Just a few weeks ago the Conte government was winning plaudits for its handling of the virus,
The long lag between cause and effect means that the damage is usually done long before anyone realises it.
I can remember when people were saying, on here, that Italy's avoidance of a bad second wave was because "they take it seriously," "they all wear masks", "the horror of the first wave sobered them up, unlike the Brits", and so on, and so forth.
Turns out that was all bollocks. Their second wave is now worse than ours.
There was an enormous amount of nonsense written by all sorts of people between July and September that has been proven to be utterly wrong.
IF we get effective vaccines quickly all those praising Sweden (including myself) will possibly look quite foolish.
The logic of the Swedish approach was that vaccines would take ages, and might never arrive. Hmm.
Swedish egghead said 2 years was an optimistic time scale. It will at best end up being 18 months in the UK, where our government look like they have done extremely well on vaccine procurement. So not out by that much.
Many countries it will be at least 2 year, maybe 3, maybe more if pfizer is the only working one.
The Swedes have been candid about their biggest mistake, not protecting care homes. That is what has caused a big bulk of the deaths.
And guess what Sweden did in the middle of September? They lifted restrictions on visiting care homes. Just as Coronavirus cases started rising again!
Yes they broke their own approach, which is consistent set of rules for the duration of the pandemic. Now they are having to go with harsher restrictions.
Tony Schwarz who ghost-wrote The Art of the Deal for Trump was interviewed by Evan Davis on R4 earlier this evening. He basically answered your question for you.
There is no plan, just a horror of losing and determination to deny it as long as possible.
Appreciated. Trump and his inner cabal are morons. However, as he IS the president and wants to stay President. And the entire GOP leadership aren't morons. So there will be a plan even if it isn't his.
As others elude to above, the Electoral College has to be the target. Doesn't matter what people think they voted for, they're voting for Electors. Who don't even have to represent their views.
By what possible mechanism do Republicans "target" the Electoral College? Where Trump wins a state, the state GOP provides the slate of electors. Where Biden wins a state, the state Democratic Party provides the slate of electors. Several states (although not all) prevent completely or heavily sanction faithless electors. I'm sorry - people saying there's a trick involving the Electoral College simply don't understand how it works.
There isn't a plan here, from Trump or anyone else. Trump has some doomed cases not involving sufficient numbers of voters to cast into doubt any, let alone several, of the states Biden won. He will try and fail to overturn or annul results, but it's all utterly hopeless. Then the Electoral College will announce Biden as President on 14 December, and he'll be inaugurated on 20 January. Trump will never accept it was fair, protecting his ego at the cost of badly damaging democracy in America. Senate Republicans know what the reality is but most of them can't say it as they don't want Trump to set his army of fanatical, drooling morons on them next time they face a primary election.
For some reason, people (both for and strongly against Trump) seem to believe that people who can't book a room for a press conference at the Four Seasons hotel are currently working on the finer points of a plan so brilliant that it will blow our minds. They really, really aren't.
I didn't say it was a *viable* plan. There can be no viable plan. But in the minds of the morons surrounding the Donald its a *brilliant* plan. Epic even. How they win back the TRUE victory or whatever.
It seems to me that there are a number of people surrounding Trump (and including himself) who really know virtually nothing about how the US institutions actually work. When Trump sees stuff said on Fox News or reads stuff on twitter from people who claim authority i think he actually believes it. So he's picking up a little bit of stuff about how states can overrule the voters in selecting electors, and he believes that SCOTUS are totally corruptible and in his pocket. He may well believe all these made stories about electoral fraud that he's been reading. And in his own mind, and those of the likes of his sons, he's thinking he's got a viable route to staying in power. Totally legally as well!
This is why the GOP silence is so disturbing. He needs to be disabused of these fantasies, and sat down and told the truth about how the US works. And if he refuses to accept it then, they have to get Pence to kick him out.
Genuine question: What is likelihood that Trump will face Federal or State criminal charges after he steps down? Are there known actions in the offing?
The Secret Barrister is an obsessive and embarrassing Remainer twat. Total lunatic. No better than Jolyon Maugham, A C Grayling, Gina Miller, etc. Bad citation.
The Secret Barrister is an obsessive and embarrassing Remainer twat. Total lunatic. No better than Jolyon Maugham, A C Grayling, Gina Miller, etc. Bad citation.
Has Mr secret and jolyon ever been seen in the same room?
Cain sound like the better option. Just looking at him, he looks more down to earth, like understands real people, like Cummings plus point is just wants to do a decent job rather than become an MP, better than how lots of spads come across.
It matters not how he does it. If he wins the EC on Dec 14 Trump will remain in office, neither Secret service or Military will remove him, nor will Dems urge their supporters to take up arms, any sort of violence plays straight into Trumps hands. If Trump achieves Scenario 1 or 2, the battle ground will be courts and ballot boxes in the years to come.
We have had 4 years of Trump, some more of it isn’t the end of the world when compared to actual violence. We agree so far?
Completely disagree.
If Biden is seen to have won, and the Electoral College decides otherwise then there will be civil war in the US.
I don't know about civil war, but the people will be entitled to use the minimum action necessary to prevent the end of democracy. A general strike, a blockade of the White House, a refusal to pay taxes could be starters.
I don't think it'll be necessary. Trump is setting himself up to be The Opposition. He'll be good at it, and he's entitled to try that and stand next time or have an anointed acolyte.. Override this election? Nah.
Thank you, I think we agree, if Republicans gerrymander the college and SC back them it’s a crisis, but the army or secret service won’t then evict him, nor the democrats result to anything other than you described, mass rally’s, civil disobedience, the courts. I don’t know about blockades though, that, and any blockade busting violence plays into Trumps hands.
The bit I disagree with though, you paint such a rosy future for Trump outside the whitehouse. Truth is, it’s stay in control or lose control and end up to his eyebrows in trouble isn’t it?
Has the Supreme Court - at any point - done anything that would lead you to believe they'd back Trump on this?
I do find it hard to accept that a SCOTUS with conservative justices that have just given the federal government a grilling over their arguments to kill Obamacare is just going to sign-off on a coup d'etat.
I did wonder if the Obamacare hearings were them sending out a deliberate and co-ordinated signal to Trump to not send electoral cases to the Supreme Court. Because he will lose.
It matters not how he does it. If he wins the EC on Dec 14 Trump will remain in office, neither Secret service or Military will remove him, nor will Dems urge their supporters to take up arms, any sort of violence plays straight into Trumps hands. If Trump achieves Scenario 1 or 2, the battle ground will be courts and ballot boxes in the years to come.
