Officials discuss how to delay Election Day (holy s**t!)

[LearnedHand]

(Please excuse if this is a dupe.)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/11/election.day.delay/index.html

Talks stem from recent fears of terror attack timed to vote
Sunday, July 11, 2004 Posted: 10:42 PM EDT (0242 GMT)

----------------

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. officials have discussed the idea of postponing Election Day in the event of a terrorist attack on or about that day, a Homeland Security Department spokesman said Sunday.

The department has referred questions about the matter to the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, said spokesman Brian Roehrkasse, confirming a report in this week's editions of Newsweek magazine.

Newsweek said the discussions about whether the November 2 election could be postponed started with a recent letter to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge from DeForest Soaries Jr., chairman of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

The commission was set up after the disputed 2000 presidential vote to help states deal with logistical problems in their elections.

<snip>

Okay. Now I'm REALLY scared. I've been mouthing off for four years that this would happen, but I don't think I actually believed it. Someone PLEASE tell me this isn't happening.

[Massacure]

1. Constitution says the president has to be sworn in on January 20th

So it obviously can't be delayed past January 19th.

No way in hell that a bill will get through the house, the senate, and passed 2/3 of the states just so Bush* can stay in power.

[freeforall]

6. I'd love to agree, but

I didn't think that a resolution to wage war against Iraq would pass either.

We can hope though.

[mountainvue]

14. What if they

declare Martial Law? See I think they are actually floating this idea as a test balloon to see if the sheeple will get upset about it or if they'll be allowed to sneak this one by too. Frankly, it scares the hell out of me.:scared:

[LearnedHand]

15. Exactly

I think it's a trial balloon, too, and I'm scared shitless; god help us all.

[gatlingforme]

45. I agree I think they are testing the waters.... I can't believe what

they could pull next, suspending the constitution.???

[ChickMagic]

57. That's what they'd have to do

Not only do they have to overcome THE Constitution, but they'd have to overcome the constitutions of 50 states.

[trogdor]

63. 38 states.

3/4 of the total. Anyway, no way this will pass, even if Kerry and Edwards stay out of town, which they won't.

[Eloriel]

27. You're missing a key point

IF there's another terrorist attack, there WILL be martial law, and the Constitution WILL be suspended.

Your Jan. 20th inauguration date will mean NOTHING.

[wtmusic]

30. Based on what?

No precedent in US history.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

33. There was no precedent for what took place...

...in December 2000, either. You remember the SCOTUS Selection, don't you? You know, that was the event that allowed FratBoy and the rest of the NeoCons to get away with a bloodless coup.

And how about the events of 911? They were also pretty unprecedented, weren't they?

And have you looked at the wording of Patriot Act I & II lately? Those new laws are just jam-packed with all kinds of precedents, all designed to keep track of every single person in the country and what they do, say, and think.

And how about the blatant lying that got us propelled into a completely unnecessary war that is as immoral as it was illegal? Any precedent there?

[wtmusic]

66. Martial law is a different league

I can see you're very angry (as am I) but you really don't need to let it suspend your judgement...

So Patriot Act I & II "keep track of every single person in the country and what they do, say, and think". Care to elaborate?

[Shakespeare]

71. How about based on Gen. Tommy Franks being sent around to say so last year

Here are a couple of links for you:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2003/11/21/63054/774

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/11/20/185048.shtml

And there's lots more info--do a search on "Tommy Franks suspend constitution."

[wtmusic]

73. Yeah yeah yeah

Tommy Franks is a bag of wind. Out of the picture.

[Shakespeare]

74. Yeah yeah yeah

Not.

This is a trial balloon--no way to say if they'll actually try this or not, but they're certainly looking into both the ability to do this as well as what public reaction would be to it.

They've now trotted Rice out to say "no," so I'm guessing the trial balloon got a less than genial reception.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

31. You don't get it, do you?....

The NeoCons don't give a rat's butt about the Constitution, or anything that looks like the Constitution!! They are all about getting control and keeping it.

Let's say we have a terrorist attack sometime between now and Election Day. Let's go on to say that the NeoCons declare Martial Law using that terrorist act as an excuse. To make sure that everything is under control, they then announce that elections are postponed indefinitely.

What are left with at that point? Unless the military tells FratBoy to go pound sand, presto-chango, welcome to the American Reich.

[Massacure]

62. Martial law with what army?

The entire army is in South Korea, Germany, Iraq, etc.

