The biggest risk now is Trump’s well-being.  The thieves and assassins are still out there.

As you have probably read by now, on January 6, 2025 the never Trumpers like Jamie Raskin, Mitt Romney, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, etc, and of course VP Kommie Harris who will be leading the joint session of Congress on that day, most likely will attempt to prevent Congress from certifying the Electoral College votes submitted by the states.  Probably they will claim that Congress as their duty should not certify a convicted felon to be President of the U.S.  The Constitution is silent on eligibility of a felon.  While there are legal provisions and precedents guiding Electoral College dispute resolution, the process is not explicitly outlined in a single statute or regulation. Instead, it is governed by a combination of constitutional provisions, statutory language, and judicial precedent. If certification is contested by Congress, as it was in 2020 by Ted Cruz et al but without sufficient supporting votes, then:

According to the 12th Amendment and the Electoral Count Act (ECA) of 1887, if Congress refuses to certify the Electoral College vote for President and Vice President, the following procedures would unfold:

1. Joint Session of Congress: The Electoral College vote count would be suspended, and Congress would meet in a joint session to consider objections to the electoral votes.
2. Objections to electors.  Members or Senators can object to one or more state’s electors or processes.  Courts generally will not intercede.  The Supreme Court’s decision in Bush v. Gore following the 2000 “hanging chaff” election established a precedent for limited judicial intervention in Electoral College disputes. The Court emphasized that federal courts should not interfere with state election processes, except in cases where there is a clear violation of federal law or the Constitution. This has led to a more cautious approach by federal courts in intervening in Electoral College disputes.
3. Objections in Writing: At least one Senator and one Representative must submit written objections to the electoral votes in question. This can occur due to disputes over the validity of electoral votes, such as concerns about “irregularly given” or “unlawfully certified” votes.
4. There could be an objection to VP Vance.  1837 Presidential Election: Martin Van Buren (D) won the Electoral College vote, but Virginia’s 23 electors refused to support his vice-presidential candidate, Richard Johnson. This led to a contingent election in the Senate, which Johnson won easily.
5. Separate Chamber Debates: The Senate and House of Representatives would meet separately for a maximum of two hours to debate the objections.  In January 2005: Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH) and Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) objected to Ohio’s electoral votes for George W. Bush, alleging they were not “regularly given.” The House and Senate met separately and rejected the objections via roll-call votes.
6. Vote on Objections: After the debates, each chamber would vote on the objections. A simple majority vote in both chambers is required to reject the electoral votes and prevent the certification of the President and Vice President.
7. Legislative Session: The objection could result in calls for the two houses of Congress to go into legislative session to pass a bill to resolve the issues, so example election of a convicted felon.  Similar happened in 1887, with the 1887 Electoral Count Act passed in response to the disputed 1876 election which established deadlines for states to select electors, resolve disputes, and cast their electoral votes.
8. No Certification: If the objections are successful and the electoral votes are rejected, Congress would not certify the President and Vice President-elect. This would create a constitutional crisis, as the President and Vice President would not have been officially elected.
9. House of Representatives’ Role: According to the 12th Amendment, if no President and Vice President have been certified, the House of Representatives would then vote to elect a President. Each state delegation would have one vote, with a simple majority required to elect the President.  This apparently simple procedure is fraught with potential problems, not the least of which is the process for the various states to select their single representative (an “elector”) is bound to vote for one candidate.   
10. Continued Crisis: Without a certified President and Vice President, the government would be in a state of limbo, potentially leading to a constitutional crisis and uncertainty about the leadership of the country.  This number 7 may be the designed result of the deep state and global oligarchs, i.e., uncertainty, fear and mayhem requiring intervention by a supposedly independent UN or the military.

As you probably know, the purpose of all these 3^rd world anti-Trump lawfare cases has always been to make him a convicted felon, deplete him of funds and supporters, if possible lock him up, and legislatively prevent him from taking office again.  The 2024 election does not change that purpose.  These nefarious lawyers, prosecutors and judges expect these lawfare cases to be overturned on appeal, likely taking years, but by then their purpose will have been achieved…an excuse to prevent inauguration of a duly elected President.

Considering all possibilities, it is possible that the deep state and global oligarchs wanted Trump re-elected for unknown dystopian reasons and thus for 2024 they held off on their decades-old-and-well-tested vote switching.  In view of the graph above, IMHO, this possibility is very real and fearful.  About 20 million voters did not disappear in the 2024 election; there were about 20 million fake or switched ballots in 2020. It is not likely we will hear about any of this continuing globalist anti-American revolution from our government or mainstream media.     

Aloha,

Bud