Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Trump's Executive Order
115 Answers
I think we may be about to witness something extraordinary with regards to the USA election.
It would appear that two years ago, Trump declared a “national emergency” to deal with foreign and domestic election interference. It was enacted under an Executive Order called “Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election” and was signed by him on 12th September 2018:
https:/ /www.wh itehous e.gov/p residen tial-ac tions/e xecutiv e-order -imposi ng-cert ain-san ctions- event-f oreign- interfe rence-u nited-s tates-e lection /
In essence, this gives him unprecedented powers to investigate and prosecute electoral fraud.
There's a long and detailed article here that goes into much more depth about it:
https:/ /www.di stribut ednews. com/474 016.htm l
It would appear that two years ago, Trump declared a “national emergency” to deal with foreign and domestic election interference. It was enacted under an Executive Order called “Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election” and was signed by him on 12th September 2018:
https:/
In essence, this gives him unprecedented powers to investigate and prosecute electoral fraud.
There's a long and detailed article here that goes into much more depth about it:
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by birdie1971. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ."not beyond the realms of possibility" is, sadly, so vague as to be meaningless. A better question to ask is why the Democrats who are supposed to have rigged this election forgot to do the same in the Congressional ballots, which have gone pretty badly for them (losing seats in the House when they were expected to gain, and failing to capture the senate).
A slightly more plausible explanation for what we've seen is that enough people dislike Trump that they'll vote him out personally, even if they still consider themselves Republicans (or, at least, not Democrats).
As to your second paragraph, I'm not sure either explanation is right. The second feels particularly strange: the logic of saying as little as possible during an investigation, refusing to concede, etc, I can certainly accept, but "saying as little as possible" is clearly undermined with his own constant tweeting, not to mention various officials spreading the word on his behalf (McEnany etc). Or that "press conference" from the White House a week or so back, where he took no questions whilst alleging major fraud. What I mean is that if this is his strategy then he's doing it badly, and should say nothing at all, even on twitter.
The first -- well, maybe, but I'd offer an alternative explanation, which is that Trump, a man who's built his career and persona around "winning", can never accept that he has lost, and is looking for anything possible to destroy the legitimacy of that defeat, at least in the eyes of his supporters. It would be enough to kick up a fuss and then go, when he must, grudgingly, in order to be able to sell the idea that the system was rigged against him so he didn't really lose, etc etc. Either that sets the platform for a 2024 campaign, or for a future pitch along the lines of "Your REAL President Speaks TV".
A slightly more plausible explanation for what we've seen is that enough people dislike Trump that they'll vote him out personally, even if they still consider themselves Republicans (or, at least, not Democrats).
As to your second paragraph, I'm not sure either explanation is right. The second feels particularly strange: the logic of saying as little as possible during an investigation, refusing to concede, etc, I can certainly accept, but "saying as little as possible" is clearly undermined with his own constant tweeting, not to mention various officials spreading the word on his behalf (McEnany etc). Or that "press conference" from the White House a week or so back, where he took no questions whilst alleging major fraud. What I mean is that if this is his strategy then he's doing it badly, and should say nothing at all, even on twitter.
The first -- well, maybe, but I'd offer an alternative explanation, which is that Trump, a man who's built his career and persona around "winning", can never accept that he has lost, and is looking for anything possible to destroy the legitimacy of that defeat, at least in the eyes of his supporters. It would be enough to kick up a fuss and then go, when he must, grudgingly, in order to be able to sell the idea that the system was rigged against him so he didn't really lose, etc etc. Either that sets the platform for a 2024 campaign, or for a future pitch along the lines of "Your REAL President Speaks TV".
THECORBYLOON & Jim360
The tweets are mostly just repetitious claims that the election was rigged – there's no meat on the bone so to speak. This, of course, may be because there's nothing to the claims. But it could be because of the ongoing investigations. We simply don't know at this time.
