The Secretary of State for WA is a Republican who others on these threads have vouched for as a person of honor and integrity. But if that is so, I have to ask, why, in the face of this strong evidence of a fraudulent election, did he certify the results? Is it simply a case of being a robot, a rubber stamp, where one has to simply bend over and certify a patently fraudulent election? Is there not any personal integrity involved in the decision to affix one's signature to a document that certifies a fraudulent election as being valid?
I don't buy the "it's the law, he had no choice" argument. Because he could have resigned his office in protest, to show that he would not be a willing participant in the blatant attempt to defraud the citizens of his state. That would take some measure of courage and a willingness to give up the office one has fought an election battle to attain, and, as an outsider, one could correctly argue that it's easy for me to tell someone else what they should give up. But there comes a time when, one way or another, we are all called upon to make the decision as to which master we are going to serve. Choosing the way of courage and moral responsibility and doing the right thing is often difficult when it's easier just to roll over for the tyrant. But it is a path that leaders often must tread.