The What-If Chronicles: A Potential Constitutional Crisis in the 2024 Election
What if: Harris Becomes President after Votes Have Been Cast for Biden?
With Joe Biden’s age and obvious health concerns at center stage in the election, questions about the continuity of the presidency and the electoral process could lead to a bonafide Constitutional Crisis. If, in this hypothetical scenario, President Biden were to resign or be removed from office right before election day, after votes have been cast in early voting, the nation could face an unprecedented constitutional crisis.
Following the provisions of the 25th Amendment, Vice President Harris would ascend to the presidency, the minute Biden is no longer able to fulfill his duties. At a minimum, she would remain President up until the transfer of power the following January. But it’s the timing of this hypothetical event that causes the issue, with a significant portion of the electorate having expressed their choices through early voting.
In this scenario, Harris’ name will not be on the ballot as a “Presidential” candidate. At best, she would be listed as the “Vice President” … assuming Biden continues to keep her on his ticket. At the time of this writing, it looks like he will.
But what happens in the election if Biden is unable to continue? There is a risk, however small, that Biden could win the election even though he would not assume office. Some scholars would argue, that despite the vagueness of the Constitution in this matter, the 2024 presidential election would automatically pass to Harris … even though she was not elected as “President”.
Even though partisan political operatives would attempt to make a case that President Harris could simply cancel the election, this is simply not the case, and it would be grossly unconstitutional for a President to attempt to cancel the election. If she did, she would almost certainly be impeached, and the Speaker of the House would step in…congratulations Speaker Johnson.
A more likely scenario is that the Democrat party would instantly jump into action and declare that ALL votes previously cast for Biden are hereby directed to a new nominee. They will make the farcical assertion that the votes cast were for a “party”, not a “person”.
Drawing on historical examples, we can reflect on the 1912 U.S. presidential election, where the sudden death of the Republican Party’s Vice Presidential candidate, James Sherman, prompted rapid adjustments. In a race split between President Taft and former President Theodore Roosevelt, the unexpected vacancy led to the selection of Nicholas Murray Butler as the new Vice-Presidential candidate. The ensuing controversy likely contributed to Woodrow Wilson’s victory.
In another example, the tragic plane crash involving Senator Paul Wellstone occurred on October 25, 2002, just 11 days before the scheduled U.S. Senate election in Minnesota. Senator Wellstone, a Democrat seeking re-election for a third term, was traveling with his wife Sheila, their daughter Marcia, three campaign staffers, and two pilots when their plane went down in freezing weather conditions in northern Minnesota.
The sudden and devastating crash resulted in the loss of Senator Wellstone, his wife, his daughter, and the other passengers on board. The incident sent shockwaves through the state and the nation, as Wellstone was a well-respected and influential figure in Minnesota politics.
With the election only days away and early voting already underway, the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (DFL), which is affiliated with the Democratic Party in Minnesota, faced a significant challenge. Minnesota law allowed the major political parties to replace a candidate in the event of death within a certain timeframe before the election.
In response to the tragedy, the DFL swiftly convened to select a replacement candidate. Former Vice President Walter Mondale emerged as the party’s choice to fill the vacancy left by Senator Wellstone. Walter Mondale had a long and distinguished political career, having served as Vice President under President Jimmy Carter and as a U.S. Senator from Minnesota prior to that.
The decision to replace Wellstone with Mondale was not without controversy, as some critics argued that the sudden change in candidate disrupted the electoral process. Nevertheless, the DFL moved forward with Mondale’s candidacy, and his name was placed on the ballot as the new Democratic nominee. He ultimately lost, but the precedent stands.
Another example is the accent of Gerald Ford.
Gerald Ford’s ascension to the presidency was indeed a unique and historic event. Ford became the 38th Vice President of the United States on December 6, 1973, following the resignation of Vice-President Spiro Agnew, who faced legal troubles related to tax evasion and bribery. Ford, a Congressman from Michigan and the House Minority Leader, was appointed by President Richard Nixon as Vice-President, and confirmed by Congress as Agnew’s replacement.
The political landscape took a dramatic turn when President Richard Nixon faced the Watergate scandal, a political crisis involving the cover-up of illegal activities within the Nixon administration. As the scandal intensified and the likelihood of Nixon’s impeachment grew, Gerald Ford found himself thrust into the limelight.
