Mike Pence is being held out as the potential savior of a fair election

Source: American Thinker.

The proposal this piece describes has been floating around the Internet in various forms for a couple of weeks. This version asserts that the Vice President, in his Constitutional role as President of the Senate, has plenary power to reject the slate of electors from any state he considers — based on knowledge and belief — to be invalid.

That the Constitution would grant such a power to a single elected official makes perfect sense as a matter of checks and balances and of the ultimate expediency a national election requires. Indeed, Vice Presidents in the past have sometimes had to choose between so-called “dueling slates” of electors when states have presented them.

The proposal goes further than this, however. It claims the VP may (and must in some cases) invalidate a state’s electors even when the state submits only one slate.

There are rumors the White House is considering the proposal. There are also rumors it isn’t. My feeling is: If Pence is willing, he should go for it.

19 thoughts on “Mike Pence is being held out as the potential savior of a fair election

  1. Pathetic and laughable. You lost. Get over it. IMAGINARY powers are not going to turn pitiful sore losers into winners.

    As for the piece you chose to link to, you should be embarrassed and ashamed. It is spreading palpable bullshit. Not to mention sedition. The elections in those six states were NOT fraudulent in ANY way.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. “…transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;–the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;…” US Constitution, 12th Amendment.

    So Pence is now supposed to open these sealed envelopes, and if he doesn’t like the results, he can pick another slate of electors?

    Somehow, I think that might be challenged since at that point it would be pure politics and not based on any verifiable reason to reject what the states have certified.

    You do realize that if he could do that, then all future elections will be decided by the president and his VP no matter how the country votes. It could be a massive landslide even winning all 50 states and 70% of the vote, but the VP picks another person for president.

    Textualists and originalists would say not so fast. The Constitution says the VP is just opening the envelopes turning the results over to Congress. It does not say he can challenge the results.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. RE: “So Pence is now supposed to open these sealed envelopes, and if he doesn’t like the results, he can pick another slate of electors?”

      No, the theory is that he needn’t (and mustn’t in some cases) open the envelopes that contain invalid certifications. That is, if the certification is invalid, it is not a “certification.”

      As I noted, VPs have exercised this very discretion in the past.

      Like

      1. “As I noted, VPs have exercised this very discretion in the past.”

        Uh, no they have not. “Dueling slates” of electors are not for the VP to choose between. Duh!

        And, by the way, there are no “dueling slates of electors” for Congress to choose from in this election. The Safe Harbor date has come and gone. Each state has presented ONE slate of electors. The clowns you have cited who nominated themselves as electors do not count. Any person of normal intellect would not have to do ANY research to know how laughable THAT was.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. RE: “And, by the way, there are no “dueling slates of electors” for Congress to choose from in this election.”

          Try to keep up. Dueling electors is not the issue here. The plenary power the Constitution grants to the VP is the issue.

          Like

          1. First, you LIE about Vice-Presidents having exercised such a power in the past. They haven’t. In fact, they have no such plenary power. Never have. It is a dumb idea as others have pointed out.

            The only time that this phase of the process – Congress counting the Electoral votes – is even an issue at all is when there are “dueling electors” sent by bona fide government institutions from a state. This year, much to your chagrin, there is not even that. ALL states have issued ONE set of Electors and they have voted to make Joe Biden the next President.

            If you really think that the V-P can simply toss the votes from states on a whim or some opinion they have about that state’s process, then you are “not very bright” – the perfect reader to eat up the garbage served by a site like the badly named “American Thinker.”

            Liked by 1 person

          2. RE: “First, you LIE about Vice-Presidents having exercised such a power in the past.”

            Keep digging. Maybe you will escape the pit of ignorance on the other side of the Earth.

            I wrote: “Vice Presidents in the past have sometimes had to choose between so-called ‘dueling slates’ of electors when states have presented them.”

            This is true. It famously happened, e.g., in the JFK election, where Hawaii delivered two slates of electors to the Senate for certification. Then VP Richard Nixon used the power of his position to recognize the JFK slate of electors, treating his own slate as invalid.

