On January 6, Mike Pence Counts EC Votes

[ian hacktorp]

Pence will determine the election outcome on January 6, 2021.

[spartan max2]

Every state certified their results. So there are no contested states.

A state is contested if they refuse to certify results. Not just because you and others say it's contested.

[Robotic Jew]

2 minutes ago, ian hacktorp said:

Pence will determine the election outcome on January 6, 2021.

The election outcome is already determined....

[Vorg]

He doesn't have the power to reject the votes.

[ian hacktorp]

Apparently, Pence is prevented by law from accepting fraudulent voting results.

January 6 will be an interesting day.

[ian hacktorp]

1 minute ago, South Alabam said:

He doesn't have the power to reject the votes.

He is duty-bound to reject fraudulent electoral votes, so, yes, he has the power.

It has happened before in US history.

[ian hacktorp]

6 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

Every state certified their results. So there are no contested states.

A state is contested if they refuse to certify results. Not just because you and others say it's contested.

There are 7 contested states with alternate electoral slates.  So-called "certification" means nothing.

Pence has the authority to declare any slate of electors invalid.

[zep73]

1 minute ago, ian hacktorp said:

Pence has the authority to declare any slate of electors invalid.

Doesn't he need evidence?

[ian hacktorp]

11 minutes ago, Robotic Jew said:

The election outcome is already determined....

Indeed it is.

[ian hacktorp]

Just now, zep73 said:

Doesn't he need evidence?

Yes, I would think he does.

Perhaps the 270 pages of evidence submitted yesterday by Sidney Powell will play an important role in Pence's decision.

[Eldorado]

Unfortunately for Trump, legal experts say Pence has absolutely no authority, constitutional or otherwise, to prevent ratification of the electoral college votes. The Constitution states that Pence “shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.” The “shall” in the provision is an imperative command, unambiguously requiring the act be completed, making Pence’s role merely ceremonial.

“The 12th Amendment merely designates the President of the Senate (the VP) to ‘open all the certificates.’ But then uses the passive voice: ‘the votes shall then be counted.’ Implicitly, Congress does the counting,” Fordham law professor and legal historian Jed Shugerman clarified on Twitter.

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/mike-pence-cannot-block-the-certification-of-joe-bidens-victory-when-the-senate-formally-counts-electoral-college-votes-on-jan-6th/

[ian hacktorp]

2 minutes ago, Eldorado said:

Unfortunately for Trump, legal experts say Pence has absolutely no authority, constitutional or otherwise, to prevent ratification of the electoral college votes. The Constitution states that Pence “shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.” The “shall” in the provision is an imperative command, unambiguously requiring the act be completed, making Pence’s role merely ceremonial.

“The 12th Amendment merely designates the President of the Senate (the VP) to ‘open all the certificates.’ But then uses the passive voice: ‘the votes shall then be counted.’ Implicitly, Congress does the counting,” Fordham law professor and legal historian Jed Shugerman clarified on Twitter.

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/mike-pence-cannot-block-the-certification-of-joe-bidens-victory-when-the-senate-formally-counts-electoral-college-votes-on-jan-6th/

Pence will be receiving alternate slates in 7 states and will be forced to reject some or all of them.

Your link is by no means definitive and much is being written arguing that Pence has the power to declare "no election" occurred in the case of fraudulent results.

[Peter B]

6 minutes ago, ian hacktorp said:

Pence will be receiving alternate slates in 7 states and will be forced to reject some or all of them.

Your link is by no means definitive and much is being written arguing that Pence has the power to declare "no election" occurred in the case of fraudulent results.

Fraudulent elections? Where was this proved?

[ian hacktorp]

14 minutes ago, Peter B said:

Fraudulent elections? Where was this proved?

Pence will likely be acting on "information and belief" using evidence provided to him.

If he rejects any slate of electors, it will be up to the states affected to challenge his decision.

And we all know how eager the US Supreme Court has been to involve itself in the 2020 election...

[Golden Duck]

1 hour ago, ian hacktorp said:

Yes, I would think he does.

Perhaps the 270 pages of evidence submitted yesterday by Sidney Powell will play an important role in Pence's decision.

Which case?

[RoofGardener]

I'm surprised.. I thought this was just a ceremonial role ? 

