> Isn't that a text book definition of a coup?
Yes, also completely made up.
Trump talks a lot, often times incoherently and faster than he thinks. This is not the greatest quality in a president, but also not the worst.
The New York Times is stating "senior leaders at the Pentagon, speaking on the condition of anonymity, acknowledged that they were talking among themselves about what to do if Mr. Trump, who will still be president from Election Day to Inauguration Day, invokes the Insurrection Act and tries to send troops into the streets".
This is only "completely made up" in the sense that every hypothetical the military prepares for is a made up scenario.
> every hypothetical the military prepares for is a made up scenario
Trump is within his authority to send the troops into the streets to quell an insurrection against constitutional order. This being an unusual situation naturally the generals should be getting prepared. Where's the coup?
We aren't talking about an insurrection against constitutional order. The hypothetical is that Trump loses the election, he cites some bogus case of fraud like he has spent the last several months building, he refuses to concede just like he said he wouldn't concede if their was fraud, large protests pop up in response to these moves as would obviously happen, Trump declares them riots just like he has been calling the largely peaceful protests of the last several months riots, and he orders in the troops to squash dissent just like he said he would when he refused to agree to a peaceful transfer of power. All of this is based off Trumps own words and prior behavior. It isn't the most likely scenario, but it can't be completely dismissed. It is a situation that the other branches of government and the military need to seriously consider.
> All of this is based off Trumps own words and prior behavior.
Which behavior is that?
>he refuses to concede
This is not supported by the NYT quote re Pentagon officials you have provided. Do you have a quote where Pentagon officials discuss actions in case of Trump's failure to concede?
The signs? The words of the president and the people around him. The article I linked is one example in which people are having to seriously consider dangerous situations that were thought impossible during all recent presidential elections.
The edge of collapse also doesn't mean it has collapsed yet. I wouldn't even say it is a likelihood that it will collapse, but there is some non-trivial chance that the US democracy fails between now and the end of the year. It has been at least decades since anyone would have said something like that previous sentence. The cold war might have been the last time in which there was this high of a chance of catastrophe.
>The sole link you provided has nothing to do with a coup - it talks about Trump potentially deploying military to quell riots. It is his constitutional right to do, however the generals are of course free to resign from this. Is this a coup on your book?
It is talking about Trump potentially deploying military in either the lead up to the election, on election day, or in the wake of election day. This can be done for any number of reasons. It can be done to rile up his base like he did with his photo-op at St John's. It can be done to intimidate people away from voting. I can be done in the wake of the election to challenge it's legitimacy or to quell protests and civil unrest in response to him challenging the election's legitimacy. The first example is clearly not a coup. The second probably doesn't qualify either even though it would be illegal. The third one is using military violence or the threat of it to illegally seize power from rightful leaders. Isn't that a text book definition of a coup?