Posted on 08/09/2023 7:13:57 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
1. The provision of the Electoral Count Act that established this “Electoral Commission.”
2. The names of the 15 people who were on this “Commission” in January 2021.
I completely agree. However, the courts didn't see it that way. Which is typical of how courts normally rule in such cases. The 2000 Bush/Gore election is but one example, but one most people remember. The law in Florida said that the "dimpled" ballots had to be thrown out. However, the courts decided that bad or incomplete laws should not override a voter's desire to vote, and ruled they must be counted. It was a similar principle here in 2020. Courts ruled if the Secretary of State put drop boxes out, and the voters then used them assuming they were lawful, then the votes should be counted, and those who broke the law addressed separately. As I said, I don't agree with that, at all, but that is how courts have consistently ruled on these matters.
That is why if there is EVIDENCE of fraud, we need to find out how widespread it is in that critical state to see if it was enough to swing the results unfairly to the so-called “winner”.
But it wasn't evidence of fraud. It was evidence of an opportunity to commit fraud. No different than coming home and finding you left your door unlocked. That is evidence that an opportunity for crime existed, such as your house being robbed, but certainly not proof that a crime actually took place. Chances are when you open the door everything will be just how you left it.
And Trump has had 2.5 years to prove a crime actually took place. I wish he had tried better, and come up with more than these opportunities for fraud, which don't win in court. If he had proven some actual fraud, then your argument would make more sense, that it WAS worth risking Trump and Pence both being immediately impeached, removed from office, criminally charged with Sedition/Treason, held without bail, then facing trial for the death penalty. But without that proof, even now, I'm really glad they didn't try to stop the vote, for not only their sakes, but ours.
Let me clarify that. I completely agree that votes should not be counted, that were gathered in a method outside of the laws governing how votes should be gathered. But they were, for the reasons I've cited.
What I do NOT agree with, is that Pence could have, or should have tried to send any electors back to their states by not counting who the states sent to be counted. Even attempting to do that, would have not worked out well for anyone. It would have never resulted in Trump retaining office, and the carnage to Trump and everyone would have been much worse than it already is.
The states had all already made it clear they were done with it, and per their legal requirements, they were. Only a Supreme Court order would have changed that, which was nowhere in sight at that point. Trump could have tried for that later, but didn't.
Ok, here’s the bottom line….
I am NOT interested in :
1. Whether or not any attempt at seeking redress would have succeeded or not.
2. Whether or not attempting to do something could have worked.
What I want to know is : Did Mike Pence, in his capacity as Vice President have ANY legal powers/authority to do anything other than ceremonially allow Congress to certify the result of an arguably fraudulent election.
If the answer is NO, he does not have any legal powers to do anything, then any FReeper or even Trump himself are unfairly blaming him and venting their ire on him for something he cannot do. Which means Pence did the right thing in doing nothing.
This also implies that in 2024, we should expect a similar result as 2020 since nothing has been done in those problematic states to change the system. It also implies that we should expect a Democrat to be president in perpetuity.
You outlined your specific question well, and I think the honest answer is, no one knows for sure, because, laws are only what they are interpreted to be. Usually, they are clear enough for transactions of all types to take place without incident. However, when there are disagreements, then the courts have to get involved to give THEIR interpretation of the law.
In this case, the initial interpretation of the law would have been done by the Senate. I know of no one in the Senate who believes that Pence had that authority, do you? Certainly not the leaders of the Senate. Therefore, that action would have almost certainly been judged by them, in that moment, as illegal. That is an assumption, but unless there’s any evidence that Senators thought that he had that right, it’s probably a good assumption.
The Senate interpretation that it was illegal could have possibly been protested in court, by Trump and Pence, later, but not at that time. What evidence is there that Trump was even prepared to argue that right of Pence to any court? None, that I’m aware of. Most of his lawyers had told them their interpretation was that Pence did not have that right. I think some even quit right before J6 did they not? Apparently it was just a couple, that are now named as co-conspirators who held that belief, but it was definitely only a few, anywhere, that have ever claimed it.
To summarize, no one in the Senate believed it, most of Trump’s own lawyers didn’t believe it, Trump wasn’t even prepared to argue it in court, etc. I’d therefore say it’s pretty flimsy that it would have held up, in any court, as well.
Hell No!
What the Country needs now is leadership and someone with a backbone to stand up to the commie left, and that sure as hell ain't Pence!
It doesn’t matter what the Senators believe. Does Pence have the legal authority or not?
I seem to get the impression that your response is NO, HE CAN DO NOTHING.
If so, then the author of this article and the majority of FReepers in this thread and others are unfairly attacking Pence for not doing something he cannot legally do.
And this of course, implies that there is NO LEGAL RECOURSE for redress of grievances should there be election fraud in the swing states ( which I am certain there WILL BE THE CASE again ).
