Skip to content

772 search results for ""voter fraud""

Yes, we will need a Trump Crime Commission

Trump dismantles voter fraud commission: Here's what the ...

I am very worried about the “let’s not look in the rearview mirror” impulse in the Biden crowd. Obama and the Democrats famously refused to force accountability for the torture regime and other excesses of the War on Terror or pursue the bankers who caused the 2008 financial crisis, using the excuse that they need to looknforward, not backwards, to fix the problem.

That was a political decision and it was the wrong one. It furthered the culture of impunity that governs right-wing politics today. It simply cannot be allowed to continue or we are well and truly sunk. There must be a public accounting, one way or another.

This piece in The Independent argues for a Crime Commission:

As Donald Trump boards a “white top” Marine helicopter (sans the “Marine One” call sign) to begin his life as a former president, many of his countrymen will be asking themselves one question: Who will be held accountable for four years of scandals, dysfunction, and often flagrant violations of law?

America has found her way back from dark places before. .. But unlike the last Republican president, the list of those facing potential criminal charges includes Trump himself. Not only could a future attorney general conceivably charge an ex-President Donald Trump for any of the multiple instances of obstruction of justice found by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, he could also find himself in the dock for financial crimes if New York County District Attorney Cyrus Vance finds anything untoward in the tax records he is seeking from Trump and the Trump family business empire.

Biden has already pledged to not follow in the footsteps of Gerald Ford by issuing his predecessor a blanket pardon, and has promised to do “whatever is determined by the attorney general” with respect to any investigation into Trump himself. He has also offered up “an ambitious proposal to ensure that our government works for the people” as evidence of his commitment to restoring trust in government and rebuilding guardrails that have all but eroded under Trump.

But good government advocates, legal experts, and some prominent Democrats say the broad range of alleged violations of law by Trump administration officials and allies, ranging from misuse of government resources for personal gain; to the abuse and mistreatment of persons — including minors — in immigration detention; to obstruction of justice and making false statements to Congress; means a Biden administration effort to simply “turn the page” on the Trump years would be a dangerous concession to lawlessness.

Remarkably, not a single Biden campaign official or adviser contacted by your intrepid correspondent would respond to questions about whether a Biden administration would undertake any effort to look back at the Trump years — either to merely document for posterity any violations of law, or to identify and prosecute administration officials and other government employees who committed illegal acts.

And while Biden’s forward-looking agenda of reforms has generally been well-received in Democratic circles, the lack of a similar plan to look back on the previous four years has set off alarm bells among those some Biden backers who are still smarting over Obama’s “let bygones be bygones” approach to Bush-era abuses.

“It took me a long time to stop being angry about people who committed torture in America’s name walking around free, but I understand why it was a tough call to make at the time,” said one prominent Democratic activist, who requested anonymity so they could speak candidly. “Not having a real, transparent investigation of the abuses that Trump and his cronies have committed would be even worse, because it would tell future presidents and their future appointees that it doesn’t matter how bad they let things get because the next president will just drop it.”

Another prominent Democrat, whose activism centers around immigration policy, suggested the only way for the country to truly put Trump’s “racist and inhumane” immigration enforcement actions behind it is to seek out each and every person involved — from Trump to rank-and-file ICE and Border Patrol agents — and bring them to justice.

“After World War Two, we made Germany go through de-Nazification. We need to put our entire government through ‘de-Trumpification’ and punish every single person who followed Stephen Miller’s illegal orders,” they said.

But Frederick Taylor, author of Exorcising Hitler: The Occupation and De-Nazification of Germany, cautioned that the effort to purge Germany of Nazi influences and bring human rights abusers to justice was one that was imposed on Germans from the outside by a military occupation. Even if a Biden-era Justice Department were to put some Trump administration officials on trial, he suggested that doing so with too heavy a hand could backfire by inspiring resentment among those asked to sit in judgment of their peers.

“That was really, really hard in postwar Germany because the Allies — even the Russians — wanted to involve some locals at some point to give it some legitimacy and give the Germans some sense of agency. But the trouble was, when you did that, a lot of them — even if they didn’t necessarily sympathize with the politics of the people they were asked to stand in judgment of — tended to resent Allied dictation,” he explained.

Any process used to shed light on Trump-era abuses or punish lawbreakers “should not feel imposed, even if it’s a convincing win for Biden and the Democrats control both houses of Congress,” he warned, especially given the potential for a Biden win to energize far-right extremist groups: “You’re going to have to be very careful with how you handle it. If the Democrats have a convincing win on all fronts in November, they will have the power to do these things. But the question is, how do you do it?”

“Even if you bring the evidence in, you do have to legitimize it,” he continued. “The general attitude among many Germans — not just fanatical Nazis, but many Germans — towards the international tribunal in Nuremberg was pretty cynical, ‘victors’ justice’ and all that.”

Taylor added that even in the event that there are no criminal prosecutions of those who may have committed abuses under Trump, there will still need to be a full airing of all the dirty laundry that America has accumulated during his presidency.

“You’ll have to talk about these things. Some people will not want to talk — they’ll just want to yell — but talking is essential, and not necessarily in an absolutely vengeful way,” he said, adding that if Democrats end up controlling Congress in 2021, they may need to enact special legislation to waive many of the provisions in the Presidential Records Act that would allow Trump to block access to his presidential papers.

Democrats, he added, would be “crazy” to not be preparing for the possibility that Trump will attempt to destroy records on his way out of office.

While Taylor cautioned against employing an accountability process that could foment resentment or resistance from Trump’s supporters, George Washington University lecturer and ex-federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner is already trying to thread that needle.

For some time now, Kirschner has been speaking and writing of the need for a “Trump Crimes Commission” to fully examine the conduct of the previous administration.

Such a commission, Kirschner said, would be a mashup of sorts which combines aspects of the de-Nazification process, and of South Africa’s post-apartheid Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

“It would be a uniquely American response to our uniquely American atrocity,” said Kirshner, who spent three decades prosecuting homicides and racketeering trials in the office of the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia.

