Important! I neglected to include the improvements made by Congress after the 2020 election. They have made this HARDER to do (thank god) and I have the details at the end of this blog. My apologies for not including this important information. It can still happen, but man, it’s going to be harder – and Trump and Johnson should know that. This will be interesting.

Last night, Donald Trump held a campaign rally at Madison Square Garden in New York City.

It wasn’t like most rallies that aim to win over voters. Instead, the event was marked by anger and divisive language. Speakers used offensive rhetoric, including racist remarks and violent threats.

Tony Hinchcliffe, a podcaster known for making racist remarks, described Puerto Rico as an “island of garbage,” sparking outrage from the Harris campaign and Puerto Rican singer Ricky Martin, who urged his followers to support Kamala Harris.

Throughout the rally, Trump stayed focused on attacking his opponents, labeling them “the enemy within” and claiming he would use the military against them if re-elected.

The Guardian reported that the event wasn’t designed to attract new voters but to energize Trump’s base. Toward the end, Trump dropped a bombshell.

“I think with our little secret we are gonna do really well with the House. Our little secret is having a big impact, he and I have a little secret, we will tell you what it is when the race is over.” Donald Trump: Source

While this remark seems cryptic, it hints at something deeper happening behind the scenes​.

What’s the ‘Little Secret’ with Speaker Mike Johnson?

Mike Johnson is the Speaker of the House and a staunch Trump ally. In 2020, he supported efforts to challenge the results of the presidential election, and he could play a similar role in 2024 if the results are contested. According to The Daily Beast, Trump’s reference to a “secret” could signal plans that involve manipulating the certification process in Congress.

This brings us to one of the most crucial aspects of the election process: election certification.

The Role of the Speaker in Election Certification

In a presidential election, Congress must officially certify the results after Americans cast their votes and the Electoral College votes are counted. This process usually happens on January 6, in a joint session of Congress presided over by the Vice President, as outlined in the 12th Amendment.

While Vice President Kamala Harris will oversee the session, the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, has a significant role, especially if the results are disputed.

If any member of the House and Senate files an objection to the results from a specific state, the House and Senate must each debate and vote on whether to accept those electoral votes. During this time, the Speaker can set the tone for how the House handles these objections.

For example, Speaker Johnson can rally members to support or oppose the objections, frame the debate, and influence the outcome by shaping the House’s stance. This makes the Speaker’s role crucial when the election’s legitimacy is questioned.

Mike Johnson has already gone on the record about this:

• House Speaker Mike Johnson has indicated that he will certify the 2024 presidential election results if the election is “free, fair, and legal.” He stated, “Well of course, if we have a free, fair and safe election, we’re going to follow the Constitution. Absolutely, yes,” in Axios.
• However, Johnson has also expressed concerns about potential election fraud, suggesting that non-citizens voting could alter the election’s outcome. He remarked, “I think there will be some cheating in this election. I think non-citizens are going to vote,” in Politico.
• He refuses to admit Trump lost in 2020, “We are not going to talk about what happened in 2020; we are going to talk about 2024,” Johnson said.

Echoes of Treason, Death, and the January 4, 2021 Assault on our Democracy

As we all know, January 6, 2021, when Congress officially met to certify the Electoral College results, things took a dangerous turn. Rather than continue our reputation of a peaceful transfer of power, Trump and his merry band of criminals tried to take matters into their own hands.

Donald Trump had his supporters storm the Capitol, trying to stop the certification process and overturn Joe Biden’s victory. In that case, they could not lean on the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, to support their crimes. They were relying on Mike Pence.

This was more than just a protest—some rioters chanted about wanting to hang Vice President Mike Pence because he refused to reject the electoral votes from certain states. Under the law, Pence didn’t have the power to do that, but Trump and his allies had encouraged the idea that he could.

The attack on the Capitol was part of a broader plan to disrupt the certification process.

Back in the House, the corrupt politicians were ready. They had been planning this all along, and Senator Chuck Grassley confirmed it.

Grassley, 87 years old in 2021, President pro tempore of the Senate, suggested that he might need to step in for Vice President Mike Pence during the certification of the Electoral College results. As President pro tempore, Grassley was next in line to preside over Senate proceedings if the Vice President was unavailable. This role gave him the authority to oversee the certification process, making him a central figure if Pence were absent.

Grassley caused confusion on January 5 when he told reporters he expected to preside over the session “because we don’t expect him [Pence] to be there.” His remark fueled speculation that Pence, under pressure from Trump and his allies, might step aside rather than certify the results.

This was a crucial moment, as Trump had been urging Pence to reject certain states’ electoral votes, a move Pence refused to make. Although Grassley later clarified that he would only take over if Pence left unexpectedly, his initial statement added to the uncertainty and tension surrounding the events of January 6.

Thankfully, our democratic leaders managed to stop Stop the Steal.

The certification process resumed later on January 6, after law enforcement cleared the Capitol following the violent attack by rioters.

