I think I still have to internalize that Trump's actions can be both an attempt at a coup, and reckless political flailing, and one doesn't necessarily diminish or exclude the other.
I think I still have to internalize that Trump's actions can be both an attempt at a coup, and reckless political flailing, and one doesn't necessarily diminish or exclude the other.
This website, along with Choose Democracy and Hold the Line, are great sources to keep informed about current U.S. election-related events and to learn ways that you can make a difference.
This website, along with Choose Democracy and Hold the Line, are great sources to keep informed about current U.S. election-related events and to learn ways that you can make a difference.
I could see this as the beginnings of a civil war. If Trump and his allies lose, they could raise up arms and be 'legitimatized' by being recognized as the real US government by such allies as...
I could see this as the beginnings of a civil war. If Trump and his allies lose, they could raise up arms and be 'legitimatized' by being recognized as the real US government by such allies as Russia. If they win, through extra-legal means, then it would be a coup.
As for the military, when I was in I couldn't see Active Duty going against the people of the US. We are sworn to uphold the constitution of the United States of America, not blindly follow the whims of our leadership. Granted, we have to follow orders, but we are trained on how to handle illegal orders (though not everyone will toe that line IMO). What would suck is if the senior military brass decides that it is ok to step in. That could be a disaster of epic purportions.
Not sure about the officer side, but I know that at all of the different levels of NCOES (Non-Commissioned Officer Education System/School) I attended we were given scenario based training on how...
Not sure about the officer side, but I know that at all of the different levels of NCOES (Non-Commissioned Officer Education System/School) I attended we were given scenario based training on how to handle ourselves when given what could be determined an illegal order. Essentially the steps are to repeat the order back to the person giving it, clarifying that it is indeed what they stated. Then if that is correct clarify HOW it is illegal and that it should not be carried out. THEN, if they STILL want to do it, you can state that you want to speak to their superior officer for clarification or that you will not/cannot do it. Then you face the consequences of your actions, and you had better damn well be right or you will probably lose your job, career, and possibly go to jail.
I honestly cannot give concrete examples, but I do know that the oath is as follows: I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States...
I honestly cannot give concrete examples, but I do know that the oath is as follows:
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962). ( https://www.army.mil/values/oath.html )
I know it states we will obey the orders, but that is superseded by the oath to support and defend the Constitution.
It's certainly the groundwork for a coup. He really just needs a couple weeks to get all his followers believing this nonsense (and it's working). At that point, who's going to stop him?...
It's certainly the groundwork for a coup. He really just needs a couple weeks to get all his followers believing this nonsense (and it's working).
At that point, who's going to stop him? Republicans are circling the wagons. I feel like we're all sitting around thinking "look how desperate they are, there's no evidence, it'll never work!" But these people have already shown a tendency to believe the unbelievable based upon even less evidence. Republicans are playing along for now to see if it works, and if it does, they'll hop onboard.
I, frankly, think this site is understating it ... or perhaps mis-stating it? This absolutely, 100% definitely, is an attempted coup d'etat, that was started months before the election. Donald...
I, frankly, think this site is understating it ... or perhaps mis-stating it?
This absolutely, 100% definitely, is an attempted coup d'etat, that was started months before the election. Donald Trump publicly declared his intention to attempt a coup ... I'm checking right now ... it looks like he first announced it on July 19th, the first time he stated that he would not accept the election results if he didn't win. That was probably also about the time he started planning it and laying the groundwork for it, though I suppose that's a bit fuzzier.
How effective it is, which specific acts are contributing to it, how likely it is to succeed, which people are involved, what leaders are supporting/opposing it ... those are all 2ndary, "accept the premise" discussions.
But by phrasing the core fact — that this is an attempted coup d'etat in the US — as a question which is open for debate, this site is giving power and legitimacy to the instigators.
I'm seeing a lot of bluster and a lot of legal cases that pretty much immediately fail. Attempting to win via lawsuits isn't a coup; if they could actually win in court then that would make it...
I'm seeing a lot of bluster and a lot of legal cases that pretty much immediately fail. Attempting to win via lawsuits isn't a coup; if they could actually win in court then that would make it legal, as with the 2000 election. A coup isn't done with lawyers.