I'd give it a week and if nothing further is announced by the Whitehouse on this matter, then I think it's safe to say that this scenario is fallacious. Time will inevitably tell.
The tweets are mostly just repetitious claims that the election was rigged – there's no meat on the bone so to speak. This, of course, may be because there's nothing to the claims. But it could be because of the ongoing investigations. We simply don't know at this time.
I'd give it a week and if nothing further is announced by the Whitehouse on this matter, then I think it's safe to say that this scenario is fallacious. Time will inevitably tell.
"Who wasn't amazed that Biden has harvested (cough) the most voted in history?
"
Well he probably has Donald Trump to thank for that :-) And hos own decency.
And Trump had the highest republican vote I believe.
And as Jim points out, gains in congress.
Credit to Trump for that.
Brickbats to the so-called "conspiracy" :-)
We've been here before: Trump's enquiry into how they fixed the popular vote in 2016 - quietly abandoned for lack of evidence
"
Well he probably has Donald Trump to thank for that :-) And hos own decency.
And Trump had the highest republican vote I believe.
And as Jim points out, gains in congress.
Credit to Trump for that.
Brickbats to the so-called "conspiracy" :-)
We've been here before: Trump's enquiry into how they fixed the popular vote in 2016 - quietly abandoned for lack of evidence
// We simply don't know at this time. //
Nah, we do know: Trump's a sore loser and is going to do anything he can to avoid looking like one to his base. I don't take seriously the suggestions that he'll actively try to remain in office beyond his term, but it's still distressing to see a sitting President continually undermine the process and disrupt the transition.
Nah, we do know: Trump's a sore loser and is going to do anything he can to avoid looking like one to his base. I don't take seriously the suggestions that he'll actively try to remain in office beyond his term, but it's still distressing to see a sitting President continually undermine the process and disrupt the transition.
He's behaved like a spoilt brat throughout his Presidency. Stamping his feet, sticking out his bottom lip or bullying/sacking those who dare oppose him until he gets his own way. Why did anyone think he'd change tact after losing the election? America, land of the free? Land of the conspiracy theory, more like.
You can see why he might not want to leave office ...
https:/ /www.bb c.co.uk /news/w orld-us -canada -547165 50
https:/
// Sounds familiar... albeit not sitting presidents. ;o)//
then it is not familiar if there isnt a president saying it
and of course - Boris saying the conservative majority in the cmmon is made up of placemen and time-servers
is different to - er Naomi saying it ( again)
this exec order does not apply at persent
then it is not familiar if there isnt a president saying it
and of course - Boris saying the conservative majority in the cmmon is made up of placemen and time-servers
is different to - er Naomi saying it ( again)
this exec order does not apply at persent
historically Nixon got near it apparently
but I was studying law in that year 1973
and I dont remember it at the time
- "all executive orders are narn-arperative"
I do remember - the executive orders are not right not wrong but non-operative. "My father is not a crook" - Nixon's daughter ...
and at the time commentatiors said this wd never happen in dear old blighty as someone wd knock on the door of No 10 and say £Prime minister - you dont have a najority"
but I was studying law in that year 1973
and I dont remember it at the time
- "all executive orders are narn-arperative"
I do remember - the executive orders are not right not wrong but non-operative. "My father is not a crook" - Nixon's daughter ...
and at the time commentatiors said this wd never happen in dear old blighty as someone wd knock on the door of No 10 and say £Prime minister - you dont have a najority"
// We've been here before: Trump's enquiry into how they fixed the popular vote in 2016 - quietly abandoned for lack of evidence//
remember they showed Russian interference -
but not collusion
I thought the lead for Hillary 's 200 000 emails came from Rasha
just - en passant - - strange how lock her up worked 2016 and failed completely in 2020
remember they showed Russian interference -
but not collusion
I thought the lead for Hillary 's 200 000 emails came from Rasha
just - en passant - - strange how lock her up worked 2016 and failed completely in 2020