We have had 4 years of Trump, some more of it isn’t the end of the world when compared to actual violence. We agree so far?
Completely disagree.
If Biden is seen to have won, and the Electoral College decides otherwise then there will be civil war in the US.
I don't know about civil war, but the people will be entitled to use the minimum action necessary to prevent the end of democracy. A general strike, a blockade of the White House, a refusal to pay taxes could be starters.
I don't think it'll be necessary. Trump is setting himself up to be The Opposition. He'll be good at it, and he's entitled to try that and stand next time or have an anointed acolyte.. Override this election? Nah.
Thank you, I think we agree, if Republicans gerrymander the college and SC back them it’s a crisis, but the army or secret service won’t then evict him, nor the democrats result to anything other than you described, mass rally’s, civil disobedience, the courts. I don’t know about blockades though, that, and any blockade busting violence plays into Trumps hands.
The bit I disagree with though, you paint such a rosy future for Trump outside the whitehouse. Truth is, it’s stay in control or lose control and end up to his eyebrows in trouble isn’t it?
Has the Supreme Court - at any point - done anything that would lead you to believe they'd back Trump on this?
No. To be honest. But I would feel more comfortable if he hadn’t slanted it a little bit more last month.
ABC is a conservative jurist, who believes in the US Constitution. Why would she vote to elevate a President who despises to judiciary over the Supreme Court?
The Secret Barrister is an obsessive and embarrassing Remainer twat. Total lunatic. No better than Jolyon Maugham, A C Grayling, Gina Miller, etc. Bad citation.
Oh shut up.
The Secret Barrister has been top of the Sunday Times best selling list, I bet you've never done that you newt botherer.
The Secret Barrister is an obsessive and embarrassing Remainer twat. Total lunatic. No better than Jolyon Maugham, A C Grayling, Gina Miller, etc. Bad citation.
Thanks for that asessment - he's now gone up in my estimation!
I don't understand the commitment to the slogan. Since it doesn't mean what it seems like it would mean, there has to be a pithy way of saying what it does mean, so why the stubborness of some to keep using it?
Indeed. The one strength it has is that it's short and memorable. But given it is misleading and unpopular, even that isn't really a strength.
I just use the same slogan for eveything and claim it means whatever I say, namely
What Profiteth It A Kingdom If The Oxen Be Deflated? (tm Terry Pratchett)
Well, if it's only King of England that would be fairly exclusive...
Since she won't abdicate, yet the heir is getting anxious for their own authority (used to be a very common occurence leading to rebellion), perhaps you'd be content for him to be King in Scotland until such time as he gets the full gig?
Only works if the UK is dissolved, i.e. different kingdoms. So yes please. (Though the Princess Royal would go down much better.)
The Secret Barrister is an obsessive and embarrassing Remainer twat. Total lunatic. No better than Jolyon Maugham, A C Grayling, Gina Miller, etc. Bad citation.
I don't understand the commitment to the slogan. Since it doesn't mean what it seems like it would mean, there has to be a pithy way of saying what it does mean, so why the stubborness of some to keep using it?
Indeed. The one strength it has is that it's short and memorable. But given it is misleading and unpopular, even that isn't really a strength.
I just use the same slogan for eveything and claim it means whatever I say, namely
What Profiteth It A Kingdom If The Oxen Be Deflated? (tm Terry Pratchett)
Well, if it's only King of England that would be fairly exclusive...
Since she won't abdicate, yet the heir is getting anxious for their own authority (used to be a very common occurence leading to rebellion), perhaps you'd be content for him to be King in Scotland until such time as he gets the full gig?
Only works if the UK is dissolved, i.e. different kingdoms. So yes please. (Though the Princess Royal would go down much better.)
No no, that's why I said King in Scotland, not of Scotland - subordinate title just to give him a taste of kingship without the real deal. It'd be like updating an existing title like Prince of Wales (a lot of rulers took the extra step of royal title a few centuries back).
It matters not how he does it. If he wins the EC on Dec 14 Trump will remain in office, neither Secret service or Military will remove him, nor will Dems urge their supporters to take up arms, any sort of violence plays straight into Trumps hands. If Trump achieves Scenario 1 or 2, the battle ground will be courts and ballot boxes in the years to come.
We have had 4 years of Trump, some more of it isn’t the end of the world when compared to actual violence. We agree so far?
Completely disagree.
If Biden is seen to have won, and the Electoral College decides otherwise then there will be civil war in the US.
I don't know about civil war, but the people will be entitled to use the minimum action necessary to prevent the end of democracy. A general strike, a blockade of the White House, a refusal to pay taxes could be starters.
I don't think it'll be necessary. Trump is setting himself up to be The Opposition. He'll be good at it, and he's entitled to try that and stand next time or have an anointed acolyte.. Override this election? Nah.
Thank you, I think we agree, if Republicans gerrymander the college and SC back them it’s a crisis, but the army or secret service won’t then evict him, nor the democrats result to anything other than you described, mass rally’s, civil disobedience, the courts. I don’t know about blockades though, that, and any blockade busting violence plays into Trumps hands.
The bit I disagree with though, you paint such a rosy future for Trump outside the whitehouse. Truth is, it’s stay in control or lose control and end up to his eyebrows in trouble isn’t it?
Has the Supreme Court - at any point - done anything that would lead you to believe they'd back Trump on this?
I do find it hard to accept that a SCOTUS with conservative justices that have just given the federal government a grilling over their arguments to kill Obamacare is just going to sign-off on a coup d'etat.
I did wonder if the Obamacare hearings were them sending out a deliberate and co-ordinated signal to Trump to not send electoral cases to the Supreme Court. Because he will lose.
Somebody at this very moment is probably trying to explain to Trump that "No, Mr President, I'm afraid you can't fire anyone from the Supreme Court."
Cain sound like the better option. Just looking at him, he looks more down to earth, like understands real people, like Cummings plus point is just wants to do a decent job rather than become an MP, better than how lots of spads come across.
Lots of spads want to become MPs because they hold the old fashioned belief that ultimately to have power in this country you need to have an electoral mandate. A spad who doesn't want that, but wants to exert the power anyway (as Cummings does) is not somebody to be "admired".
Cain sound like the better option. Just looking at him, he looks more down to earth, like understands real people, like Cummings plus point is just wants to do a decent job rather than become an MP, better than how lots of spads come across.
Fabulous - so you want to make appointments based on whether somebody looks "down to earth" and like they understand real people? Unbelievable.
I don't understand the commitment to the slogan. Since it doesn't mean what it seems like it would mean, there has to be a pithy way of saying what it does mean, so why the stubborness of some to keep using it?
Indeed. The one strength it has is that it's short and memorable. But given it is misleading and unpopular, even that isn't really a strength.
I just use the same slogan for eveything and claim it means whatever I say, namely
What Profiteth It A Kingdom If The Oxen Be Deflated? (tm Terry Pratchett)
Well, if it's only King of England that would be fairly exclusive...
Since she won't abdicate, yet the heir is getting anxious for their own authority (used to be a very common occurence leading to rebellion), perhaps you'd be content for him to be King in Scotland until such time as he gets the full gig?
Only works if the UK is dissolved, i.e. different kingdoms. So yes please. (Though the Princess Royal would go down much better.)
No no, that's why I said King in Scotland, not of Scotland - subordinate title just to give him a taste of kingship without the real deal. It'd be like updating an existing title like Prince of Wales (a lot of rulers took the extra step of royal title a few centuries back).
No, we had enough of that nonsense with Longshanks and Baliol in the waiting room at Berwick-upon-Tweed railway station. HYUFD would go on about it for the next two generaitons that we'd signed up to subordinate status.
Cain sound like the better option. Just looking at him, he looks more down to earth, like understands real people, like Cummings plus point is just wants to do a decent job rather than become an MP, better than how lots of spads come across.
Fabulous - so you want to make appointments based on whether somebody looks "down to earth" and like they understand real people? Unbelievable.
In fairness a lot of people either believe that, or imply it when they complain about people not being down to earth or understanding real people as if in itself that is a disqualifier.
Never saw that coming. Just blown away. All those PB posts with "Well actually they aren't actually Nazis" had led me to believe they were a diverse group of multi faceted faiths, colours and creeds
Tony Schwarz who ghost-wrote The Art of the Deal for Trump was interviewed by Evan Davis on R4 earlier this evening. He basically answered your question for you.
There is no plan, just a horror of losing and determination to deny it as long as possible.
Appreciated. Trump and his inner cabal are morons. However, as he IS the president and wants to stay President. And the entire GOP leadership aren't morons. So there will be a plan even if it isn't his.
As others elude to above, the Electoral College has to be the target. Doesn't matter what people think they voted for, they're voting for Electors. Who don't even have to represent their views.
By what possible mechanism do Republicans "target" the Electoral College? Where Trump wins a state, the state GOP provides the slate of electors. Where Biden wins a state, the state Democratic Party provides the slate of electors. Several states (although not all) prevent completely or heavily sanction faithless electors. I'm sorry - people saying there's a trick involving the Electoral College simply don't understand how it works.
There isn't a plan here, from Trump or anyone else. Trump has some doomed cases not involving sufficient numbers of voters to cast into doubt any, let alone several, of the states Biden won. He will try and fail to overturn or annul results, but it's all utterly hopeless. Then the Electoral College will announce Biden as President on 14 December, and he'll be inaugurated on 20 January. Trump will never accept it was fair, protecting his ego at the cost of badly damaging democracy in America. Senate Republicans know what the reality is but most of them can't say it as they don't want Trump to set his army of fanatical, drooling morons on them next time they face a primary election.
For some reason, people (both for and strongly against Trump) seem to believe that people who can't book a room for a press conference at the Four Seasons hotel are currently working on the finer points of a plan so brilliant that it will blow our minds. They really, really aren't.
I didn't say it was a *viable* plan. There can be no viable plan. But in the minds of the morons surrounding the Donald its a *brilliant* plan. Epic even. How they win back the TRUE victory or whatever.
It seems to me that there are a number of people surrounding Trump (and including himself) who really know virtually nothing about how the US institutions actually work. When Trump sees stuff said on Fox News or reads stuff on twitter from people who claim authority i think he actually believes it. So he's picking up a little bit of stuff about how states can overrule the voters in selecting electors, and he believes that SCOTUS are totally corruptible and in his pocket. He may well believe all these made stories about electoral fraud that he's been reading. And in his own mind, and those of the likes of his sons, he's thinking he's got a viable route to staying in power. Totally legally as well!
This is why the GOP silence is so disturbing. He needs to be disabused of these fantasies, and sat down and told the truth about how the US works. And if he refuses to accept it then, they have to get Pence to kick him out.
...or just let the electoral processes flow naturally without illegal interference and he'll be out anyway by 20th January.
I don't understand the commitment to the slogan. Since it doesn't mean what it seems like it would mean, there has to be a pithy way of saying what it does mean, so why the stubborness of some to keep using it?
Indeed. The one strength it has is that it's short and memorable. But given it is misleading and unpopular, even that isn't really a strength.
I just use the same slogan for eveything and claim it means whatever I say, namely
What Profiteth It A Kingdom If The Oxen Be Deflated? (tm Terry Pratchett)
Well, if it's only King of England that would be fairly exclusive...
Since she won't abdicate, yet the heir is getting anxious for their own authority (used to be a very common occurence leading to rebellion), perhaps you'd be content for him to be King in Scotland until such time as he gets the full gig?
Only works if the UK is dissolved, i.e. different kingdoms. So yes please. (Though the Princess Royal would go down much better.)
No no, that's why I said King in Scotland, not of Scotland - subordinate title just to give him a taste of kingship without the real deal. It'd be like updating an existing title like Prince of Wales (a lot of rulers took the extra step of royal title a few centuries back).
No, we had enough of that nonsense with Longshanks and Baliol in the waiting room at Berwick-upon-Tweed railway station. HYUFD would go on about it for the next two generaitons that we'd signed up to subordinate status.
I was hoping no one would pick up on my devious plan there, damn it. Entirely unrelated, I just read a biography of Longshanks.
I don't believe it, but if he said that then Boris really has no choice but to see him go. Even if Boris treated his advisers as more important than his Cabinet Ministers, and really does rely so heavily on Cummings, no PM could allow advisers to dictate to him so blatantly the nature of their relationship. Even a figurehead has to remain visible in charge, even if they are not.
It matters not how he does it. If he wins the EC on Dec 14 Trump will remain in office, neither Secret service or Military will remove him, nor will Dems urge their supporters to take up arms, any sort of violence plays straight into Trumps hands. If Trump achieves Scenario 1 or 2, the battle ground will be courts and ballot boxes in the years to come.
We have had 4 years of Trump, some more of it isn’t the end of the world when compared to actual violence. We agree so far?
Completely disagree.
If Biden is seen to have won, and the Electoral College decides otherwise then there will be civil war in the US.
I don't know about civil war, but the people will be entitled to use the minimum action necessary to prevent the end of democracy. A general strike, a blockade of the White House, a refusal to pay taxes could be starters.
I don't think it'll be necessary. Trump is setting himself up to be The Opposition. He'll be good at it, and he's entitled to try that and stand next time or have an anointed acolyte.. Override this election? Nah.
Thank you, I think we agree, if Republicans gerrymander the college and SC back them it’s a crisis, but the army or secret service won’t then evict him, nor the democrats result to anything other than you described, mass rally’s, civil disobedience, the courts. I don’t know about blockades though, that, and any blockade busting violence plays into Trumps hands.
The bit I disagree with though, you paint such a rosy future for Trump outside the whitehouse. Truth is, it’s stay in control or lose control and end up to his eyebrows in trouble isn’t it?
Has the Supreme Court - at any point - done anything that would lead you to believe they'd back Trump on this?
No, but there may be subtler ways to get there that shift the blame around.
Say Trump (not saying he's this competent but bear with me) staged a national security event that prevented the Electoral College from meeting or prevented some of the electors from getting there. Then the thing should go to the House, but the Dems realize they'll pick Trump so they refuse to meet, in the hope of seating Pelosi. Then SCOTUS conservatives make a ruling to throw the thing back to House congressional delegations, and they pick Trump.
If you can create enough chaos and disruption, while having your thumb on most of the scales, you may be able to exploit a succession of small biases, without forcing any one party to commit to a big one.
Tony Schwarz who ghost-wrote The Art of the Deal for Trump was interviewed by Evan Davis on R4 earlier this evening. He basically answered your question for you.
There is no plan, just a horror of losing and determination to deny it as long as possible.
Appreciated. Trump and his inner cabal are morons. However, as he IS the president and wants to stay President. And the entire GOP leadership aren't morons. So there will be a plan even if it isn't his.
As others elude to above, the Electoral College has to be the target. Doesn't matter what people think they voted for, they're voting for Electors. Who don't even have to represent their views.
By what possible mechanism do Republicans "target" the Electoral College? Where Trump wins a state, the state GOP provides the slate of electors. Where Biden wins a state, the state Democratic Party provides the slate of electors. Several states (although not all) prevent completely or heavily sanction faithless electors. I'm sorry - people saying there's a trick involving the Electoral College simply don't understand how it works.
There isn't a plan here, from Trump or anyone else. Trump has some doomed cases not involving sufficient numbers of voters to cast into doubt any, let alone several, of the states Biden won. He will try and fail to overturn or annul results, but it's all utterly hopeless. Then the Electoral College will announce Biden as President on 14 December, and he'll be inaugurated on 20 January. Trump will never accept it was fair, protecting his ego at the cost of badly damaging democracy in America. Senate Republicans know what the reality is but most of them can't say it as they don't want Trump to set his army of fanatical, drooling morons on them next time they face a primary election.
For some reason, people (both for and strongly against Trump) seem to believe that people who can't book a room for a press conference at the Four Seasons hotel are currently working on the finer points of a plan so brilliant that it will blow our minds. They really, really aren't.
I didn't say it was a *viable* plan. There can be no viable plan. But in the minds of the morons surrounding the Donald its a *brilliant* plan. Epic even. How they win back the TRUE victory or whatever.
It seems to me that there are a number of people surrounding Trump (and including himself) who really know virtually nothing about how the US institutions actually work. When Trump sees stuff said on Fox News or reads stuff on twitter from people who claim authority i think he actually believes it. So he's picking up a little bit of stuff about how states can overrule the voters in selecting electors, and he believes that SCOTUS are totally corruptible and in his pocket. He may well believe all these made stories about electoral fraud that he's been reading. And in his own mind, and those of the likes of his sons, he's thinking he's got a viable route to staying in power. Totally legally as well!
This is why the GOP silence is so disturbing. He needs to be disabused of these fantasies, and sat down and told the truth about how the US works. And if he refuses to accept it then, they have to get Pence to kick him out.
...or just let the electoral processes flow naturally without illegal interference and he'll be out anyway by 20th January.
The failure to commence the transition process is extremely dangerous. It may all turn out OK, but remember that the delay to the transition was held as a contributing factor to the 9/11 attacks and response in 2001. You don't feck about or take chances with national security at a time like this.
Cain sound like the better option. Just looking at him, he looks more down to earth, like understands real people, like Cummings plus point is just wants to do a decent job rather than become an MP, better than how lots of spads come across.
Fabulous - so you want to make appointments based on whether somebody looks "down to earth" and like they understand real people? Unbelievable.
In fairness a lot of people either believe that, or imply it when they complain about people not being down to earth or understanding real people as if in itself that is a disqualifier.
Yes, but based on what they're actually like, not just on their looks, which is what was said.
I don't understand the commitment to the slogan. Since it doesn't mean what it seems like it would mean, there has to be a pithy way of saying what it does mean, so why the stubborness of some to keep using it?
Indeed. The one strength it has is that it's short and memorable. But given it is misleading and unpopular, even that isn't really a strength.
I just use the same slogan for eveything and claim it means whatever I say, namely
What Profiteth It A Kingdom If The Oxen Be Deflated? (tm Terry Pratchett)
Well, if it's only King of England that would be fairly exclusive...
Since she won't abdicate, yet the heir is getting anxious for their own authority (used to be a very common occurence leading to rebellion), perhaps you'd be content for him to be King in Scotland until such time as he gets the full gig?
Only works if the UK is dissolved, i.e. different kingdoms. So yes please. (Though the Princess Royal would go down much better.)
No no, that's why I said King in Scotland, not of Scotland - subordinate title just to give him a taste of kingship without the real deal. It'd be like updating an existing title like Prince of Wales (a lot of rulers took the extra step of royal title a few centuries back).
No, we had enough of that nonsense with Longshanks and Baliol in the waiting room at Berwick-upon-Tweed railway station. HYUFD would go on about it for the next two generaitons that we'd signed up to subordinate status.
I was hoping no one would pick up on my devious plan there, damn it. Entirely unrelated, I just read a biography of Longshanks.
So the Government had this great idea of centralising all the Govt communications and Spads in one place in a single group based in no10. And then having done so, they are all going to resign en masse? What a great triumph that was!
Cummings has been king shit. But when push comes to shove he is a Spad and his boss is the Prime Minister. So he can posture and threaten and bluster all he likes.
It matters not how he does it. If he wins the EC on Dec 14 Trump will remain in office, neither Secret service or Military will remove him, nor will Dems urge their supporters to take up arms, any sort of violence plays straight into Trumps hands. If Trump achieves Scenario 1 or 2, the battle ground will be courts and ballot boxes in the years to come.
We have had 4 years of Trump, some more of it isn’t the end of the world when compared to actual violence. We agree so far?
Completely disagree.
If Biden is seen to have won, and the Electoral College decides otherwise then there will be civil war in the US.
I don't know about civil war, but the people will be entitled to use the minimum action necessary to prevent the end of democracy. A general strike, a blockade of the White House, a refusal to pay taxes could be starters.
I don't think it'll be necessary. Trump is setting himself up to be The Opposition. He'll be good at it, and he's entitled to try that and stand next time or have an anointed acolyte.. Override this election? Nah.
Thank you, I think we agree, if Republicans gerrymander the college and SC back them it’s a crisis, but the army or secret service won’t then evict him, nor the democrats result to anything other than you described, mass rally’s, civil disobedience, the courts. I don’t know about blockades though, that, and any blockade busting violence plays into Trumps hands.
The bit I disagree with though, you paint such a rosy future for Trump outside the whitehouse. Truth is, it’s stay in control or lose control and end up to his eyebrows in trouble isn’t it?
Has the Supreme Court - at any point - done anything that would lead you to believe they'd back Trump on this?
No. To be honest. But I would feel more comfortable if he hadn’t slanted it a little bit more last month.
ABC is a conservative jurist, who believes in the US Constitution. Why would she vote to elevate a President who despises to judiciary over the Supreme Court?
We can’t presume what is put before her, though at this moment in time we both think it will be nothing, so unlikely to even get there. You are 100% convinced it remains nothing. We both probably agree the pressure that is out there won’t sway the SC as much as other players in this.
I think the difference between us boils down to from the support Trump has, there is a lot of pressure on the GOP to give him something or bravely turn their faces away from him, without much middle way for them. Pence for example has to be the one to declare the result to congress? so not to underestimate the difficult spot he finds himself in, now that Trump has chosen to go so far down this road? do you agree on this last point, it’s not an easy place for the GOP leadership?
He's an adviser for Christ's sake. I know he has a lot of influence but have enough respect for those he advises to think they are also somewhat more significant, or should be.
He's an adviser for Christ's sake. I know he has a lot of influence but have enough respect for those he advises to think they are also somewhat more significant, or should be.
As ever, all the Tory party cares about is itself. The self-obsession is overwhelming. I just laugh these days when they claim to be patriotic.
To be fair, SO, if tonight sees a clear out of the Cummings team at no10, then the Tory party self-obsession at the expense of other matters, will, for a couple of days at least, be a resounding triumph. Cummings going also leads to an inevitable rebalancing back to proper Cabinet Government and greater input of Parliament to the workings of Government.
Which i for one will welcome, even if "input of Parliament" will involve paying more attention to a few idiots along the way.
I don't understand the commitment to the slogan. Since it doesn't mean what it seems like it would mean, there has to be a pithy way of saying what it does mean, so why the stubborness of some to keep using it?
Indeed. The one strength it has is that it's short and memorable. But given it is misleading and unpopular, even that isn't really a strength.
I just use the same slogan for eveything and claim it means whatever I say, namely
What Profiteth It A Kingdom If The Oxen Be Deflated? (tm Terry Pratchett)
Well, if it's only King of England that would be fairly exclusive...
Since she won't abdicate, yet the heir is getting anxious for their own authority (used to be a very common occurence leading to rebellion), perhaps you'd be content for him to be King in Scotland until such time as he gets the full gig?
Only works if the UK is dissolved, i.e. different kingdoms. So yes please. (Though the Princess Royal would go down much better.)
No no, that's why I said King in Scotland, not of Scotland - subordinate title just to give him a taste of kingship without the real deal. It'd be like updating an existing title like Prince of Wales (a lot of rulers took the extra step of royal title a few centuries back).
No, we had enough of that nonsense with Longshanks and Baliol in the waiting room at Berwick-upon-Tweed railway station. HYUFD would go on about it for the next two generaitons that we'd signed up to subordinate status.
I was hoping no one would pick up on my devious plan there, damn it. Entirely unrelated, I just read a biography of Longshanks.
This is a very good example of the self entitled incompetence of the current government. I wrote to my MP about the appointment of Dido Harding which was the same. Process exists for a reason and following it is good. Any fool can throw hundreds of millions at companies to secure contracts as this government seems to be proving. Unfortunately they have no magic money tree to pay the bill. So we will all have to suffer massive tax hikes to meet the cost of their payments to their mates.
Bingham at least has some competencies in the field, however casual she and those who appointed her might be about conflicts of interest.
Harding has proved neither effective nor principled.
Cain sound like the better option. Just looking at him, he looks more down to earth, like understands real people, like Cummings plus point is just wants to do a decent job rather than become an MP, better than how lots of spads come across.
Fabulous - so you want to make appointments based on whether somebody looks "down to earth" and like they understand real people? Unbelievable.
In fairness a lot of people either believe that, or imply it when they complain about people not being down to earth or understanding real people as if in itself that is a disqualifier.
Yes, but based on what they're actually like, not just on their looks, which is what was said.
It’s perfectly possible to surround yourself with people who only think in a particular way, so you make mistakes by not hearing everything you need to to make sound decisions, isn’t it?
So the Government had this great idea of centralising all the Govt communications and Spads in one place in a single group based in no10. And then having done so, they are all going to resign en masse? What a great triumph that was!
Gather all the most ambitious, mouthy, sociopathic people who think they should be in charge of stuff and put them in the same room. Surprise! They hate each other and backstab. This is why people are given departments in different buildings...
I don't understand the commitment to the slogan. Since it doesn't mean what it seems like it would mean, there has to be a pithy way of saying what it does mean, so why the stubborness of some to keep using it?
Indeed. The one strength it has is that it's short and memorable. But given it is misleading and unpopular, even that isn't really a strength.
I just use the same slogan for eveything and claim it means whatever I say, namely
What Profiteth It A Kingdom If The Oxen Be Deflated? (tm Terry Pratchett)
Well, if it's only King of England that would be fairly exclusive...
