"The President is entitled to a process to determine whether the results that are reported are the results that were. He is entitled to recounts where the tallies are close. He is entitled to assurance that no fraud produced this overwhelming result. To many, the very idea seems just bizarre. Even Karl Rove said it would “require a conspiracy on the scale of a James Bond movie.” Yet that doesn’t negate the President’s right to ask."

Well, right. The rule of law must govern all.

When elections are not close (even 2016's razor thin election was settled, in the statistical war rooms of the media, by 4AM the day after the election), we (the public) allow the megacorporation media to decide for us who the president-elect is; and we call the president-elect "President-Elect" from that point.

This is not a good habit for us to get into.

Legally, the President-Elect becomes the President-Elect only after the electors have made him or her so. That's December 14. If the President chooses to fight for his win until that date, that's not strange or illegal. It's ODD, in that we're all trained to accept the mass media's "coronation" of the President-Elect, turning the Electoral College into a anachronistic tradition, but legally, the Corporations hold no sway.

Let's all take a breath and remember that in 2016, the election of Donald Trump was --- without doubt, in the minds of some -- going to result in nuclear war and a Depression. Neither has happened. This bellicose president brings out incredible fears in many people ..... which tend to be unrealized.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store