I am wondering if some anti-Trump people are inadvertently contributing to the smokescreen.
Everything Putin does is legal, at least according to Russian laws. The 2000 election was effectively stolen by the Supreme Court. They upended years of states rights, by saying the Federal court...
Everything Putin does is legal, at least according to Russian laws.
The 2000 election was effectively stolen by the Supreme Court. They upended years of states rights, by saying the Federal court could overall State court on a State matter (which is what elections are) and only they could correctly interpret what the State legislature really wanted, because it had Federal implications, but... that giving Bush the presidency set absolutely no precedent, because it was such a bullshit ruling they didn't want it extending beyond stopping the recount.
Three of those partisan hacks who pushed this bogus interpretation are now on the Supreme Court, and quoting this bullshit as precedent. If you undermine the courts with political puppets, it can make your Coup "legal", but it doesn't make it any less a coup.
That said, I doubt the Supreme Court is ready to go that far. If they did, it would be the end of either America or the Supreme Court.
Yes, just because it's legal doesn't make it right. I disagreed with that ruling in 2000 and I don't think that ruling was good law. But, "effectively stolen" or not, Bush won the 2000 election...
Yes, just because it's legal doesn't make it right. I disagreed with that ruling in 2000 and I don't think that ruling was good law. But, "effectively stolen" or not, Bush won the 2000 election via legal means (a court ruling), not via a coup.
I was reacting to your earlier comment I think by definition, you are probably correct, although it still feels like an attempted coup. I suppose the correct term is dictatorship?
I was reacting to your earlier comment
Attempting to win via lawsuits isn't a coup
I think by definition, you are probably correct, although it still feels like an attempted coup.
I don't know what a good term would be. I think that, rather than summing things up with a word, it might be more valuable to share news reports of what's going on?
I don't know what a good term would be. I think that, rather than summing things up with a word, it might be more valuable to share news reports of what's going on?
I would hardly call rhetoric that is clearly designed to completely undermine the validity of an election, coming from a sitting President that 70M people still voted for, merely "bluster"......
I would hardly call rhetoric that is clearly designed to completely undermine the validity of an election, coming from a sitting President that 70M people still voted for, merely "bluster"... regardless of the fact that (at least so far) the only tangible thing to come of it all is thankfully failing lawsuits. Especially since, with the firing of Def Sec. Esper and resignation of several other senior Pentagon officials, and their replacement with Trump loyalists (one of which, Anthony Tata, accused Obama of being a "terrorist leader" and secret Muslim), the prospect of a bonafide coup attempt just got a whole lot less outlandish. And if you think Trump isn't crazy and desperate enough to try to take things to the next level when all else fails, you're kidding yourself, IMO.
p.s. Not saying it would succeed, but I personally wouldn't put a legitimate coup attempt by Trump & Co. out of the realm of possibility at this point, since they certainly seem to be making moves behind the scenes to make it a more realistic option.
If illegal orders are given then I think that counts as an attempted coup. But I'm assuming that the military knows what illegal orders are and this isn't going to go anywhere, and most people...
If illegal orders are given then I think that counts as an attempted coup.
But I'm assuming that the military knows what illegal orders are and this isn't going to go anywhere, and most people besides Trump, including the appointed Trump loyalists, know that. I couldn't really say whether they would actually try to give such orders, or if this is just kayfabe as they say in wrestling.
I try to make a distinction between people saying things and doing things, especially when the people saying things are lying all the time.
The problem with that is you're assuming the coup would come from the military itself. IMO the more realistic scenario is Trump puts out a call to his blue lives matter, militia, and gun nut...
The problem with that is you're assuming the coup would come from the military itself. IMO the more realistic scenario is Trump puts out a call to his blue lives matter, militia, and gun nut supporters to "fight back" against his opponents who he will also claim are attempting a coup, and the military, reserves, and national guard is merely ordered to stand down when the chaos erupts, which would be a lot harder to define as an "illegal order".
I do not think the NG will stand down, but rather be activated by the governors. The federal military, will... Likely stay uninvolved, due to the Posse Comitatus Act. They are legally not allowed...
