal transition process? How well would American institutions hold up if one or both candidates refused to “play by the rules”?
there is every reason to be concerned that our electoral rules and norms are under threat. In an interview with Chris Wallace, President Trump suggested that he might not abide by the results of the election if he loses.
The President deployed agents from Homeland Security to Portland to suppress racial justice protestors, a move that outraged many, including the Republican former head of Homeland Security, and indicates President Trump’s appetite to deploy federal agents even against the will of local elected officials.
He has announced plans to expand this deployment to blue cities in swing states, raising the specter of electoral intimidation.
Trump also demanded that the election results be called immediately on Election Day, e.g. before all mail-in ballots can be counted. And the director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a statement warning that foreign countries are again trying to interfere in the US election.
Second, the exercises were not able to fully capture the ways in which the media will shape and drive public opinion, or how specific media outlets would cover events differently and drive increasingly partisan responses.
Social media in particular will undoubtedly play a heavy role in how the public perceives the outcome of the election. Political operatives, both domestic and foreign, will very likely attempt to use social media to sow discord and even move people to violence.
Social media companies’ policy and enforcement decisions will be consequential, and this merits further exploration and consideration.
What happens before Election Day will, to a large extent, determine the margin of contestation. Reporters, pollsters, pundits, political parties, and many others will communicate confidence or concern about the legitimacy of the election. Viral social media memes will play a role as well.
During the exercises, winning “the narrative” emerged as a potentially decisive factor. Either side can expand or contract the “margin of contestation” if they succeed in substantially changing how key decision makers and the public view the “facts,” the risks of action or inaction, or external events such as civil unrest.
An integrated strategy of legal contestation, political leadership, mass mobilization, and messaging is much stronger, and Team Trump often had the advantage because they could rely on Fox News, a significant and committed base, and loyalties from law enforcement agencies.
Team Biden often had the majority of the public on its side, and the ability to mobilize resentment about the structural disenfranchisement in the way we conduct presidential elections.
TIP’s exercises suggest that President Trump may expand the margin of contestation primarily by contesting the legality of votes cast (e.g., by alleging fraudulent mail-in ballots, voting by ineligible voters, etc.).
Meanwhile, former Vice President Biden may expand the margin of contestation by highlighting voter suppression by the GOP (purges of voter rolls, shutting down of polling places, failure to fund election administration, ID and other verification requirements, intimidation of voters, etc.).
Biden may also be able to expand the margin of contestation by questioning the overall legitimacy of a system that doesn’t require the winner to get a majority of the popular vote or by decrying how President Trump uses the power of the presidency to manipulate the process.
Both sides may expand the margin of contestation by questioning the credibility of reported results, if, for example, they believe (or merely assert) that foreign interference or other factors compromised the integrity of the vote count.
WELL THERE’S MORE, BUT THAT’S ABOUT ALL I CAN TAKE AT ONCE. I NOTE FOR THE RECORD, THAT SO FAR, IT HAS BEEN THE DemonRATs THAT HAVE REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE ELECTION OF 2016, AND THE UNFLATTERING PICTURE OF TRUMP-IS IN FACT THEIR OWN.