Trump outrage of the day

[Glenstache]

Things like this scare me. The GOP seems to have largely drunk the kool aid and ready to approve a second Trump term regardless of the votes cast. The quote from below is from this afternoon. Barr is also setting the stage for pre-certification investigations of Trump's fraud claims... which has resulted in the resignation of the head of the election crimes unit.

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just became the latest high-ranking Republican official to insist, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, that President Trump didn’t actually lose the 2020 election.

“There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration,” Pompeo said in  a briefing on Tuesday.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgq8nd/mike-pompeo-american-secretary-of-state-said-there-will-be-a-smooth-transition-to-a-trump-second-term

[dandarc]

Call it what it is - they are attempting a coup. Unsurprising given they've been saying this for months and months.

[caracarn]

So this may qualify as the Trump outrage of the last four years.  How many families are similar.  I know ours has been impacted as I argue with my brother and my parents.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/10/opinions/trump-tore-my-family-apart-eldredge/index.html

[partgypsy]

My mother who is 77, is happy with the election results, but also remarked that Trump's words and actions (not conceding, not congratulating the winner) is unheard of in recent times. But she said, you know what he doesn't have to concede, it's a nicety and regardless, he will still need to leave come January. Again anything other than trump departing and Biden being inaugurated (barring some incredible new information) is let's just say highly abnormal. I  find the statements that Barr is making, dangerous and harmful to our election process, that Trump and his team will only accept the results of election if they are in his favor. That's not democracy.  That's a coup.

[dandarc]

The Trump administration isn't trying to do anything legal really. They are attempting to stage a coup, and all these frivolous lawsuits are just a side show. I think it will fail (call me an optimist), but that's what they are doing.

[OtherJen]

The Trump administration isn't trying to do anything legal really. They are attempting to stage a coup, and all these frivolous lawsuits are just a side show. I think it will fail (call me an optimist), but that's what they are doing.

It's like the worst whack-a-mole game ever.

[talltexan]

Mike Pence going on vacation.

I cannot blame him for wanting to be...not around...but it's not like there isn't work for the Senate or for his Coronavirus task force.

[GuitarStv]

Mike Pence going on vacation.

I cannot blame him for wanting to be...not around...but it's not like there isn't work for the Senate or for his Coronavirus task force.

Why start working on it now, after he has lost the job?

[jrhampt]

The Trump administration isn't trying to do anything legal really. They are attempting to stage a coup, and all these frivolous lawsuits are just a side show. I think it will fail (call me an optimist), but that's what they are doing.

I am also trying to figure out how concerned I should be about Trump somehow staying in office after January 20th (10-20% chance?  I mean, we're a democracy, he LOST the election, and it should be 0%.).  I'm not thrilled about what Barr, Pompeo, Lindsey Graham and assorted other congressional Republicans are doing and saying right now.  Plus other attempts to block the transition from happening.

[sherr]

The Trump administration isn't trying to do anything legal really. They are attempting to stage a coup, and all these frivolous lawsuits are just a side show. I think it will fail (call me an optimist), but that's what they are doing.

I am also trying to figure out how concerned I should be about Trump somehow staying in office after January 20th (10-20% chance?  I mean, we're a democracy, he LOST the election, and it should be 0%.).  I'm not thrilled about what Barr, Pompeo, Lindsey Graham and assorted other congressional Republicans are doing and saying right now.  Plus other attempts to block the transition from happening.

0%, your concern should be 0%. Ignore the loudmouth traitorous liars and conspiracy theorists. There is nothing they can do to say in power after having lost the election. They are simply trying to whip their base into a froth so that they'll continue to listen to them after Biden becomes president. I have no doubt that that will work, but Biden will still become president.

[bacchi]

Things like this scare me. The GOP seems to have largely drunk the kool aid and ready to approve a second Trump term regardless of the votes cast. The quote from below is from this afternoon. Barr is also setting the stage for pre-certification investigations of Trump's fraud claims... which has resulted in the resignation of the head of the election crimes unit.

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just became the latest high-ranking Republican official to insist, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, that President Trump didn’t actually lose the 2020 election.

“There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration,” Pompeo said in  a briefing on Tuesday.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgq8nd/mike-pompeo-american-secretary-of-state-said-there-will-be-a-smooth-transition-to-a-trump-second-term

It's not as bad if you listen to Barr's full answer. Given the context it's a poor joke but he does go on answer the question in an expected, non-coup-like, manner.

