[ExI] Endarkenment was Electoral College

[Stuart LaForge]

John Clark wrote:

>> ?And Trump hasn't yet even started his PR offensive by ordering his
>> mindless followers to start a "fake election" chant at one of his
>> nuremberg style rallies.  John K Clark

Actually, there are some very smart but misguided people at those rallies;
even racist transhumanists. The Alt Right is a bit more sophisticated a
crowd than you seem to think it is.

https://www.vox.com/2016/4/18/11434098/alt-right-explained

If anything, the Alt Right are the true danger. They are the wind and
Donald Trump is but a leaf upon it. Some of them, most notably the
Neoreactionaries (NRx) are a direct threat to the republic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/behind-the-internets-dark-anti-democracy-movement/516243/

The TL;DR is that there is a movement that believe the Enlightenment was a
mistake and that democracy, egalitarianism, and personal liberties are
wrong. Basically these people want fascism or even monarchy with white
people in charge.


Spike wrote:

> The rally chants would have little or no impact on the Supreme Court.
>
> Worry about real things John.  We have real threats.

Actually John is not being entirely paranoid here, Spike. Rally chants
might have little effect on the SCOTUS but there are only nine justices on
it.

Alt Right extremists who attend those rallies might get it into their head
to pay visits to those justices when they are on vacation. Perhaps a few
more Scalia-style accidents so they can't swear in the new President.

Fortunately, the Constitution does not require the SCOTUS to be involved
in the swearing in. (Calvin Coolidge was sworn in by his own father who
was a notary public.) But nonetheless the loss of SCOTUS judges just
before the inauguration of the new president might disrupt the transition
of power.

The reason I bring this up is that while they are thoroughly guarded by
the U.S. Federal Marshals during the time that the SCOTUS is in session, I
do not believe they are guarded 24-7 like presidents are. If they were,
Scalia's death would not have been so controversial.

With the republic under attack by the Putin and NRx, I think we need to
remedy this post-haste. The SCOTUS judges are too vulnerable in their
personal time and too important to the republic to lose.

There are only nine of them so round the clock protection would not be
that expensive as far as those things go.

Frank McElligott wrote:

> If they (dems) win the house, and try to impeach him,  those 50% who
> support him will revolt, and if history tells us anything (turkey is
> latest) First the judges, then the elected officials, then the college
> professors all jailed, and you have a man who will promise then a free
> election in 2020 .

I agree, the SCOTUS judges are vulnerable, even w/o Trump's knowledge or
permission.

> Please read some history,  South America is a great place to start. And
> for a primer to this talk about constitutions  read about how Putin came
> to power at the turn of the century.

Lately Putin has been pushing the boundary between world leader and James
Bond villain. His money and influence can be traced to far-right takeovers
in governments all over the world. Brexit in the U.K., Trump in the USA,
and now this in Austria.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/austrias-far-right-government-ordered-a-raid-on-its-own-intelligence-service-now-allies-are-freezing-the-country-out/2018/08/17/d20090fc-9985-11e8-b55e-5002300ef004_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.666662db0341


Putin has picked up the cold war where he left it off all those years ago
playing the covert intelligence game, influencing elections, social
engineering, computer hacking etc. He is funding xenophobic racists in
various countries to destabilize them from within. That is classic
divide-and-conquer strategy. Sun Tzu would have been impressed.


Stuart LaForge