There isn't much of an army left here in the U.S. to declare martial law with.

The people would rebel and topple the government.

[trogdor]

65. They have to maintain the APPEARANCE of giving a shit.

Suspending elections will make this VERY difficult. The shit will seriously hit the fan if they try, and it won't look good for them on the day elections eventually get rescheduled.

[Wednesdays]

52. Shrub doesn't have to delay the election past January 19

to make a mockery of the democratic process! Take a look at the scenario I wrote up here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1971133#1972474

[tlmorris]

72. A president has to be sworn in at noon on the 20th....

If a "qualified" president-elect has not been identified by Jan 20th, the House can select someone to act as President until a president-elect can be qualified. Doesn't take a change to the constitution.

[kysrsoze]

2. OK, here's what I don't get: What the hell does the DHS have to do with

the electoral process anyway? They have absolutely no control and should NEVER have it. This reeks of a Nazi-esque plot.

[Cha]

3. Please check out this very intriguing analysis from

buzzflash.com

July 12, 2004
snips~

"Bush Cartel Talks of Steps to Potentially Cancel ("Postpone") the Presidential Election: This is For Real Folks!

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

Oh yes, the incendiary BuzzFlash -- and other online publications -- have been engaging in their typical hyperbolic scare tactics when we have warned that the Bush Cartel might actually postpone the presidential election if Kerry and Edwards are poised to win it through the will of the people.

We were just fanning the flames of fear based on the Bush Cartel stealing the election in 2000, right?

Wrong.

In a short Newsweek brief, in Monday's (July 19) edition, by the infamous Michael Isikoff, it is revealed that Tommy Ridge is exploring what would be needed to be done to postpone the fall presidential election, if there were to be a terrorist attack:

You see, the Bush Cartel could claim that they have solid information of an imminent attack and postpone the election because they don't want the terrorists to influence the outcome, because, they would argue, that would give a victory to the terrorists.

Which is all another way of saying, the Republicans don't plan on yielding power under any circumstances, the will of the people be damned.. end snips~

I say the bushreich lied about Iraq and they'll lie about "terrorist attacks", too.


More from buzzflash.com
http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/04/07/ana04012.html

[LearnedHand]

4. Great.

Is there any chance in hell we'll be able to save our country? Will the military back this up? Will anyone spill out into the streets and stop these megalomaniacs?

[NMDemDist2]

10. we;ll spill into the streets alright, Right and Left

even my pacifistic hubby says he'll march on that one, and I quote "They aren't going to steal my country without a fight"

the military won't back them either, they have pissed all over the military and the intelligence community

[Tommy_Douglas]

68. It's easy for me to say you guys should revolt...

However if your elections were suspended and martial law implemented I really hope every single American would realize their democracy and freedom is a sham and the terrorists have won.

It's a scary thought. If such a thing occurred and America became an outright dictatorship... Well I think that sets the stage for WWIII... Hopefully that will never be the case.

[Cha]

13. One poster said...

Canceling elections=Civil War

That's why they're floating "trial balloons", imo, to see what they can get away with.

I imagine ..in the darkest dungeons of the cheney chambers ..they gleefully high five all they have gotten away with so far..especially the 2000 coup and invading Iraq(back when "mission accomplished", anyway)

[RoyGBiv]

19. The Military

There's a story from the Nixon era, possibly apocryphal since I can't remember where or even when I saw this, that addresses this issue.

It seems the subject of the lengths Nixon might go to hang on to his job became the subject of discussion among the crew of some ship in the US Navy while they were on a tour. That had apparently received vague orders that at least one officer interpreted as potentially being an order to turn their guns on US civilian craft should some circumstance arise in which US citizens were disturbing public order. This was in the waning days of Nixon's administration when the very real possibility of his resistance to impeachment and removal from office were being discussed in the open.

While not specific, the orders raised enough alarm among this officer's associates that they decided they needed to have a meeting to clarify how they would all act in the event some direct order came down that had the intent of keeping Nixon in power against the wishes of the people. Their conclusion was that their highest duty was to the Constitution itself, not the President if that President was usurping the Constitution.

Again, I'm not sure how true this story is. I do know I saw it as an interview in a documentary type of program. Nonetheless, it may give some glimmer of hope.

More practically, I think some among our military would likely follow this train-wreck of an administration straight to hell. I do not think they all, or even most would. Wes Clark was once in the military. I have to think he would never have done such a thing (obeyed an illegal and immoral order with the potential for such grievous consequences), and I have to hope there are more people like him out there.