I do not think the NG will stand down, but rather be activated by the governors. The federal military, will... Likely stay uninvolved, due to the Posse Comitatus Act. They are legally not allowed to enforce laws.
In the end, we'd have Proud Goyos and Police shooting at each other, with a dash of National Guard. I wont be sad for a minute to have right wing groups shooting at the enforcement arm of capitalism, personally. I hope the NG folk stay safe, though.
Even if they don't participate directly, the current Pentagon leadership that was just put in place is far more likely to accept and advocate for such a "stand down" order, or at least aid in...
Even if they don't participate directly, the current Pentagon leadership that was just put in place is far more likely to accept and advocate for such a "stand down" order, or at least aid in obstructing any attempt to restore order as much as possible.
Again though, I'm not saying all this is inevitable or even likely... but I genuinely think it's not particularly wise to be so certain that a coup absolutely can't happen in the US just because there is an "illegal order" clause, and Trump is a blowhard and compulsive liar. 70M people still voted for that man despite the last four years of insanity, and a significant amount of them unfortunately believe his lies.
Domestic unrest isn't the military's job, though? Other than the National Guard. It's not clear to me what the Pentagon leadership changes have to do with the National Guard. The stories I'm...
Domestic unrest isn't the military's job, though? Other than the National Guard. It's not clear to me what the Pentagon leadership changes have to do with the National Guard.
The stories I'm reading seem to be about how the changes will affect troops in Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq.
The Secretary and Deputy Undersecretary of Defense just got replaced with Trump loyalists (Miller and Tata). Do you honestly think that if a situation came up where the National Guard might be...
The Secretary and Deputy Undersecretary of Defense just got replaced with Trump loyalists (Miller and Tata). Do you honestly think that if a situation came up where the National Guard might be needed to restore order on a National level, those two wouldn't have any influence over that?
p.s. For the record, I genuinely hope you're right that Trump is all bluster, and the US' military institutions are a lot more robust and resistant to being undermined than I am giving them credit for. And perhaps I, and everyone else worried about a coup, are just being insanely paranoid... but given the last 4 years it's really hard not to be, TBH. ;)
Bear in mind, the governors have to agree to allow their national guard to go under federal control. It's not just a decree from on high that federalizes them.
Bear in mind, the governors have to agree to allow their national guard to go under federal control. It's not just a decree from on high that federalizes them.
I don’t know and I think this argument would benefit from hearing from someone who knows more about how the US military works. We are in danger of making stuff up out of ignorance. I know enough...
I don’t know and I think this argument would benefit from hearing from someone who knows more about how the US military works. We are in danger of making stuff up out of ignorance.
I know enough to point to the Posse Comitatus Act and I’m sure all the generals know it better than we do. But I don’t know the mechanics of how the National Guard gets called out.
It seems like this is similar to fears of election fraud by people who don’t really know how elections are designed to prevent it. If you don’t know that then you can come up with scenarios that aren’t realistic. A first step towards dispelling those fears or at least making them more realistic is to study up.
A coup has historically only worked when the military has been involved. I don’t see any such involvement or even endorsement at the least of Trump from major military leaders. This is not a coup,...
A coup has historically only worked when the military has been involved. I don’t see any such involvement or even endorsement at the least of Trump from major military leaders.
This is not a coup, it is a sad political stunt where a man-child acting as a politician stomps his feet on his way out the door.
Just because it's not a successful one doesn't make it not one. It's a pathetic attempt at a coup, from a sad, pathetic excuse of a man. But that man is in one of the most powerful positions in...
Just because it's not a successful one doesn't make it not one.
It's a pathetic attempt at a coup, from a sad, pathetic excuse of a man.
But that man is in one of the most powerful positions in the world right now, so YMMV.
I just don’t like it, calling it a coup gives him too much that he hasn’t earned. If he had cultivated the necessary means to attempt a coup, failed or otherwise, that would be one thing. However...
I just don’t like it, calling it a coup gives him too much that he hasn’t earned.