[John Galt incarnate!]

I am also trying to figure out how concerned I should be about Trump somehow staying in office after January 20th (10-20% chance?  I mean, we're a democracy, he LOST the election, and it should be 0%.). 

You shouldn't  be concerned at all:  Trump has no legal, presidential,  or constitutional power to stay in office after 12 noon on Inauguration Day 2021.

Many have  worried out loud that Trump won't accept his defeat and will obstruct a peaceful transition of power.

 I assure all the worriers that  no phalanx of factotums from the USSS, FBI, or DOJ will be standing by  to abet Trump should he refuse to vacate the White House on Inauguration Day 2021.

[MudPuppy]

Things like this scare me. The GOP seems to have largely drunk the kool aid and ready to approve a second Trump term regardless of the votes cast. The quote from below is from this afternoon. Barr is also setting the stage for pre-certification investigations of Trump's fraud claims... which has resulted in the resignation of the head of the election crimes unit.

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just became the latest high-ranking Republican official to insist, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, that President Trump didn’t actually lose the 2020 election.

“There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration,” Pompeo said in  a briefing on Tuesday.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgq8nd/mike-pompeo-american-secretary-of-state-said-there-will-be-a-smooth-transition-to-a-trump-second-term

It's not as bad if you listen to Barr's full answer. Given the context it's a poor joke but he does go on answer the question in an expected, non-coup-like, manner.

Do you have a link? I’d like to listen to the full clip

[JLee]

I am also trying to figure out how concerned I should be about Trump somehow staying in office after January 20th (10-20% chance?  I mean, we're a democracy, he LOST the election, and it should be 0%.). 

You shouldn't  be concerned at all:  Trump has no legal, presidential,  or constitutional power to stay in office after 12 noon on Inauguration Day 2021.

Many have  worried out loud that Trump won't accept his defeat and will obstruct a peaceful transition of power.

 I assure all the worriers that  no phalanx of factotums from the USSS, FBI, or DOJ will be standing by  to abet Trump should he refuse to vacate the White House on Inauguration Day 2021.

The constant barrage of GOP politicians not shutting this shit down legitimizes the concept of fraud it in the eyes of Trump supporters.  That is a problem.

[ixtap]

Things like this scare me. The GOP seems to have largely drunk the kool aid and ready to approve a second Trump term regardless of the votes cast. The quote from below is from this afternoon. Barr is also setting the stage for pre-certification investigations of Trump's fraud claims... which has resulted in the resignation of the head of the election crimes unit.

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just became the latest high-ranking Republican official to insist, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, that President Trump didn’t actually lose the 2020 election.

“There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration,” Pompeo said in  a briefing on Tuesday.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgq8nd/mike-pompeo-american-secretary-of-state-said-there-will-be-a-smooth-transition-to-a-trump-second-term

It's not as bad if you listen to Barr's full answer. Given the context it's a poor joke but he does go on answer the question in an expected, non-coup-like, manner.

We were talking about Pompeo, not Barr, and when asked about how this affects his job (presenting democracy to the rest of the world) he said the very question was ridiculous.

[sherr]

Do you have a link? I’d like to listen to the full clip

Here's the article from The Hill which includes a video:

"There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration," Pompeo replied.

“We're ready,” Pompeo continued. “The world is watching what's taking place. We're gonna count all the votes. When the process is complete, there'll be electors selected. There's a process. The Constitution lays it out pretty clearly. The world should have every confidence that the transition necessary to make sure that the State Department is functional today ... and successful with a president who's in office on Jan. 20, a minute after noon, will also be successful.”

Pompeo appeared to smirk after delivering the line about a "second Trump administration," though it was unclear from his remarks themselves whether he was joking. The State Department did not immediately respond to an inquiry about his comments.

[MudPuppy]

Thank you!

[bacchi]

Things like this scare me. The GOP seems to have largely drunk the kool aid and ready to approve a second Trump term regardless of the votes cast. The quote from below is from this afternoon. Barr is also setting the stage for pre-certification investigations of Trump's fraud claims... which has resulted in the resignation of the head of the election crimes unit.

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just became the latest high-ranking Republican official to insist, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, that President Trump didn’t actually lose the 2020 election.