[LearnedHand]

21. Thanks, RGB

I'm hoping we still have plenty of people around who can reason thusly. I know there are nearly 50 thousands of us here, but that's a pretty small number, comparatively speaking.

I mean, how many people actually KNOW this would be unconstitutional? And is there some stupid-ass, hidden provision in the Patriot Act that allows this?

[RoyGBiv]

24. The Larger Issue

There's a larger issue at work here, and it is based in the separation of powers and the very foundations of our republic.

Since the adoption of the Constitution, there's been an ongoing battle between the various branches of government over what powers they hold and how those powers relate to each other. This is not a bad thing; to some extent the Constitution was designed that way. These battles have taken various forms. During Jefferson's administration, it was primarily between the executive and the judiciary. During Lincoln's and then Andrew Johnson's terms, it was between Congress and the executive branch. At other times, it's been two branches against another.

Since at least the 1950's, this battle has been primarily between the legislative and executive branches with a secondary front of the judiciary against both at different times, but what changed from previous struggles was that Congress, largely due to partisan influence, began relinquishing its own authority almost willingly. At times, such as with the War Powers Act, the original intent was to recapture legitimate authority that the President had assumed under the guise of securing the country against Communism. In its final form, this act gave the President more authority to wage war without even giving a reason for a period of time than he'd ever had before. Since then the balance of powers has rapidly shifted from the legislative to the executive branch. The only mitigating factor has been the Court.

Despite the current composition of the Court, it is still the only obstacle to a de facto dictatorship, as recently rulings have shown. But, the margin that maintains that has slowly eroded.

At the point we're at now, the President has a level of authority that would have terrified most of the founders. Through the WPA and the various executive orders that established FEMA, the President can technically suspend the Constitution given certain conditions, but practically speaking, those conditions are essentially irrelevant since once he has suspended the laws that govern his actions, the laws that would prevent him from wielding arbitrary power have been nullified.

And the real problem is not so much the text of laws or court decisions, but the institutional structure those laws allowed to form. FEMA, OSP, DHS, et al, as agents of the executive branch, have been given legislative authority, the will to use it, and the infrastructure to make that happen. The genius of the Constitution was that it put in place structural elements that were supposed to jealously guard their own authority, making the written law a set guidelines that those institutions would use to do so. The intent of this was to disperse power and make it less likely that a single individual could assume the position of a despot. However, with the breakdown of these structures and the development of those to replace them, all acting under the orders of that one man, the paradigm has shifted. In our rush to make sure our government could still function in the event of a massive catastrophe, we made the Constitution essentially irrelevant.

We have become slaves to our own fear.

[Beaker]

25. those who would give up freedoms in the name of security deserve neither.

didn't ben franklin say something to that effect?

[Lugnut]

26. Yep!

Read my sig line. Very appropriate I'd sy.

[LearnedHand]

29. Beautiful windup, RGB...

...to an incredibly scary punchline (to mix metaphors). I knew a lot of what you wrote (not all), but I certainly did NOT realize how much we have weakened the Constitution.

However, if I'd thought about it for very long, this pretender to the throne has taunted us with the Constitution from the very beginning. What was a US Supreme Court, for example, doing "deciding" the outcome of a STATE-RUN election? Shoulda extrapolated from there, I guess.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

34. Let me add a couple of comments to that...

...about 16 months before Nixon resigned from office and right in the middle of all of the Watergate hearings, Nixon told a closed-door Senate committee that if China wanted to threaten Taiwan, he (Nixon) would "bomb them back to the Stone Ages". That DEFINITELY raised some collective eyebrows in Congress and elsewhere.

Well, about 2 months later, 2-star General Al Haig took over as Chief-of-Staff, and assumed control over the Executive Branch. He reported to only one guy, and that was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. At the same time that happened, the person carrying the nuclear codes stops following Nixon around. Also concurrently, a message went out to all of the major military commands that all orders from the Commander-in-Chief were to be disregarded.

IMHO, that was our country's first military coup. But, as you stated, they did it because of their loyalty to the Constitution, not the office of the president. Thankfully, the miltary was superbly low-key, and turned over the reins of government to Ford when he was sworn in as the new president.

I'm beginning to think that we may have to have another military coup like the first one to get us out of the mess we're in now.

[mountainvue]

17. Here's another thing I don't

understand. Didn't Isiskoff get spoon fed the Monica story initially? When he couldn't get it past his editor, they fed it to Drudge instead. Where do you suppose this is coming from and do you think it's legit?

[LearnedHand]

20. Newsweek originally reported it

I read it on CNN, who quoted Dept. of Homeland Security official, who verified the plan.

[Charles19]

64. Hypocrite's

"You see, the Bush Cartel could claim that they have solid information of an imminent attack and postpone the election because they don't want the terrorists to influence the outcome, because, they would argue, that would give a victory to the terrorists."

Gotta love the hypocrisy. We won't allow the "terrorist's" to possibly affect the outcome but we will allow them to move our election date's. What kind of sense does that make?

According to them it is ok if the terrorists action's affect how we run our democracy as long as it doesn't result in GW losing. Shame, shame on them.

[freeforall]

5. This doesn't surprise me in the least; however...

What are Americans prepared to do about it?

In 2000, while living in NYC, I was alarmed that * might become pResident. Just an intuition - that happened to be right!

I believed - and still do - that the first terrorist attacks on 9/11 were MIHOP.

So, I am not surprised to see that they will try anything they can to avoid another election, especially since it looks as if the Dems could win by a large margin this time. (I know the polls keep reporting they're close, but that is a setup to keep people from questioning if they win.)

The * administration keeps stating that the Madrid bombing affected the outcome of Spain's election. True enough! What they don't explain, is that a country who wanted to get rid of the warmonger president was simply more determined to do so after the bombing. The people chose democracy!!!

I think that these guys (Bushco) would even create another terra-ist event just to cancel the election.

So, IMHO, you folks really, really need to come up with a plan in case that happens.

* is absolutely desperate to remain in office and further his grandiose PNAC agenda. I hope Americans are just as desperate to prevent it.

[mahina]

40. The Anti-Coup

Tools we ALL need: download for FREE (link below) or buy for 6$ The Anti-Coup by Gene Sharp. Also on the Einstein Institution site are links to his Methods of Nonviolent Action.

Watch the film "A Force More Powerful"- it's in some libraries. It's a documentary of the power that the people have used to nonviolently defeat the likes of Pinochet, Hitler, etc. That's a great neighborhood video night. WE HAVE THE POWER!

From the Anti-Coup:
Supporters of political democracy, human rights, and social justice have good reasons to be alarmed about coups d’état. These abrupt seizures of the state apparatus have occurred with great frequency in recent decades. Coups have overthrown established constitutional democratic systems of government, halted movements toward greater democracy, and have imposed brutal and oppressive regimes. Coups d’état are one of the main ways in which new dictatorships are established. Coups may also precipitate civil wars and international crises. Coups remain a major unsolved defense problem.

Massive efforts and sums of money are regularly devoted to prepare to resist foreign aggression. Yet, virtually nothing is done to prepare societies to deal with the defense problem of coups d’état, despite their frequency in world politics. Serious consideration of anti-coup defense is long overdue.
<..[br />
http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations.php3?action=printContentItem&orgid=88&typeID=16&itemID=57&User_Session=0075662fcf07a79bbf3648863efde1ae

[lapauvre]

7. I have been saying the same thing

for three years. Today I received five phone calls, two of them long distance, all telling me, "I never would have believed it possible, but you were right. Now I believe they're actually going to pull something."

They all said some form of your last sentence. "Please tell me this can't happen?"

I don't know, but if it can't, and "they" are clearly losing this election, I think something WILL happen. Don't know what, but something.

That this is coming up just BEFORE the Democratic Convention is the scariest part.

[Ilsa]

8. Let's have the election early.

Hell, they let Iraq take over two days early. I'd love an election right after the Dem COnvention.

[LearnedHand]

9. Okay, guys. This is NOT the kind of reassurance I was...

...looking for. :scared:

I actually was hoping someone had an inside perspecitve -- or something -- that this couldn't play out.

Will the military leadership support this? Will they turn against our own citizens to support cancelation of the election?

[BiggJawn]

12. Sorry, my rose-coloured glasses are busted.

Don't worry about the Military. They're all over in Iraq, teaching the locals "Sovereignty"

They'll have fast-deploy sqauds of SWAT and riot cops to keep us peasants in line. Fancy that, you'll get your skull caved in by some guy who's never been to your city before!

[LearnedHand]

16. Oh, right

I forgot that while our men and women were over there being stretched to the breaking point, they can't maintain martial law here. You're absolutely right; it WILL be some stormtroopers or brownshirts, or something.