If he had cultivated the necessary means to attempt a coup, failed or otherwise, that would be one thing. However that is far far beyond his capabilities. This is much weaker, it’s just a tantrum during his transition period. He has to leave in January, if he accomplishes something then that is actually worrisome or even frightening, we’ll we can revisit this conversation. He can whine and cry but until he somehow starts changing the laws or if members of the military start backing him up and calling Biden a fraud...then it’s not a coup. How could it be?
You gotta keep in mind this isn't just him. The GOP is supporting this. Him alone, like in the first couple days? That was just a tantrum. The GOP's support is what makes it an attempted coup.
You gotta keep in mind this isn't just him. The GOP is supporting this.
Him alone, like in the first couple days? That was just a tantrum. The GOP's support is what makes it an attempted coup.
It depends which parts of the GOP you're talking about and what kind of support. There are a lot of Republicans who voted for Trump but that's not what you need for a coup. Some of them will...
It depends which parts of the GOP you're talking about and what kind of support.
There are a lot of Republicans who voted for Trump but that's not what you need for a coup. Some of them will protest, but that's not what you need for a coup. A few may even act out violently, but that wouldn't do it either.
Republican leaders are wary of doing anything that Trump voters dislike, so there are some who will wait to call the election until it's certified. While that's annoying, it isn't support for a coup, that's just humoring Trump and his supporters. And certainly they did what they could to encourage Republicans to vote and try to discourage Democrats from voting, but interfering with the electoral process didn't work and doesn't matter at this point. There's no sign yet that Republican-controlled state legislatures are going to ignore the vote or prevent certifying the result.
A coup would require military and police commanders and the people the lead to act illegally to try to keep Trump in office. There are a lot of Trump supporters in these organizations, but would they risk jail for him? It seems very unlikely, and certainly they haven't tried yet.
I guess you could say that Trump is trying to drum up support for something, and possibly this might a precondition to attempt a coup, but this attempt hasn't happened yet, as far as we known.
I think I still have to internalize that Trump's actions can be both an attempt at a coup, and reckless political flailing, and one doesn't necessarily diminish or exclude the other.
This website, along with Choose Democracy and Hold the Line, are great sources to keep informed about current U.S. election-related events and to learn ways that you can make a difference.
I could see this as the beginnings of a civil war. If Trump and his allies lose, they could raise up arms and be 'legitimatized' by being recognized as the real US government by such allies as Russia. If they win, through extra-legal means, then it would be a coup.
As for the military, when I was in I couldn't see Active Duty going against the people of the US. We are sworn to uphold the constitution of the United States of America, not blindly follow the whims of our leadership. Granted, we have to follow orders, but we are trained on how to handle illegal orders (though not everyone will toe that line IMO). What would suck is if the senior military brass decides that it is ok to step in. That could be a disaster of epic purportions.
Just curious... are you able/willing to expand on this?
Not sure about the officer side, but I know that at all of the different levels of NCOES (Non-Commissioned Officer Education System/School) I attended we were given scenario based training on how to handle ourselves when given what could be determined an illegal order. Essentially the steps are to repeat the order back to the person giving it, clarifying that it is indeed what they stated. Then if that is correct clarify HOW it is illegal and that it should not be carried out. THEN, if they STILL want to do it, you can state that you want to speak to their superior officer for clarification or that you will not/cannot do it. Then you face the consequences of your actions, and you had better damn well be right or you will probably lose your job, career, and possibly go to jail.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMaI1Hg8dl8
I honestly cannot give concrete examples, but I do know that the oath is as follows:
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962). ( https://www.army.mil/values/oath.html )
I know it states we will obey the orders, but that is superseded by the oath to support and defend the Constitution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMaI1Hg8dl8
That would have to be just about the stupidest civil war in history.
So stupid it won't even happen.
It's certainly the groundwork for a coup. He really just needs a couple weeks to get all his followers believing this nonsense (and it's working).
At that point, who's going to stop him? Republicans are circling the wagons. I feel like we're all sitting around thinking "look how desperate they are, there's no evidence, it'll never work!" But these people have already shown a tendency to believe the unbelievable based upon even less evidence. Republicans are playing along for now to see if it works, and if it does, they'll hop onboard.
I, frankly, think this site is understating it ... or perhaps mis-stating it?