“There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration,” Pompeo said in  a briefing on Tuesday.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgq8nd/mike-pompeo-american-secretary-of-state-said-there-will-be-a-smooth-transition-to-a-trump-second-term

It's not as bad if you listen to Barr's full answer. Given the context it's a poor joke but he does go on answer the question in an expected, non-coup-like, manner.

We were talking about Pompeo, not Barr, and when asked about how this affects his job (presenting democracy to the rest of the world) he said the very question was ridiculous.

Pompeo, sorry.

[frugalnacho]

I am also trying to figure out how concerned I should be about Trump somehow staying in office after January 20th (10-20% chance?  I mean, we're a democracy, he LOST the election, and it should be 0%.). 

You shouldn't  be concerned at all:  Trump has no legal, presidential,  or constitutional power to stay in office after 12 noon on Inauguration Day 2021.

Many have  worried out loud that Trump won't accept his defeat and will obstruct a peaceful transition of power.

 I assure all the worriers that  no phalanx of factotums from the USSS, FBI, or DOJ will be standing by  to abet Trump should he refuse to vacate the White House on Inauguration Day 2021.

I hear you, and I think we all understand that he has no legal right to stay, but it's been 4 years of him constantly breaking the law with no repercussions.  We are on page 110 of a thread titled "Trump outrage of the day".  Many of those outrages were him flagrantly breaking the law. 

[Roadrunner53]

This is on the Washington Post:

White House tells federal agencies to proceed with plans for Trump’s February budget in latest sign of election defiance
The new directive for agencies to prepare their budget plans is the latest sign that aides are acting as if President Trump plans to try to remain in office even after his term expires.
By Jeff Stein, Erica Werner and Josh Dawsey1 hour ago

I can't read the article because I don't have a subscription but OMG, Trump is just going to be a squatter in the WH? What on earth is going to happen to get rid of this guy?

[Glenstache]

I am also trying to figure out how concerned I should be about Trump somehow staying in office after January 20th (10-20% chance?  I mean, we're a democracy, he LOST the election, and it should be 0%.). 

You shouldn't  be concerned at all:  Trump has no legal, presidential,  or constitutional power to stay in office after 12 noon on Inauguration Day 2021.

Many have  worried out loud that Trump won't accept his defeat and will obstruct a peaceful transition of power.

 I assure all the worriers that  no phalanx of factotums from the USSS, FBI, or DOJ will be standing by  to abet Trump should he refuse to vacate the White House on Inauguration Day 2021.

I hope that you are right. However:

1. Thus far he has not accepted defeat and is actively working to change the outcome through what appear to be frivolous lawsuits. Some have hypothesized that the purpose of these lawsuits is not to win them, but to tie up the results until the electoral college meets and  a window for legislatures to make decisions opens (or the specter of faithless electors). TBD.
2. In conjunction with the above, the GSA has prevented Biden from beginning the transition process.
3. Barr, aka the head of the DOJ, has fallen in line with supporting Trump's conspiracy theories. Again, a diligent investigation is unlikely to change the outcome of the voting, but the (likely quite public and heavily tweeted) investigations would create enough smoke for the base to believe there is fire (not to be confused with FIRE).

Nothing about Trump has indicated that his baseline is respect for law. I hope that what we are seeing amounts to a really ugly temper tantrum that will fade out without consequence. However, it is worth watching this carefully and not relying on Trump's good will and respect for the law to prevail.

[Kris]

I am also trying to figure out how concerned I should be about Trump somehow staying in office after January 20th (10-20% chance?  I mean, we're a democracy, he LOST the election, and it should be 0%.). 

You shouldn't  be concerned at all:  Trump has no legal, presidential,  or constitutional power to stay in office after 12 noon on Inauguration Day 2021.

Many have  worried out loud that Trump won't accept his defeat and will obstruct a peaceful transition of power.

 I assure all the worriers that  no phalanx of factotums from the USSS, FBI, or DOJ will be standing by  to abet Trump should he refuse to vacate the White House on Inauguration Day 2021.

I hope that you are right. However:

1. Thus far he has not accepted defeat and is actively working to change the outcome through what appear to be frivolous lawsuits. Some have hypothesized that the purpose of these lawsuits is not to win them, but to tie up the results until the electoral college meets and  a window for legislatures to make decisions opens (or the specter of faithless electors). TBD.
2. In conjunction with the above, the GSA has prevented Biden from beginning the transition process.
3. Barr, aka the head of the DOJ, has fallen in line with supporting Trump's conspiracy theories. Again, a diligent investigation is unlikely to change the outcome of the voting, but the (likely quite public and heavily tweeted) investigations would create enough smoke for the base to believe there is fire (not to be confused with FIRE).

