MIKE PENCE ADMITS HE BELIEVES THAT HE COULD HAVE STAYED THE SENATE COUNT
Beginning in the summer of 2020, when myriad states, legally and illegally, changed their voting rules in a way that removed all safeguards against fraud, it was clear that there might be problems in November. Then, on election night, six major precincts — election outcome–changing precincts — stopped counting votes altogether.
When you add in all the other evidence adduced in subsequent weeks showing fraud (including Biden’s unbelievably soaring vote count long after the election ended), there was good reason to question the election. Mike Pence has now conceded that he believes he could at least have opened the path to question election fraud.
On Sunday (8/06), former vice president Mike Pence, who is running for the Republican nomination, announced that he’s been clear that he had no right to do anything other than to certify the election. Appearing on CNN’s State of the Union (which means he’s courting Democrats, who despise him for his stands regarding abortion and homosexuality), Pence defiantly threw Trump under the bus:
“Former Vice President Mike Pence on Sunday trashed his former boss Donald Trump for allegedly attempting to overthrow the 2020 election — and defended his actions on blocking the ex-president from doing so.
’What I want the American people to know is that President Trump was wrong then and wrong now. I had no right to overturn the election,’ Pence said on CNN’s ‘State of the Union’ while stumping in New Hampshire. ‘By God’s grace, I did my duty under the constitution of the United States and I always will’.
Pence, along with Congress, certified the election of President Biden as the winner of the 2020 election — over Trump’s objections.”
However, when appearing on Fox News on Monday (8/07), Pence suddenly had a different version of events. He admitted that he could have rejected the electors on January 6, 2020, which would have turned the matter over to the House of Representatives (AKA the people’s house), but did not do so because he feared “chaos” (which I take to mean he was afraid of what leftists would do, given their propensity for “mostly peaceful” riots that burn down cities and murder people):
Watch this clip:
Watch this clip
Pence just accidentally admitted he could have turned the 2020 election over to the House of Representatives but he didn't because he was worried about 'chaos'
That means he admits he knew that he had the legal ability to do that pic.twitter.com/0hHRHLQdq6
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) August 7, 2023
“Pence just accidentally admitted he could have turned the 2020 election over to the House of Representatives but he didn’t because he was worried about ‘chaos’
That means he admits he knew that he had the legal ability to do that pic.twitter.com/0hHRHLQdq6
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) August 7, 2023”
Notice that nasty remark about Trump’s “gaggle of crackpot lawyers.” Would he also say that two Boston University professors are “crackpot lawyers”? I ask because two of those professors published a law review article holding that the 12th Amendment gives the vice president vast authority to determine the validity of electoral submissions:
“Last year two Boston University professors published a law review article arguing the Vice President is the sole federal officer with discretion under the 12th Amendment to determine the validity of electoral vote submissions. Presumably they risk being charged with felonies now pic.twitter.com/Z04gKw6MYe
— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) August 6, 2023”
That authority isn’t necessarily without risk because a vice president who wants to continue for a second term in the White House might put his thumb on the scale in favor of the incumbent. Nevertheless, there’s a strong and legitimate argument to be made in favor of his having that power.
After all, the Constitution is a document about substantive rights and authority. If it’s just a matter of counting numbers, you can have a clerk do it, just as the clerk counts votes in Congress. An assigned task must have some meaning behind it beyond being a rubber stamp.
At the very least, the Supreme Court should have been called in to determine what role the vice president did have on January 6. Ideally, that would have happened before January 6. Failing that, it should have happened after Pence signed on the election.
However, because matters got out of hand on January 6 (something I believe Democrats deliberately fomented), Sundance notes that the Democrats managed to avoid any objections to the vote count, making it ineligible for Supreme Court review.
Regardless of the merits of arguments for or against the vice president having some power to reject obviously fraudulently achieved Electoral College votes, the point here is a narrow one:
Pence has admitted that he believes that he had the power to reject manifestly fraudulent counts or to halt the vote because of double-slates of electors. Further, he admits, by implication, that he was too afraid of leftist violence to do anything about it.
Most importantly, Pence has conceded that he is a weasel and, for all his God talk, a dishonest man.
Andrea Widburg is deputy editor of American Thinker.