Posted on 08/03/2023 6:00:55 AM PDT by george76
Pence has repeatedly maintained he lacked the constitutional authority to send the elections results back to the contested states for review and insisted he saw no evidence of voter fraud swaying the outcome of the 2020 election.
Special Counsel Jack Smith's most recent indictment of former President Donald Trump repeatedly referenced former Vice President Mike Pence objecting to Trump's efforts to overturn the election and insisting that the vice president had no authority to halt the electoral certification process.
Pence has repeatedly maintained he lacked the constitutional authority to send the elections results back to the contested states for review and insisted he saw no evidence of voter fraud swaying the outcome of the 2020 election, a point Smith notes early in the indictment.
The former vice president's own words prior to the events of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, however, seem to contradict his post-vice-presidency narrative.
Video footage from a public address less than one week prior to the electoral certification on Jan. 6, 2021 shows Pence expressing concerns about election irregularities in the contest and vows to hear the objections of his supporters during the certification process, seemingly suggesting he held a belief in his authority to do so.
"I know we all got doubts about the election. I share the concerns of millions of Americans about voting irregularities," he told supporters on Jan. 4. "I promise you this Wednesday. We'll have our day in Congress. We'll hear the objections. We'll hear the evidence."
...
Pence made the remarks during a rally to support then-GOP Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue in the Georgia runoff elections.
Smith's indictment includes six other co-conspirators with whom Trump allegedly conspired to unlawfully overturn the election. One of those individuals, he alleges, put forward plans outlining the theory that Pence could deem the elector slates from seven disputed states invalid.
"The Defendant's Vice President-who personally stood to gain by remaining in office as part of the Defendant's ticket and whom the Defendant asked to study fraud allegations-told the Defendant that he had seen no evidence of outcome-determinative fraud," the indictment states.
...
Pence on Monday blamed Trump's efforts on a gaggle of "crackpot lawyers" for telling Trump "what his itching ears wanted to hear."
"You know, I’m a student of American history. And the first time I heard in early December somebody suggest that as vice president I might be able to decide which votes to reject and which to accept. I knew that it was false... I dismissed it out of hand," he said.
Mike Pence and his lack of integrity were on full display on January 6 2021. We all watched him politically-neuter himself in front of the nation.
This why he polls only slightly higher than herpes at the moment.
No matter what the truth is, Pence isn’t bright enough to defend himself.
Pence has repeatedly maintained he lacked the constitutional authority to send the elections results back to the contested states for review and insisted he saw no evidence of voter fraud swaying the outcome of the 2020 election, a point Smith notes early in the indictment.
The former vice president’s own words prior to the events of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, however, seem to contradict his post-vice-presidency narrative.
See here:
Video footage from a public address less than one week prior to the electoral certification on Jan. 6, 2021 shows Pence expressing concerns about election irregularities in the contest and vows to hear the objections of his supporters during the certification process, seemingly suggesting he held a belief in his authority to do so.
“I know we all got doubts about the election. I share the concerns of millions of Americans about voting irregularities,” he told supporters on Jan. 4. “I promise you this Wednesday. We’ll have our day in Congress. We’ll hear the objections. We’ll hear the evidence.”
Summary: first, Pence said, publicly, yea, I’ll look into the 2020 election and sure there do seem to be problems.
Then, he doesn’t do that at all.
He ran out the back door.
Pence is now admitting he had not only the power, but therefore a DUTY, to stop the electoral college if there was questions of voter fraud.
Mike Pence first claimed that he did not have the power. Therefore, he had no responsibility or duty. Now, he is claiming that he had the power, but did not want to use it because of “Trumps crazy lawyers”. In a Republic, power comes with responsibility.
Congress refused to investigate or pause the electorial college to investigate valid claims of election fraud in 2020. The SCOTUS refused to hear cases on the matter. The finding in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, George, and the specter of illegal ballot harvesting as well as turning off voter signature verification in many states, with ILLEGAL drop boxes without tracking, left the election in question.
The last recourse is the Vice President, who presides over the electorial college, to step up and force the process back to the state legislatures. This isn’t ‘insanity’ this is the system and how it’s supposed to work. The power goes back to the States. Mike Pence refused this process, and accepted the results of the 2020 election as valid, refusing investigation. Again, MIKE PENCE accepted the results of the 2020 election, despite ALL of the issues and valid requests for investigations by Congress.
That’s something Mike Pence will have to answer to God for. Democrats love him for it. He got television appearances and book deals, and money he will keep into his Presidential campaign. A campaign that was dead before it started because he didn’t demonstrate leadership, he demonstrated corruption and cowardice in the face of adversity.
Trump is right. People should feel sorry for Mike Pence. He could have stood up and make sure we had passed power back to the States and Guaranteed and investigation. He failed and is despised by all (except those that have financially benefited from the Biden Administration or Hunter Biden’s foreign deals) his acts.
Really why have the preview to review if you Ave to power to action?... kind of stupid and the founding father’s were not stupid.. the wrote check and balances for everything including election fraud...
Or do you content they never considered that a state could have a fraudulent election or delegates or there a dispute in the state?
