Why Trump Said Pence Could Decertify the Electoral Ballots of States with Competing Electors
Why Trump Said Pence Could Decertify the Electoral Ballots of States with Competing Electors
By Paul Dowling
“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress. . ..” – Article II, Section 1, Clause Two, of the US Constitution
The President of the Senate’s Duty to Count Only Constitutionally Cast Electoral Ballots
All states holding elections in accordance with rules prescribed by entities other than the state legislatures, during the 2020 presidential election, were in direct violation of the Constitution. This means that Vice President Mike Pence, who was charged with counting valid electoral ballots, in his role as President of the Senate, should have set aside the ballots of any states whose elections were run un-Constitutionally. Throwing out those bad ballots may have changed the election.
Indeed, Pence had the Constitutional duty to set aside the electoral votes of states in dispute which had “dueling electors” (states which had cast competing electoral slates of votes, following the precedent of Hawaii in the 1960 presidential election). Of course, the Constitutional basis that these ballots should have been set aside is because the elections generating those ballots had been held under rules not in line with the Constitution. In the case of Nevada, the legislature’s enactment of an un-Constitutional law allowing ballot harvesting – going against the equal-protection principle of “one-person, one-vote” – was a huge red flag. And, in six other states, the elections were held in accordance with rules that were made by illegitimate rule-makers.
So, seven states in all – New Mexico (5), Nevada (6), Wisconsin (10), Arizona (11), Michigan (16), Georgia (16), and Pennsylvania (20) – stood to have their sum total of 84 electoral ballots set aside from the number of legal electoral votes to be tallied. Instead of 538 electoral votes to count, this would have yielded 454 votes available for tallying. Biden’s electoral win of 306 to 232 would have transformed into a Trump victory of 232 to 222. This would have been the outcome, had Pence simply set the illegal ballots aside prior to counting.
Trump was not insisting that Pence set the disputed ballots permanently aside, however; instead, what Trump was proposing was a ten-day recess, during which time the state legislatures could weigh in on what to do with respect to their electoral slates. The states might choose simply to decertify their electoral slates altogether and send no ballots whatsoever, or they could decide to decertify one slate of electoral votes in favor of the other before sending the ballots back to the Congress. A state legislature has the right to choose the electors outright, in accordance with Article II, Section 1, Clause Two of the Constitution: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress . . ..” This clause means that the state legislature may allow a popular vote to choose the electors, or the legislature may choose the electors itself; ultimately, the decision always rests with the legislature.
The 12th Amendment is the law of the land with respect to determining how the electoral votes are to be tallied. It says “the President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates [of the states with legal electoral votes] and the votes shall then be counted.” The clear implication is of the President of the Senate being responsible for the actual opening and tallying of electoral votes, as well as the duty of judging, in the process, which ballots are legal. It would not be un-Constitutional to ask for input from the state legislatures before making this potentially momentous final decision; a ten-day adjournment, per Trump’s suggestion, would not have been out of the question, since the counting of ballots would have concluded on January 16th, four days prior to Inauguration Day. The text of the Constitution does not require any special method to be used, upon which to base decisions about which ballots are valid, nor is a recess prohibited before the vice president exercises his Constitutional duty to count the ballots.
Trump Posts Approval of the Texas GOP’s Recognition of Voter Fraud
On June 21, 2022, Trump posted these comments to Truth Social: “Wow! Look at the Great State of Texas and their powerful Republican Party Platform on the 2020 Presidential Election Fraud. After much research and study, they disavow the national result for President. Such courage, but that’s why Texas is Texas!!! They know that a Country cannot survive without Free and Fair Elections (and STRONG BORDERS!).” For over a year, Trump has been waiting for patriotic states to take action. And not only has Texas taken action, but Idaho has now followed suit.
Arizona’s disputed 2020 electoral votes – a topic raised by the Idaho GOP – caused the Grand Canyon State to conduct a thorough audit that Trump, according to Newsweek, expected to yield important findings, along with the other states whose elections appear to have been compromised. Remarked Trump, “Let’s see what they find. I wouldn’t be surprised if they found thousands and thousands and thousands of votes [in Arizona], so we’re going to watch that very closely. You’ll watch Pennsylvania, and Georgia, and you’re going to watch Michigan and Wisconsin, and you’re watching New Hampshire – they found a lot of votes up in New Hampshire just now – because this was a rigged election, and everybody knows it. We’re going to be watching it very closely.” What sounded to many like mere bravado on Trump’s part now appears more likely, with every passing day, to prove otherwise in the end.
President Trump vowed that America would never become totalitarian, saying in his 2019 State of the Union Address that “America was founded on liberty and independence – not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.” And now, Trump is leading the charge to get patriotic outsiders elected to federal office by endorsing congressional and senatorial candidates for the 2022 midterm elections, all the while enjoying an unprecedented high success rate in seeing his endorsed candidates win in their primary elections.
What Is the Chance a Joint Session of Congress Might Recount the Electoral Ballots?
At the Turning Point Action rally in Arizona, on July 24, 2021, Trump said, “You know, if somebody robs Tiffany, a beautiful jeweler . . ., and they steal the diamonds, and then they get caught, they have to turn the diamonds back.” The 45th president also pointed out, with regard to election fraud, “This isn’t coming from Trump. This has been reported.” In other words, what may prove to be the Crime of the Century is actually being reported by the American people. And, with the Texas and Idaho Republican parties now having declared the election of Joe Biden as being illegitimate, the path to a reconsidered electoral vote appears to be forming. If the Congress were to revert to Republican hands, come January of 2023, it would seem likely that the joint-session counting of electoral votes by Congress may well reconvene, if, by that time, enough disputed states have signaled an interest in having their ballots reconsidered. Whatever happens, no one can deny that historic days lie ahead.