Unlike Taylor, Kirschner said worrying about complaints that any attempt to hold Trump administration figures accountable will be political retribution or victor’s justice is a waste of time.

“The criticism will come, and it will be argued that anything that’s done to address the crimes committed during the Trump years is somehow politically motivated revenge or retribution, and that’s absolute horses**t,” he said. “If crimes were going unaddressed because of political reasons, you can’t possibly argue that if you address them in the future, honestly, ethically, and in a nonpartisan way, that somehow you’re doing the wrong thing.”

Kirshner argued that the Biden administration and the next Congress should “stand up a truly independent, nonpartisan or bipartisan commission,” with members and staff drawn from across all three branches of government.

Such a commission, he said, should have broad investigatory powers along the lines of the old Office of Independent Counsel, which was established under the post-Watergate Ethics in Government Act but was allowed to expire after Congress failed to renew the provision in law authorizing it in the wake of Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial.

Former Michigan Representative Bob Carr, who was elected to Congress in 1974 as part of a post-Watergate landslide, agreed that there needs to be a full accounting of the Trump administration’s actions, if not for justice, then for the benefit of history.

“The new administration and the new Congress really should take it very seriously to do an audit of the last four years,” he said. “Of course, the Republicans will scream and holler that this is just political retribution and blah, blah, blah, but if it’s done by the right types of leaders in the Congress and the right kind of people inside the executive branch… in a methodical, professional, relatively low-key kind of way, it could provide … historians … with important facts.”

And while Kirshner would ideally have such an entity undertake a top-to-bottom review of agencies like Immigration and Customs enforcement to find out to what degree rank-and-file employees have been complicit in carrying out unlawful policies, he recognized that civil service laws and the limits of political capital could make that too heavy a lift.

“When it comes to civil servants, how do you go through the agencies that have potentially been complicit in Trump’s crimes… and try to figure out who actively did something that was criminal or that was that punishable by losing your job, versus who just kept their head down and just kept trying to do the honest work of government?” he asked. “I think in a perfect world, we tackle that, but in our world, I think we can probably only hope to hold the most obviously criminal government employees, cabinet members and administration officials accountable for the sort of big-ticket violations of law by investigating fully and figuring out if we have enough evidence to charge them.”

Kirshner agreed with Taylor’s assessment that the usual secrecy afforded to former presidents’ records should be off-limits to Trump and suggested that legislation is needed to open things up.

“I would argue that we need to pass legislation that amends whatever it is that has that has built secrecy into the system, because we used to build secrecy into the system for the right reasons, whether that’s grand jury secrecy or protecting Presidential Records, and now we see how that’s been taken advantage of, and we need to fix it,” he said. “I think where we are as a country, I don’t care about the chaos that might result by opening up the presidential archives on matters that will not impact national security so that the public can see what the heck is going on.”

I will be shocked if we actually do this. There is tremendous reluctance to “criminalizing politics” and since they managed to slither out of the Russia investigation charges, that impulse may perversely be even stronger. The fear of backlash is real. The Trump cult has a lot of guns…

So I don’t know if something this sweeping will happen. But there is some hope that the Congress can open a number of investigations looking back on various crimes and abuses, get relevant documents and at least hold a public accounting of what happened. The Republicans have lost any claim that it’s wrong to do such investigations of a previous administration with their ongoing “investigations of the investigation” that goes back to the Obama years. They cannot complain about the DOJ looking back either, if it comes to that.

I can understand why the Biden people aren’t talking about this in the campaign. But I sure do hope it’s not something they’ve already decided won’t be on the menu. It would be a catastrophic error.

Saboteur-in-chief

Late absentee ballots piled up in Wisconsin in 2016. AMBER ARNOLD, STATE JOURNAL ARCHIVES

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you’re always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away

“For What It’s Worth” by Stephen Stills (1966), inspired by the “Sunset Strip riots.”

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow asked Mary Trump (“Too Much and Never Enough“) Thursday night what her uncle Donald might do if he loses the November election. She might have asked what the acting president might do to ensure he does not lose.

How might Trump cheat thee? Rolling Stone’s Andy Kroll counts the ways. Including Trump’s setting expectations for his base that, should he lose, it was Democrats and who-knows-who voting illegally by mail that stole his righteous victory.

Republicans plan massive investments this year in rooting out supposed “voter fraud,” including $20 million on lawsuits aimed at stopping Democratic efforts to make voting easier and safer during the coronavirus pandemic. Rick Hasen, a University of California, Irvine law professor and proprietor of Election Law Blog, says they have a simple goal: “Casting doubt on the legitimacy of the election. Raising spurious fraud claims.”

On cue, the Washington Post reports this:

A spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee said that attempts to “forcibly implement” policies that make it easier to vote absentee will “destroy public confidence in the integrity of our elections.”

Which is a strange complaint. Republicans have worked assiduously for decades to do just that.

Kroll notes that this is the first presidential election in 40 years that Republicans will not be restrained by the 1982 consent decree signed to resolve a case brought by Democrats over voter intimidation tactics the GOP deployed in the 1981 governor’s race in New Jersey:

On November 3rd, 1981, Lynette Monroe, who lived in northwest Trenton, headed out to her polling place. It was Election Day in New Jersey. When Monroe, a Democrat, arrived at the polling site, she was stopped outside by a member of a group called the National Ballot Security Task Force. Monroe was asked if she had her voter-registration card with her. She said she did not but that it didn’t matter — she was a registered voter. But the National Ballot Security Task Force members “turned her away, preventing her from casting her ballot,” according to a lawsuit later filed by the Democratic Party, Monroe, and several others.

When she was turned away, Monroe had no way of knowing that the National Ballot Security Task Force was a massive voter-suppression project funded and carried out by the Republican National Committee and the New Jersey Republican Party. Republicans hired county deputy sheriffs and local policemen with revolvers, two-way radios, and “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands to patrol predominantly black and Hispanic precincts in New Jersey. They posted large warning signs outside polling places saying that it was “a crime to falsify a ballot or to violate election laws.” The signs omitted any mention of the GOP’s role in this egregious intimidation scheme, but the intent was obvious: “to harass and intimidate duly qualified black and Hispanic voters for the purpose and with the effect of discouraging these voters from casting their ballots,” the lawsuit stated.