Nothing about Trump has indicated that his baseline is respect for law. I hope that what we are seeing amounts to a really ugly temper tantrum that will fade out without consequence. However, it is worth watching this carefully and not relying on Trump's good will and respect for the law to prevail.

Don't forget that Biden is not receiving the president's daily national security briefings, as he should be.

Trump is having a temper tantrum. The people who are enabling him and refusing to aid in the transition process are putting our nation in an unstable position, and even in existential danger.

This is nothing to take lightly, or pretend it isn't serious.

[katsiki]

Don't forget that Biden is not receiving the president's daily national security briefings, as he should be.

What is the risk here?  Since Biden isn't taking off for a few weeks, does this create more of a learning curve on new/emerging issues, or something more serious?

[sherr]

Don't forget that Biden is not receiving the president's daily national security briefings, as he should be.

What is the risk here?  Since Biden isn't taking off for a few weeks, does this create more of a learning curve on new/emerging issues, or something more serious?

Yes, basically. For example see the Raid on Yakla eight days after Trump took office. That wasn't planned and executed solely in his presidency, the military would have been weighing its options and doing reconnaissance and whatnot for a while, so I'm sure these discussions were part of Trump's transitional national security briefings.

If he hadn't known about it beforehand then there's no way with all the chaos of assuming office that he'd have been informed enough to make a decision, and opportunities may be lost. Which may have actually been a good thing in this particular case given that the raid didn't go well, but the point still stands regardless.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

Don't forget that Biden is not receiving the president's daily national security briefings, as he should be.

What is the risk here?  Since Biden isn't taking off for a few weeks, does this create more of a learning curve on new/emerging issues, or something more serious?

Obama and Bush are getting the briefings (as do all former Presidents), and Biden seems to have a pretty good relationship with both.  I'm not going to stay up at night worrying too much about this one, although it is incredibly petty and childish.

[RetiredAt63]

Don't forget that Biden is not receiving the president's daily national security briefings, as he should be.

What is the risk here?  Since Biden isn't taking off for a few weeks, does this create more of a learning curve on new/emerging issues, or something more serious?

Obama and Bush are getting the briefings (as do all former Presidents), and Biden seems to have a pretty good relationship with both.  I'm not going to stay up at night worrying too much about this one, although it is incredibly petty and childish.

Past Presidents get briefings?  Huh?  Why?

[nereo]

Don't forget that Biden is not receiving the president's daily national security briefings, as he should be.

What is the risk here?  Since Biden isn't taking off for a few weeks, does this create more of a learning curve on new/emerging issues, or something more serious?

Obama and Bush are getting the briefings (as do all former Presidents), and Biden seems to have a pretty good relationship with both.  I'm not going to stay up at night worrying too much about this one, although it is incredibly petty and childish.

Past Presidents get briefings?  Huh?  Why?

They've been privy to all our government's secrets (and created some of their own) and remain important political targets.

It makes sense to keep them briefed - otherwise they could be exploited with severe consequences.

[frugalnacho]

Don't forget that Biden is not receiving the president's daily national security briefings, as he should be.

What is the risk here?  Since Biden isn't taking off for a few weeks, does this create more of a learning curve on new/emerging issues, or something more serious?

Obama and Bush are getting the briefings (as do all former Presidents), and Biden seems to have a pretty good relationship with both.  I'm not going to stay up at night worrying too much about this one, although it is incredibly petty and childish.

Past Presidents get briefings?  Huh?  Why?

Because they all have experience being president and can potentially offer invaluable wisdom and insight. 

[frugalecon]

I am also trying to figure out how concerned I should be about Trump somehow staying in office after January 20th (10-20% chance?  I mean, we're a democracy, he LOST the election, and it should be 0%.). 

You shouldn't  be concerned at all:  Trump has no legal, presidential,  or constitutional power to stay in office after 12 noon on Inauguration Day 2021.

Many have  worried out loud that Trump won't accept his defeat and will obstruct a peaceful transition of power.

 I assure all the worriers that  no phalanx of factotums from the USSS, FBI, or DOJ will be standing by  to abet Trump should he refuse to vacate the White House on Inauguration Day 2021.