This absolutely, 100% definitely, is an attempted coup d'etat, that was started months before the election. Donald Trump publicly declared his intention to attempt a coup ... I'm checking right now ... it looks like he first announced it on July 19th, the first time he stated that he would not accept the election results if he didn't win. That was probably also about the time he started planning it and laying the groundwork for it, though I suppose that's a bit fuzzier.
How effective it is, which specific acts are contributing to it, how likely it is to succeed, which people are involved, what leaders are supporting/opposing it ... those are all 2ndary, "accept the premise" discussions.
But by phrasing the core fact — that this is an attempted coup d'etat in the US — as a question which is open for debate, this site is giving power and legitimacy to the instigators.
I'm seeing a lot of bluster and a lot of legal cases that pretty much immediately fail. Attempting to win via lawsuits isn't a coup; if they could actually win in court then that would make it legal, as with the 2000 election. A coup isn't done with lawyers.
I am wondering if some anti-Trump people are inadvertently contributing to the smokescreen.
Everything Putin does is legal, at least according to Russian laws.
The 2000 election was effectively stolen by the Supreme Court. They upended years of states rights, by saying the Federal court could overall State court on a State matter (which is what elections are) and only they could correctly interpret what the State legislature really wanted, because it had Federal implications, but... that giving Bush the presidency set absolutely no precedent, because it was such a bullshit ruling they didn't want it extending beyond stopping the recount.
Three of those partisan hacks who pushed this bogus interpretation are now on the Supreme Court, and quoting this bullshit as precedent. If you undermine the courts with political puppets, it can make your Coup "legal", but it doesn't make it any less a coup.
That said, I doubt the Supreme Court is ready to go that far. If they did, it would be the end of either America or the Supreme Court.
Yes, just because it's legal doesn't make it right. I disagreed with that ruling in 2000 and I don't think that ruling was good law. But, "effectively stolen" or not, Bush won the 2000 election via legal means (a court ruling), not via a coup.
I was reacting to your earlier comment
I think by definition, you are probably correct, although it still feels like an attempted coup.
I suppose the correct term is dictatorship?
I don't know what a good term would be. I think that, rather than summing things up with a word, it might be more valuable to share news reports of what's going on?
I would hardly call rhetoric that is clearly designed to completely undermine the validity of an election, coming from a sitting President that 70M people still voted for, merely "bluster"... regardless of the fact that (at least so far) the only tangible thing to come of it all is thankfully failing lawsuits. Especially since, with the firing of Def Sec. Esper and resignation of several other senior Pentagon officials, and their replacement with Trump loyalists (one of which, Anthony Tata, accused Obama of being a "terrorist leader" and secret Muslim), the prospect of a bonafide coup attempt just got a whole lot less outlandish. And if you think Trump isn't crazy and desperate enough to try to take things to the next level when all else fails, you're kidding yourself, IMO.
p.s. Not saying it would succeed, but I personally wouldn't put a legitimate coup attempt by Trump & Co. out of the realm of possibility at this point, since they certainly seem to be making moves behind the scenes to make it a more realistic option.
If illegal orders are given then I think that counts as an attempted coup.
But I'm assuming that the military knows what illegal orders are and this isn't going to go anywhere, and most people besides Trump, including the appointed Trump loyalists, know that. I couldn't really say whether they would actually try to give such orders, or if this is just kayfabe as they say in wrestling.
I try to make a distinction between people saying things and doing things, especially when the people saying things are lying all the time.
The problem with that is you're assuming the coup would come from the military itself. IMO the more realistic scenario is Trump puts out a call to his blue lives matter, militia, and gun nut supporters to "fight back" against his opponents who he will also claim are attempting a coup, and the military, reserves, and national guard is merely ordered to stand down when the chaos erupts, which would be a lot harder to define as an "illegal order".
I do not think the NG will stand down, but rather be activated by the governors. The federal military, will... Likely stay uninvolved, due to the Posse Comitatus Act. They are legally not allowed to enforce laws.
In the end, we'd have Proud Goyos and Police shooting at each other, with a dash of National Guard. I wont be sad for a minute to have right wing groups shooting at the enforcement arm of capitalism, personally. I hope the NG folk stay safe, though.
