The Treachery of VP Mike Pence Explained

https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/the-treachery-of-vp-mike-pence-explained ^

[cuz1961]

The Treachery of VP Mike Pence Explained Who fired General Flynn and started the Russia Hoax in the first place?

/\ \/

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fda7418c5-6916-403b-a034-766ac02585c7_537x503.png

“How come the Democrats and … Republicans, like Wacky Susan Collins, are desperately trying to pass legislation that will not allow the vice-president to change the results of the election?

“Actually, what they are saying, is that Mike Pence did have the right to change the outcome, and they now want to take that right away. Unfortunately, he didn’t exercise that power. He could have overturned the election!”

It’s time for Republican voters to admit that they had no idea who Mike Pence was. Don’t be too upset with yourself. He fooled plenty of people. The man you thought he was — that guy doesn’t really exist. It’s time you paid much closer attention to your favorite politicians though— if you want your country to survive.

[DiogenesLamp]

Excellent! Exactly to the point in all particulars.

I am especially admiring of this sentence.

"Yet I think our forefathers expected us to use our brains when mischief was affoot."

[mdmathis6]

The VP can refuse to open the electoral box. Period. He doesn’t overturn an election. The congress would have to take up the question of impeachment, and the senate,the removal of the VP so that another could quickly take his place should they wish to stick with the electoral counts. Or the congress could have decided the election by congressional delegation count which is also constituional but not desirable.

[DiogenesLamp]

Which means you don't reply to my posts and bother me with your never-ending litany of nonsense.

This sort of thing happens when a child tries to understand what adults are talking about.

[dadfly]

yup. been saying this about pence from the time Trump chose him.

[Mr. K]

Nobody asked him to “overturn the election”

All they asked him to do was postpone giving the count his ‘certification’ until significant outstanding issues had been examined.

Look at “200 Mules” for an example.

[DiogenesLamp]

Or the congress could have decided the election by congressional delegation count which is also constituional but not desirable.

In this case it would have been extremely desirable. Each state gets only one vote, and it would have been a landslide for Trump.

I would argue that *ANY* outcome which prevented the empowerment of that piece of sh*t Biden, would have been a far better outcome.

[Alberta's Child]

The founders of this country would never have envisioned a scenario where every jackass with a pulse would have the right to vote in a presidential election.

Frankly, we'd do well to go back to the early days of the country when most presidential electors were appointed by state legislatures.

[DoodleDawg]

The VP can refuse to open the electoral box. Period.

Then the President Pro Temp will open it in his absence. The work will go on.

[MayflowerMadam]

“he could have POSTPONED accepting results from certain states with which had evidence of voter fraud”

Yes. He had until January 20 to do that. Instead, he stuck the knife in PDJT’s back on Jan. 6, and within minutes he was high-tailing it for vacation. Totally disappeared. (Probably off yukking it up with Ryan, Romney, etc.)

[Alberta's Child]

The problem with "2000 Mules" is that it exposes the flaw in having Federal courts involved in adjudicating presidential election disputes. The process of ballot harvesting is supposed to be illegal in most states -- including swing states like Georgia and Pennsylvania. But a legal challenge to that process from another state has no merit unless there is a single, uniform standard among all the states for choosing electors. The Constitution explicitly says this is NOT the case (the manner of choosing electors is established by the state legislatures).

So a Federal court challenge in these cases could involve the absurdity of State A (which allows "ballot harvesting," voting by mail, and absentee voting for weeks before Election Day) challenging the election results in State B (which only allows in-person voting on Election Day) because State B had the audacity to ignore cases of "ballot harvesting" -- which is perfectly legal in State A -- in a presidential election.

[x]

His role was not ceremonial. The founders were creating a working blueprint of power, not pomp and circumstance rituals without meaning. He was not a mere powerless rubber stamp or the founders would have seen no need for it.

As it happens, when John Adams was vice president, he had ideas about what "presiding over the Senate" meant. He wondered if it justified a more active role for him. The Senate disagreed. Adams ended up thinking that his job was basically ceremonial. So far as I know, none of the other founders protested at the VP's lack of real power.

[DiogenesLamp]

Then the President Pro Temp will open it in his absence.

Why would he leave and allow that to happen?

You don't really know how to fight, do you?

The first thing it takes is a willingness to fight.

[DugwayDuke]

FreeReign wrote: “It’s the state legislatures, not just the states, and as I said, somebody has to determine which certificates represent the wishes of the state legislatures.”

Did any of the state legislatures indicate their certificates were invalid?

[PCPOET7]

all that mike pence not certifying the elections would have done is kicked it back to the states and to the state house and senate picking the electors college. a state has the ability to not certify an election and instead sending an electoral college voted on in the house and Senate...

Having pence not certify looks really bad if there is no real proof of fraud and has the potential to destroy a political party. the same is true if a party is perceived to committed voter fraud at the levels the dens are thought to have committed voter fraud....

[DiogenesLamp]

"...because State B had the audacity to ignore cases of "ballot harvesting" -- which is perfectly legal in State A..." "Ballot Harvesting" is defacto fraud on the face of it.

Whether a state has made it "legal" or not, the courts should throw it out as inherently fraudulent.

Any election tainted with it should be regarded as null and void.

[DugwayDuke]

DiogenesLamp wrote: “D@mn sure does. Here, I can prove it to you. President of the Senate Pence”

What does the Constitution say about the duties/roles/powers of the President of the Senate wrt determining the legitimacy of the slates of electors submitted by the state legislatures?

[DiogenesLamp]

What does it say about any exercise of executive power?

It's discretionary.

[Taxman]

Ping

[Dr. Franklin]

The "as I understand it" part you describe seems reasonable, but it simply is not correct. Read the 12th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It says nothing about the VP having that kind of power.

The Twelfth Amendment refers to "certificates", but makes no mention of who issues them. Since the state legislature itself has the constitutional power to select the presidential electors, the constitutional administrator of the election, VPOTUS, could refer any dubious "certificates" back to the legislature for their official certification. Pence failed the test. His name is now Mudd Pence

[Taxman]

“The Great One” talked about the failure of VP Pence to challenge the 2020 election on his show last night.

Mark mad a good case for the legality of Pence NOT allowing Pennsylvania electors to vote.

PA ignored its own constitution and changed their voting laws judicially. IIRC, so did several other states that participated in the 2020 steal.