Counting coup involves winning prestige against an enemy rather than doing serious damage. We’re now way past that point. But the latest gesture in search of a coup is today’s Trump meeting with MI GOP legislative leadership. It’s a sedition stunt close to horseshoes and hand grenades. They have just issued a statement that they “will follow the law and follow the normal process regarding Michigan’s electors…” leaving open the possibility of new information, because never say never.
In Duck Soup (1933), the Marx Brothers take over Freedonia. In 2020, it’s Cuck Coup.
Trump will be removed despite all his perfidy.
— Jill Wine-Banks (@JillWineBanks) November 20, 2020
— NBC News (@NBCNews) November 20, 2020
President Donald Trump invited two Michigan Republican lawmakers to a Friday meeting at the White House as he and his allies continue their efforts to contest the election results.
Trump invited Michigan Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey and House Speaker Lee Chatfield, and they’ve agreed to attend the meeting, the Associated Press reported.
The meeting comes as Trump’s reelection campaign has filed lawsuits challenging the results that led to President-elect Joe Biden’s victory, with Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani alleging that fraud cost Trump the election.
Trump hasn’t conceded and could try to convince Michigan’s board of canvassers not to certify Biden’s victory. Instead, lawmakers would have to select Trump’s slate of electors to the Electoral College — a move that could result in challenges in court, according to the AP.
Both Shirkey and Chatfield have suggested they wouldn’t overturn Biden’s win in Michigan.
Meanwhile, on Twitter, Chatfield was mocked for his attempt to justify his meeting with Trump. “Yeah, legitimizing a fascist coup attempt makes a lot of sense,” journalist Alex Kotch remarked sarcastically.
— Ari Berman (@AriBerman) November 20, 2020
— Andrew Feinberg (@AndrewFeinberg) November 20, 2020
Federal crimes ahead for Trump:
— Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) November 20, 2020
Rudy Giuliani and other key members of President Trump's outside legal team won't be attending today's meeting with two Michigan lawmakers because they've been exposed to the coronavirus, two sources familiar with the internal discussions tell Axios.
Why it matters: This added turmoil inside the president's legal operation comes at a time when the president is urging Republican state lawmakers to interfere with the electoral process and reverse Joe Biden's victory to a Trump win.
“It's just a shitshow, it's a joke,” said a Trump campaign adviser.
Behind the scenes: Top Trump campaign officials held a conference call this morning with Eric Herschmann, a lawyer on the White House staff, in which they candidly discussed their legal conundrum.
- Herschmann serves in an advisory role outside the counsel's office, and no one in the counsel's office participated on the call, according to another person familiar with the call.
- Officials on the call included campaign manager Bill Stepien and advisers Jason Miller, Justin Clark, Matt Morgan, Tim Murtaugh and Boris Epshteyn, as well as Trump campaign lawyer Jenna Ellis.
- Asked whether the White House counsel's office would be present in the meeting, Herschmann told the Trump campaign officials that the counsel's office would not be represented but that somebody needed to brief the president about the legal situation.
— Richard Primus (@Richard_Primus) November 20, 2020
- As you’ll remember, Trump was impeached because he used his office to try to undermine the fairness/integrity of the presidential election process, by pushing a foreign government to throw (made-up) mud on Biden. (2/17)
- At the time, many people said that the President shouldn’t be impeached & removed for that; that instead, the voters should pass judgment on it in the election that was soon to come. (3/17)
- Impeachment and removal, they said, breeds mistrust and damage downstream, because pro-Trump Americans will think their guy was unjustly sacked. Elections, they said, are cleaner and more authoritative and provide better resolution. (4/17)
- That was always a terrible argument, for lots of reasons, including first that if a president does something for which he should be removed, he should be removed; and second… (5/17)
- …that it’s especially weak to say that the remedy for tampering with an election should be the election itself. If he is trying to tamper with the election, the election might not be a reliable remedy.
- So far, this is old news. Here’s the new point: (6/17)
- The idea that we could avoid the pain of impeachment/removal and deal with Trump’s misconduct at the ballot box presumed that if he lost the election, he’d be out of office without the pain/crisis of impeachment/removal. And that was always naïve, as we’re now seeing. (7/17)
- A president who doesn’t care about the future of his country or his party, and who is willing to commit impeachable offenses to stay in power, is also likely to be willing to break all kinds of rules to stay in office after losing an election. (8/17)
- Including by fanning distrust among his supporters and otherwise doing lasting damage to the country and its electoral system. (9/17)
- Nobody should have thought “Trump lies/cheats/breaks things to tamper with the election in advance, but he’ll play by the rules once he’s lost.” He was never going to do that. Removing him by election was always going to involve the pain/damage/distrust we’re seeing now. (10/17)
- The point here isn’t that Trump will manage to stay in office despite losing the election. I don’t think he will. His days are numbered. (11/17)
- The point is that it was never reasonable to think the country could minimize the pain/damage/distrust attending his exit by showing him the door after an election rather than with an impeachment. (12/17)
- Because the guy who needs to be impeached for the stuff Trump was impeached for is also the guy who won’t go gracefully after he loses an election. He’ll burn the house down around him. As everyone should have known. (13/17)
- If he’d been removed in February, there would have have pain/trauma/distrust to get through. But it wouldn’t have been worse than what we’ve got now. Right now millions of Americans are being told the election was stolen. (14/17)
- Impeachment/removal would not have brought 11 weeks of a dangerous/desperate lame-duck President still giving orders. And it’s hard to bring totally baseless claims of voter fraud against an electorate of 100 Senators voting publicly. (15/17)
- And if he’d been removed in February, the country would have stood up for the principle that presidents are accountable. (To say nothing of the difference for COVID, among other things.) (16/17)
- Not removing him in February at best delayed the pain. Because what’s happening now is at least as damaging as what would have happened then. And everyone should have known it. (17/17)(end)
— katrina mulligan (@NatSecMulligan) November 20, 2020
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 20, 2020
The Politicus is a collaborative political community that facilitates content creation directly on the site. Our goal is to make the political conversation accessible to everyone.Any donations we receive will go into writer outreach. That could be advertising on Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit or person-to-person outreach on College campuses. Please help if you can: