[ad_1]
One day historians and journalists will recount what has happened in the United States in the last three dramatic weeks, which represented one of the greatest challenges to the American constitutional system. Once again the institutions resisted. If Donald Trump’s simple election victory had harmful effects, the falsification of the electoral process by undermining democratic rules would have devastating implications.
Three weeks after the popular vote, Trump surrenders to reality and accepts the transition of power. You can still do damage. If your defeat is consummated, worries about the future remain.
“At the moment, the country appears to have avoided a disastrous collapse of its electoral system,” he writes in New York Times journalist Alexander Burns. “Next time, it’s not sure I’ll be lucky again.” Although Trump failed “on the mission to subvert the elections, he exposed the deep cracks in the construction of American democracy and paved the way for future disruptions or disasters.” He revealed great amateurism but “managed to freeze the transition for nearly a month, in the face of the submissive indulgence of the Republicans and the fear and frustration of the Democrats.”
The crisis had two phases. Prior to the election, Trump tried to disqualify the election process by talking about the “biggest fraud in American history”. The main objective was to reduce or cancel the postal vote, which should have been very large in a pandemic period. Trump knew that a high turnout favored him. His fortune was sealed by a massive turnout, the highest ever and in a climate of exemplary calm.
In the shadow of the coup
Trump, as announced, had another card up his sleeve. Even before the end of the counting of votes he proclaimed himself the winner and denounced, once again, the “electoral fraud”. It does not recognize the opponent’s victory. The most serious chapter begins here: the president tries to avoid certifying the results in the states won by Joe Biden, to change the composition of the constituency. This means, in fact, an invalidation of the popular vote.
The scheme would work like this: Republican delegates would refuse to validate the results, creating a dead end and passing the decision to state assemblies: those with a Republican majority would appoint pro-Trump delegates to the constituency. A constitutional crisis will open, which would ultimately be arbitrated by the Supreme Court, where Trump believes he has an edge in the balance of forces.
There are two interpretations. In the “benign” hypothesis, this is a strategic move by Trump to begin meeting the conditions for the reconquest of the White House in 2024. The goal would be to consolidate his electoral base and ensure control of the Republican Party. At the same time, it would reaffirm the illegality of the upcoming Biden administration, preparing to boycott its action by all means.
In the Republican camp, Trump has a weapon: intimidation. In 2016 he managed to launch a “hostile takeover bid” on the party. He was chosen against the institution republican. He came to personally control his constituency and, having a core of unconditional fanatics, became the chief arbiter – it’s hard for a Republican candidate to get an investiture against Trump. Representatives, senators, and governors took notice and became obedient.
However, Trump has gone too far. In the case of Michigan, he also called the two Republican representatives to the White House on a joint certification commission. They didn’t give in to the president’s call: “Bring Michigan back to TRUMP“(Return Michigan to TRUMP.) Pressure on Republicans in other states, such as Pennsylvania or Georgia, was rejected by Republican officials. Georgian Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger showed more seriousness and courage than senators of his Furthermore, Trump’s “coup” was neutralized by the judges of the disputed states.
The most eminent Republican expert on electoral law, Ben Ginsberg, stunned analysts by denouncing Trump. “In a few months we will look back and see that Trump’s strategy was an extreme failure, which is unlikely to be copied. But the system has never been subjected to such fatigue. “
Currently, the word “coup” is associated with the military. In June, Trump made the mistake of trying to use the military in American cities during the Black Lives Matter protests. Defense Secretary Mark Esper eventually backed down under pressure from the generals. The US military has an ingrained civil culture: they do not intervene in domestic politics.
At the time, figures such as Admiral Mike Mullen, former Chief of Staff of Interarmas, or General James Mattis, former Secretary of Defense of the Trump administration, denounced the attempted political manipulation of the military and its threat. use on city streets: “I cannot remain silent,” wrote Mike Mullen, in Atlantic. Interarmas Chief of Staff, General Mark Milley, has sent a directive to all military commands on allegiance to the Constitution.
It is an unprecedented initiative that challenges interpretations. And, to complicate matters, the generals were not silent. A few days ago, while Trump was purging the Pentagon, installing men he trusted, General Milley took advantage of a ceremony at the Military Museum to send a message: “We have sworn before the Constitution. We have not sworn before any king or queen, tyrant or dictator. ”What is the overall goal?
The “strong men”
“As for what is happening now, I think it is a real attack on the American democratic system and is making millions of Americans question the outcome. [eleitoral]says al New York Times Barbara Pariente, former Florida high court judge.
This is Donald Trump’s most explosive legacy. Far more significant than the 74 million votes it received – an extraordinary result – is another fact: four out of five Republican voters believe there was an irregularity in the election.
Paul Kolb, a former senior CIA official, comments: “The kind of seeds he (Trump) planted, the kind of extremism he spurred and the rejection of the constitutional process will persist for a long time.” It is up to Joe Biden to disarm this potential time bomb.
And Donald Trump? The historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a scholar of authoritarianism, explains this Harvard Daily Gazette: “It’s hard to put down a strong man, but when he loses power he feels ‘psychological annihilation’. You can’t imagine being powerless. It’s very destructive.”
Fortunately, he turned out to be an amateur.
.
[ad_2]
Source link
