If Asking Mike Pence To Send Votes Back To States Was a Crime Then Why Are Democrats Now Trying To Change the Law That Allowed It?

The January 6 Soviet style show trial is still underway. One of the things they are trying to hammer into the brains of Americans is that former President Donald Trump tried to get Vice President Mike Pence to reject the certification of certain states where there were numerous irregularities that pointed to voter fraud, and send the whole thing back to those states. The Democrats are saying that it was illegal because there is nothing in the Constitution or the law that allows for that. Despite their ignorance on the matter, there actually is.

The members of the committee are guilty of telling bald-faced lies, lies of omission, not the least of which they have said that this was Trump lawyer John Eastman’s strategy for Trump to win the election after the 2020 steal and prior to certification, and that it was a crime.

The big question is, if Eastman’s strategy was illegal, if it was a crime, then how come the DC Democrats are fighting furiously to get that part of election law removed so that what they claim doesn’t exist can never be used?

In February this year, The Washington Post (where truth dies in their darkness) published a piece called “Fix The Electoral Count Act.”

“The Electoral Count Act of 1887 was a belated response to the fiercely disputed presidential election of 1876, which was marred by violence and widespread fraud allegations. Several states submitted competing Electoral College slates, but no system was in place to assess which were legitimate. Congress hastily put together a commission to try to determine a victor (that would eventually be Republican Rutherford B. Hayes, despite Democrat Samuel Tilden winning more popular votes).”

Just two Fridays ago on June 11, 2022, CBS News ran a story with the headline, “Bipartisan senators reach a general agreement on updating Electoral Count Act” where they too want to see the vice president’s role as being nothing more than ministerial.

“Advocates for reforming the Electoral Count Act of 1887 argue that it is outdated and does not provide clear guidance about the role that Congress plays in certifying election results. That ambiguity, they say, created the circumstances that led to the attack on the Capitol on Jan.6, 2021, when thousands of then-President Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol to try to stop Congress from affirming what the states had already determined — that Joe Biden had won the 2020 presidential election.”

Actually, the guidance is pretty clear. The Democrats just don’t like it, and when they don’t like something, they tend to try to change it and then refer to their changes as “reform.”

Even CNN recently talked about the efforts to change the Electoral Count Act law that the Democrats on the J6 committee say doesn’t exist.

WATCH:

Van Jones, the man who Newsweek in June 2017, wrote a piece headlined, “CNN’s Van Jones Calls Trump-Russia Story ‘Nothing Burger,’ Newest Project Veritas Video Shows,” did a Ted Talk before the 2020 election where he was warning people that President Trump might try this strategy if he lost. Jones, who is a lawyer, pointed out that what the January 6 Committee is trying to criminalize is actually very legal and very Constitutional according to the research he’s done, and some legal people he consulted.

“OK, as an attorney, as a political commentator, and frankly, as a former White House official, I used to think I knew a lot about how America picks a president. I was wrong, I did not know.

And this year, I’ve been doing some research into some of the fine print and all the different things in our constitution that we never talk about, and I’ve discovered some legal loopholes that shocked me, I guarantee will shock you, and could determine the way that the presidential election of 2020 turns out.

For instance, did you know that under our constitution a presidential candidate could actually lose the popular vote, fail to get a majority in the electoral college, refuse to concede, manipulate hidden mechanisms in our government and still get sworn in as the president of the United States of America? That’s a fact. I know it sounds like some crazy ‘House of Cards’ episode, and I wish it was, because then we could just change the channel, but I just described to you a real-world, real-life possibility that could occur this year, the year I’m talking, in 2020, or in some other year, if we don’t fix some of these glitches in our system.”

Jones then gets into how a concession speech is what keeps the peace among American voters. When there is a close election and accusations of cheating come out, tensions start to flare, violence is on the cusp. If one of the candidates concedes and gives a concession speech, it almost instantly quells the burning fires in people’s bellies, and the healing begins.

But there is neither anything in the Constitution that demands a candidate concede nor that a candidate has to give a concession speech. It has simply been a tradition. But why would a candidate concede when he knows the election was stolen from him?

After the 2020 election, there were many serious accusations of Democrat voter fraud. To this day, the misinformation news media tells us that there is no evidence of voter fraud, while there is a plethora of evidence found and reported all the time. The movie 2000 Mules comes to mind. They just ignore the evidence to support the Democrats.

When the decision to send the question of electoral votes is sent back to the states, the states can determine who wins the election. This is why that gutter slimeball known as Al Gore (D-TN) knew from the day he contested the 2000 race that he would never be president because the numbers, least of which the votes, were not on his side.

Jones talked about this:

“Now, here’s where it gets totally crazy. If the presidential election winds up in the House of Representatives, they don’t have to pay any attention at all to the popular vote or the electoral vote. It’s like the election never happened. And then it gets even crazier. The final tally in the House is taken not by delegates but by delegation. In other words, individual congresspeople don’t get to vote. It’s done by states.”

Now, get your head wrapped around this. In 2020, the majority of Americans live in blue states, but there are more red states. So there’s a possibility that the Republicans in the House of Representatives could just anoint their candidate to be president, even without the popular vote, or a majority in electoral college. That could happen.

Like in 2020, in 2000, there were more red states than blue states. Each state gets 1 vote. This means that the Republican candidate would get more votes and would win. What’s more, the Republicans in 2000 held majorities in both the House and the Senate, so if the question were the go there, the Republican would win again.

Of course, Al Gore and his lawyers knew this was the law, and knew Gore didn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hillary Clinton’s black soul of winning, but he caused all the ruckus just to give the rightful winner, George W Bush, a political hard time. That’s why they relied on the Florida Supreme Court to do Gore’s dirty work. Left-wing judges have election flouted laws in the past in favor of Democrats, so Gore took a shot.

WATCH:

Remember, the Democrats and their boot-licking sycophants in the mainstream news media leading up to the 2020 election were telling us ad nauseam that on Election Day it was going to look like Donald Trump was the winner, but then after all the fraudulent mail-in ballots were counted, Joe Biden would be the actual winner. I’m telling you right now that everyone who listened to that garbage who was to the right of Vladimir Lenin knew they were telling us that the Democrats were going to use the mail-in ballots to steal the election. Even Donald Trump said it multiple times.

So Van Jones came out with the warning that Trump might use this tactic and the unsaid part was, if he suspected election fraud and didn’t trust the state’s certification efforts. Why else would Jones bring this up? He’s not a stupid man.

Sometimes we forget: candidates do not HAVE to concede. It's just a norm – and in 2020, NOTHING is normal.

So, what happens if a US presidential candidate refuses to admit defeat?

Watch & share my new @TEDTalks:https://t.co/vzLMQ311t6#ChooseDemocracy #HoldTheLine2020

— Van Jones (@VanJones68) October 26, 2020

So, then why are the Democrats and the two RINOs on the J6 Committee trying to convince the American people that Trump asking VP Pence to not certify the states in question due to serious irregularities was illegal and he should be charged with a crime even though it was very legal and very Constitutional?

The simple answer is that the Democrats are lying. The more complicated explanation is that the Democrats are lying.