Since she won't abdicate, yet the heir is getting anxious for their own authority (used to be a very common occurence leading to rebellion), perhaps you'd be content for him to be King in Scotland until such time as he gets the full gig?
Only works if the UK is dissolved, i.e. different kingdoms. So yes please. (Though the Princess Royal would go down much better.)
No no, that's why I said King in Scotland, not of Scotland - subordinate title just to give him a taste of kingship without the real deal. It'd be like updating an existing title like Prince of Wales (a lot of rulers took the extra step of royal title a few centuries back).
No, we had enough of that nonsense with Longshanks and Baliol in the waiting room at Berwick-upon-Tweed railway station. HYUFD would go on about it for the next two generaitons that we'd signed up to subordinate status.
I was hoping no one would pick up on my devious plan there, damn it. Entirely unrelated, I just read a biography of Longshanks.
Cain sound like the better option. Just looking at him, he looks more down to earth, like understands real people, like Cummings plus point is just wants to do a decent job rather than become an MP, better than how lots of spads come across.
Fabulous - so you want to make appointments based on whether somebody looks "down to earth" and like they understand real people? Unbelievable.
In fairness a lot of people either believe that, or imply it when they complain about people not being down to earth or understanding real people as if in itself that is a disqualifier.
Yes, but based on what they're actually like, not just on their looks, which is what was said.
It’s perfectly possible to surround yourself with people who only think in a particular way, so you make mistakes by not hearing everything you need to to make sound decisions, isn’t it?
It matters not how he does it. If he wins the EC on Dec 14 Trump will remain in office, neither Secret service or Military will remove him, nor will Dems urge their supporters to take up arms, any sort of violence plays straight into Trumps hands. If Trump achieves Scenario 1 or 2, the battle ground will be courts and ballot boxes in the years to come.
We have had 4 years of Trump, some more of it isn’t the end of the world when compared to actual violence. We agree so far?
Completely disagree.
If Biden is seen to have won, and the Electoral College decides otherwise then there will be civil war in the US.
I don't know about civil war, but the people will be entitled to use the minimum action necessary to prevent the end of democracy. A general strike, a blockade of the White House, a refusal to pay taxes could be starters.
I don't think it'll be necessary. Trump is setting himself up to be The Opposition. He'll be good at it, and he's entitled to try that and stand next time or have an anointed acolyte.. Override this election? Nah.
Thank you, I think we agree, if Republicans gerrymander the college and SC back them it’s a crisis, but the army or secret service won’t then evict him, nor the democrats result to anything other than you described, mass rally’s, civil disobedience, the courts. I don’t know about blockades though, that, and any blockade busting violence plays into Trumps hands.
The bit I disagree with though, you paint such a rosy future for Trump outside the whitehouse. Truth is, it’s stay in control or lose control and end up to his eyebrows in trouble isn’t it?
Has the Supreme Court - at any point - done anything that would lead you to believe they'd back Trump on this?
No, but there may be subtler ways to get there that shift the blame around.
Say Trump (not saying he's this competent but bear with me) staged a national security event that prevented the Electoral College from meeting or prevented some of the electors from getting there. Then the thing should go to the House, but the Dems realize they'll pick Trump so they refuse to meet, in the hope of seating Pelosi. Then SCOTUS conservatives make a ruling to throw the thing back to House congressional delegations, and they pick Trump.
If you can create enough chaos and disruption, while having your thumb on most of the scales, you may be able to exploit a succession of small biases, without forcing any one party to commit to a big one.
The Electors don't actually all meet together IIRC. They meet in their individual states and send their votes in to Congress.
He's an adviser for Christ's sake. I know he has a lot of influence but have enough respect for those he advises to think they are also somewhat more significant, or should be.
The interesting question is if Cummings leaves who is going to run the show (assuming it's not Boris of course).
It matters not how he does it. If he wins the EC on Dec 14 Trump will remain in office, neither Secret service or Military will remove him, nor will Dems urge their supporters to take up arms, any sort of violence plays straight into Trumps hands. If Trump achieves Scenario 1 or 2, the battle ground will be courts and ballot boxes in the years to come.
We have had 4 years of Trump, some more of it isn’t the end of the world when compared to actual violence. We agree so far?
Completely disagree.
If Biden is seen to have won, and the Electoral College decides otherwise then there will be civil war in the US.
I don't know about civil war, but the people will be entitled to use the minimum action necessary to prevent the end of democracy. A general strike, a blockade of the White House, a refusal to pay taxes could be starters.
I don't think it'll be necessary. Trump is setting himself up to be The Opposition. He'll be good at it, and he's entitled to try that and stand next time or have an anointed acolyte.. Override this election? Nah.
Thank you, I think we agree, if Republicans gerrymander the college and SC back them it’s a crisis, but the army or secret service won’t then evict him, nor the democrats result to anything other than you described, mass rally’s, civil disobedience, the courts. I don’t know about blockades though, that, and any blockade busting violence plays into Trumps hands.
The bit I disagree with though, you paint such a rosy future for Trump outside the whitehouse. Truth is, it’s stay in control or lose control and end up to his eyebrows in trouble isn’t it?
Has the Supreme Court - at any point - done anything that would lead you to believe they'd back Trump on this?
No, but there may be subtler ways to get there that shift the blame around.
Say Trump (not saying he's this competent but bear with me) staged a national security event that prevented the Electoral College from meeting or prevented some of the electors from getting there. Then the thing should go to the House, but the Dems realize they'll pick Trump so they refuse to meet, in the hope of seating Pelosi. Then SCOTUS conservatives make a ruling to throw the thing back to House congressional delegations, and they pick Trump.
If you can create enough chaos and disruption, while having your thumb on most of the scales, you may be able to exploit a succession of small biases, without forcing any one party to commit to a big one.
I referenced the council of Nicaea below. I think they turned up early, locked the gates, and then got on with the voting? Gangsterism then, and now.
It matters not how he does it. If he wins the EC on Dec 14 Trump will remain in office, neither Secret service or Military will remove him, nor will Dems urge their supporters to take up arms, any sort of violence plays straight into Trumps hands. If Trump achieves Scenario 1 or 2, the battle ground will be courts and ballot boxes in the years to come.
We have had 4 years of Trump, some more of it isn’t the end of the world when compared to actual violence. We agree so far?
Completely disagree.
If Biden is seen to have won, and the Electoral College decides otherwise then there will be civil war in the US.