[BiggJawn]

23. Saw another thread about the Mercs that will be here...

Maybe it'll be some KBR or Wackin'Hut employee who'll be busting our skulls.

Hell, $1,000 a day, They'll have all the ditto-monkeys they can use. After all, they're just gonna have to go out and stomp some pussy Liberals, not like we'd fight back or anything like that...(heh-heh....)

[BiggJawn]

11. Uh-huh, we were all talking crazy, we were "Tinfoil-Hatters"...

In the words of Lance Armstrong ..."How do you fuckin' like me NOW???"

Won't be an election.
Won't be a public outcry. Why?
Nekkid Titties on FAUX, that's why.

So what do we do? All run to various Foreign Consulates and ask for asylum?

Just hope I get somebody else to "Water the Tree" before I have to.

[onehandle]

18. I don't mind that they are talking about this.

Practical. I would be disappointed if any administration didn't have a plan like this.

However I resent that the Bush administration is using this news to scare the people (further), and are sending a clear communication to terrorists that our elections can be affected by their actions.

It gives the appearance Bush is working with the terrorists to help his campaign.

IMO, it would have to be a Hell of an attack to stop our elections. Major bio-attack or nuke. Unlikely. Also an attack would be bad for Bush. It would be a major failure. They don't want an attack. They just want us scared.

[Wednesdays]

55. Shrub won't care

>> Also an attack would be bad for Bush. It would be a major failure. <<

You think Pinochet or Ceausescu cared if some of their people thought them failures?

Seriously folks, we too often underestimate how easily the thugs can keep everyone in line through fear. Remember duct tape and plastic? Well, we all laughed at that, but when I tried to get a roll of duct tape to seal some boxes when I moved, I swear I couldn't find a single roll in Oklahoma City for a solid month.

A major MIHOP or LIHOP, and the BFEE will have the country in it's grip once again. Once again, see my scenario here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1971133#1972474

[TahitiNut]

22. Delayed Election = No Time For Recounts (or maybe even full counts)

In some states, that would mean the slate of electors could get thrown into the legislature.

Remember the "Safe Harbor" provisions?
Remember Florida?

A delayed election is a stolen election.

[shraby]

28. Not only a terrorist attack can

institute martial law...demonstrations at the Republican convention can trigger it also. Go to the Plame thread no. 6. This has been hashed out on that thread.

[natrat]

50. recounts?

diebold machines have a paper trail? or is it only a portion of the voting is electronic

[Matilda]

32. This has implications world-wide.

Can you imagine - every jumped-up little tyrant would seize the
opportunity to crack down on "dissidents" everywhere.

Never mind the stock markets - it could match 1929.

After the lengths he went to in 2000, I think Bush would try
anything, but they probably haven't thought beyond the U.S.

Big bad.

[illuminaughty]

35. This train wreck is right on schedule

I believe my first of just a few posts here on DU dealt with this very scenario. MIHOP repeated = martial law = no election. I was hoping to throw away my tinfoil hat, but this looks pretty grim. This is one conspiracy theory that has so far been predicted so well you can set your watch by it or your terror alert code color...whatever method of measure you wish to choose.

Anarchy, anyone?

[Swamp Rat]

38. If they suspend the election, anarchy will be a possibility.

Welcome to DU :toast:

[givemebackmycountry]

69. Welcome to DU

"We discuss, then decide"

[eowyn70]

36. Tom Ridge will engineer something

I'll lay money that Tom Ridge will start shit, say on Halloween. Or maybe sooner if Chimpie is down in the polls.I wouldn't put it past those Nazis #cough# Republicans to either 1) engineer a "terriorist attack, or 2)threaten a terriorist attack.

[yardwork]

37. I have more confidence in America

Even if there was a major terrorist attack - which the thugs in the WH have done everything they can to encourage - I don't think we would fall apart.

I think that the military would step in and support the Constitution, not the rat-weasels in power.

I think that many Republicans in Congress would step up.

While I'm sure that Scalia and Brown would hand the country over to the thugs, I don't believe another member of the Supreme Court would go along with it. I think some of them are already regretting their 2000 vote, and was decided on a razor-thin margin of one vote.

I think that people would take to the streets - and not only that - we would strike. There would be major work stoppages nationwide.

Some local police would go along with thug-orders, but more would not.

