>>12529715 (LB)

>I'm thinking martial law, followed by the scheduling of a new election. Perhaps the calling of a Congress of the States, but who knows

You mean "military coup". Martial law implies that we're still working within the legal framework of the Constitution… somehow.

Forcing new elections cannot be done within the currently legal framework. So it may have to be "switched off" by the goon-with-guns deciding that Might Makes Right and taking over, with no pretense of legality or constitutionality, and ruling as a junta until they decide to hold elections and hand over power back to civilian government. It will be the end of the First Republic and the beginning of the second. Maybe (probably) with the same or very similar constitution. If that happens, it won't be the same country afterwards.

Let's hope that that can be avoided.

>>12529784

>How do you justify Kamala still holding on to her Senate Seat?

So she can still vote in the Senate. They already picked her successor:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alex-padilla-california-senator-replace-kamala-harris/

>Why is Biden cancelling his inauguration walk through for security concerns when he as two full armies protecting DC?

>Why did the Senate abruptly cancel confirmation hearings for Biden's DNI pick?

I have no idea. But I doubt it's because they're worried about wasting taxpayer money on inefficiency. Is there any reason to cancel those things if Biden secretly knows he's not going to be president?

>>12529869

>This year there may not be a President.

That is very possible.

It has always been a mystery how we'd to the Military Tribunals when civilians would naturally be tried in civilian courts. Maybe it was always the plan for the bad guys to win before they lose.