I don't know about civil war, but the people will be entitled to use the minimum action necessary to prevent the end of democracy. A general strike, a blockade of the White House, a refusal to pay taxes could be starters.
I don't think it'll be necessary. Trump is setting himself up to be The Opposition. He'll be good at it, and he's entitled to try that and stand next time or have an anointed acolyte.. Override this election? Nah.
Thank you, I think we agree, if Republicans gerrymander the college and SC back them it’s a crisis, but the army or secret service won’t then evict him, nor the democrats result to anything other than you described, mass rally’s, civil disobedience, the courts. I don’t know about blockades though, that, and any blockade busting violence plays into Trumps hands.
The bit I disagree with though, you paint such a rosy future for Trump outside the whitehouse. Truth is, it’s stay in control or lose control and end up to his eyebrows in trouble isn’t it?
Has the Supreme Court - at any point - done anything that would lead you to believe they'd back Trump on this?
No, but there may be subtler ways to get there that shift the blame around.
Say Trump (not saying he's this competent but bear with me) staged a national security event that prevented the Electoral College from meeting or prevented some of the electors from getting there. Then the thing should go to the House, but the Dems realize they'll pick Trump so they refuse to meet, in the hope of seating Pelosi. Then SCOTUS conservatives make a ruling to throw the thing back to House congressional delegations, and they pick Trump.
If you can create enough chaos and disruption, while having your thumb on most of the scales, you may be able to exploit a succession of small biases, without forcing any one party to commit to a big one.
As SeaShanty pointed out, the EC does not meet in one place, but in 51:
"Electoral college delegations meet separately in their respective states and the District of Columbia at places designated by their state legislature. The electors vote by paper ballot, casting one ballot for President and one for Vice President. The electors count the results and then sign six certificates, each of which contains two lists, one of which includes the electoral votes for the President, the other, electoral votes for the Vice President, each of which includes the names of persons receiving votes and the number of votes cast for them. These are known as Certificates of the Vote, which the electors are required to sign. They then pair the six Certificates of Ascertainment provided by the state governors with the Certificates of the Vote, and sign, seal, and certify them (3 U.S.C. §§8-10). The six certificates are then distributed by registered mail as follows: (1) one certificate to the President of the U.S. Senate (the Vice President); (2) two certificates to the secretary of state (or equivalent officer) of the state in which the electors met; (3) two certificates to the Archivist; and (4) one certificate to the judge of the U.S. district court of the district in which the electors met (3 U.S.C. §11)."
"January 6, 2021: Joint Session of Congress to Count Electoral Votes and Declare Election Results Meets On January 6, or another date set by law, the Senate and House of Representatives assemble at 1:00 p.m. in a joint session at the Capitol, in the House chamber, to count the electoral votes and declare the results (3 U.S.C. §15). The Vice President presides as President of the Senate. The Vice President opens the certificates and presents them to four tellers, two from each chamber. The tellers read and make a list of the returns. When the votes have been ascertained and counted, the tellers transmit them to the Vice President. If one of the tickets has received a majority of 270 or more electoral votes, the Vice President announces the results, which “shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President.”
"Joint Session Challenges to Electoral Vote Returns While the tellers announce the results, Members may object to the returns from any individual state as they are announced. Objections to individual state returns must be made in writing by at least one Member each of the Senate and House of Representatives. If an objection meets these requirements, the joint session recesses and the two houses separate and debate the question in their respective chambers for a maximum of two hours. The two houses then vote separately to accept or reject the objection. They then reassemble in joint session, and announce the results of their respective votes. An objection to a state’s electoral vote must be approved by both houses in order for any contested votes to be excluded."
Rumours were swirling in Westminster that the aide resigned over an inquiry into the leaked news of the decision to lock down England on October 30. While some Whitehall officials speculated Mr Cain may have been “partially” to blame for the story, he has “categorically denied” responsibility.
It matters not how he does it. If he wins the EC on Dec 14 Trump will remain in office, neither Secret service or Military will remove him, nor will Dems urge their supporters to take up arms, any sort of violence plays straight into Trumps hands. If Trump achieves Scenario 1 or 2, the battle ground will be courts and ballot boxes in the years to come.
We have had 4 years of Trump, some more of it isn’t the end of the world when compared to actual violence. We agree so far?
Completely disagree.
If Biden is seen to have won, and the Electoral College decides otherwise then there will be civil war in the US.
I don't know about civil war, but the people will be entitled to use the minimum action necessary to prevent the end of democracy. A general strike, a blockade of the White House, a refusal to pay taxes could be starters.
I don't think it'll be necessary. Trump is setting himself up to be The Opposition. He'll be good at it, and he's entitled to try that and stand next time or have an anointed acolyte.. Override this election? Nah.
Thank you, I think we agree, if Republicans gerrymander the college and SC back them it’s a crisis, but the army or secret service won’t then evict him, nor the democrats result to anything other than you described, mass rally’s, civil disobedience, the courts. I don’t know about blockades though, that, and any blockade busting violence plays into Trumps hands.
The bit I disagree with though, you paint such a rosy future for Trump outside the whitehouse. Truth is, it’s stay in control or lose control and end up to his eyebrows in trouble isn’t it?
Has the Supreme Court - at any point - done anything that would lead you to believe they'd back Trump on this?
No, but there may be subtler ways to get there that shift the blame around.
Say Trump (not saying he's this competent but bear with me) staged a national security event that prevented the Electoral College from meeting or prevented some of the electors from getting there. Then the thing should go to the House, but the Dems realize they'll pick Trump so they refuse to meet, in the hope of seating Pelosi. Then SCOTUS conservatives make a ruling to throw the thing back to House congressional delegations, and they pick Trump.
If you can create enough chaos and disruption, while having your thumb on most of the scales, you may be able to exploit a succession of small biases, without forcing any one party to commit to a big one.
The Electors don't actually all meet together IIRC. They meet in their individual states and send their votes in to Congress.
That really disappoints me. Would be a cool bit of ceremony to do once every 4 years.
It matters not how he does it. If he wins the EC on Dec 14 Trump will remain in office, neither Secret service or Military will remove him, nor will Dems urge their supporters to take up arms, any sort of violence plays straight into Trumps hands. If Trump achieves Scenario 1 or 2, the battle ground will be courts and ballot boxes in the years to come.
We have had 4 years of Trump, some more of it isn’t the end of the world when compared to actual violence. We agree so far?
Completely disagree.
If Biden is seen to have won, and the Electoral College decides otherwise then there will be civil war in the US.