On August 8, 1974, Richard Nixon became the first U.S. president to resign from office. Following Nixon’s resignation, Gerald Ford was sworn in as the 38th President of the United States on August 9, 1974.
Now, let’s take this hypothetical scenario a step further. Imagine that, due to unforeseen circumstances, Joe Biden is unable to follow through with the election. What are the legal maneuvers that the Democrat Party would embark to resolve the situation?
Faced with this unprecedented challenge, the Democratic Party makes a groundbreaking decision. All delegates, traditionally bound by primary and caucus outcomes, are granted the status of superdelegates, able to vote for any candidate they choose.
With amazing and mind-baffling speed, the majority of delegates rally around California Governor Gavin Newsom, instead of sitting President, Kamala Harris. Known for his progressive policies and leadership, Newsom emerges as a consensus candidate who could unite the party and appeal to a broad spectrum of voters…so they believe.
This scenario sets the stage for an unconventional Democratic National Convention, where every delegate, now a superdelegate, wields independent voting rights. The decision to pivot towards Governor Newsom reflects a collective belief that he possesses the qualities necessary to lead the party and the nation during a challenging period.
However there is no legal or constitutional authority that grants a party the ability to transfer a vote cast by a citizen from one person to another. But this won’t stop Democrats from trying and they most assuridily will find a judge to agree with them … in these extraordinary times.
Therefore, Harris would continue as the first Woman President until Newsom is sworn in on January 20, 2025.
But this hypothetical scenario assumes an alternate universe where Donald Trump is not victorious in the 2024 election. The more likely scenario is that the Democrats will use the chaos caused by Biden’s inability to continue with the election to declare that Trump, once again, is an illegitimate President. Thus, causing a whole new era of riots in the streets, impeachments, FBI setups etc. … just like 2016.
Texas Senate Primaries Show Early Leads for Crockett and Paxton
AUSTIN, Texas – A new poll released by The Texas Tribune indicates that Jasmine Crockett and Ken Paxton are leading their respective primary races for the U.S. Senate seat in Texas. The survey, published on February 9, 2026, highlights the early momentum for both candidates as they vie for their party nominations in a closely watched election cycle. The results point to strong voter recognition and support for Crockett in the Democratic primary and Paxton in the Republican primary.
The poll, conducted among likely primary voters across the state, shows Crockett holding a significant lead over her Democratic challenger James Talarico, while Paxton maintains a commanding position among Republican contenders John Cornyn & Wesley Hunt.
According to the poll, Ken Paxton leads with 38 percent of likely GOP primary voters, pulling ahead of incumbent John Cornyn, who trails at 31 percent, while Wesley Hunt remains a distant third at 17 percent. The survey indicates Paxton would hold a commanding advantage in a runoff scenario and currently outperforms Cornyn across nearly every key Republican demographic group, with Latino voters the lone exception, where Cornyn maintains a seven-point edge.
Among Democrats, the poll shows Jasmine Crockett opening a notable lead, capturing 47 percent of likely primary voters compared to 39 percent for James Talarico—a meaningful shift from earlier polling that had Talarico in the lead. While still early, the numbers suggest momentum is consolidating ahead of primaries that will determine the general election matchups.
Jasmine Crockett, a sitting U.S. Representative whose district lines were redrawn out from under her, has responded to political extinction with a desperate lurch toward the U.S. Senate. Her campaign, widely criticized as race-baiting and grievance-driven, has leaned heavily on inflaming urban Democratic turnout while cloaking thin policy substance in fashionable slogans about healthcare and “equity.”
By contrast, Ken Paxton enters the race with a long, battle-tested record as Texas Attorney General, earning fierce loyalty from conservatives for his aggressive defense of state sovereignty, constitutional limits, and successful legal challenges to federal overreach. Though relentlessly targeted by opponents, Paxton’s tenure reflects durability, clarity of purpose, and an unapologetic alignment with the voters he represents—qualities that define his standing in the contest.
The Texas U.S. Senate race draws national attention, as the state remains a critical battleground in determining the balance of power in Congress. With incumbent dynamics and shifting voter demographics at play, the primary outcomes will set the stage for a potentially contentious general election. The Texas Tribune poll serves as an initial benchmark, though voter sentiment could evolve as campaigns intensify and debates unfold in the coming weeks.
Councilman Mark Harper walks out of meeting before adjournment.