[ian hacktorp]

1 minute ago, RoofGardener said:

I'm surprised.. I thought this was just a ceremonial role ? 

Thomas Jefferson would beg to differ.

Were he not dead, I mean.

[Robotic Jew]

59 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Which case?

I'm guessing he's talking about this nonsense

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sidney-powell-shares-270-page-binder-of-documents-buttressing-election-fraud-claims/ar-BB1cgRyG

 

Quote

No new evidence appears in the binder, but it does contain some of the materials Powell has cited as she asserted there was voter fraud and foreign interference in the 2020 election, allegations that have been roundly dismissed by the courts as well as federal and state officials who say they have not seen evidence of widespread fraud. Meanwhile, the electronic voting machine companies targeted by the allegations are gearing up for litigation.

 

[Robotic Jew]

[ian hacktorp]

The linked article has a good description of the power vested in the US Vice President (Pence) as President of the Senate:

December 26, 2020
It's for Mike Pence to Judge whether a Presidential Election Was Held at All
By Ted Noel

Quote

Since the state of Georgia has failed to follow the election law established by its legislature under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, it has not conducted a presidential election.  Therefore, no "presidential electors" were appointed in Georgia.  Further, "electors" "certified" by non-legislative actors pursuant to this process are in fact not "presidential electors."  The competing slate of "electors" is similarly deficient, having not been elected through a presidential election.

Therefore, the chair rules that Georgia has not transmitted the votes of any presidential electors to this body.  Georgia presents zero votes for Donald Trump and zero votes for Joseph Biden.

The central point is that the VP, as the presiding officer and final authority, has the unquestionable authority to declare that the states in question have not conducted presidential elections.  There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth, but no one has the authority to override his decision.

The statement says nothing about who might or might not have "won" the contested states.  Rather, by not following their own laws, as enacted by their own legislatures, they have violated Article II, Section 1.  Thus, they have not conducted an election, and their results are void.

If the votes of all seven contested states are registered as zero, President Trump will have 232 votes, and Joe Biden will have 222.  The 12th Amendment says, "[T]he votes shall then be counted[.] ...  The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President[.]"

In plain language, Donald Trump will be re-elected, since he has a majority of the actual electoral votes.  There will be no need to involve the House of Representatives to resolve a contingent election.

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/12/its_for_mike_pence_to_judge_whether_a_presidential_election_was_held_at_all.html#ixzz6hwkmBTXY
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/12/its_for_mike_pence_to_judge_whether_a_presidential_election_was_held_at_all.html

[spartan max2]

You are delusional.

But as always, what is more concerning is how you legit want (despite that not being true) is you want VP to have the power to deny individual state election results. That would not be a democracy.

Putin would love to have power like that.

Edited December 28, 2020 by spartan max2

[ian hacktorp]

7 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

You are delusional.

But as always, what is more concerning is how you legit want (despite that not being true) is you want VP to have the power to deny individual state election results. That would not be a democracy.

Putin would love to have power like that.

Power of the VP in written in the Constitution, not in anyone's delusion...sorry.

Read it (and weep).

[spartan max2]

Just now, ian hacktorp said:

Power of the VP in written in the Constitution, not in anyone's delusion...sorry.

Read it (and weep).

You have been wrong about everything related to the election process since election day. 

Literally every step of the way has been a new plot on how "Trump can still win".

Why should I believe you now when you have been wrong about every other step?

 

 

[ian hacktorp]

2 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

You have been wrong about everything related to the election process since election day. 

Literally every step of the way has been a new plot on how "Trump can still win".

Why should I believe you now when you have been wrong about every other step?

I've said all along that Trump will win.  And he did...in a landslide.

I offer no reasons why YOU should believe me.  To the contrary, it's much more fun when some folks offer themselves up for a bit of good-natured abuse after the fact.

I appreciate it, truth be told.

[RavenHawk]

3 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

Every state certified their results. So there are no contested states.

A state is contested if they refuse to certify results. Not just because you and others say it's contested.

Is that the only way that state can be contested?  Aren't there other ways?  Can't a contested state be one that ignores widespread fraud in their elections?  Even if you only consider it an appearance of fraud, that still puts into question the results.