TRIGGER WARNING: In which I talk about Mr Trump v Mrs Clinton.
For John, BLUF: Remember, Russia isn't pro-Trump. It is anti-Hillary. Nothing to see here; just move along.
The OpEd writers are Ms Dahlia Lithwick and Mr David S Cohen. The paper is The New York Times.
On Monday, members of the Electoral College will vote in Donald J. Trump as president. Though he lost the election by nearly three million votes and almost daily generates headlines about new scandals, the Democratic Party is doing little to stop him. If you’ve been asking yourself “Where are the Democrats?” you’re not alone.Well, First Amendment and all that, I guess. And, somewhere I heard that Joseph Stalin noted that "paper will accept anything written on it." And, there is always the example of Pulitzer Prize winning New York Times reporter Walter Duranty.
Then there is this innovative paragraph, full of hope and passion:
There’s no shortage of legal theories that could challenge Mr. Trump’s anointment, but they come from outsiders rather than the Democratic Party. Impassioned citizens have been pleading with electors to vote against Mr. Trump; law professors have argued that winner-take-all laws for electoral votes are unconstitutional; a small group, the Hamilton Electors, is attempting to free electors to vote their consciences; and a new theory has arisen that there is legal precedent for courts to give the election to Mrs. Clinton based on Russian interference.What "legal precedent" are they talking about? Is this some sort of New York Times inside baseball thing?
Then there is Harvard University constitutional law professor Larry Lessig, who claims to know of 20 Republican Electors who are not going to vote for Mr Trump. Per Politico.
Mr Trump has 306 Electoral Votes and needs 270. If Professor Lessig can attract 20 more Republicans to his nefarious cause he will have thrown the election into the House of Representatives, for them to pick from amongst Mr Trump, Mrs Clinton and Mr Johnson. While this might defeat Mr Trump, it is unlikely to elevate Mrs Clinton.
My sense is that Ms Lithwick and Mr Cohen are of the "any means, fair or foul" school of politics.
Regards — Cliff