Ok. First my bona dudes: Never a Pence fan. I think a much Berger choice of someone more interring could have been made. Still and all, he did a serviceable job, though I wouldn’t have supported him in 24.
Now my question: just what was the precedent you refer to for the highly theoretical proposition he could have prevented the election from being certified? You know, the action that would have gotten both him and Trump impeached for usurpation of power. What was the precedent?
They were impeaching Trump for anything they could think of anyway, including impeaching him for just doing his job. So worrying that not certifying the election because he would be impeached is not even a consideration to me.
Second his job is not to rubber stamp Whatever crap the democrats gave him. Certifying means that you attest that you think things are in order. Things were clearly not in order.
Lest I believe there was atleast one other time where election results were not certified because of questions of election integrity, so that is where I said there was precedent for doing it.
Being asked to certify something does that mean you are forced to certify it. How is it “highly theoretical” ?
To give you a real-life example I’ve written computer software for very technical medical systems. I have refused to certify some results when I determined that the testing was not adequate. Otherwise I would be responsible if somebody died.
Likewise Pence is responsible what is happening now, for for certifying highly suspicious results.