Mike Pence op-ed in the Washington Post: Jan 6 was a power grab. So is busting the filibuster to nationalize elections

[basquebromance]

take that, Biden!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/01/14/mike-pence-filibuster-nationalize-elections/?utm_campaign=wp_opinions&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

excerpts:

Now that the anniversary of Jan. 6 has come and gone, some of us who lived through that tragic day in 2021 are getting a clearer picture of what was and is at stake. On Jan. 6, an angry mob ransacked the Capitol, largely to try to get Congress and me, as the president of the Senate, to use federal authority to overturn results of the presidential election that had been certified by all 50 states.

Lives were lost and many were injured, but thanks to the selfless and courageous work of law enforcement, the Capitol was secured, and Congress was able to reconvene the very same day and complete its work under the Constitution and laws of the United States.

In the year since that fateful day, states across the country have enacted measures to try to restore confidence in the integrity of our elections while ensuring access to voting for every American. Georgia, Arizona and Texas have led the way with common-sense reforms, such as requiring verifiable identification on absentee ballots and using cameras to record ballot processing.

Despite this steady progress of state-based reforms, now come President Biden and Senate Democrats with plans to use the memory of Jan. 6 to attempt another federal power grab over our state elections and drive a wedge further into our divided nation.

Their plan to end the filibuster to allow Democrats to pass a bill nationalizing our elections would offend the Founders’ intention that states conduct elections just as much as what some of our most ardent supporters would have had me do one year ago.

 

[Calypso Jones]

Mike Pence political career is dead.

 

[basquebromance]

that's what they said about Trump's political career

 

[FA_Q2]

Mike Pence political career is dead.

And?

Everything said in the OP is still true regardless of how popular it may or may not be.

 

[BackAgain]

Mike Pence political career is dead.

I think so.

I also think he would merit a chapter in John F. Kennedy’s “Profiles in Courage.” Pence’s fidelity to his oath is inspiring, in my estimation.

 

[FA_Q2]

I think so.

I also think he would merit a chapter in John F. Kennedy’s “Profiles in Courage.” Pence’s fidelity to his oath is inspiring, in my estimation.

meh.

There was no other options. Trump lost and nothing was going to change that no matter what childish acts they may have gone through.

 

[BackAgain]

meh.

There was no other options. Trump lost and nothing was going to change that no matter what childish acts they may have gone through.

I wonder. The thing you attempt to label a “childish game” would have had significant immediate Constitutional repercussions.

Personally, I haven’t seen sufficient evidence that the voting frauds which took place would have amounted to enough votes to change the outcome as determined in any of the highly contested States. On that basis, I am not one who feels it is proper to say that Trump won.

That said, I am also aware that under the Constitution, it is the State Legislatures that determine voting laws. And it certainly appears that a lot of states had voting laws, rules and procedures changed by other bodies (like local election boards or Secretaries of State). The legal challenges to the legal and Constitutional propriety of the election — on that basis — were given very short shrift by the courts.

Had Pence chosen to defer to the advice he’d gotten rather than to his own understanding of what the Constitution seemed to require of him, he easily could have acted very differently. Then maybe the SCOTUS would have been compelled to step in.

I’m not so sure the Courts wouldn’t have ruled in accordance with that latter Constitutional argument (concerning the province of the State legislature). But we’ll never know now, because Pence perceived his sworn duty differently.

 

[Samofvt]

I wonder. The thing you attempt to label a “childish game” would have had significant immediate Constitutional repercussions.

Personally, I haven’t seen sufficient evidence that the voting frauds which took place would have amounted to enough votes to change the outcome as determined in any of the highly contested States. On that basis, I am not one who feels it is proper to say that Trump won.

That said, I am also aware that under the Constitution, it is the State Legislatures that determine voting laws. And it certainly appears that a lot of states had voting laws, rules and procedures changed by other bodies (like local election boards or Secretaries of State). The legal challenges to the legal and Constitutional propriety of the election — on that basis — were given very short shrift by the courts.

Had Pence chosen to defer to the advice he’d gotten rather than to his own understanding of what the Constitution seemed to require of him, he easily could have acted very differently. Then maybe the SCOTUS would have been compelled to step in.

I’m not so sure the Courts wouldn’t have ruled in accordance with that latter Constitutional argument (concerning the province of the State legislature). But we’ll never know now, because Pence perceived his sworn duty differently.

I was going to say something cheeky: like "let's hang the jerk (that invented work)" or "Pense lost me in the first paragraph, but makes sense toward the end"

But naw. That was a thoughtful retrospect and bears down on the truth of the situation. In the long run, [we] have to do a better job ensuring election integrity. Many outstanding ideas have been proposed, and I hope our leadership has the good sense to implement at least some of the ideas (like voter ID, for one example). Things may not be so casual next time.