I don't know about civil war, but the people will be entitled to use the minimum action necessary to prevent the end of democracy. A general strike, a blockade of the White House, a refusal to pay taxes could be starters.
I don't think it'll be necessary. Trump is setting himself up to be The Opposition. He'll be good at it, and he's entitled to try that and stand next time or have an anointed acolyte.. Override this election? Nah.
Thank you, I think we agree, if Republicans gerrymander the college and SC back them it’s a crisis, but the army or secret service won’t then evict him, nor the democrats result to anything other than you described, mass rally’s, civil disobedience, the courts. I don’t know about blockades though, that, and any blockade busting violence plays into Trumps hands.
The bit I disagree with though, you paint such a rosy future for Trump outside the whitehouse. Truth is, it’s stay in control or lose control and end up to his eyebrows in trouble isn’t it?
Has the Supreme Court - at any point - done anything that would lead you to believe they'd back Trump on this?
No, but there may be subtler ways to get there that shift the blame around.
Say Trump (not saying he's this competent but bear with me) staged a national security event that prevented the Electoral College from meeting or prevented some of the electors from getting there. Then the thing should go to the House, but the Dems realize they'll pick Trump so they refuse to meet, in the hope of seating Pelosi. Then SCOTUS conservatives make a ruling to throw the thing back to House congressional delegations, and they pick Trump.
If you can create enough chaos and disruption, while having your thumb on most of the scales, you may be able to exploit a succession of small biases, without forcing any one party to commit to a big one.
The Electors don't actually all meet together IIRC. They meet in their individual states and send their votes in to Congress.
That really disappoints me. Would be a cool bit of ceremony to do once every 4 years.
I hope the Accession Council here actually meets.
EiT's scenario only works if the target is the Joint Session of Congress on January 6
Does anyone know what Cummings' attitude is regarding the lockdown? Is he more or less pro-lockdown than Johnson, or about the same?
He doesn't care because the rules don't apply to him anyway.
Okay — what he thinks the rules ought to be for everyone else then. Just wondered whether a disagreement with Johnson about the lockdown might be one of the reasons for this situation.
Comments
This is why the GOP silence is so disturbing. He needs to be disabused of these fantasies, and sat down and told the truth about how the US works. And if he refuses to accept it then, they have to get Pence to kick him out.
When do they stop standing by?
Genuine question: What is likelihood that Trump will face Federal or State criminal charges after he steps down? Are there known actions in the offing?
The Secret Barrister has been top of the Sunday Times best selling list, I bet you've never done that you newt botherer.
As the only bona fide Northerner on PB, I know what I speak of.
https://twitter.com/SkyNewsPolitics/status/1326643080699801600
Please, please, please, please, please...
If we can support the arts, primarily the west end, why not support poorer football teams in the smaller towns in the north?
No one wants their fingers on this Brexit when the music stops.
I'm not sure either you or I represent 'the people', though...
Say Trump (not saying he's this competent but bear with me) staged a national security event that prevented the Electoral College from meeting or prevented some of the electors from getting there. Then the thing should go to the House, but the Dems realize they'll pick Trump so they refuse to meet, in the hope of seating Pelosi. Then SCOTUS conservatives make a ruling to throw the thing back to House congressional delegations, and they pick Trump.
If you can create enough chaos and disruption, while having your thumb on most of the scales, you may be able to exploit a succession of small biases, without forcing any one party to commit to a big one.
Dickhead Donald Trump 72 million votes
Who knew!
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5806134
I think the difference between us boils down to from the support Trump has, there is a lot of pressure on the GOP to give him something or bravely turn their faces away from him, without much middle way for them. Pence for example has to be the one to declare the result to congress? so not to underestimate the difficult spot he finds himself in, now that Trump has chosen to go so far down this road? do you agree on this last point, it’s not an easy place for the GOP leadership?
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1326647985317482496
Which i for one will welcome, even if "input of Parliament" will involve paying more attention to a few idiots along the way.
Robert Bruce seems to have been an...interesting figure to say the least.
Harding has proved neither effective nor principled.
Surprise! They hate each other and backstab.
This is why people are given departments in different buildings...
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5806089
Frost would be a big deal.
Phil's head might explode
50% aren't listening of course. They want to live in a warlord monarchy.
Interesting times.
"Electoral college delegations meet separately in their respective states and the District of Columbia at places designated by their state legislature. The electors vote by paper ballot, casting one ballot for President and one for Vice President. The electors count the results and then sign six certificates, each of which contains two lists, one of which includes the electoral votes for the President, the other, electoral votes for the Vice President, each of which includes the names of persons receiving votes and the number of votes cast for them. These are known as Certificates of the Vote, which the electors are required to sign. They then pair the six Certificates of Ascertainment provided by the state governors with the Certificates of the Vote, and sign, seal, and certify them (3 U.S.C. §§8-10). The six certificates are then distributed by registered mail as follows: (1) one certificate to the President of the U.S. Senate (the Vice President); (2) two certificates to the secretary of state (or equivalent officer) of the state in which the electors met; (3) two certificates to the Archivist; and (4) one certificate to the judge of the U.S. district court of the district in which the electors met (3 U.S.C. §11)."
"January 6, 2021: Joint Session of Congress to Count Electoral Votes and Declare Election Results Meets On January 6, or another date set by law, the Senate and House of Representatives assemble at 1:00 p.m. in a joint session at the Capitol, in the House chamber, to count the electoral votes and declare the results (3 U.S.C. §15). The Vice President presides as President of the Senate. The Vice President opens the certificates and presents them to four tellers, two from each chamber. The tellers read and make a list of the returns. When the votes have been ascertained and counted, the tellers transmit them to the Vice President. If one of the tickets has received a majority of 270 or more electoral votes, the Vice President announces the results, which “shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President.”
"Joint Session Challenges to Electoral Vote Returns
While the tellers announce the results, Members may object to the returns from any individual state as they are announced. Objections to individual state returns must be made in writing by at least one Member each of the Senate and House of Representatives. If an objection meets these requirements, the joint session recesses and the two houses separate and debate the question in their respective chambers for a maximum of two hours. The two houses then vote separately to accept or reject the objection. They then reassemble in joint session, and announce the results of their respective votes. An objection to a state’s electoral vote must be approved by both houses in order for any contested votes to be excluded."
https://www.ft.com/content/2c431395-021b-471d-878c-3ab342304745
Rumours were he pushed the scientists(!) into the lockdown back in March.
I hope the Accession Council here actually meets.