I hope that you are right. However:

1. Thus far he has not accepted defeat and is actively working to change the outcome through what appear to be frivolous lawsuits. Some have hypothesized that the purpose of these lawsuits is not to win them, but to tie up the results until the electoral college meets and  a window for legislatures to make decisions opens (or the specter of faithless electors). TBD.
2. In conjunction with the above, the GSA has prevented Biden from beginning the transition process.
3. Barr, aka the head of the DOJ, has fallen in line with supporting Trump's conspiracy theories. Again, a diligent investigation is unlikely to change the outcome of the voting, but the (likely quite public and heavily tweeted) investigations would create enough smoke for the base to believe there is fire (not to be confused with FIRE).

Nothing about Trump has indicated that his baseline is respect for law. I hope that what we are seeing amounts to a really ugly temper tantrum that will fade out without consequence. However, it is worth watching this carefully and not relying on Trump's good will and respect for the law to prevail.

I think this is a good take. If he thinks he can remain in office despite losing the election, he will act on that conclusion. This strikes me as one of the most perilous times in U.S. history since Watergate, or perhaps the Cuban Missile Crisis. We have an Executive that is determined to undermine respect for the rule of law and the Constitutional order.

[nessness]

Former presidents only get occasional briefings, like before they go on foreign travel. And it's a courtesy, not a requirement (which probably means Obama isn't getting them, unless someone has seen otherwise).

https://www.npr.org/2020/11/10/933374321/biden-should-be-getting-top-level-intelligence-briefings-but-he-isnt

[RetiredAt63]

Former presidents only get occasional briefings, like before they go on foreign travel. And it's a courtesy, not a requirement (which probably means Obama isn't getting them, unless someone has seen otherwise).

https://www.npr.org/2020/11/10/933374321/biden-should-be-getting-top-level-intelligence-briefings-but-he-isnt

I wondered because former Canadian Prime Ministers tend to go off and do other things.  I suppose they might get a briefing if necessary, but it isn't common practice.

[aspiringnomad]

I am also trying to figure out how concerned I should be about Florida Man somehow staying in office after January 20th (10-20% chance?  I mean, we're a democracy, he LOST the election, and it should be 0%.). 

You shouldn't  be concerned at all:  Florida Man has no legal, presidential,  or constitutional power to stay in office after 12 noon on Inauguration Day 2021.

Many have  worried out loud that Florida Man won't accept his defeat and will obstruct a peaceful transition of power.

 I assure all the worriers that  no phalanx of factotums from the USSS, FBI, or DOJ will be standing by  to abet Florida Man should he refuse to vacate the White House on Inauguration Day 2021.

I hope that you are right. However:

1. Thus far he has not accepted defeat and is actively working to change the outcome through what appear to be frivolous lawsuits. Some have hypothesized that the purpose of these lawsuits is not to win them, but to tie up the results until the electoral college meets and  a window for legislatures to make decisions opens (or the specter of faithless electors). TBD.
2. In conjunction with the above, the GSA has prevented Biden from beginning the transition process.
3. Barr, aka the head of the DOJ, has fallen in line with supporting Florida Man's conspiracy theories. Again, a diligent investigation is unlikely to change the outcome of the voting, but the (likely quite public and heavily tweeted) investigations would create enough smoke for the base to believe there is fire (not to be confused with FIRE).

Nothing about Florida Man has indicated that his baseline is respect for law. I hope that what we are seeing amounts to a really ugly temper tantrum that will fade out without consequence. However, it is worth watching this carefully and not relying on Florida Man's good will and respect for the law to prevail.

I think this is a good take. If he thinks he can remain in office despite losing the election, he will act on that conclusion. This strikes me as one of the most perilous times in U.S. history since Watergate, or perhaps the Cuban Missile Crisis. We have an Executive that is determined to undermine respect for the rule of law and the Constitutional order.

Not to be hyperbolic, but I'd say the most perilous time since at least WWII and maybe the Civil War given how armed and divided the country is.

[MilesTeg]

I am also trying to figure out how concerned I should be about Trump somehow staying in office after January 20th (10-20% chance?  I mean, we're a democracy, he LOST the election, and it should be 0%.). 

You shouldn't  be concerned at all:  Trump has no legal, presidential,  or constitutional power to stay in office after 12 noon on Inauguration Day 2021.

Many have  worried out loud that Trump won't accept his defeat and will obstruct a peaceful transition of power.

