Maybe the bigger question is why Pelosi didn’t force him to ask the question.
As long as the question wasn’t asked, Obama could not be lawfully certified as the electoral winner. To this day he has not been lawfully certified.
Is Kerchner’s case the one that has been merely suspended? Is SCOTUS able to take it up if and when they so desire?
I’m seriously wondering if SCOTUS is planning on taking it up as soon as the dems who perpetrated this fraud are no longer the majority party in Congress. Cheney’s failure (refusal?) to ask the question leaves the legality of the whole last stinkin’ almost 2 years in great doubt.
I can’t help but think that Pelosi didn’t push the issue because she knew there would be objections and didn’t dare try to force Cheney to ask the legally-required question.
Thank you so much for that transcript. That totally blows out of the water the typical Obot arguments here, that 1) the objections had to be submitted ahead of time, and 2) the question wasn’t asked because there were no objections that met the requirement of being written and signed by a House and Senate member.
The legal process still had to be followed, as Gore followed it even though there were no objections submitted in advance that met the requirements.
Cheney left the door wide open for lawsuits because the main claim that people use to say that Obama is legitimate is that he was certified as the electoral winner - without which he could not be lawfully inaugurated. But he wasn’t lawfully certified as the winner. That throws that whole argument back in the faces of the people making the argument. If that was what they pinned their hats on, then their hats have long since fallen to the floor.
I may be crazy, but I can’t help but wonder if Cheney had some reason that he felt he couldn’t push the issue at the time but wanted to reserve the option of it being pushed later on. I also can’t help but wonder why Pelosi let him get away with it.
Either way, there’s definitely more to the story than meets the eye.
It’s simply (2nd time I’ve used this word tonight, but it applies) bizarre and confounding. Why? Why? Why?
As you, perhaps for a legal premise down the road.
Thank you for the link, BZ.
Chairing the January 2009 Joint Session was not Dick Cheney’s first rodeo, of course, and I believe it was his intent to do everything he could for the nation prior to leaving office.
And, unlike most federal politicians, he is man enough to take any hit for his actions.
The trolls here on FR have been intellectually dishonest on this point since shortly after January 2009.
Any objection(s) to a certificate of electoral vote must be in a writing signed by a member of both chambers only to assure that when the Senate withdraws to consider the objection, the issue will be brought to the floor of each chamber and that both will separately consider precisely the same objection.
There is no requirement that an objection be submitted in advance of the session inasmuch as the basis for any objection might not be knowable prior to the session.