At that point, as Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi reconvened the joint session of Congress alongside Vice President Mike Pence, who returned to fulfill his role as presiding officer. Despite earlier chaos, the certification continued into the early hours of January 7, and Congress ultimately certified Joe Biden’s victory.

Meanwhile, in the House, some Republicans did try to object to the results from key states, such as Arizona and Pennsylvania, forcing debates on whether to accept the electoral votes from those states. Each objection required debate and a vote in both chambers.

Nancy Pelosi managed these objections by overseeing the House’s debates and votes, which showed how the process could be used to challenge election results legally. Although these efforts to overturn the election failed, they exposed the vulnerability of the certification process and how close it came to being derailed.

A Contingent Election is what Trump, Elon and the Heritage Foundation want

If no candidate wins a majority of the Electoral College votes (270), a contingent election decides the election.

This process is a backup outlined in the Constitution and has only been used twice in U.S. history—once in 1800 and again in 1824 –because no one got enough electoral college votes. It’s triggered by two scenarios: a tie in the Electoral College, or if a third-party candidate splits the votes enough to prevent any candidate from reaching a majority​.

Here’s how a contingent election works:

1. The House of Representatives chooses the President

In this process, each state delegation in the House gets one vote. That means a small state like Wyoming has the same power as a large state like California. To win, a candidate needs the support of at least 26 state delegations. This setup can favor Republicans, as they currently control more state delegations, even if Democrats hold more overall seats in the House​.

• The Senate chooses the Vice President

In the Senate, each senator has one vote, and the top two vice presidential candidates are considered. A simple majority of 51 votes is needed to decide the vice president. This process could lead to a split result, where the president and vice president are from different parties​.

• Potential for Partisan Manipulation

The contingent election process is inherently political, and the Speaker of the House becomes a central figure in guiding the House’s response. In a highly polarized Congress, the Speaker could wield significant influence over which candidate is chosen. This makes Speaker Mike Johnson’s relationship with Trump critical, especially given Johnson’s past support for contesting the 2020 election results​.

What a Contingent Election Means for Democracy

The contingent election process raises serious questions about fairness.

It shifts power from the general public to Congress, meaning the presidency could be decided by political maneuvering rather than voter choice.

This is allowed under the Constitution but goes against the idea of majority rule. As experts from Vanity Fair explain, relying on procedural tactics instead of voter turnout could make people lose trust in the election process, potentially causing long-term harm to democracy.

This is why Trump doesn’t need any votes. He has it locked up.

Trump’s strategy, as seen in his rally rhetoric and his “little secret” with Speaker Johnson, suggests he might be relying more on legal and procedural tactics than on mobilizing voters.

This approach could make individual votes feel less impactful, especially if the election is decided in Congress. It’s a high-stakes gamble that puts democracy at risk, as it focuses on winning by any means rather than earning widespread voter support.

---

BREAKING: Lawrence Tribe just pushished an editorial that this won’t happen. I only worry he’s still using an older lens to make his assessment. What we’ve seen is normal or regular is typically off the table because Trump creates chaos. Here’s the thing that might matter:

This is where an accurate reading of the 12th Amendment comes in. It doesn’t matter that Harris’s 268 votes would not be a majority of the full 538 electoral college votes. The amendment says the victor must receive “a majority of the whole number of electors appointed” — not that could have been appointed. In this example, she would win by virtue of having received a majority of the 519 votes cast after Pennsylvania’s were discarded. Read more >

---

Correction: How this will be harder than I thought.

The 2022 Electoral Count Reform Act makes several changes to how the Electoral College results are certified, reducing the chances of a contingent election and tightening the process to prevent manipulation. Here’s how it affects certification:

1. Clarifying the Vice President’s Role

The law explicitly states that the Vice President’s role during the certification is purely ceremonial, making it clear that they do not have the power to reject or alter electoral votes. This is a direct response to the claims made during the January 6, 2021 certification process, where Trump and his allies pressured Vice President Pence to block certain states’ votes.

2. Raising the Threshold for Objections

Under the new law, objections to a state’s electoral votes now require the support of at least one-fifth of both the House and the Senate (as opposed to just one member from each chamber). This change aims to limit baseless objections and make it more difficult to disrupt the certification process.

3. Clarifying State Certification of Electors

The law requires governors to certify electors and submit them to Congress, reducing the chances of conflicting slates of electors. It specifies that only electors certified by a state’s governor (or equivalent authority) can be counted, making it harder for alternate slates to be submitted during the process.

4. Speeding Up Judicial Review

The law allows for expedited judicial review in cases where states submit competing slates of electors to resolve disputes before the certification in Congress. This change helps prevent legal ambiguity from spilling into the congressional certification process.

These changes strengthen the certification process and reduce the potential for disputes, making it harder to create the conditions for a contingent election. While the reforms don’t eliminate the possibility of a contingent election, they make it less likely that procedural loopholes or ambiguous challenges could force the election into Congress.