Posted on 10/24/2024 12:37:59 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
As we approach Election Day, I’m cautiously optimistic — not so much about the outcome of the election (it’s way too close for either side to feel confident), but rather about the durability and integrity of the process itself. The legal arguments Donald Trump used to try to reverse the election outcome in 2020 have been decisively rejected, and the legal loopholes he tried to open have been closed.
I’m not arguing that we should be complacent. We should expect MAGA lawyers to bombard courts and state legislatures with frivolous arguments to try to reverse the outcome if Trump loses — and we shouldn’t be shocked or surprised if MAGA ultimately resorts to violence like it did on Jan. 6 — but I don’t think most Americans know how well our election system has been fortified against Trump’s legal schemes. He can’t run the same playbook he ran in 2020.
To understand how we’ve changed our system, it’s necessary to understand the Trump team’s strategy leading up to Jan. 6. As I’ve explained before, it had two key components: the conspiracy theory and the coup theory.
The conspiracy theory was the election lie itself, that Trump had been cheated out of an electoral victory that was rightly his. This required him to essentially commandeer a compliant and corrupt right-wing media establishment to broadcast his election lies to tens of millions of angry and disappointed Republicans.
The conspiracy theory created the demand for the coup. Without right-wing rage, there would be no appetite to try to overturn the election. And stealing the election required a legal plan.
And that brings us to the coup theory, the actual legal mechanism for overturning the election. The core plan was called operation “Green Bay Sweep.” It was named after an...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
A white neck-beard.
Yuck.
New York Times too depraved even for left-wing Milan daily Corriere della Sera
Keep dreaming.
It takes the count of first digits of each number, by candidate, for each polling place in the county. They should roughly follow the Benford distribution. The IRS uses a Benford analysis to analyze the claimed deductions in large tax returns; they indicate when a forensic analysis should be performed.
The same principle holds here - in the Milwaukee county ballots, only the Biden counts were way out of the Benford distribution. It implies that a forensic analysis should have been performed. Nothing was done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.