Listen to more on this saga from WNYC.

I’ve written about the RNC’s voter fraud campaign and consent decree multiple times, and about the March 2012 opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Judge Joseph Greenaway wrote in denying the RNC’s appeal, “If the RNC does not hope to engage in conduct that would violate the Decree, it is puzzling that the RNC is pursuing vacatur so vigorously …”

Now that the decree has expired, Justin Clark, a senior Trump 2020 campaign attorney told a group of Republicans at a private meeting in November that the consent decree’s demise was “a huge, huge, huge, huge deal.” He told them, Kroll writes, that “it frees the RNC to directly coordinate with campaigns and political committees on so-called Election Day operations.”

For massive voter-suppression this coming Election Day, the events this week in Portland make New Jersey cops in armbands look like pikers. Might Portland be a trial run?

USA Today’s headline Friday night: ‘Secret police force’: Feds reportedly pull Portland protesters into unmarked vehicles, stirring outrage

“It’s like stop and frisk meets Guantanamo Bay,” said civil rights attorney Juan Chavez. “You have laws regarding probable cause…. [This] sounds more like abduction. It sounds like they’re kidnapping people off the streets.”

Recall that Italy in 2009 convicted 23 CIA operatives (Americans) in absentia for involvement in abducting a Muslim cleric off the street in Milan in 2003. Several men dragged him into in an unmarked van. They “rendered” Abu Omar to Egypt where he claimed he was tortured.

If Trump gets away with this, Portland could end up a template for intimidating voters in blue cities in swing states, say, around Election Day. Before Trump, I might have considered that tinfoil hat territory.

But Election Day is just the denouement. For warm-ups, the president and his team are working to ensure the U.S. Postal Service’s ability to deliver those mailed ballots Trump distrusts is severely impaired (Paul Waldman):

For most of his time in office, President Trump has attacked and criticized the U.S. Postal Service, for reasons that range from the bizarre to the intensely personal. And lately, he has been waging a crusade against voting by mail, apparently out of the mistaken belief that it inherently benefits Democrats.

These two Trump wars — against the USPS and against mail voting — may be coming together to produce an election nightmare come November.

Have you noticed a slowdown in your mail delivery recently? Letters taking longer to reach you? Some days when you don’t get mail at all? If you have, you’re not alone. And that’s where our story starts.

Bottom line: If your state has a deadline for your vote-by-mail or absentee-by-mail ballot to arrive at the Board of Elections, DO NOT WAIT to mail it. Seriously, if you are reading this blog, are you really going to change your mind on candidates between the time your ballot arrives at your home and Election Day? Fill it out. Mail it back as soon as possible. Or don’t mail it at all. Place it in a nearby drop box. I plan on depositing mine in the drop box at the local Board office weeks ahead of Election Day.

To repeat:

We need to “flatten the curve” on how and when people vote this fall. Expand absentee voting as early as practicable to relieve pressure on in-person voting methods. COVID-19 means we expect to have trouble staffing polling places. Expanded use of absentee ballots means reducing lines and the risk of infection for early- and election-day voters. Think of it as a democratic strategic triad.

The Trump administration’s new postmaster general has eliminated overtime. If there aren’t enough hours in the day to handle today’s mail, it will sit until tomorrow. As ballots pile up … you get the idea.

Waldman again:

You may have heard that we need to be prepared for the vote count to take longer this year; because mail ballots take longer to process and there will be so many more of them, it could be a couple of days before we know who won the presidential election.

That’s bad enough, but we now face a situation in which hundreds of thousands of Americans could find their ballots tossed in the trash — which could not only interfere with the election, but also make people angry at the Postal Service itself. And that would make Trump very happy.

The Associated Press has more on Trump’s assault on the Postal Service.

Ignore the polls. Get your friends to vote. All of them. If you vote by mail or absentee, mail your ballot early or find a drop box. Everything is on the line.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 3rd Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide GOTV mechanics guide at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.
Note: The pandemic will upend standard field tactics in 2020. If enough promising “improvisations” come my way, perhaps I can issue a COVID-19 supplement.

The enemy is the Deep State

This is unusual:

I get the sense from listening to the interminable interviews with Trump voters standing in line that they think it’s impossible that Trump will lose. They don’t fear Biden, they don’t even acknowledge him.

Their enemy is a much darker force arrayed against Trump — The Deep State which they believe encompasses everything from the local mayor’s office to Apple Computers to China and the Department of Education. They are convinced that Trump has “drained the swamp” however and is on a trajectory to win in a landslide.

This is a cult that’s focused on itself. The Democrats are considered to be evil, but essentially powerless. It’s fun to play with them and “own the libs” but they are not a serious threat.

And when you think about it, you can sort of see why they believe that. They have not shown any capability of stopping him. Sure the Republicans in Congress have been unable to dismantle the hated Obamacare and other signature Democratic achievements, but Fox News and the Grim Reaper have assured them that the judiciary is now totally in their back pocket so they don’t really have to worry about anything. (This week may have shaken that faith a little bit, but they want to believe so they will.)

Their psyches will fracture if Biden wins. But Trump is already working on that, insisting that if he loses it will be because of mail-in voter fraud. They certainly don’t believe Joe Biden can beat Dear Leader. In their eyes, he is divine.

Think they’ll cheat?

Composite image by DonkeyHotey via Flickr. (CC BY 2.0)

Our right-leaning counterparts have invested decades into promoting the idea that if they win, it’s because they have the mandate of the people in what truly must be a right-leaning country. And if they lose, well, it’s because those dastardly Others cheated. Massively.

Massive, of course, is in the eye of the beholder. The Heritage Foundation sees fit to reach back to 1948 to pad out the numbers in its “1,088 proven instances of voter fraud” among hundreds of millions of votes cast since then. A plurality involve false registrations and fraudulent use of absentee ballots. Among 13 cases of “Impersonation Fraud at the Polls” are cases of election workers running the poll and one by a man wanting to demonstrate how easy it is to impersonate someone at the polls.

