I second the motion of Mr. Hartley of Kansas
~John the Virginian
Mr. Hartley just made quite an eye-opening accusation. He claims that Mike Pence will go down as the biggest traitor in American History.
I second Mr. Hartley's motion.
In so doing, I reject the notion that it is, in any way hyperbolic.
I base that on several factors, allow me to make compelling arguments to support each.
First, the speciousness of Mike Pence's argument is betrayed by the fact that he did exactly what it was he claimed the Constitution banned him from doing.
It is my considered judgement that my oath to support and defend the Constitution constrains me from claiming unilateral authority to determine which electoral votes should be counted and which should not. ~ Mike Pence
The irony is just staggering because, cited there is the most compelling argument I can imagine for sending all 7 pairs of competing slates back to the legislatures, rejecting all 7 pairs of slates, or approving all 7 pairs of slates. All these scenarios mean Trump wins.
He just stated that he lacks the unilateral authority to determine and, yet, determine is exactly what he did!! Two slates of Biden electors were challenged in the joint session- Pennsylvania and Arizona. Those challenges were rejected and the count held at 306 Biden, 232 Trump.
The only problem is that there were not 232 electors submitted for Trump. There were 311 electors submitted for Trump. What happened to those 84 other electors for Trump? What happened to those 7 states? Surely, they were rejected by the house and the senate after being presented, right?
No. They were never presented. Pence did not present them. Not to put too fine a point on it, Pence made a unilateral decision to determine which electoral votes should be counted and which should not. It's just that simple. 7 State legislatures sent in alternate slates on December 14th, Pence disregarded them. In a contested election, Pence made a unilateral decision to choose who to count and who not to count. Exactly what he claimed he couldn't do!
Ah, but some will say "Only the electors certified by the Governors" can count". Maybe that is how congress would have voted, maybe not. Pence, contradicting his own alleged restraint, made the decision for them.
Oh, but it's worse than that.
In the case of 6 of those states, Pence unilaterally threw out challenges to states with pending Constitutional and Fraud litigation on the docket of the United States Supreme Court. These were cases where the Supreme Court asked for briefs from the defendants! He deliberately counted states contested as unlawful!
Oh, but it's even worse than that.
For when Pence says, he lacks the unilateral authority to count the electors, he makes an argument that can be Constitutionally challenged. When he makes the argument that the Governor-certified slates hold sway, he makes an argument that is certainly unconstitutional. However, even those two arguments- as weak as they already were- collapse into dust when you consider that 5 separate states decertified Biden (Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia) and/or certified for Trump (Pennsylvania, Arizona).
In Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia, Pence unilaterally chose uncertified Biden electors over uncertified Trump electors. Worse, in Pennsylvania and Arizona, Pence unilaterally chose uncertified Biden electors over certified Trump electors. He was presented with an official decertification document from Pennsylvania that he ignored!
We can argue about many things that the Constitution says on this question but we cannot argue about one. Article 2, section 1 of the Constitution is clear. The State Legislatures alone dictate the awarding of electors. Period, Full stop.
In this year's election, make no mistake, Pennsylvania's and Arizona's electors were chosen by Mike Pence. All 5 of those states, acting under the authority expressly granted them by the Constitution, instructed Mike Pence to count those states either for Trump or uncertified for either. All 5 of them. Pence, by his own words, did not have the authority to defy them. Yet, he defied them anyway.
Adding further scandal to his stance is that Pence says he arrived at this position by consultation with legal experts. Yet, when an actual lawsuit was presented to the courts to establish this authority, Pence- himself- asked for the case to be thrown out. Why would he do that? If fidelity to the Constitution was his highest concern, why would he sabotage efforts to get to the answer?
Finally, when questions were raised about his objections, it was presented to him that he could resign in good conscience. Trump could have appointed someone like Michael Flynn as acting VP. That way, Pence could uphold his moral position without betraying 10s of millions who disagreed with him.
Instead, he destroyed a nation and codified a system that he knows very well will prevent another fair election from every taking place and ensured immunity to the perpetrators of the greatest electoral crime in American history and an act of war by nations like China.
Greatest traitor in American history? If he's not, I don't know who would be.