 I assure all the worriers that  no phalanx of factotums from the USSS, FBI, or DOJ will be standing by  to abet Trump should he refuse to vacate the White House on Inauguration Day 2021.

I hope that you are right. However:

1. Thus far he has not accepted defeat and is actively working to change the outcome through what appear to be frivolous lawsuits. Some have hypothesized that the purpose of these lawsuits is not to win them, but to tie up the results until the electoral college meets and  a window for legislatures to make decisions opens (or the specter of faithless electors). TBD.
2. In conjunction with the above, the GSA has prevented Biden from beginning the transition process.
3. Barr, aka the head of the DOJ, has fallen in line with supporting Trump's conspiracy theories. Again, a diligent investigation is unlikely to change the outcome of the voting, but the (likely quite public and heavily tweeted) investigations would create enough smoke for the base to believe there is fire (not to be confused with FIRE).

Nothing about Trump has indicated that his baseline is respect for law. I hope that what we are seeing amounts to a really ugly temper tantrum that will fade out without consequence. However, it is worth watching this carefully and not relying on Trump's good will and respect for the law to prevail.

Florida Man is trying to prevent states from certifying results so that the vote goes directly to the states (1 vote per state) which he would win because the majority of states are Republican run.

However, in order to pull this off without finding valid reasons to stop certification he will have to convince the judiciary and various state governments to disenfranchise the entire electorate. This would be a wildly unpopular decision that at best would ruin the careers and lives of the people involved and likely lead to a broader national conflict.

The only way Florida Man can pull off a legitimate overturning would be to find a way to prove enough fraud in a combination of states amounting to 37 electoral votes (assuming current projections of Biden with 306 EVs stand after initial counts are complete).

That means he would need to successfully overturn the results in at least three states.

If at least 270 EV worth of states finalize their results all other litigation seeking to overturn the result in remaining states will be dismissed as Florida Man could no longer claim harm/damages because no result of such litigation would alter the outcome of the election anymore.

[Roadrunner53]

Michael Cohen: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/michael-cohen-trump-biden-inauguration_n_5fab3c89c5b635e9de9cf7ef

[LennStar]

The Trump administration isn't trying to do anything legal really. They are attempting to stage a coup, and all these frivolous lawsuits are just a side show. I think it will fail (call me an optimist), but that's what they are doing.

True, but the guys now calling for a shitstorn on the law firms doing that are also assholes like Trump. Trump, as every citizen, has the right to use the court system and lawyers.
It's still a dick move, but personally as a lawyer I would not take this, but shitting on lawyers because they do their job is on the bad side of the red line too.

There is nothing they can do to say in power after having lost the election. They are simply trying to whip their base into a froth so that they'll continue to listen to them after Biden becomes president.

But that is also a - sorry - HUGE problem. It is even more of a divided country, and if that goes on it will end in some sort of civil war. 

It's not as bad if you listen to Barr's full answer. Given the context it's a poor joke but he does go on answer the question in an expected, non-coup-like, manner.

[Pompeo] So he is just unfit for his job instead of a couper?
If you are a high ranking official, you don't joke about that. Not even outside a press conference/interview and certainly not in a situation where people are rightfully concerned about that topic.

[LaineyAZ]

So this may qualify as the Trump outrage of the last four years.  How many families are similar.  I know ours has been impacted as I argue with my brother and my parents.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/10/opinions/trump-tore-my-family-apart-eldredge/index.html

I read this too.  Sad that his Trumpist family members had cut him off. 
He sounds like he's in his 50s or 60s, and recounts many wonderful shared life events.  Now, nothing.  Also said to read his plaintive question to them:  "was it worth it?"

[talltexan]

The Trump administration isn't trying to do anything legal really. They are attempting to stage a coup, and all these frivolous lawsuits are just a side show. I think it will fail (call me an optimist), but that's what they are doing.

True, but the guys now calling for a shitstorn on the law firms doing that are also assholes like Trump. Trump, as every citizen, has the right to use the court system and lawyers.
It's still a dick move, but personally as a lawyer I would not take this, but shitting on lawyers because they do their job is on the bad side of the red line too.

There is nothing they can do to say in power after having lost the election. They are simply trying to whip their base into a froth so that they'll continue to listen to them after Biden becomes president.

But that is also a - sorry - HUGE problem. It is even more of a divided country, and if that goes on it will end in some sort of civil war. 

