That “Little Secret” Between Trump and Johnson? Here’s What It Could Mean.
www.thenation.com
The “secret” almost certainly involves a plan to install Trump in the White House if he loses the election—but this plan could be even worse than you think.

A potential plan by Republican leaders to steal the 2024 presidential election. The plan involves delaying the certification of election results in key battleground states, potentially decreasing the overall number of electors appointed and allowing Donald Trump to win the presidency through a contingent election, whereby the House of Representatives, not the Electoral College, determines the president.

  • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
    662·
    13 days ago

    bloodless if the left allows it.

    The left should not allow a coup.

    • FenrirIII@lemmy.world
      81·
      13 days ago

      I don’t think that the military would fall in line with it. There would be grave concerns

        • Entropywins@lemmy.world
          93·
          12 days ago

          You greatly underestimate our men and women in the service…it’s alright you probably haven’t served or been exposed to many service members, but if you can trust an internet stranger slightly I hope I can put your mind at ease by saying I have 100% faith from the top down in our military up holding the oath we all took.

          • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
            41·
            12 days ago

            You have read meanings into my comment that aren’t intended and have presumed I lack a career in military service. The U.S. military is forbidden from enforcing policy on U.S. soil by the Posse Comitatus Act.

            The military is not going to do anything about election issues or any other issues unless leadership has been compromised at large. I doubt they will be compromised.

          • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
            31·
            12 days ago

            Ok, but this “bloodless coup” will theoretically be following the letter of the law.

          • fadingembers@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
            131·
            12 days ago

            They don’t need the military. The police have already been militarized and have zero issue using violence against the populace as has been demonstrated time and time again.

            Also respectfully, as a vet, the military is not homogenous and Trump will absolutely find the people in the military that will listen to him and put them in charge

        • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
          31·
          12 days ago

          The marines won’t, but pentagon leadership and the army, along with the NY and CA National guards may be enough.

    • zephorah@lemm.ee
      104·
      12 days ago

      Please. We will sit at home and cry. Or go wave signs in a street somewhere. And neither of those things will change anything.

      • nomous@lemmy.world
        5·
        12 days ago

        Idk I seem to remember a lot of “cities burning” or something during some nationwide protests a few years ago after cops killed another person, I don’t think those people have gone anywhere.

          • nomous@lemmy.world
            3·
            11 days ago

            Rome wasn’t built in a day as the saying goes. Because we make incremental progress shouldn’t mean we stop fighting. Defeatism and apathy has never won anyone anything.

            • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
              12·
              11 days ago

              I’m just pointing out that police violence increased, not decreased, after #BLM.

              • nomous@lemmy.world
                3·
                11 days ago

                Police violence has been an epidemic for decades, ask the nearest brown guy. What we’re seeing now isn’t necessarily the increase in violence itself, but a rise in reporting and accountability, people are becoming aware of it and how often it actually happens.

                An increase in awareness doesn’t mean you lost or that it’s over.