FATE, TX – The Fate City Council voted late Monday night to waive deliberative privilege, opening the door to the public release of secret audio recordings that may have driven a recall election against Councilwoman Codi Chinn. The decision came after hours of public criticism, procedural friction, and a lengthy executive session with legal counsel.
The meeting, held Monday, February 2, was streamed live by the city and is available on YouTube at: https://www.youtube.com/live/zQVN0i-d8C0 (Embedded Below)
(Source: City of Fate, official meeting broadcast)
Timeline for Readers
- 00:33:52 – Public comments begin, largely focused on the recall election of Councilwoman Codi Chinn.
- 00:56:10 – Councilman Harper interrupts public Comment.
- 00:57:00 – Councilman Harper interrupts public Comment.
- 00:58:00 – Councilman Harper interrupts public Comment.
- 02:21:00 – Executive Session – Council enters closed session to consult with legal counsel.
- 03:22:52 – Council reconvenes in open session.
- Primary motion – Council votes to “waive deliberative privilege”, allowing release of disputed audio recordings.
Public Comment and Visible Strain
Public comments began just after the 33 minute mark and quickly centered on the recall election. Speaker after speaker questioned the conduct of city officials and demanded transparency regarding audio recordings that have circulated privately but remained unavailable to the public.
During one speaker’s remarks, critical of Councilwoman Chinn, procedural tension became visible. Three separate times, Councilman Mark Harper interrupted to remind Mayor Andrew Greenberg that the speaker had exceeded the three-minute time limit. Each time, Mayor Greenberg thanked Harper for the reminder, then directed the speaker to continue.
The exchange stood out. While council rules clearly limit speakers to three minutes, the mayor’s repeated decision to allow the speaker to proceed suggested an effort to avoid the appearance of silencing criticism during a highly charged meeting.
Clarifying the Recordings
Contrary to some early assumptions, the audio recordings at issue were not recordings of executive sessions. Instead, they are one-party consent recordings, the existence of which has been previously reported and alluded to on Pipkins Reports. Their precise origin has not been publicly detailed, but their contents have been referenced repeatedly by both supporters and critics of the recall effort.
Behind Closed Doors
Following the public meeting, the council entered executive session to consult with legal counsel. After about an hour, members returned to open session at approximately 3:22:52 .
The primary motion coming out of that session was to “waive deliberative privilege“. The effect of the vote was to remove a legal obstacle to releasing the secret audio recordings that have been at the center of the controversy.
No excerpts were played, and no conclusions were announced. The council did not rule on the legality of the recordings, nor did it weigh in on the merits of the recall election itself.
Why the Vote Matters
The decision does not resolve the recall of Councilwoman Chinn. It does not validate or refute claims made by either side. What it does is shift the debate away from rumor and secondhand accounts.
According to guidance from the Texas Municipal League, governing bodies may waive certain privileges when transparency is deemed to serve the public interest, particularly when litigation risk is balanced against public trust (Texas Municipal League, Open Meetings Act resources).
Opinion and Perspective
The council’s action was a necessary step. Secret recordings, selectively referenced and strategically leaked, undermine confidence in local government. So does a refusal to confront them directly.
Transparency is not about protecting officials from embarrassment. It is NOT the job of the council to assist the city in concealing information that may be used against it in legal proceedings when the City Manager, or Councilmen, may have done bad things. It is about protecting citizens from manipulation. If the recordings exonerate those involved, their release will restore credibility. If they raise concerns, voters deserve to hear them unfiltered before making decisions in a recall election.
Monday night in Fate did not end the controversy. It ended the excuse for keeping the public in the dark.
ROCKWALL, TX — Texas State Sen. Bob Hall appeared before voters at Rockwall County’s Final Friday Night Forum, on Friday. The appearance renewed online criticism from supporters of his primary challenger which brought attention back to a decades-old allegation from a former marriage and also to social-media comments allegidily attributed to Hall’s wife.
The renewed discussion did not stem from new legal filings, court actions, or investigative reporting. Instead, it followed social-media posts by individuals publicly supporting Hall’s opponent, Jason Eddington, including Fate City Councilwoman Codi Chinn, whose sharply worded statements have drawn attention for both their substance and tone.