“All levels of government and Law Enforcement are watching carefully for VOTER FRAUD, including during EARLY VOTING,” Trump tweeted shortly before the 2018 mid-term elections. “Cheat at your own peril. Violators will be subject to maximum penalties, both civil and criminal!”

Naturally, those threats about cheating are meant for Democrats. IOKIYAR.

Take Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer recently charged with murder in the death of George Floyd. (You may have heard of it.) It seems Chauvin may have voted improperly in Florida in both 2016 and 2018:

Derek Michael Chauvin, 44, is listed as having property in both Oakdale, Minn., and Windermere, Fla. On Friday, Dan Helm, a Florida attorney and candidate for Pinellas County Supervisor of Elections, asked Orange County State Attorney Aramis Ayala to prosecute Chauvin for violating the state’s election laws when he voted in Florida elections. Helm said the violation is a third-degree felony.

Orange County, Fla., voting records list Chauvin as an active voter and affiliated with the Republican Party of Florida.

In an e-mail Friday, Helm told the Star Tribune that he checked the county’s voter file after learning Chauvin had property there. “When I learned he voted here to influence our elections, while living in Minnesota, I was outraged,” said Helm, who described himself as active in voter protection efforts in Florida.

Working and (presumably) paying taxes in Minnesota over his 19 years with the Minneapolis Police Department would make Chauvin ineligible to claim Florida residency. Heaven forfend Chauvin also voted in Minnesota in those same elections!

Maybe it’s a Florida thing. Huffington Post reports on the voting habits of the White House’s new secretary of press disinformation and her boss, Donald J. Trump:

Kayleigh McEnany cast Florida ballots in 2018 using her parents’ address in Tampa, even though she lived in Washington, D.C., and held a New Jersey driver’s license.  Trump cast a Florida ballot this year using a business address in Palm Beach, where he had promised the town government he would not live.

Trump signed an agreement nearly three decades ago that his Mar-a-Lago social club would not be used as a private residence. Florida law, HuffPost adds, does not permit a business address (including a social club) to be used as a residential address for voter registration.

McEnany voted in both the 2018 primary and general elections in Florida using her parents’ waterfront address in Tampa as her legal residence rather than the house she and her husband bought in 2017, located a mile and half away ― all while living and working in Washington as a full-time employee of the Republican National Committee.

At the time, McEnany’s driver’s license and car registration showed an address in Edgewater, New Jersey. Those documents can only be obtained by proving residency in that state, according to the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission website.

McEnany has since changed her legal residence to her own house in Hillsborough County. Voting by mail 11 times in 10 years has not dissuaded her from condemning the practice as her boss does.

Maybe it’s a Florida thing.

Conservative bomb-thrower Ann Coulter faced a couple of dust-ups over her voter absentee voting. Connecticut dismissed a complaint alleging she fraudulently used her parents’ New Canaan address to cast absentee ballots in 2002 and 2004.

Then in 2006, she moved to Florida where Coulter allegedly falsified her registration address and voted there. Coulter listed “999 Indian Rd” in Palm Beach as her residence, having never lived there. “The Indian Road address is that of Coulter’s Real Estate agent and her husband David,” the Brad Blog reported.

“She never lived here,” Suzanne Frisbie, owner of the Indian Road home, told the Palm Beach Post. “I’m Ann’s Realtor, and she used this address to forward mail when she moved from New York.”

And what happened with that? This was, after all, a period when the Bush administration was firing U.S. attorneys for not pursuing voter fraud with sufficient vigor.

Coulter was cleared of wrongdoing after intervention by the FBI with the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office. And not just any FBI agent, reported the Palm Beach Post, but “Supervisory Special Agent Jim Fitzgerald, of the FBI Academy’s Behavioral Analysis Unit in Quantico, Va. — the closest reality gets to the serial-killer catchers on CBS’ Criminal Minds.”

The Palm Beach Post links are now dead, but Harpers extracts this:

County Supervisor of Elections Arthur Anderson, meanwhile, decried what he called “FBI intrusion.” He referred the Coulter case to PBSO after poll worker Jim Whited originally reported the incident. “This doesn’t bode well in terms of the public’s impression that celebrities receive preferential treatment,” Anderson said. “I’m curious about how anyone can justify the FBI’s intrusion.”

First-year Detective Kristine Villa in December was assigned the job of investigating whether Coulter committed a felony in February 2006, when she cast her ballot in the wrong precinct in a Palm Beach election after registering to an address that wasn’t hers.Villa’s report leaves the clear impression that Coulter’s attorney, Miami’s Marcos Jimenez, stonewalled Villa for five months—at times agreeing to make Coulter available, at others reneging, often not returning calls promptly or claiming not to be able to reach his client.

But hey, if you’re white and blonde (blonde-ish in Trump’s case), it’s all good, as your intentions are assumed to be. Not so for the Others. You know, THEM. As I’ve written before:

Nice, decent white people wake up on Election Day, shower, dress, eat breakfast, then go the polls to do their patriotic duty by casting their votes. OTHERS — Poors numbering in the invisible millions — are not like US. They go instead to commit felonies punishable by five years in prison and a $10,000 fine for each offense just to add a single extra vote to their team’s total.

And those hordes of invisible malefactors must be stopped before they cheat (and Republicans lose) again.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 3rd Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide GOTV mechanics guide at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.
Note: The pandemic will upend standard field tactics in 2020. If enough promising “improvisations” come my way by June, perhaps I can issue a COVID-19 supplement.

Distractions of Unusual Size

It’s a classic political dirty trick. The robocall advises people the election has been moved to Wednesday, or that they can vote over the phone, or that they don’t need to vote. That last disinformation tactic resulted in Paul Schurick, 2010 campaign manager for former Maryland governor Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., being convicted of “of trying to influence votes through fraud, failing to identify the source of the call as required by law and two counts of conspiracy to commit those crimes.”

