What Trump will do the day he loses

 If Donald Trump loses the election on November 3rd, his reaction will be akin to that of a birthday boy who is grounded from attending his own birthday party. To put it mildly, he will not take it well. He will rant, rave, protest and demand a recount. And he will continue his endless Twitter diatribe about the unfairness of the election process, the so-called "fraudulent ballots," the phony mail-in ballots, etc., etc., etc.. He will mudsling towards Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff and others. And he will save plenty of blame for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rep. Ilhan Omar. And if he loses Florida too, he will try to "fire" Florida Governor Ron DeSantis for failing to deliver Florida for him.

And of course he will have plenty of blame left for Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham and Kevin McCarthy for failing to bring in the undecided voters for him. He will be in a rant and rave like that of a rabid dog biting its own tail. He will be like a desperate criminal pinned against a wall, not able to ascertain who his friends and enemies are and hating the world. He will lunge out at everyone with an anger, hatred and wrath not seen in a leader since the dictatorial reign of Adolf Hitler at his worst.

He will deny the results

I predict that after Trump goes into his tirade on Twitter blaming all of the aforementioned people for his 2020 election defeat, that he go to the East Lawn of the White House and hold a "no question" press conference. At the press conference, he will announce that he does not accept the results of the election. He will announce that it is a fraudulent election, that the ballots were tampered with and that the "only way" that he could have lost is if there was fraud and he will insist that there was fraud.

He will demand a recount

I predict that Trump's next move will be to demand a "recount" in every county or parish in which he is listed as the loser, across the country. I predict that he will have Attorney General William Barr contact the Secretaries of State of all states that Trump lost and demand a full recount of all the ballots.

He will reject postmarked ballots

I predict that Trump's next move will be to have Barr attempt to issue a binding order to all Secretaries of State in all 50 states to the effect that any and all ballots postmarked November 3rd, but not received until after November 3rd, cannot be counted. This would disqualify most ballots from active military personnel and other Americans overseas, since most of their ballots are not received by Election Day. 

He will deny ballots from unconfirmed voters

In what perhaps will be his boldest move after losing, Trump will attempt, once again through Barr, to invalidate any and all ballots nationwide from voters whose identities were not confirmed through photo identification. This would ban all mail-in ballots nationwide and would ban all ballots from California voters, the nation's most populous state, thus depriving Biden of California's 55 Electoral College votes. (California does not require photo identification for voters and has not done so for years).

He will refuse to concede

I predict that Trump's next move will be to refuse to concede his loss to Joe Biden. Although it is not absolutely mandatory that the incumbent President concede if he loses, it always has been the practice to do so. No defeated incumbent President ever has refused to concede. Although he does not absolutely have to concede, he does have to turn over the powers of the Presidency, as well as the launch codes and the nuclear football, on January 20, 2021. If he refuses to do so on Inauguration Day, then most likely the Marines and the Secret Service would intervene and force the issue. This will be extremely embarrassing indeed for all concerned parties, including the American People.

He will lose his court battles

More than likely, Trump will lose his court battles. Joe Biden will be certified as the winner and will be declared the President-Elect of the United States. It's what most likely will happen next that is of particular interest to students of politics.

He will try to pardon himself

I predict that Trump's next move will be to try to pardon himself for obstruction of justice, abuse of power and tax evasion. I predict that the backlash from this will be swift, deliberate and definitive. Somebody will take it to court and the pardon will be declared "null and void" almost immediately.

He will resign from the Presidency

It is my prediction that just as soon as his self-pardon is declared unconstitutional, that Trump will resign the Presidency with approximately two and a half months left in his term. Trump will make up some phony excuse for resigning, but the real reason will be that he hopes that Pence, who is finishing out Trump's term, will pardon him.

He will move to an undisclosed foreign location

I predict that President Pence, who still has dreams of being elected President in his own right in four to eight years, will not pardon Trump. I predict that Trump, Melania and Barron will move to an undisclosed foreign country, leaving Trump's adult children behind to deal with the Paparrazzi. 

Conclusion...

Well that's how I see it. Of course I do not have a crystal ball; but I think that this is pretty close to how things will play out if Trump loses on November 3rd. Whatever happens, we all know that Trump is not going to take losing easily and that he is going to blame everybody else, including his greatest political allies. In his mind, nothing is his fault and it never has been. And he has never made a mistake. And he handled the pandemic with total artistry. 