With this, we all have to be prepared to be governed by Democrats for the rest of our lives.
RE: What the Country needs now is leadership and someone with a backbone to stand up to the commie left, and that sure as hell ain’t Pence!
I have been going back and forth on this with other FReepers in this thread who seem convinced that Pence is being attacked unfairly for failing to do something he is not legally authorized to do on January 2021.
By standing up to the Commie left, exactly what do you believe Pence should have done?
Excellent article.
“Hawaii sent two competing sets of electors to Washington. Upon receiving the competing slates, Vice President Nixon made a discretionary decision. Rather than freezing up, as Pence did, and claiming the Constitution didn’t allow him to act, Nixon opened envelopes from competing electors, then presented both sets of Hawaii’s electors to Congress, three for Kennedy and three for himself. He then moved that the Democrat slate be counted.
In other words, Nixon served as judge over the count, even though the Constitution did not specifically address the procedure Nixon followed.”
Nixon showed class, perhaps to excess. Unlike Pence, he did not pretend that the Vice President had no role.
The only question I have with that Nixon comparison is this — in January 2021, were there similar competing electors in the 6 problematic swing states?
If the answer is No, then this isn’t an apt comparison.
Mike Pence, constitutional ZERO!
There, I fixed it.
It absolutely does matter what the Senators believe, because they are the interpreters of law, in their chamber. That is one of their core responsibilities. And if they all believe what Pence was doing was illegal, then that is how it will be decided, in that moment. They can even exert punishment, in the form of impeachment, in conjunction with the House, if they so choose. If their interpretation is never referred to a court of law, then their interpretation of the law is final.
Does Pence have the legal authority or not?
Only to the extent that it's allowed. If the Senate believed it was illegal, as all indications are, then no, he does not have that authority, in their chamber. Not at that moment, would they have allowed what they believed to be an illegal order.
The Senate is not the final arbiter of law, however, and Trump could have tried to eventually protest to a court. But not right away, although he immediately would have been subject to the justice (impeachment) of the Congress, which would have made his ability to even protest to a court much more difficult.
this of course, implies that there is NO LEGAL RECOURSE
No it does not, it simply means that without proof of actual election fraud, that a majority of Congress finds credible, it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to change the electoral college vote, on the day of the electoral college vote.
While Trump had evidence of an opportunity for fraudulent votes to be cast, there was no evidence that fraudulent votes had actually been cast. There's still not much proof of it 2.5 years later.
So without proof of actual fraud, the electoral college should be allowed to vote. Proof of fraud, if gathered later, can still be presented in a court of law, especially since Trump would have by then have legal standing. Trump either has insufficient evidence of actual fraud, or has been unwilling to share it with a court in the form of a protest, since he had actual legal standing. But the day that the electoral college voted, he was under the supervision of the Senate.
Good to see you. Care to comment on #54?
I believe there were competing slates of electors in 2020. Perhaps someone, who knows more than me, can identify those states and the number of electors in play.
RE: It absolutely does matter what the Senators believe, because they are the interpreters of law, in their chamber.
This is an unsatisfactory state of affairs. What you are saying is —even if there were a law that gave the VP LEGAL authority to send questionable electors back to state legislatures, for proper consideration, that law can be re-interpreted to mean something else and we can’t do anything about it.
In other words, even if a Senate interpreted it wrongly, it is still what they say that counts.
That’s like saying if there are enough Senators who interpret the second amendment to mean that the government has the right to take your firearms for the cause of national security, they are right in doing so because, HEY, THEY ARE THE INTERPRETERS OF THE LAW IN THEIR CHAMBER.
I’m afraid that with the Senate controlled by Democrats, and a few Trump-hating Republicans like Romney and Murkowski, the future isn’t going to look good for seeking any redress should a repeat of 2020 happen ( I am dead sure it will ).
RE: Trump could have tried to eventually protest to a court. But not right away, although he immediately would have been subject to the justice (impeachment) of the Congress
That was EXACTLY what happened in January 2021. You’re simply recounting recent history.
RE: No it does not, it simply means that without proof of actual election fraud, that a majority of Congress finds credible, it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to change the electoral college vote, on the day of the electoral college vote.
And how can you give proof of electoral fraud unless you first stop the certification process and give the protester time to present evidence? As it stands, after an election, TIME is of the essence and the country does not have the luxury of having the Presidency in a state of limbo waiting for the case to adjudicated. This will always be the same reasoning in 2024 should the same questionable process play out once again.
RE: There’s still not much proof of it 2.5 years later.
What type of “proof” would be satisfactory ?
Were for example, ballot-stuffed truckloads to the TGY Center in Detroit, in the dark, early morning hours, where Michigan, like Georgia and four other states, suddenly shut down at 10:00, with Trump winning big time? OK, this is not proof, but the EVIDENCE ought to be considered.