The Forum and the Race
The forum was hosted by Blue Ribbon News in partnership with the Rockwall County Republican Party, and held at the Rockwall County Courthouse. It marked the final event in a series intended to give Republican voters an opportunity to hear directly from candidates ahead of the March primary.
Other candidates in attendance included:
- Rockwall County Judge
- Frank New
- Scott Muckensturm
- County Commissioner, Precinct 4
- John Stacy
- James Branch
- Lorne Megyesi
- Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2
- Victor Carrillo
- Chris Florance
Pipkins Reports could find no official transcript or video of the forum. According to available coverage, the event proceeded without public discussion of personal controversies, and no candidate addressed the matter from the stage.
Background on the Allegations
The most damaging allegations currently being recirculated date back to divorce proceedings in Florida in the early 1990s, during which Hall’s former wife, Jane Hall, made claims in court filings alleging physical, verbal, and sexual abuse during their marriage.
The allegations, raised during a contested divorce, as they often do. Bob Hall has denied the allegations. No criminal charges were filed. No court ruled against Hall or issued a finding of abuse. The filings did not result in convictions, injunctions, or adverse judgments.
The allegations became publicly discussed during Hall’s first Senate campaign in 2014 and have resurfaced intermittently during contested elections. Their latest reappearance coincides with the current Republican primary and has been driven by individuals openly advocating for Hall’s opponent.
Explicit Attribution and Political Context
Following the January 30 forum, Fate City Councilwoman Codi Chinn, who has publicly endorsed Jason Eddington, posted a statement on social media criticizing Hall and urging Republican voters to support Eddington.
In her post, Chinn wrote:
“Senator Bob Hall I expect you will be making a statement issuing an apology on behalf of your wife for body shaming a woman simply because you don’t ideologically agree with her. These comments are shameful and your silence is deafening. Being Republican shouldn’t mean being small minded. I hope Republican Primary voters will pick the true Conservative Jason Eddington, Candidate for Texas Senate, District 2!”
Critics of Chinn, including some local Republican activists, say the post reflects what they describe as a pattern of caustic and confrontational rhetoric directed at individuals she opposes politically. It’s ironic that Chinn requests accountability for language of others, while she herself asks for forgiveness of her digressions in her bid to not be recalled. Supporters of Chinn, by contrast, characterize her comments as blunt advocacy and a willingness to publicly challenge those with whom she disagrees.
Amplification by a Political Social Media Page
On January 31 at 10:57 p.m., the Facebook page Rockwall County News First published a post calling on the Rockwall County Republican Party to condemn comments attributed to Hall’s wife. The page credited Codi Crimson Chinn as the source of screenshots included in the post.
The post stated:
“We hope that Rockwall County Republican Party will join us in condemning Senator Bob Hall’s wife in her comments.”
The screenshots included in the post purport to show comments written by Kay Hall, Senator Hall’s wife. The screenshots have not been independently authenticated by this publication. According to the screenshots, the comments attributed to Kay Hall read:
“Oh, yes, so disgusting to see Jill get up an speak. She and all of the TFRW little people are in their element. Wish I had recorded her speech, or even more wish I had stood up in the room to tell everyone how she got the Democrats to vote for her in the election. The pictures are very flattering to her because she has gained weight and really looked aged. I am sitting across from Bob near the podium. too, close!!!”
As of publication, neither Senator Hall nor his wife has publicly confirmed the authenticity of the screenshots or issued a statement regarding the comments.
Hall’s Position and Current Status
Hall has not publicly addressed the social-media posts and did not respond to our request for comment. He has previously stated, during earlier campaigns, that efforts to revive allegations from his former marriage are politically motivated and unrelated to any legal findings or his conduct in office.
Hall is currently married to Sarah Kay Smith Hall, with whom he has three children. There are no legal actions or criminal allegations involving his current marriage. The current controversy centers on online posts circulated by political opponents and their supporters.
Conclusion
The Final Friday Night Forum was intended to focus voter attention on policy differences among Republican candidates. In the days following the event, however, the race shifted toward personal disputes fueled by online posts from supporters of Hall’s challenger, including commentary that some observers describe as emblematic of an increasingly sharp-edged political style.
As the March primary approaches, voters in Senate District 2 must weigh not only policy and legislative records, but also the motivations and methods used by campaigns and their advocates. Whether the renewed criticism is viewed as relevant scrutiny or as opposition-driven escalation remains a question for the electorate to decide.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login