The country is awash with guns. I hope it wouldn't come to that, but if it did, there is the potential for major violent riots, and there are more of us than there are thugs in D.C.

They wouldn't get away with it. They'd have to totally destroy the country - major nuclear attack - to disrupt things enough. And they aren't willing to do that.

[ze_dscherman]

39. Kick

IF really some major attack happened, this would be very probable. But so far, I consider it scare tactics, employed because * still has better poll numbers in security questions than Kerry.

[NeoConsSuck]

42. BONG !! You win the prize..

It is my belief that no one is contemplating suspending an election.

They do, however, want the voter on Election day to be very fearful, with Terror, Terror, Terror on the voter's mind. Terror->Vote->Wartime President, Terror->Vote->Wartime President.

Don't forget to make that connection on Election day!

How many will vote the cockroach because he is a "WAR TIME" pResident?

[Norquist Nemesis]

56. Add weight in gold to that prize! Scare tactic plus

direct manipulation. How? Putting police around specific voter precincts in swing states with heavy Democratic polling.

Oh, here's another tinfoil theory to chew on...bear with me here.

Elections are on Tuesdays and polls are open for 12 hours. Imagine if business owners and managers who are Bush supporters decided to make it the most productive day in history with their workforces? In other words, make a 7-3 shift mandatory overtime on the morning of arrival. Or maybe schedule some mandatory meetings, demand extensive modification of business plan reports, send people on overnight business trips, etc. There are plenty of ways to do this and the beauty of it is no one would notice!

Ok, I'm just weird, I know. But this is one of the problems I have had for a long time with Tuesday being the election day. There have been times that I haven't been able to vote due to work. :shrug:

[allemand]

41. securing the (re-)election?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3885663.stm

"Homeland Security Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse told Newsweek, "We are reviewing the issue to determine what steps need to be taken to secure the election." "

For Bush that is.

[bushisanidiot]

43. The american people won't stand for it, neither will the UN

if AWOL tries to pull this trick to stay in office he will see the entire world turn against him.. including many people who WOULD have voted for him had the elections taken place.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

47. But the UN is irrelevent, remember. And the pukes don't give a rat's ass

about the people of this country unless you define corporations as people (um...which they do!)

[Wednesdays]

58. Oh, but it won't be AWOL's fault...

>>if AWOL tries to pull this trick to stay in office he will see the entire world turn against him.. including many people who WOULD have voted for him had the elections taken place. <<

Oh, but within hours of the attack, it will be shown that Al Qaiada was behind it, and it will be all over the national and local news. How could people possibly indict the glorious president over it? He would be totally innocent, I tell ya!

Not only that, but to second-guess him during such a time of crisis would be "playing politics with a tragedy" and just plain un-patriotic!

/sarcasm=off...but this is exactly what we would hear from all the talking heads.

[skippysmom]

44. The fact that they can even contemplate this idea publicly

scares the living shit out of me.

[dusty64]

46. It IS all SO obvious.

Where the fu%k are the Democrats on this issue, are they blind? I would expect this trial balloon to be shot down in a hurry, yet they keep letting it float away. I'm getting REALLY disgusted.

[sandraj]

48. The more I hear about this story

the more skeptical I am.

First, an attack on a grand enough scale to disrupt national elections would have to be well-timed and well planned, among other things. If it were to go off without a hitch (i.e., simultaneous attacks in major cities) that would mean our military and government officials were either sleeping on the job or complicit. Bush is campaigning on how he has made the world safer, and yet we have this "credible" threat, and Ridge is making it sound inevitable. Uh, sorry - can't have it both ways.

Second, the only thing being discussed in the event of such a catastrophic attack is the legality of suspending the elections. No talk of trying to prevent this supposed imminent attack. No talk of how our illustrious department of Homeland Security is going to assist the public in the event of such an attack.

Third, I'm starting to wonder if the admin is using a terrorist threat as a smokescreen (they've done it many times before for various other reasons) in order to investigate the legal issues involved in suspending elections. What legal issues are they really looking for; what are they really trying to do here?

They get away with these suspiciously-timed terrorist alerts over and over again. I think it's time for the media and others, especially in government, to start calling them on it.

Just my 2 cents. I'm having a very hard time taking any of this at face value.

[Edmond Dantes]

49. DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel....

Please note that the question has been referred to DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel. This is the exact SAME OFFICE that produced the TORTURE MEMORANDA.