Was the testimony of Jesse Morgan ( as one example), the truck driver who claimed that he delivered large volumes of mail for the U.S. Postal Service, and said a trailer he hauled from New York to Lancaster on Oct. 21, 2020, was full of ballots already filled out by Pennsylvania voters ever considered? Those ballots, he said, went missing after he parked the truck trailer at the Post Office on Harrisburg Pike that evening. Was this ( but one example) ever considered by ANY Senate or Congressional panel , much less a court of law?
SEE HERE:
AND HERE:
Nothing you said thus far assures me that we won’t have a Democrat President in this country for the rest of our lives.
In fact, we can forget the polls showing Trump leading the GOP field by double digits or even leading Biden by 3 or 4 points, or that Biden’s approval is in the dumps. They don’t really matter since the same state of affairs are sill in existence and WILL BE REPEATED in 2024.
RE: I believe there were competing slates of electors in 2020
If you can show me a reliable source that tells us that this is so, I’d be grateful.
Despite all the criticism of Trump's New York Style and his choices to head government agencies and cabinet members Trump was a success. Let's go down the Trump memory hole and review the Obama/Biden/Hillary impediments and Trump's successes.
To begin with there was the Hillary inspired Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax that was known to and thereby approved by the Obama/Biden Administration. Think about that, a previous POTUS purposely set out to obstruct an incoming administration. That has never happened in American history. This was unimaginable just 8 years ago.
Was Trump wrong March 2017, when he accused the Obama/Biden Administration of spying on him? No he was not, but who believed him? He was not being outrageous or narcissistic. Trump was accurate and told the truth. Don't forget Governor DeSantis was Congressman DeSantis. What did Congressman DeSantis do about all that Hillary/Obama crap from 2012 thru 2018? FYI, DeSantis chaired the Subcommittee on National Security (remember Benghazi?) and served on the Foreign Affairs (Hello Benghazi!!!) and Judiciary Committees.
Then there were the two Impeachments 1 and 2 and finally the Special Prosecutor Investigation. Impeachment 2 - Trump gets impeached for one phone call with Zelenskyy while Biden's family made millions off of Ukraine's corrupt company Burisma. Simply unbelievable!
Despite the despicable, malicious, and the bullying behavior of Obama, Biden and Hillary and the anemic RINO response, which recent POTUS was as successful as Trump?
Look at what Trump accomplished in 4 years for the majority of Americans:
The gas price per gallon was about $2.30 vs $3.30 under Biden.
Inflation was about 1.4%, mortgage rates were half of what they are now.
Unemployment was low before Covid and before Blue Governors shut everything down and we were in the midst of a V-shaped recovery until January 22, 2021.
Tax decrease - tax laws promoted small businesses as well as large.
US enjoyed energy independence - No Green Agenda, no war on energy, No Paris Treaty.
No war in Ukraine, no threat of nuclear war, NATO paid its way.
China was quiet and we were winning the trade war.
US companies were bringing home well paying jobs due to well executed tax treatments.
There was peace in the Middle East, aka Abraham Accords; the US Embassy moved to Jerusalem; and Iran was isolated. Remember Trump's audacious assassination of Iran's Qassem Soleimani? How about Trump destroying Isis in just a matter on months? Trump handled Syria and Russia elegantly.
Trump got three non-left “I don't know what a woman is” Supreme Court Justices on the bench allowing Roe vs Wade to be overturned.
Trump had an excellent Economic Team and the US enjoyed a AAA+ rating that Biden's Team destroyed in 2+ years:
https://time.com/4440711/donald-trump-economic-advisors/
They were brilliant! And do not forget Wilbur Ross.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_Donald_Trump
Funny how Russia was quiet during the Trump Administration. There was no Russian invasion of Ukraine until Biden took over. Why was that?
I hope you remember this:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nuclear-summit-obama-medvedev-idUSBRE82P0JI20120326
This was a very memorable and strategic event early into Trump's Administration:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/12/trump-xi-jinping-chocolate-cake-syria-strikes
The above is why Putin behaved himself during the Trump Administration. Putin invaded the Ukraine under Biden just like he did under Obama when he claimed Crimea.
Who the heck can accomplish the above in four years while being impeached twice and investigated by the Obama/Biden Weaponized Agencies? Again, talk about “bullying”! Please, spare me!
Trump received 11 million more votes in 2020 over 2016. Never has a sitting President lost when receiving more votes in his reelection bid. Trump increased his vote total by 17+%. Trump can claim victory in 17 of the 18 bellwether counties but still “lost” according to the Dems/MSM?
Do you really believe that Bumbling Biden received 15 million more votes than Hillary? That is an amazing and unbelievable 23% increase in votes for Bumbling Biden than Hillary. The election was blatantly in your face stolen.
Face it, Trump did one hell of a job.
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.