            That was an exercise of the VP’s plenary power as described in the post. The same power, it is argued, allows the VP to simply reject a slate of electors.

            Like

          3. Uh, the facts of the 1960 Hawaii election do not support your claims of some sort of “power” by the V-P to reject Electoral votes or choose between dueling electors. By the time that the votes were counted the issue was moot – Kennedy had won the Electors the old fashioned way. By getting more votes.

            It was a close race and it appeared that Nixon had won. The GOP governor jumped the gun and certified Nixon’s Electors. But after a recount it was Kennedy who had won and his Electors were certified by the state. Nixon had no choice to make. There was only ONE set of legal Electoral votes – the ones based on the decision of the voters.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidential_election_in_Hawaii

            Liked by 1 person

    2. Although I don’t endorse this approach, Pence would not open the envelopes and decide then whether to accept them. He would reject those states entirely as not having followed the Constitutional requirement of choosing their electors according to the law established by the legislatures. Those states Executive Branches, or courts, unlawfully changed the manner in which the election was held to something different from what the legislature allowed.

      That would leave neither candidate with 270 votes and the election would go to the House, with each state having 1 vote.

      Like

    3. Len,

      Your cruelty knows no bounds. The idiots have been dealt defeat after defeat by the courts with the harshest criticism coming from Republican chosen and appointed judges, and you snatch their last hope.

      Here’s what will happen. Pence won’t preside over the Congressional count. That’s because on the 6th of January, he will be President Pence and he’ll be too busy granting a pardon to the former President and his family.

      Liked by 3 people

  3. If he could, he shouldn’t

    Trump is welcome to exhaust his options in court, or make his case to the state legislatures, but overturning the election by parliamentary maneuvering would be wrong even if legal.

    Even I would have to ask him to leave.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Needs a little edit

    “This version asserts that the Vice President, in his Constitutional role as President of the Senate, has plenary power to reject the slate of electors from any state he considers — based on knowledge and belief — is invalid.”

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Famous Black Yachtmen was always the one I heard. Sometimes Hockey Players is substituted, hence the wonderfully funny “Bo knows hockey” commercial.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Am I being naïve? No, seriously, am I?

    Yes, Pence is a Republican and has backed DJT all along the way. He’s refused to call Trump out at times when he must have known Trump was 10 different ways of WRONG. But, his backing has never really been loud and proud of Trump. He’s just ‘gone along’ it seems with very little energetic enthusiasm.

    I think he would give up his right you-know-what to successfully run in the 2024 election. But, if Pence wants to seriously campaign in that election he has to know that he’s going to need help from Independents and Democrats. He’s also got to know that the country probably will not be looking for a continuation of Trump’s chaos. I believe he will suck it up and deal with whatever President Biden will do for 4 years, and then GO FOR IT.

    I don’t believe Pence is stupid. (Although he has some very weird ideas about riding in a car alone with a woman not his wife. Ha. He’s been over-the-top nutty and ridiculous in his assumption that he might not be able to stop himself from cheating on his wife if he’s put in a car with only a woman. It could be just thinks women can’t keep their hands off him. EEEK!) That, nonsense from him and a few other things aside – I just don’t believe he’s as unaware and inept as Trump. (Well, let’s face it – WHO IS?)

    And, here it comes. I’m going out on a limb here, so be kind. I’m going to say that I don’t believe Pence would screw up what could be a reasonable chance of him winning in 2024 by doing something as un-American and un-Constitutional as doing whatever it is that Trump is begging him to do. Throwing out millions and millions of American’s votes simply wouldn’t serve him well.

    I’m no fan of Pence; that’s for sure. But, I just don’t see him being THAT stupid, ignorant or THAT bad of a man. Even if he hates Joe Biden’s innards, I just don’t see him putting himself in the place where that last-ditch effort would put him.

    So, I’m asking – am I being as pathetically naïve, stupid, unaware, inept and down-right looney as I always point out Trump to be? Goodness, I hope not.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s