The tactic is usually deployed by shadowy players who make an effort to distance themselves from the candidate they mean to help. In this year’s disinformation campaign aimed at keeping people from voting by mail, the disreputable player is the candidate. He’s President of the United States and doing it openly using Twitter.

Twitter this week attached fact-check disclaimers to the two Trump tweets above, tacitly branding them false. The move sent Trump into a paroxysm of rage. He threatened a “big action” against social media companies he accuses of silencing conservatives. He is expected to sign an executive order today to remove legal protections from social media companies in the name of free speech. Or free lying, in his case.

Trump is convinced proposals to encourage voting by mail to save lives during a deadly pandemic will hurt his reelection chances in November. He’s deployed publicly paid White House staff as accessories in spreading his disinformation.

Team Trump would rather THOSE people stay home or risk sickness or death if they vote:

This is Trump’s and the White House press secretary’s metamessage:

Nice, decent white people wake up on Election Day, shower, dress, eat breakfast, then go the polls to do their patriotic duty by casting their votes. OTHERS — Poors numbering in the invisible millions — are not like US. They go instead to commit felonies punishable by five years in prison and a $10,000 fine for each offense just to add a single extra vote to their team’s total.

We may mock Trump or wager he has no power to bring down legal wrath upon Twitter. But that’s not the point. Trump’s efforts are beyond the decades-old habit of conservatives “working the refs.”

“Even if these threats do not end up coming to fruition, the threats themselves constitute a serious abuse of power,” writes Greg Sargent at the Washington Post’s Plum Line:

The threat of conservative rage via fake claims of “bias” and the threat of state action as retribution are two sides of the same coin: The latter constitutes a deeply corrupt wielding of institutional power in and of itself, and it’s also critical to helping mobilize the former. Such a threat is not somehow rendered meaningless if Trump cannot find a way to follow through.

And this surely works, at least to some degree. This is obvious when you consider how mild and tentative Twitter’s corrective efforts have been. The tweets spreading Trump’s lies about voter fraud remain posted, and he has already posted more such lies that do not yet have any such corrective appended.

To this point, Trump has felt conservative outlets like Fox News may freely distribute false and misleading information. He feels entitled to having access to their privately owned platforms. Only when they begin straying from his preferred narrative does the habitual whiner feel put upon. Now seeing his fortunes fading and him headed for defeat likely taking Republicans with him, conservative outlets are beginning to distance themselves. Trump means to nip that in the bud.

Especially today, Trump needs D.O.U.S.’s.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 3rd Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide GOTV mechanics guide at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.
Note: The pandemic will upend standard field tactics in 2020. If enough promising “improvisations” come my way by June, perhaps I can issue a COVID-19 supplement.

The election doomsday preppers

OK, I wrote earlier about the polling showing that Biden’s lead in the presidential race is pretty solid and that we could afford to feel a little bit hopeful about the election in November. Here’s the other side of that coin.

I think we’ve all contemplated the idea that Trump might refuse to accept the results of the election. After all, he said last time that he would only accept the results if he won/ Its not as if he’s been discreet about his thinking.

However, I suspect we all thought it was fairly unlikely unless the vote was super close like it was in Florida 2000. But the pandemic changes the calculation. Trump has shown a willingness to use “emergency” powers to jack his trade policy and build his stupid wall. Are we sure he won’t do it if a second wave of COVID hits during the weeks around the election? I’m not.

Anyway, the New York Times reports on some people doing some disaster planning around this idea:

In October, President Trump declares a state of emergency in major cities in battleground states, like Milwaukee and Detroit, banning polling places from opening.

A week before the election, Attorney General William P. Barr announces a criminal investigation into the Democratic presidential nominee, Joseph R. Biden Jr.

After Mr. Biden wins a narrow Electoral College victory, Mr. Trump refuses to accept the results, won’t leave the White House and declines to allow the Biden transition team customary access to agencies before the Jan. 20 inauguration.

Far-fetched conspiracy theories? Not to a group of worst-case scenario planners — mostly Democrats, but some anti-Trump Republicans as well — who have been gaming out various doomsday options for the 2020 presidential election. Outraged by Mr. Trump and fearful that he might try to disrupt the campaign before, during and after Election Day, they are engaged in a process that began in the realm of science fiction but has nudged closer to reality as Mr. Trump and his administration abandon longstanding political norms.

The anxiety has intensified in recent weeks as the president continues to attack the integrity of mail voting and insinuate that the election system is rigged, while his Republican allies ramp up efforts to control who can vote and how. Just last week, Mr. Trump threatened to withhold funding from states that defy his wishes on expanding mail voting, while also amplifying unfounded claims of voter fraud in battleground states.

“In the eight to 10 months I’ve been yapping at people about this stuff, the reactions have gone from, ‘Don’t be silly, that won’t happen,’ to an increasing sense of, ‘You know, that could happen,’” said Rosa Brooks, a Georgetown University law professor. Earlier this year, Ms. Brooks convened an informal group of Democrats and never-Trump Republicans to brainstorm about ways the Trump administration could disrupt the election and to think about ways to prevent it.

But the anxiety is hardly limited to outside groups.

Marc Elias, a Washington lawyer who leads the Democratic National Committee’s legal efforts to fight voter suppression measures, said not a day goes by when he doesn’t field a question from senior Democratic officials about whether Mr. Trump could postpone or cancel the election. Prodded by allies to explain why not, Mr. Elias wrote a column on the subject in late March for his website — and it drew more traffic than anything he’d ever published.

But changing the date of the election is not what worries Mr. Elias. The bigger threat in his mind is the possibility that the Trump administration could act in October to make it harder for people to vote in urban centers in battleground states — possibilities, he said, that include declaring a state of emergency, deploying the National Guard or forbidding gatherings of more than 10 people.

Such events could serve to depress or discourage turnout in pockets of the country that reliably vote for Democrats.

“That to me is that frame from which all doomsday scenarios then go,” he said.

To ward off such a scenario, Mr. Elias is engaged in multiple lawsuits aimed at making it easier to cast absentee ballots by mail and making in-person voting more available, either on Election Day or in the preceding weeks.

