The virtual broadcast kicked off with the inevitable intro discussion on the presidential election, in which the count continues and in particular the attempts by the incumbent President Trump’s attempts to derail the count process by court challenges. Seamus Gunn was of the view that there was no merit in such an approach, that it was extremely damaging to democracy and it was bizarre to suggest that a legal challenge could be mounted without any evidence to back it up, referring to the only requirement to mount such a challenge was to make an allegation of fraud or wrongdoing in the postal process and name the county precinct township in which it was alleged to have occurred. He was strongly of the view that such an approach would not reach the bar of establishing a prime facie case to be adjudicated upon in this jurisdiction and he had reservations whether such actions on the part of President Trump would reach the Supreme Court. He said it was incredulous to consider that while the Republicans wanted to stop the count in States in which they were ahead such as Georgia and Pennsylvania, but in the same breath, wanting it to proceed in the likes of Nevada and Arizona, where they were behind. Notwithstanding the attitude of the republicans, he thought that in 4 years’ time, that Trumpism would still be present and it could be in the form of the next generation. He had reservations about Vice President Biden going forward, especially as the power which lay in the senate, where the democrats are likely to be in the minority, could obstruct legislative reforms. He referred to Biden’s 2 terms as Vice President in the shadow of Barack Obama and expressed the view that a couple of years into his term, there could be a hand over of power to his Vice President Kamala Harris.
There was then a discussion in relation to the perception of truth, Gregg Hughes expressing the view that there are 2 sides to it, with which Seamus Gunn did not agree, explaining that democracy was based on truth and that it was facts that were established in a court of law that were the measure of what was fact or fiction.
The Q&A session that followed revolved around estates and an interesting insight into neighbors and disputes.