How does this theory relate to changes in defense department leadership?
Even if they don't participate directly, the current Pentagon leadership that was just put in place is far more likely to accept and advocate for such a "stand down" order, or at least aid in obstructing any attempt to restore order as much as possible.
Again though, I'm not saying all this is inevitable or even likely... but I genuinely think it's not particularly wise to be so certain that a coup absolutely can't happen in the US just because there is an "illegal order" clause, and Trump is a blowhard and compulsive liar. 70M people still voted for that man despite the last four years of insanity, and a significant amount of them unfortunately believe his lies.
Domestic unrest isn't the military's job, though? Other than the National Guard. It's not clear to me what the Pentagon leadership changes have to do with the National Guard.
The stories I'm reading seem to be about how the changes will affect troops in Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq.
The Secretary and Deputy Undersecretary of Defense just got replaced with Trump loyalists (Miller and Tata). Do you honestly think that if a situation came up where the National Guard might be needed to restore order on a National level, those two wouldn't have any influence over that?
p.s. For the record, I genuinely hope you're right that Trump is all bluster, and the US' military institutions are a lot more robust and resistant to being undermined than I am giving them credit for. And perhaps I, and everyone else worried about a coup, are just being insanely paranoid... but given the last 4 years it's really hard not to be, TBH. ;)
Bear in mind, the governors have to agree to allow their national guard to go under federal control. It's not just a decree from on high that federalizes them.
I don’t know and I think this argument would benefit from hearing from someone who knows more about how the US military works. We are in danger of making stuff up out of ignorance.
I know enough to point to the Posse Comitatus Act and I’m sure all the generals know it better than we do. But I don’t know the mechanics of how the National Guard gets called out.
It seems like this is similar to fears of election fraud by people who don’t really know how elections are designed to prevent it. If you don’t know that then you can come up with scenarios that aren’t realistic. A first step towards dispelling those fears or at least making them more realistic is to study up.
A coup has historically only worked when the military has been involved. I don’t see any such involvement or even endorsement at the least of Trump from major military leaders.
This is not a coup, it is a sad political stunt where a man-child acting as a politician stomps his feet on his way out the door.
Just because it's not a successful one doesn't make it not one.
It's a pathetic attempt at a coup, from a sad, pathetic excuse of a man.
But that man is in one of the most powerful positions in the world right now, so YMMV.
I just don’t like it, calling it a coup gives him too much that he hasn’t earned.
If he had cultivated the necessary means to attempt a coup, failed or otherwise, that would be one thing. However that is far far beyond his capabilities. This is much weaker, it’s just a tantrum during his transition period. He has to leave in January, if he accomplishes something then that is actually worrisome or even frightening, we’ll we can revisit this conversation. He can whine and cry but until he somehow starts changing the laws or if members of the military start backing him up and calling Biden a fraud...then it’s not a coup. How could it be?
You gotta keep in mind this isn't just him. The GOP is supporting this.
Him alone, like in the first couple days? That was just a tantrum. The GOP's support is what makes it an attempted coup.
It depends which parts of the GOP you're talking about and what kind of support.
There are a lot of Republicans who voted for Trump but that's not what you need for a coup. Some of them will protest, but that's not what you need for a coup. A few may even act out violently, but that wouldn't do it either.
Republican leaders are wary of doing anything that Trump voters dislike, so there are some who will wait to call the election until it's certified. While that's annoying, it isn't support for a coup, that's just humoring Trump and his supporters. And certainly they did what they could to encourage Republicans to vote and try to discourage Democrats from voting, but interfering with the electoral process didn't work and doesn't matter at this point. There's no sign yet that Republican-controlled state legislatures are going to ignore the vote or prevent certifying the result.
A coup would require military and police commanders and the people the lead to act illegally to try to keep Trump in office. There are a lot of Trump supporters in these organizations, but would they risk jail for him? It seems very unlikely, and certainly they haven't tried yet.
I guess you could say that Trump is trying to drum up support for something, and possibly this might a precondition to attempt a coup, but this attempt hasn't happened yet, as far as we known.
A seemingly helpful AMA that touches on this subject.