Mr. Biden, for his part, has suggested more than once that Mr. Trump might try to disrupt or delay the election. And his campaign grew very concerned this month when it was announced that election security briefings, which in past cycles had been delivered to candidates by the F.B.I. and the Department of Homeland Security, would now be the province of the director of national intelligence. That post is currently held by John Ratcliffe, a Trump ally who was confirmed to the position on Thursday. Mr. Ratcliffe was among the president’s chief Fox News defenders during the Russia investigation and has been a sharp critic of the F.B.I.

“Since 2016, Donald Trump has shown that he is always ready to sacrifice our basic democratic norms for his personal and political interests,” said Bob Bauer, a Biden senior adviser who is the campaign’s chief lawyer. “We assume he may well resort to any kind of trick, ploy or scheme he can in order to hold onto his presidency. We have built a strong program to plan for and address every possibility to ensure that he does not succeed.”

Mr. Trump has said he expects the election to be held on Nov. 3 as scheduled, and under federal law he does not have the power to unilaterally postpone it. But a recent comment by the president’s son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner about whether the election would be held as scheduled — “I’m not sure I can commit one way or another,’’ he said — renewed fears that Mr. Trump would try to move the election, or discredit the balloting process, if he thought he was going to lose.

[…]

Ms. Brooks’s group at Georgetown is not the only one forecasting doomsday scenarios for the election. Ian Bassin, the executive director of Protect Democracy, a nonprofit group dedicated to resisting authoritarian government, last year convened the National Task Force on Election Crises, a bipartisan 51-member group that includes Republicans such as Michael Chertoff, the former homeland security secretary. The group is dedicated to envisioning and presenting plans for scenarios that could wreck the 2020 presidential election.

The task force began with 65 possibilities before narrowing the list early this year to eight potential calamities, including natural disasters, a successful foreign hack of voting machines, a major candidate’s challenging the election and seeking to delegitimize the results, and a president who refuses to participate in a peaceful transfer of power.

Among the scenarios they eliminated when making final cuts in January, ironically, was a killer pandemic that ravaged the country and kept people homebound before Election Day. After the coronavirus struck, the group reconstituted to publish pandemic-related recommendations for state governments to follow.

The group also produced a 200-page document, which has not been made public. Several members said they had worked on specific scenarios but had not seen the complete draft. They said that while many of the possibilities envisioned an incumbent president’s using the forces of government to his advantage, the report’s authors had been careful not to make the document explicitly about Mr. Trump.

“We hope there are safeguards in place,” said Norman J. Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who participated in the task force. “Let’s face it, those safeguards ought to include the Senate of the United States and the Justice Department. There’s reason to be nervous.”

After reading that I was tempted to write something like “I never thought I’d see the day when serious people would be contemplating such things in the United States of America.” But that wouldn’t be true. It was only 20 years ago that a 5-4 conservative Supreme Court majority decided a presidential election based on a dubious result in the Republican winner’s state which just happened to be run by his own Republican brother. Anyone who protested that was shushed by the media and everyone in politics and told to “get over it.” 9/11 happened just a few months later and that was that.

They have been preparing the ground for years.

Do we have any reason at all, after all we’ve seen from this administration — the acquiescent potted plants known as the GOP establishment, Trump’s corrupt Justice Department and now a pliant Intelligence Community run by an unqualified flunky — to believe it’s impossible that they’ll find some rationale for suppressing the vote or denying their loss in November? It clearly is not.

Setting the table for the loss

At the intersection of Rawsonville and Textile Roads, on a slender stretch of turf that runs the length of a half-deserted strip mall, Kathryn Prater and Kelra Rise are dancing.

The longtime friends, white women in their early 40s, haven’t had much to celebrate recently. Rise lost her job as a shipping clerk two months ago and is now uninsured and struggling to get by; Prater, a school bus driver, will receive her final paycheck in two weeks with no obvious prospect of income thereafter. Their pain is representative of Michigan on the whole, a state battered by Covid-19 to the tune of 5,000 deaths; a state crushed under the weight of a 22 percent unemployment rate; and now, a state reeling from a 500-year flood in mid-Michigan that has displaced tens of thousands of people. If America has a headache, Michigan has a migraine.

But in this moment, none of it matters. For the masses gathered on the side of the road, the sight of a presidential motorcade—and the knowledge that Donald Trump himself has come to their backyard, to visit the local Ford plant and pay homage to the old “Arsenal of Democracy”—is sufficient to distract from the suffering of the day. Country music blares from the back of a parked pickup truck. Giddy customers fork over $5 bills and pull MAGA shirts over their outfits. One man hoists a Betsy Ross-era flag from his fishing pole, with a naked brunette doll—“Governor Half-Whit!” he cries, echoing a presidential putdown—dangling from a noose.

[…]

[E]ven as Trump stuck predominantly to the script on Thursday, portraying himself as the fireman who had ventured into a state smoldering with rage and anxiety, the scent of kerosene followed close behind. Just 24 hours before he arrived in Michigan, the president launched a dangerous disinformation campaign, accusing the secretary of state of going “rogue” by illegally sending absentee ballots to every Michigan voter. He threatened to block funding to Michigan—a state beleaguered by multiple converging disasters, including one that was unfolding just as the tweet was sent—“if they want to go down this Voter Fraud path!”

To be clear, none of this is accurate. Voters were sent applications to vote absentee, a practice consistent with a newly adopted Michigan law (a law that exists in other states, red and blue alike). The Michigan GOP has itself sent out applications. There is nothing sordid or illegitimate going on; both parties here understand the rules of the game and are attempting to master them before November.

But Trump is playing his own game. Ever in need of a foil—be it Barack Obama’s birth certificate, John McCain, Megyn Kelly, Low Energy Jeb, Lyin’ Ted, Little Marco, Crooked Hillary, the Deep State, Never Trumpers, Sleepy Joe, Obamagate, or combinations thereof—the president has set his sights on the institution of the ballot box. The benefit is twofold: Trump can simultaneously incite the distress of his base to juice enthusiasm come November while establishing a built-in justification should he lose.