Do not be surprised if OLC concludes, on the basis of shoddy legal analysis, that the President has inherent authority to suspend elections in times of national emergency, that this power can be exercised by Ridge if the President so delegates, and that legislation is unnecessary.

OLC is chock-full of *'s toadies and the toadies always tell the President exactly what he wants to hear. That the question originated with Ridge's DHS is irrelevant. That is simply political cover for * who wants to avoid the appearance of being personally responsible for postponing an election in which his own political future is at stake.

[Aries]

51. A related story from "The Atlantic"

Found on http://digbysblog.blogspot.com:


The Atlantic Monthly | March 2004

The Armageddon Plan

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2004/03/mann.htm

During the Reagan era Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were key players in a clandestine program designed to set aside the legal lines of succession and immediately install a new "President" in the event that a nuclear attack killed the country's leaders. The program helps explain the behavior of the Bush Administration on and after 9/11.

by James Mann

.....

At least once a year during the 1980s Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld vanished. Cheney was working diligently on Capitol Hill, as a congressman rising through the ranks of the Republican leadership. Rumsfeld, who had served as Gerald Ford's Secretary of Defense, was a hard-driving business executive in the Chicago area—where, as the head of G. D. Searle & Co., he dedicated time and energy to the success of such commercial products as Nutra-Sweet, Equal, and Metamucil. Yet for periods of three or four days at a time no one in Congress knew where Cheney was, nor could anyone at Searle locate Rumsfeld. Even their wives were in the dark; they were handed only a mysterious Washington phone number to use in case of emergency.

After leaving their day jobs Cheney and Rumsfeld usually made their way to Andrews Air Force Base, outside Washington. From there, in the middle of the night, each man—joined by a team of forty to sixty federal officials and one member of Ronald Reagan's Cabinet—slipped away to some remote location in the United States, such as a disused military base or an underground bunker. A convoy of lead-lined trucks carrying sophisticated communications equipment and other gear would head to each of the locations.

Rumsfeld and Cheney were principal actors in one of the most highly classified programs of the Reagan Administration. Under it U.S. officials furtively carried out detailed planning exercises for keeping the federal government running during and after a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. The program called for setting aside the legal rules for presidential succession in some circumstances, in favor of a secret procedure for putting in place a new "President" and his staff. The idea was to concentrate on speed, to preserve "continuity of government," and to avoid cumbersome procedures; the speaker of the House, the president pro tempore of the Senate, and the rest of Congress would play a greatly diminished role.

[Commendatori]

53. This wouldn't suprise me.

After an attack close to Election Day, BFEE would need a few days to lean on the press to give us the impression that he's without fault.

[Salmo Trutta]

54. Instead of delaying...

can't they have it 2 days prior to the scheduled date, ala the Iraq sovereignty handover? They're such sneaky bastards, I'm sure they can figure something out besides delaying....

[JPZenger]

59. Extend Voting a Day?

I could understand that if there is a major terrorist attack on Election Day, that it may make sense to EXTEND the voting another day. However, I am not real comfortable with any long delay.

I remember an old skit on the David Frost show in the early 1970s. They had Richard Nixon in a speach to the nation: "I could go back to letting you elect your President .... but that would be the EASY way out."

What scares the Administration shitless is that in Spain, the incumbent government was supposed to win an easy re-election. Even after the terrorist attack, people were willing to vote for them. But them the government's lies and deception came out, and it became clear the government was using the terrorist attack for its own political purposes. And THAT is what sunk the Spanish Government.

[knitter4democracy]

60. What about

a fake biological or chemical attack on several polling places around the country? That's what my husband thinks will happen. It doesn't even have to be real to put us on alert. If someone found some white powder and started sneezing in several places at once all over the country (something Al Qaeda is known for) and the media got a hold of it, that would shut everything down. Most polls are in schools, and no one would want to risk the kids. It would take weeks to decon the school or even to find out what the thing was. We'd be under martial law in no time and would lose everything that makes us American.

[Barrett808]

61. "he people of San Francisco are an endangered species." -- Jebbie Bush

October Surprise.

[tjwash]

67. The more they pull this garbage...

...the more people will see through the lies, to how desperate this administration really is.

[Justitia]

70. What about EARLY VOTING?

Where I live we get practically 2 wks of early voting to cast ballots. If everyone did early voting, absentee, etc, would the actual day even really matter? Doesn't everyone have early voting?

Am I missing something???

I would think early voting would undermine their plans to undermine Election Day (at least as far as the ridiculous terra threat goes).