It's not as bad if you listen to Barr's full answer. Given the context it's a poor joke but he does go on answer the question in an expected, non-coup-like, manner.

[Pompeo] So he is just unfit for his job instead of a couper?
If you are a high ranking official, you don't joke about that. Not even outside a press conference/interview and certainly not in a situation where people are rightfully concerned about that topic.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to judge a lawyer for taking on a case that is thinly documented with no reasonable support under the law. It reflects on that lawyer's understanding of evidence and the law.

That's a really different situation from judging a family member for zHer casual support of any particular politician.

[katsiki]

Don't forget that Biden is not receiving the president's daily national security briefings, as he should be.

What is the risk here?  Since Biden isn't taking off for a few weeks, does this create more of a learning curve on new/emerging issues, or something more serious?

Yes, basically. For example see the Raid on Yakla eight days after Trump took office. That wasn't planned and executed solely in his presidency, the military would have been weighing its options and doing reconnaissance and whatnot for a while, so I'm sure these discussions were part of Trump's transitional national security briefings.

If he hadn't known about it beforehand then there's no way with all the chaos of assuming office that he'd have been informed enough to make a decision, and opportunities may be lost. Which may have actually been a good thing in this particular case given that the raid didn't go well, but the point still stands regardless.

Thanks @sherr .  Good info.

I do wonder how much this matters normally - regardless of who the President is.  It seems like the govt has plenty of career folks who know what to do.  I realize and respect that leadership matters though...  Interesting stuff.

Disappointing that normal transition procedures are not being followed.  Not surprising though!

[sherr]

There's also just a general concern about actions from others. If your enemies know that there's a period of a leadership vacuum during the chaos when a new president assumes office, then they may use that as an opportunity to do "something". It's in National Security's best interest to make the transition as smooth as possible.

[Glenstache]

There's also just a general concern about actions from others. If your enemies know that there's a period of a leadership vacuum during the chaos when a new president assumes office, then they may use that as an opportunity to do "something". It's in National Security's best interest to make the transition as smooth as possible.

Such as:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/11/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-democracy.html

[LennStar]

The Trump administration isn't trying to do anything legal really. They are attempting to stage a coup, and all these frivolous lawsuits are just a side show. I think it will fail (call me an optimist), but that's what they are doing.

True, but the guys now calling for a shitstorn on the law firms doing that are also assholes like Trump. Trump, as every citizen, has the right to use the court system and lawyers.
It's still a dick move, but personally as a lawyer I would not take this, but shitting on lawyers because they do their job is on the bad side of the red line too.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to judge a lawyer for taking on a case that is thinly documented with no reasonable support under the law. It reflects on that lawyer's understanding of evidence and the law.

That's a really different situation from judging a family member for zHer casual support of any particular politician.

Well, it's not the lawyer's decision if to go to court or not. And it is not the lawyers job to decide for the client if any action is reasonable or not. It's his job to say it's stupid to do so if it is, but it is not his decision.

With your logic you could also say no lawyer should defend a criminal just because the evidence is overwhelming.

[sherr]

Well, it's not the lawyer's decision if to go to court or not. And it is not the lawyers job to decide for the client if any action is reasonable or not. It's his job to say it's stupid to do so if it is, but it is not his decision.

With your logic you could also say no lawyer should defend a criminal just because the evidence is overwhelming.

Except for the specific case of a court-appointed public defender (which Republicans have attacked Democrats for being before, like in 2016 when they attacked both Hillary and Deborah Ross for their previous roles as public defenders), attorneys do have the ability to decide which cases to take and which not to. Refusing to take frivolous lawsuits is actually expected of them by the Bar Association, and theoretically they can lose their license to practice law if they don't.

[talltexan]

@sherr, you have argued effectively in a number of topics on here, if you told me you were an attorney, I'd believe it

Are there (other) practicing attorneys on this thread who can weigh in?

With Trump, there's also a question about whether you'll ever get paid.

[frugalecon]

The Trump administration isn't trying to do anything legal really. They are attempting to stage a coup, and all these frivolous lawsuits are just a side show. I think it will fail (call me an optimist), but that's what they are doing.