Look at the results of the first few presidential elections this country ever had. In 1792, for example, only six of the fifteen states even had a popular vote for presidential electors. And fewer than 28,000 total votes were cast in the four states where the popular vote total was recorded.
In the other nine states, the presidential electors were selected by a vote of their state legislatures. If New Jersey (for example) had a corrupt state government that ran shoddy elections, then that was really their problem first and foremost. Because the power in the U.S. government rested primarily in Congress by design under the U.S. Constitution, the founders didn't care quite so much about incompetence or corruption in a few individual states.
On the docket for Jan. 6th, already known to Pence (and to Pelosi, who restricted access to the “counting” by many of the House members from States whose election results and Electors were to be challenged) some 140 plus Representatives from disputed Electoral States (carrying authorizations of their State Legislatures to question slates of Electors and their “vote” vs. actual tallies in the popular votes) had filed their objections.
Someone got to Pence and it should be noted the one who organized the bussed in Capitol “rioters” attired in Trump regalia and hats—Pelosi both restricted access (remember she was Speaker) and “covid” rules to reduce the number of known objectors from being present. They were all in masks- remember? Pelosi and Pence BUMPED ELBOWS- all on video.
Never forget that Pence’s assigned job was to ferret out election fraud in all the States.. and the other one- heading up the covid response (which included mail-in ballots for the locked down voters real and fake). And one more people don’t talk about— the creation of the Space Force (satellites- which included the digitized votes sent over to Europe for tabulation and then sent back in larger numbers spread across all the precincts in the 6 key Electoral states.) Acting SecDev Chris Miller alluded to Pence’s aid in spec ops (it’s on the video) and CISA was part of that Space Force.
Please cite any evidence you have to support this. There wasn't a single state legislature anywhere in 2020 that voted to contest the state's election results, or even to authorize anyone to represent the state in contesting any election results.
Put Pence on the stand….
“MrPence , do you believe Donald Trump actually believes he had his win stolen from him….?”
“Yes, I do”
No further questions.
You do not understand the state politics of the 6 targeted states... the delegations were political and not one had any lefist dems on it supporting their House members.
The filing of objections for Jan. 6th were known weeks before and there is record of that. Look it up. It’s why Pelosi ramped up her DC mob and brought in the paid rioters.
I live in one of them. Why don't you fill me in on the details of what I've missed here.
... the delegations were political and not one had any lefist dems on it supporting their House members.
I don't even know what you're trying to say here.
Of course he had the authority, just not the balls.
Swing states’ executives enacted voting changes without complying with their own state laws — like running those changes thru their legislature. That is a violation of the US Constitution. That makes the Electors from those states invalid — automatically.
If a Veep says he does not have the authority to enforce the US Const — he has been bought. Pence is a traitor.
Then the legislatures of those states should have convened and voted on their own slates of electors. I hold those legislators in contempt for their failure to uphold their responsibility under the U.S. Constitution to formally address any conflicts within their own state laws.
In my own (swing) state, the changes enacted by the executive never would have been overturned in a legal challenge -- simply because the state statutes are filled with contradictory laws and provisions, some of which give the governor the authority to do exactly what he did.
That makes the Electors from those states invalid — automatically.
That's interesting. I've never seen this legal argument presented anywhere.
BTTT
We have precedent on four occasions for challenging an election.
1) 1796, There was a flawed, illegally prepared slate of electors (I forget if it was from GA or NH). John Adams sat down when he got to reading that “vote” from the slate of electors to entertain a challenge from the floor. Jefferson instructed his supporters NOT to challenge. Adams became pres.
2) 1800 same thing, but with Jefferson counting, but he didn’t even sit down when he came to the irregular state (again, it was either GA or NH) slate. He just blew right past it. TJ became pres.
3) In 1876, three states’ electors were viewed as illegitimate. It took a join commission of Congress to settle this with the Compromise of 1877.
4) In 1960, Hawaii’s governor quickly sent in a slate of electors for, as I recall, Nixon. But the legislature sent in a second slate for JFK. Then a recount showed JFK won Hawaii, so the state (can’t recall if it was gov or leg) sent in a THIRD slate of electors for JFK. Richard Nixon accepted and read the slate from the third, recounted, slate.
Clearly a veep has the authority to a) recognize a challenge from the floor, upon which he refers the slates to the House and Senate meeting in separate sessions; b) ignore any discrepancies (Pence’s route); c) reject any slates that, in estimation were fraudulent; or d) refer the entire matter to Congress (the 1876 solution).
So you’re saying Pence’s earlier comments were meaningless bs, made to fool people.
The objections all fell flat on their faces. None of them was successful. None of them was even close to being successful.
The 1960 case is the most instructive. It is important to note that all the legal and procedural maneuvering related to the three slates of electors took place before the joint session of Congress in January 1961. The reason that particular case is not all that relevant to 2020 was that Hawaii actually certified multiple slates of electors. In 2020, there wasn't a single state that submitted more than one slate of electors to Congress after the Electoral College certification in mid-December (December 14th, I believe).
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.