Donald Trump's press secretary Kayleigh McEnany alleges voter fraud in Fox News interview. Video / Fox News
A US law professor wrote an eerie prediction more than a year ago of Donald Trump's election defeat and his refusal to accept his loss - complete with furious tweets in capital letters.
The article, written by Edward B Foley and published in the law journal of Chicago's Loyola University, uncannily echoes what has unfolded on and since election night.
And what the professor anticipated would happen next is scary.
Foley's fictional account includes Trump being ahead in Pennsylvania, then falling behind, then issuing furious tweets saying the election is being stolen from him.
In one imagined tweet, Foley has Trump exhorting, "STOP THIS THEFT RIGHT NOW!!!" "DON'T LET THEM STEAL THIS ELECTION FROM YOU!!!"
Then: "THIS THEFT WILL NOT STAND!!!" "WE ARE TAKING BACK OUR VICTORY."
Foley, an election law scholar and former Ohio solicitor Ggeneral, wrote the article before Joe Biden had even been selected as Democrat candidate, when Elizabeth Warren was touted as the frontrunner.
The article was published around October 2019 for the Loyola University Chicago Law Journal Winter 2019 edition.
THE OBSERVERS WERE NOT ALLOWED INTO THE COUNTING ROOMS. I WON THE ELECTION, GOT 71,000,000 LEGAL VOTES. BAD THINGS HAPPENED WHICH OUR OBSERVERS WERE NOT ALLOWED TO SEE. NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE. MILLIONS OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS WERE SENT TO PEOPLE WHO NEVER ASKED FOR THEM!
"This time it is all eyes on Pennsylvania, as whoever wins the Keystone State will win an Electoral College majority.
"Trump is ahead in the state by 20,000 votes, and he is tweeting 'The race is over. Another four years to keep Making America Great Again.'
"The Associated Press (AP) and the networks have not yet declared Trump winner.
"Although 20,000 is a sizeable lead, they have learned in recent years that numbers can shift before final, official certification of election results.
"They are afraid of 'calling' the election for Trump, only to find themselves needing to retract the call – as they embarrassingly did twenty years earlier, in 2000.
"Trump's Democratic opponent, _________ (fill in the blank with whichever candidate you prefer; I will pick Elizabeth Warren since at the moment she is the frontrunner according to prediction markets), is not conceding, claiming the race is still too close to call.
President-elect Joe Biden, VP-elect Kamala Harris and their families on stage in Delaware on November 7. Photo / AP
"Both candidates end the night without going in front of the cameras.
"In the morning, new numbers show Trump's lead starting to slip, and by noon it is below 20,000.
"Impatient, Trump holds an impromptu press conference and announces: 'I've won re-election. The results last night showed that I won Pennsylvania by over 20,000 votes.
"Those results were complete, with 100 per cent of precincts reporting.
"As far as I'm concerned, those results are now final.
"'I'm not going to let machine politicians in Philadelphia steal my re-election victory from me – or from my voters!'
"Despite Trump's protestations, the normal process of canvassing election returns continues in Pennsylvania, and updated returns continue to show Trump's lead slipping away.
"First, it drops below 15,000. Then 10,000. Then 5000.
"As this happens, Trump's tweets become increasingly incensed – and incendiary. STOP THIS THEFT RIGHT NOW!!!" "DON'T LET THEM STEAL THIS ELECTION FROM YOU!!!"
"The canvassing process in Pennsylvania has continued, and Trump's lead in the state diminishes even further.
"Then, several days later, the lead flips. Now, Warren is ahead in Pennsylvania.
"First by only a few hundred votes. Then, by a couple of thousand votes.
"Although the AP and networks continue to declare the race 'too close to call', it is Warren's turn to take to the cameras declaring victory.
Armed Trump supporters on the steps of the Pennsylvania State Capitol on November 7. Photo / AP
"Trump insists, by tweet and microphone, 'THIS THEFT WILL NOT STAND!!!" "WE ARE TAKING BACK OUR VICTORY'."
Foley's article, entitled Preparing for a Disputed Presidential Election: An Exercise in Election Risk Assessment and Management, foresees the so-called "blue shift" in 2020 voting.
This sees the in-person vote counted first, favouring Republicans, and the mail-in votes counted later, favouring Democrats.
This causes a shift to the left later in the vote-counting process and leaves some observers questioning the legitimacy of the outcome if Democrats win.
The blue shift occurs traditionally because young voters, low-income voters, and voters who move often are likely to vote by mail and are likely to lean Democratic. In 2020, the coronavirus added to the picture, with Joe Biden urging voters to cast their ballots by mail to protect their health.
Foley writes that the blue shift did in fact happen in Pennsylvania in 2016, when Hillary Clinton gained 23,659 votes, reducing Trump's lead of 67,951 in the state to 44,292.
It was not enough to flip Pennsylvania to Clinton.
In 2020, Foley writes, "Trump would go to court in an effort to prevent certification of the canvas based on the blue shift 'overtime' vote."
His prediction of what happens next in his fictional account of Trump v Warren is chilling.
Professor Edward B. Foley. Photo / Supplied
Warren is declared the winner, but when the Electoral Council meets – as it is due to next month, on December 14 – the Republican-pledged electors cast their 20 electoral votes for Trump.
When Congress meets on January 6, 2021 to count the electoral votes from the states, there are two conflicting results and two winners.
"If … Trump can gain traction with his allegation that the blue shift amounts to fraudulently fabricated ballots, then it becomes more politically tenable to claim that the legislature must step in and appoint the state's electors directly to reflect the 'true' will of the state's voters, who otherwise would be deprived of the result they mandated as reflected on election night," Foley writes.
"The two parties take to cable news and social media to test various arguments as to why their candidate is the winner entitled to be inaugurated as president on January 20."
Foley's article is long and detailed, but basically both Republicans and Democrats continue to claim they won the election and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi steps in as acting president-elect.
"Trump announces that he is proceeding to prepare to be inaugurated for a second term on January 20 as does Ms Pelosi," Foley writes.
"As the clock ticks toward noon on January 20, all of DC – indeed all of America – is in turmoil over what will happen.
"Neither … is backing down.
"Both insist that at noon on January 20 they will take the presidential oath and begin to assert the powers of commander-in-chief.
"Both demand the full support and obedience of America's armed forces upon taking the presidential oath."
In Foley's account, Pelosi warns the military, the FBI, and other federal security forces not to refuse to obey her orders as acting president starting at noon on January 20.
If that happened, Foley says "the American people must take to the streets in massive demonstrations to show that their democracy will not be stolen from them".
Foley then asks: "What is the military to do starting at noon on January 20? Who should the military recognise as commander-in-chief?
"Who should get the 'nuclear football' with the launch codes, Trump or Pelosi?"
Foley concludes that Americans must hope the nightmare scenario he paints never comes to pass.
"Instead, the nation will be well served if the outcome of the 2020 presidential election is so lopsided as to be impossible to dispute," he writes.
