Robert Reich's Nightmare Scenario

“How Trump could win the presidency even if he loses the popular vote AND the Electoral College“

Robert Reich, in his Feb. 1st, 2024 worries that those of us who are dedicated to democracy and therefore committed to playing by the rules are underestimating the willingness of House Republicans to break the rules to elect Trump:

Remember: Most current Republican members of the House, including Speaker Michael Johnson, refused to certify the outcome of the 2020 election. In fact, Johnson helped organize 138 Republican House members to dispute that outcome, despite state certifications and the nearly unanimous rulings from state and federal courts that it was an honest election.

If Johnson and his cronies had so few scruples then, why should we assume they’ll have more scruples in the weeks following November’s elections?

What happens if, in the wake of the elections, the House’s election-denying Republicans find that they can retain their majority in the next Congress only by denying certification of Democratic candidates who have won by close margins, and do so?

Then, on January 6, 2025, what if the new Republican majority refuses to certify as president any Electoral College results from states that went for Biden by close margins — thereby ensuring that no candidate receives an Electoral College majority?

Presto! The decision about who’s to be the next president is made on a state-by-state delegation vote — almost surely delivering it to Trump.

Is this scenario really so far-fetched? Two astute Washington veterans conclude in a recent article in The Washington Spectator that it’s not at all far-fetched, because “good faith can no longer be assumed.”

Long before we reach this constitutional crisis, Speaker Johnson and others in the Republican House leadership must pledge to certify the results of the November elections.

They should be asked by the media to make this commitment. If they won’t, Americans need to know — and know why.

It’s worth noting in this regard that Rep. Elise Stefanik, the fourth-ranking Republican in the House, recently refused to commit to certifying the results of next November’s elections, saying “we will see if this is a legal and valid election.”

She then claimed that the 2020 presidential race “was not a fair election” despite multiple legal reviews sought by Trump and his allies confirming that it was.

Rep. Fitzpatrick's Legislative Mirage: An Exercise in Futility and Facade

The latest legislative charade, courtesy of Rep. Fitzpatrick and his cohort, is a masterclass in political shadowboxing. With the grand announcement of the so-called 'Defending Borders, Defending Democracies Act,' Fitzpatrick has mounted a spectacle that is as hollow as it is disingenuous.

What we have here is not a serious attempt at governance but a sad joke, a cynical ploy dressed up as bipartisan effort. It's a classic bait-and-switch, giving the illusion of action while ensuring none is taken. The Republicans, including Fitzpatrick, had their golden chance with Sen. Lankford's border security policy, which was swept aside not by opposition, but by the mercurial whims of their own party in the person of Donald Trump. This sad end to a genuine bipartisan effort means that Fitz[atrick’s efforts are doomed.

So why this sudden, urgent push? The answer is as transparent as it is self-serving. This is nothing but a desperate attempt for Fitzpatrick to paint himself as 'the independent voice,' a so-called problem solver who can't seem to name a single substantive problem he's solved. His legislative track record? As impactful as a commemorative coin in a wishing well.

It's a slap in the face to the constituents who expect—and deserve—more than political posturing. In a time when our southern border faces real challenges and when international allies like Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan rely on us for concrete support, Fitzpatrick offer is dead on arrival. Under Speaker Johnson, this legislation won't see the light of day, let alone the floor of the House.

Voters are tired of these empty gestures. We're weary of the smoke and mirrors that politicians like Fitzpatrick use to obscure their lack of real action. It's time to demand more than performative legislation. We need tangible solutions, not commemorative coins.

Brian Fitzpatrick - What a Sad Joke

This week, Rep. Fitzpatrick bragged in his newsletter about legislation he was introducing:

Yesterday, along with Reps. Jared Golden (ME-2), Don Bacon (NE-2), Ed Case (HI-1), Mike Lawler (NY-17), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA-3), Lori Chavez-DeRemer (OR-5), and Jim Costa (CA-21), I introduced the bipartisan Defending Borders, Defending Democracies Act. This legislation provides, for one-year, necessary authorities to secure the U.S. southern border and defense-only appropriations in support of Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.

What kind of sad joke is this? The Republicans got everything they wanted to secure the border from Sen. Lankford’s border security policy he added to the supplemental national security bill. This was quashed by Trump and his minions in the Senate and House because Trump would rather have the problem to throw at Biden than a solution to help our country. So Fitzpatrick’s legislation has no chance of passing, or, under Speaker Johnson, even getting to the floor of the House.

Is this just a cynical ploy—an empty gesture—so that Fitzpatrick can tell his constituents that he is their independent voice, the problem solving Congressman? What problems has he solved? What legislation has he created that has passed? A Commemorative Coin for the Marine Corps seems to be the highlight.