I think that the Donald may be in for one rude awakening on November 3rd. It's time for him to vacate  government housing and move to a foreign country; that is if they will have him. 

Senator Feinstein: Don’t berate my Catholic faith

Senator Dianne Feinstein, as you prevail in your attempt to dissuade your fellow Senators from voting to approve Amy Barrett as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, please do not berate my Catholic faith or question its principles and teachings. Yes we disagree with you on Choice. Yes we are Pro Life. And yes we believe in certain principles, practices and morals that distinguish us from other sects of the Christian faith.

Your off mic comment in which you stated that Amy Barrett’s “deeply personal” faith is influencing her decisions as a judge was quite disturbing. You went further and told Barrett, “Your dogma lives loudly within you.” What dogma are you talking about, Senator? Are you talking about the Catholic teachings about the sanctity of life? Are you talking about the Catholic belief that life begins at conception and that unborn babies need to be protected? Are you talking about our steadfast and total objection to late term abortions in which doctors take inventories of body parts as they rip them off babies that are still in the womb? 

Pandora’s Box

Senator, the point that I am trying to make is that once you start attacking a person for their religious faith and referring to it as their “dogma,” you are opening Pandora’s Box. And when you are talking about a faith as old and as complicated as the Catholic faith, the conversation can go on from here to perpetuity. 

Instead of attacking nominees for their faith, or “dogma” as you call it, perhaps you should ask nominees about their qualifications for the job and make your decision based on their qualifications instead of your perception of what their “dogma” is or is not. And speaking of qualifications, being Catholic is not an instant “disqualifier“ for a judicial nominee or any other type of nominee. And if you see it as a disqualifier, then you are guilty of anti-Catholic bigotry.

Catholics can be leaders too

We Catholics can be leaders too. And we can make decisions that pertain to the society as a whole, guided by our principles, beliefs and morals without forcing our faith on others. And yes we may have a more stringent sense of right and wrong than do most Christian denominations; but we still can listen to others and make principled decisions without infringing upon the rights of others.

Roe v. Wade

Yes Senator Feinstein it is no secret that we Catholics oppose the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide. It is no secret that we believe in the sanctity of human life and that we believe that life begins at conception. 

But you are making quite a presumption when you assume that just because we oppose Roe v. Wade that it means that we can come up with a Constitutional rationale for overturning it. If such a rationalization does exists, it exists no matter whether those who discover it are Catholic, HIndu or anything in between. Conversely, if no rationale exists for overturning Roe v. Wade, it does not matter if the Justices determining that are Catholic, Jewish or agnostic. 

If there is no rationale for overturning Roe v. Wade, then you ought not fear that a Catholic Associate Justice will find one. And if there is such a rationale, it can be found by any Associate Justice, no matter their religion.

And so the fact that a devout Catholic has been nominated to the Court should not make any difference at all. Just because Amy Barrett is very sincere about her Catholic faith does not mean that she cannot be objective, fair and equitable in her decisions as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. And it does not mean that she would be any less objective, fair and equitable than anybody else. 

Fearing the Pope

When Senator John F. Kennedy was nominated for President by the Democratic Party, a lot of people feared that he would be directed or influenced by the Pope. Senator Kennedy reassured voters that he would not be directed by the Pope and that he would listen to the American People before making decisions.

The American People believed Kennedy and gave him their trust. As it turned out, Kennedy kept his promise and did not depend upon the Pope when making decisions as President. Senator Feinstein, I believe that you should extend the same courtesy to any Catholic nominee for a judicial post who assures you that they will not allow their faith to dictate their judicial decisions. Once such a nominee has provided you with such assurances, you should drop the issue of their religion and accept their assurances at face value.

It’s your decision

Senator Feinstein, how you vote on the nomination of Amy Barrett is your decision and only yours to make. I am not telling you how to vote on her nomination. However, I am asking that you not let Barett’s faith enter the picture as you cast your vote in the Senate. Base your vote on her qualifications, not her faith. After all, isn’t that what millions of Catholics did in California when they voted for you as a Senator? Need I say more?