The effects are already manifest. In conversation after conversation with voters here Thursday, Trump supporters repeatedly—and completely unsolicited—say Democrats are attempting to steal the election from the president.

“I lived in Chicago for six years. We know how Mayor Daley stuffed the ballot box for JFK against Nixon.” says Keith Brudder, a 72-year-old landscape contractor from the nearby town of Willis. “That’s what the Democrats in charge here want to do, with this mail-in voting. There’s just no way to have accountability for those ballots like you do when people come to the voting booth.”

“In Wayne County alone, more than a million people who weren’t registered to vote in 2018 got to vote anyway, and that’s how Whitmer and these Democrats got elected,” says Matthew Shepard, a retired career military man who drove his hulking, orange paramilitary-style truck 90 minutes south from Shiawassee County to cheer on the president. (He offered no documentation for those statistics.) “That’s the only way Trump loses this election—this mail voting scam.”

Deborah Fuqua-Frey, who sits on the board of the Washtenaw County GOP and helped organize the pro-Trump rally here, says the United Auto Workers union “controls the outcome of the 2020 election.” And that terrifies her. “Because nobody knows how to stuff the ballot box like the UAW,” she says. “Trust me, I was a third-generation UAW member, and I know they’re always looking for new ways to cheat. That’s what they’re going to do with the mail system.”

You will notice that this crowd is pretty sparse. I doubt they represent more than a handful of Americans. But it does show that Trump is getting his message across. If he wins it’s a sign of his magnificent electoral prowess. If he loses, the game was rigged.

He’s already on the record with this. From 2016:

Remember when Trump had trouble voting in 2004?

Access Hollywood got it all on tape.

Trump is making a big deal about vote by mail, insisting that it’s rife with fraud. It isn’t, of course. Many states have been providing this option for some time and some even do it entirely by mail now.

But whatever. My personal feeling is that he’s just setting up the “fraud” excuse in case he loses. He knows he can’t stop states from doing vote by mail. If he wins, he’ll just do what he did last time and say that he won in spite of a huge number of fraudulent Democratic votes. In fact, it was really a landslide!

Yesterday he said that voting in person is an “honor” and that the only people who should be allowed to vote absentee should be those who are sick or are not going to be in the state on election day.

I guess he doesn’t remember this:

I’d guess he forgot to register and so his absentee ballot wasn’t counted. Some Republicans would say people like him should be charged with voter fraud.

But by his reasoning he should never have been allowed to vote that year at all. He didn’t have an excuse for voting absentee. He just didn’t turn up on the rolls.

“Texas on Everything” revisited

The depth of the administration’s cynicism recalls the Big Daddy line from Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, “I detect the powerful odor of mendacity.” – Louis Dubose, co-author with Molly Ivins of Bushwhacked: Life in George W. Bush’s America, speaking to the Austin Chronicle, 2003.

Don’t let these people near Washington, Molly Ivins warned when former Texas Gov. George W. Bush ran for president. They’ll do to the country what they did to Texas.

If she’d lived long enough to see the Trump administration, it would look eerily familiar. Only worse.

Another public official ousted for insufficient ideological purity under Acting President Donald Trump is fighting reassignment. Rick Bright this week lost his position as director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority. The head of an agency charged with overseeing research into a coronavirus vaccine found himself abruptly reassigned to the National Institutes of Health amidst a pandemic on track to kill more Americans in two months than died in the Vietnam War:

“I believe this transfer was in response to my insistence that the government invest the billions of dollars allocated by Congress to address the COVID-19 pandemic into safe and scientifically vetted solutions, and not in drugs, vaccines and other technologies that lack scientific merit. I am speaking out because to combat this deadly virus, science — not politics or cronyism — has to lead the way,” Dr. Rick Bright said Wednesday in a statement issued by his lawyers.

“Specifically, and contrary to misguided directives, I limited the broad use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, promoted by the Administration as a panacea, but which clearly lack scientific merit. While I am prepared to look at all options and to think ‘outside the box’ for effective treatments, I rightly resisted efforts to provide an unproven drug on demand to the American public,” Bright said in the statement, which was first reported by The New York Times.

In his daily briefing on Wednesday, Trump claimed, “I never heard of him.” But he’s heard of hydroxychloroquine. For weeks he’s been hyping the anti-malaria drug as a “game changer” in the fight against COVID-19. A small study released Tuesday found more deaths among those treated with hydroxychloroquine than among patients given standard treatments.

Doesn’t matter. Make Trump look bad and you’re gone. Even if you’re right. Ask Michael K. Atkinson, former intelligence community inspector general. Ask Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman, the national security aide who testified under subpoena before the House. Or his twin brother. Or former ambassador Gordon D. Sondland. Or Capt. Brett Crozier, former commander of the USS Theodore Roosevelt. Or James Comey or Andrew McCabe or Jeff Sessions or … you get the point.

The pattern recalls the 2007 Bush Department of Justice purge of federal prosecutors. A 2017 Brennan Center report summarized the scandal:

DOJ political leadership fired seven well-respected U.S. Attorneys, dismissing some top Republican prosecutors because they had refused to prosecute nonexistent voter fraud. Senior officials hired career staff members using a political loyalty test, perverted the work of the nonpartisan Voting Section toward partisan ends, and exerted pressure on states and an independent government agency to fall in line with an anti-voting rights agenda.

After a 22 -month investigation, the DOJ brought no criminal charges against former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales or others involved.

A 2008 report by the DOJ Office of Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility found that when hiring for the department’s Honors Program and Summer Law Intern Program (the Monica Goodling scandal), the Bush DOJ exhibited “a pattern of deselecting candidates based on political or ideological affiliations.” Politico reported those programs “are used to funnel new law-school graduates into DOJ’s ranks.” In fact, they broke the law. There were resignations, but no charges filed.

