Posted on 03/12/2021 4:12:28 AM PST by gattaca
House Democrats have started the process of determining whether a Republican congresswoman was the legitimate winner of her race in Iowa — a process that could ultimately end with Democrats deciding to seat the congresswoman’s Democrat opponent.
Democrats on the House Administration Committee have turned their attention to Democrat Rita Hart’s claims that Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA) was not the legitimate winner of November’s election in Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District.
“The House Administration Committee gathered virtually Friday afternoon to finalize the process by which it will adjudicate Hart’s claim, which was filed under the Federal Contested Elections Act. The committee has been largely silent since Hart first made her contest in December, but the hearing suggests that it is preparing to review the matter further,” Politico reported. “At the center of Hart’s complaint are 22 ballots that her campaign says were improperly rejected.”
Miller-Meeks won the district by a total of six votes, making it one of the closest federal elections in recent history, according to the report. Democrats have a razor-thin majority in the House, and if Hart were to be seated, it would give them a tiny bit more breathing room.
“The last time the House chose to overturn a state-certified election was an acrimonious affair. After the 1984 elections, the House Democratic majority refused to seat the Republican challenger to Democratic Rep. Frank McCloskey,” the report added. “A Republican official in Indiana certified the GOP candidate, Richard McIntyre, as the winner, but a recount conducted by Congress found McCloskey won by 4 votes. When the House Democrats voted to seat McCloskey, Republicans stormed out of the chamber in protest.”
Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.), Ranking Member on the House Administration Committee, said, “I can’t think of a worst first step this committee could take in a new Congress than to waste taxpayer dollars by moving forward with overturning this election.”
Davis cited the 1984 election result out of Indiana during Friday’s meeting, warning that Democrats could try to play the same game now.
“Ballots that were not legal under the state law were suddenly determined legal votes under new rules invented by a partisan task force, who completely rejected state law,” Davis said. “They changed the rules of the game after the game had already been played. And that’s exactly what could be happening 35 years later.”
Republicans won another nail biter in a House race out of New York earlier this month when a state Supreme Court Justice Scott DelConte ruled that Claudia Tenney must be certified as the winner of the state’s 22nd Congressional District over Rep. Anthony Brindisi (D).
“DelConte panned local elections boards for ‘systemic violations of state and federal election law,’ including the Oneida County’s failure to process more than 2,400 voter applications,” The Hill reported. “However, the judge ruled it is not the court’s job to rectify those errors.”
Correction: This article has been updated to replace Miller-Meek’s name with Hart’s name in the second sentence of the fourth paragraph.
Democrats only care about violations of election law when they lose.
Do they really have the chutzpah to try this?
Becoming more brazen every day.
COUNT on it.
No doubr - and it will a huge media story slanted towards the Dems so the sheep will think the R did something wrong.
Well, they have the chutzpah to lie to the nation about “no evidence of election fraud”, etc. So, probably yes.
A couple of weeks ago you were a traitorous insurrectionist if you questioned the certified results of a state election. That was a “debunked conspiracy theory”.
Now that’s all down the memory hole when the RAT has a potential gain.
As Democrats become more and more overt in their efforts to cheat, the likelihood things will be settled in blood increases.
The fact that it’s in the news right now, means it’s already a done deal. The R will be out by Easter.
isn’t questioning the outcome of an election, treasonous?
Absolutely.
They just stole the White House and 2 Senate seats in Georgia. This is nothing.
By their definition (ie refusing to accept the certified election results) they are insurrectionists, domestic terrorists and an existential threat to democracy.
did the GOP protest the REAL fraud?
no.
never do.
America is lost because of the backstabbing GOP
and the frightened, divided, hiding US mil.
I’m happy that the Democrats are concerned about election integrity and I’m sure that they will soon turn the question to Biden’s obviously illegitimate election.
The irony is apparent. No doubt the Supreme Court will hear any case that may result from such a miscarriage of electoral process.
Of course they do. They act with absolute impunity.
If it goes all the way to SCOTUS...you KNOW which way they’ll roll. Guess who’ll have standing...
Related to this, I think claims were put forward that cheating took place in November in about 10 different ways. I suspect that just 1 or 2 of those ways really made the difference.
“Hey,” people said, “We should investigate those 10 ways they cheated.”
And so the “official people” said, “OK, we can investigate the 8 or 9 ways they cheated. There. Done. We looked at the 8 ways they may have cheated, and none of them were significant.”
“No, no, no,” people said, “We need to look at all 10 ways. Because I think 1 or 2 of them may have been significant.”
“Well, I’m telling you, we already looked at the 8 ways. But we can look at those 8 ways again, if it makes you feel any better. There. Done. We checked out the 8 ways they may have cheated. And we have debunked any notion that they may have cheated.”
“8 ways? What about the other 2? Shouldn’t we investigate everything?”
“But we did. Go away.”
The Rs in the House should shut it down if the San Francisco Dems try this. But they won’t. How many of Biden’s executive orders have been challenged in the courts by them? To date. ONE. There was a great article online the other day which compared congressional Republicans to people dragged onstage to be pelted with rotted vegetables by the opposition. Instead of fighting back, you will have Mitt Romney fink on his own side, and most of the rest pull their skirts above their heads and run off the stage crying hysterically. That’s why we love Trump - despite his faults, he is the living embodiment of Lincoln’s characterization of General Grant when Lincoln was attacked by the press for keeping a drunk as lead general - “I need this man - he fights”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.