True, but the guys now calling for a shitstorn on the law firms doing that are also assholes like Trump. Trump, as every citizen, has the right to use the court system and lawyers.
It's still a dick move, but personally as a lawyer I would not take this, but shitting on lawyers because they do their job is on the bad side of the red line too.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to judge a lawyer for taking on a case that is thinly documented with no reasonable support under the law. It reflects on that lawyer's understanding of evidence and the law.

That's a really different situation from judging a family member for zHer casual support of any particular politician.

Well, it's not the lawyer's decision if to go to court or not. And it is not the lawyers job to decide for the client if any action is reasonable or not. It's his job to say it's stupid to do so if it is, but it is not his decision.

With your logic you could also say no lawyer should defend a criminal just because the evidence is overwhelming.

There is a very clear reason why individuals accused of crimes by the state absolutely should have competent legal counsel to vindicate their rights. Namely, our whole system is ideally set up to protect individual rights from the vastly greater power of the state. Even someone who has been accused of a crime for which there is overwhelming evidence has rights to a fair and impartial process, and the state needs to be held to account for abuses it commits in the process.

There is simply no comparison between that situation and that of a private plaintiff who seeks to initiate meritless litigation to accomplish his or her own ends. It is a faulty analogy.

[sherr]

@sherr, you have argued effectively in a number of topics on here, if you told me you were an attorney, I'd believe it

I'm not. :)

[OtherJen]

The Trump administration isn't trying to do anything legal really. They are attempting to stage a coup, and all these frivolous lawsuits are just a side show. I think it will fail (call me an optimist), but that's what they are doing.

True, but the guys now calling for a shitstorn on the law firms doing that are also assholes like Trump. Trump, as every citizen, has the right to use the court system and lawyers.
It's still a dick move, but personally as a lawyer I would not take this, but shitting on lawyers because they do their job is on the bad side of the red line too.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to judge a lawyer for taking on a case that is thinly documented with no reasonable support under the law. It reflects on that lawyer's understanding of evidence and the law.

That's a really different situation from judging a family member for zHer casual support of any particular politician.

Well, it's not the lawyer's decision if to go to court or not. And it is not the lawyers job to decide for the client if any action is reasonable or not. It's his job to say it's stupid to do so if it is, but it is not his decision.

With your logic you could also say no lawyer should defend a criminal just because the evidence is overwhelming.

These are not public defenders. They're private attorneys and absolutely do have the right not to take cases. In fact, many of them appear to be concerned about the damage to their own reputations and that of the firms in question.

[LennStar]

Yes, as I said they can refuse. And probably should. But the decision is still in the client. I don't know how it is in the US, but at least at lower courts you should be able to go without lawyer, so even if all lawyers say no you can sue. 

And if a lawsuit is frivolous is decided by the judge, not the lawyer (who of course has his opinions). Especially in case law systems there seems to be everything possible.

I mean even in Germany, if it is something about the press and you want a common sense defying judging, you go to LG Hamburg. There is even a website named after the president of that court chamber with a list of awkward rulings.

[caracarn]

There's also just a general concern about actions from others. If your enemies know that there's a period of a leadership vacuum during the chaos when a new president assumes office, then they may use that as an opportunity to do "something". It's in National Security's best interest to make the transition as smooth as possible.

I am expecting a massive international event started by Putin on or about January 15th and then Trump saying "see I told you Biden is incapable of doing the job" as they scramble to make up for all the lost effort.  It is import to recall a key finding in the 9/11 Commission Report was that the lack of a national security team being up to speed due to the delay in Bush transition was a contributing factor to 9/11.

[Norioch]

Donald Trump is attempting a coup. If the coup succeeds then America will no longer be a democracy. https://wagingnonviolence.org/2020/09/10-things-you-need-to-know-to-stop-a-coup/

[Wolfpack Mustachian]

Donald Trump is attempting a coup. If the coup succeeds then America will no longer be a democracy. https://wagingnonviolence.org/2020/09/10-things-you-need-to-know-to-stop-a-coup/

He's not going to be in office in January. Only the really vocal Trump supporters are still talking about it like he's actually still going to win. The vast majority of his supporters, even if they feel he was cheated, have resigned themselves that it's over and are talking with that frame of mind. Trump's pushing the narrative, imo, to have something to push and still come out looking good or to potentially run in 2024. All of his court cases have been dismissed. Unless the SC takes the case and somehow rules against Biden (and I find this very unlikely), Trump will vacate the office complaining all the way, but he will be out.

Does anyone really think this will come to him somehow needing to be removed by a police force or something like that?