Why bring those matters up again? This story on the Trump Office of Personnel Management stonewalling congressional Democrats trying to assess teleworking arrangements for federal employees:

Former officials and others have expressed concern in interviews that OPM’s new leadership favors sweeping changes to the federal workforce — in ways that would fundamentally change the nature of government service.

At the same time, other top officials are seeking to align the federal workforce more squarely with President Trump’s political agenda, rankling longtime civil servants. The drive has been spearheaded by John McEntee, the 29-year-old head of PPO and a fierce Trump loyalist.

OPM is currently headed up by acting director Mike Rigas, who assumed the role in mid-March after the abrupt resignation of Dale Cabaniss, who stepped down because of alleged poor treatment by several Trump appointees. Rigas has worked as the deputy director of OPM for the last two years and is also an alum of the Heritage Foundation.

Why, yes, there’s more (emphasis mine):

Rigas has told colleagues that he questions the constitutionality of the 1883 Pendleton Act, which codifies using merit to pick government officials, and believes that all executive branch employees should be political appointees, according to a person who has discussed the matter with him.

They want the executive branch fully politicized. Loyalists or nothing. Trump and Republican allies could soon have the conservative judges in place to allow it.

Ivins said of the Bush administration in 2003, “One of the fatal political mistakes they’re making is that classic political mistake when you only listen to the people on your side. That information group gets narrower and narrower and people convince themselves of things that simply aren’t true.”

What the Bushies attempted, Trump is trying again with less subtlety. He’s Trump-izing the federal government, taking the Trump Organization national in a way Karl Rove never dreamed. Ivins saw the possibility in 2003:

Austin Chronicle: What do you think is the relationship between Texas and national politics right now?

MI: We’re taking Texas national — it’s like that old [Terry Allen album] Lubbock (on Everything) ought be changed to Texas on Everything. They are Texas-izing the entire country; it’s amazing the other 49 haven’t seceded. There’s that old saying around the Capitol: “The purpose of government is to create a healthy business climate.” People really believe that here — and the result is we’re 49th in every indicator of people’s health and education and welfare and safety and all that other good stuff, and often we don’t even have a healthy business climate to show for it. I just think that “Let ‘er rip,” late-19th-century unregulated capitalism is back. As near as I can tell, that’s where Rove and the ideologues want to take the country. They want to completely undo the Great Society and the New Deal.

Ivins said of Pat Buchanan’s infamous 1992 Republican Convention speech that it “probably sounded better in the original German.” Trump’s 2016 convention speech might have killed her if the cancer hadn’t first. How I miss her.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 3rd Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide GOTV mechanics guide at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.
Note: The pandemic will upend standard field tactics in 2020. If enough promising “improvisations” come my way by June, perhaps I can issue a COVID-19 supplement.

He’s bringing back the “A” Team. Lol.

Trump announced that “Hopey” HIcks is coming back on board. And now Spicey and Reince will be returning as well. He needs his security blankees around him:

President Donald Trump has rehired his former chief of staff Reince Priebus and former press secretary Sean Spicer almost three years after both men unceremoniously departed the White House.

Priebus and Spicer will each join the President’s Commission on White House Fellowships, according to a White House announcement Tuesday. As a part of the commission, the pair will interview and recommend to their former boss national finalists for appointments.

Spicer, who resigned in July 2017 out of dissatisfaction with the hiring of Anthony Scaramucci as communications director, courted controversy for repeatedly telling lies on behalf the president. Among those were false claims that Trump’s inauguration had the biggest crowds in history, that the president would have won the popular vote in the 2016 if not for voter fraud, that former President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower and that Adolf Hitler had not used chemical weapons.

Spicer has become something of a pop culture fixture since his exit from the White House. He joined the reality competition show “Dancing With the Stars,” in which he and other famous contestants were paired with professional ballroom dancers as they competed for the mirror ball trophy, last year. He announced on Cameo that he would record Valentine’s Day messages for people who were willing to pay him $199 earlier this week.

Priebus, whose six-month tenure as chief of staff was the shortest in history for anyone who did not hold the position on an interim basis, was fired in July 2017. A number of reasons cited for his termination, including: Trump’s disappointment with Priebus’ stewardship of the campaign to repeal the Affordable Care Act and a belief that Priebus lacked the strength to run the White House.

All is forgiven.

I wonder if he knows how much leaking those two did? It’s pretty clear that they have spilled their guts to a whole lot of journalists and book authors. I man where do you suppose people heard about this?

When Reince Priebus was the White House chief of staff, President Donald Trump repeatedly asked him whether badgers, the state animal of Priebus’ home state of Wisconsin, are “mean to people,” how they “work,” and how aggressive they can get.

That’s according to “Sinking in the Swamp: How Trump’s Minions and Misfits Poisoned Washington,” a new book by the Daily Beast reporters Lachlan Markay and Asawin Suebsaeng. During that time, Trump would often “waste Priebus’s time” during briefings about foreign and domestic policy by pelting him with questions about badgers, the book says.

Here’s what the book says about the president’s fascination with badgers:

“After Trump was reminded that the short-legged omnivore was practically synonymous with the Badger State, he’d make a point of bringing it up at seemingly random occasions to his beleaguered chief of staff.

“‘Are they mean to people?’ Trump at least twice asked Priebus in the opening months of his presidency. ‘Or are they friendly creatures?’ The president would also ask if Priebus had any photos of badgers he could show him, and if Priebus could carefully explain to him how badgers ‘work’ exactly.

“He wanted Reince — resident White House badger historian, apparently — to explain to him Wisconsin’s obsession with the animal, how the little critters function and behave, what kind of food they like, and how aggressive or deadly they could be when presented with perceived existential threats.

“Trump also wanted to know if the badger had a ‘personality’ or if it was boring. What kind of damage could a badger to do a person with its flashy, sharp claws?

“An obviously enthralled president would stare at Priebus as the aide struggled for sufficiently placating answers, all the while trying to gently veer the conversation back to whether we were going to do a troop surge in Afghanistan or strip millions of Americans of healthcare coverage.”

Of course, he doesn’t read so Priebus has nothing to worry about.

Can't find what you're looking for? Try refining your search: