October surprise: how Democrats are going to disseat Trump
7 August , 16:48
The pre-election situation in America is so tense and confused that in the long run it can lead to a global split of the country.

As you know, the US presidential elections will be held on November 3, the results of which will be of great importance for the whole world, and, in particular, for Russia. Political scientist Boris Makarenko, analyzing the pre-election situation, finds it difficult to give preference to any of the candidates, believing that the results of the voting will most likely split the country in the same way as it was during the Civil War:

“The Washington Examiner has published an article about an interesting business game conducted by the Transition Integrity Project. The publication itself gravitates towards the Republican Party, the Transition Integrity Project ("for a full-fledged transit [of power]") - mostly Democrats, so they interpret the results of the game in different ways. But we are more interested in the essence of the game and its scenarios.

100 people - including politicians, retired high-ranking officials, campaign specialists, journalists, pollsters (imitating public opinion) predicted how presidential candidates would behave if the election results did not give 100% clarity about who won. Trump himself "provoked" this project, refusing to give an unequivocal answer on July 19 whether he will recognize the election results (meaning, if they are not in his favor).

So:

Scenario One: Biden has a clear majority in the popular vote and in the electoral college. Conclusion: Trump will try to argue that the results are falsified, but ultimately admit defeat, and on January 21, 2021, Biden will take over as president. Everything is clear here.

Second: the same, but Biden's advantage is minimal: less than 1 point in votes, 278 - electors (with a minimum of 270). Trump fiercely resists, but if the Supreme Court confirms the results, then - as a last resort under the escort of the Secret Service - is removed from the White House (it is unclear from the script, voluntarily or compulsorily). Again, Biden is the president.

Third: everything is decided by the votes of the electors of one state (in the scenario - Michigan), where some of the ballots (supposedly for Biden) were destroyed by a crazy fanatic. Trump has a majority, but the state governor (Democrat) appoints electors in Biden's favor. Dead end. Neither party accepts this decision. There is no withdrawal.

Fourth. It is not said who has the majority in votes. The implication is that in the current environment, Trump cannot win him. But Trump has 286 electoral votes. Biden refuses to admit defeat, Democratic governors of Michigan and Wisconsin appoint Biden's electors. There is also a continuation, but - "let's go around for clarity" - again, there is no conclusion who will become president on January 20 next year. Dead end.

The last two scenarios destroy all the canons of American electoral politics, but - paradoxically - are not excluded by the letter of the law. The electors are appointed by the STATES. The fact that they appoint them in favor of the candidate who has gained the majority in the state (48 in its pure form, 2 in a slightly more complicated procedure) is a general rule, but not a written rule of federal law. From 1888 to 2000, this procedure never failed: the majority of votes of voters and electors always converged on the same candidate. But in 16 years of this century, the Republican candidate who lost the popular vote twice became president.

The current objective balance of power in society has ceased to comply with the norms of representation in government institutions (namely, these norms determine the number of electors from each state): not only small states, but also states with more rural population and fewer large cities, are "overrepresented" - and this gives the Republicans an edge, all other things being equal. For several years now, the initiative of the Interstate Compact has been living in America - there is such a form of de facto federal legislation in the USA - according to which the electors would be obliged to vote for the one who received the most votes (i.e., in fact, the elections became direct) ... It is not a fact that such an Agreement will enter into force: for this it is necessary that the states vote for it, which in total give more than half of all electors (the real situation: close to half, but still not enough). But the very idea that the current rules for the formation of the electoral college do not correspond to the reality of today is alive and very popular among democratic voters. The third “stolen victory” since the turn of the century and the second in a row will split America like never before — at least since the Civil War.

All of these scenarios - there was probably a reason for that - did not describe how the procedures actually provided by the US Constitution for such cases would work . Recall that there are two of them:

  1. If the electoral college does not have an absolute majority for one candidate (and all attempts to resolve this problem fail), then the presidential elections are postponed to Congress, as has happened twice in American history (though the last time was almost two centuries ago). Such a situation may well arise, for example, if it is not possible to find a solution to whom to vote for one densely populated state. The decision - in favor of one of the three candidates with the largest number of electors (in reality there will be only two) - is made by the lower House of Representatives, but not by a simple majority (this would practically guarantee a victory for Biden), but by a majority of 26 or more "state delegations" ... Those. it all depends on how many states have sent more Republicans or Democrats to the House. In the current 116 convocation, the Democratic Party has 34 mandates, but they lose in terms of states: the Republican Party has a majority in 26 delegations, another state (Pennsylvania) has an equal number of deputies from both parties. So today, Congress would elect Trump as President, there are new elections ahead, in which the balance of power may change, but in any case it will be clear enough by the second week of November.
  2. If, however, they cannot find a solution in the House of Representatives, then on January 21, 2021, the presidential powers will be transferred to the one who is second in line to the White House - and this is the Speaker of the House of Representatives, today a Democrat Nancy Pelosi. She or not, but the next speaker is likely to be from the Democratic Party: the scenario of their loss of the majority in the House in the November elections is now considered fantastic.

So the “tree” of uncertainties, scenarios and risks in these elections has a very spreading crown..."

***

Meanwhile, the Soviet dissident, publicist Mikhail Kazachkov, now living in America and closely following the political upheavals there, describes one of the episodes of the pre-election struggle that could be decisive for Trump's fate:

“Impressed by the meticulous choreography of the people playing Trump. ONE NEWS reported today (1) the investigation received data on Trump finance from Deutsche Bank, (2) the judge's decision to turn over his tax returns to investigators, and (3) an important press conference by the New York State Attorney General. Everyone, of course, decided: here it is, a criminal offense against Trump!

It turned out not, but not much less: the liquidation of the NRA, with charges against its five leaders. It is a non-profit organization that brings together gun owners. Its leadership violated a dozen state laws and allegedly pocketed about $ 17 million.

Why is it important.

First, the NRA kept a good half of the Republicans in Congress on the financial hook - now they will be deprived of its support. Secondly, it was they who blocked the laws prohibiting combat weapons in the hands of the population, which made all these shootings of schoolchildren, etc., possible. More than 70% of Americans want these restrictions; The NRA has blocked them, and its debacle with the seizure of bank accounts will be popular.

But don't think Trump's finances aren't going to be the next act in the playbook. Yesterday, the judge decided the issue of disclosing Trump's tax returns to the investigation of New York prosecutors. They, of course, have been known to those for a long time, but this cannot be officially recognized. Trump's lawyers will certainly challenge this decision, but the documents of Deutsche Bank are already officially in the hands of the investigation! And there is already information that this only (by the way, very dirty) bank gave Trump loans only after receiving funds from VTB (VNESHTORGBANK OF RUSSIA).

In the American political lexicon, there is the term "October surprise." It's only August yet. I have no doubt for a second that the data not only that Trump received loans actually from Russia, but also about his massive tax and other scams will appear at the moment when they will cause the greatest damage to his campaign. And the main thing will be the documented fact that if he is a billionaire, then only in debt. A common thimble...

I knew for a long time that it would be so. But the more interesting it is to watch the direction..."