Pence statements prior to Jan. 6 undercut his claims on election integrity, constitutional duty

Just the News. ^ | August 3, 2023 - | Ben Whedon

[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.

[Alberta's Child]

If the Constitution wanted to define the role of the Veep/President of the Senate in such matters they would have.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that the Constitution clearly does this. The President of the Senate presides over a joing session of Congress where the electoral votes from each state are unsealed and counted. That's it.

It should be a simple process, but in several cases even that wasn't simple enough.

Interestingly, it should become LESS complicated over time. The Constitution was written at a time when electronic communications didn't exist, when documents had to be delivered by hand while the recipients waited for them, and when there was always a chance that the person delivering them could get lost or waylaid on the way. None of that really applies anymore, which really does make the Congressional certification of the electoral votes pretty much a mere formality today.