As far as ending the filibuster rule, c'mon. The democrats know they will want to use that again themselves when things turn around the other way. You think they're dumb enough to shoot themselves in the foot?

 

[Esdraelon]

that's what they said about Trump's political career

Pence is NOT Trump. Pence could have refused to accept the EC results and delayed the issue until a REAL investigation was done, openly and in the public eye. He punted and with that, ended any chance of a career in politics at the national level. Republicans who support Trump wouldn't spit on him if he was on fire and Democrats would do less.

The disconnect here is that those on the Left seem to think that only THEIR perspective and opinions on 1/6 have any value. They are soon going to be disabused of that error. TICK...TOCK...

 

[Esdraelon]

Things may not be so casual next time.

I think that unless we find compromise and have a VERY clear discussion and airing of evidence over what happened in 2020, America as we've known it, is OVER. The ballot is about all we have left to bind us together and those who want to trash the filibuster so they can federalize state elections will set this nation on FIRE.
When trust in elections is lost, so is America.

 

[Snouter]

Did Trump even interview Pence before assigning him as his running mate? Trump ran on "draining the swamp" but he basically added to it.

Recall Pence, the born again (mental case) Christian, was a stooge of mass murderer Fauci.

 

[22lcidw]

I wonder. The thing you attempt to label a “childish game” would have had significant immediate Constitutional repercussions.

Personally, I haven’t seen sufficient evidence that the voting frauds which took place would have amounted to enough votes to change the outcome as determined in any of the highly contested States. On that basis, I am not one who feels it is proper to say that Trump won.

That said, I am also aware that under the Constitution, it is the State Legislatures that determine voting laws. And it certainly appears that a lot of states had voting laws, rules and procedures changed by other bodies (like local election boards or Secretaries of State). The legal challenges to the legal and Constitutional propriety of the election — on that basis — were given very short shrift by the courts.

Had Pence chosen to defer to the advice he’d gotten rather than to his own understanding of what the Constitution seemed to require of him, he easily could have acted very differently. Then maybe the SCOTUS would have been compelled to step in.

I’m not so sure the Courts wouldn’t have ruled in accordance with that latter Constitutional argument (concerning the province of the State legislature). But we’ll never know now, because Pence perceived his sworn duty differently.

So Pence who is supposedly a devout religious man, has the opportunity to question something, especially when those who won are anti-Christian. He has seen and experienced the marginalization of his faith by those who took over the nation and usurped the Constitution decades ago. I am disappointed because if you must go by being Presidential capable, he is more than Hillary, Keane, Trump, Biden and Harris. He had his opportunity to question a questionable election.

 

[Calypso Jones]

The Repunks didn't want Trump either. WE wanted President Trump. These guys are all corrupted. They're all money grubbers. They'll all sell us out and this country for another buck OR YUEN in their pocket. He had to fight Both sides. and while they smiled and pretended friendship, these repunk bastards were joining the dems in undermining him every opportunity.

 

[BackAgain]

I was going to say something cheeky: like "let's hang the jerk (that invented work)" or "Pense lost me in the first paragraph, but makes sense toward the end"

But naw. That was a thoughtful retrospect and bears down on the truth of the situation. In the long run, [we] have to do a better job ensuring election integrity. Many outstanding ideas have been proposed, and I hope our leadership has the good sense to implement at least some of the ideas (like voter ID, for one example). Things may not be so casual next time.

As far as ending the filibuster rule, c'mon. The democrats know they will want to use that again themselves when things turn around the other way. You think they're dumb enough to shoot themselves in the foot?

Democrap leadership should continue their prior opposition to eliminating the filibuster. But Schmucky Schumer is too blinded by partisan hackery to see the pitfalls of his current call for its elimination.

 

[BluesLegend]

Dems fear it could be decades before they win the White House again or a majority in congress. Hence their desire to RIG congress.

 

[FA_Q2]

I wonder. The thing you attempt to label a “childish game” would have had significant immediate Constitutional repercussions.

If any of it worked in any fusion whatsoever it would have.

The idea that any of it would have worked is a silly narrative. The sky is always falling in and the end of the world near in partisan hack town and that is where the narrative 'our democracy was almost destroyed' lives.

Personally, I haven’t seen sufficient evidence that the voting frauds which took place would have amounted to enough votes to change the outcome as determined in any of the highly contested States. On that basis, I am not one who feels it is proper to say that Trump won.

Because it didn't. There has been a LOT of investigation into this. It is another narrative that only lives in partisan hack land.

That said, I am also aware that under the Constitution, it is the State Legislatures that determine voting laws. And it certainly appears that a lot of states had voting laws, rules and procedures changed by other bodies (like local election boards or Secretaries of State). The legal challenges to the legal and Constitutional propriety of the election — on that basis — were given very short shrift by the courts.

And why is that?

It was not because the rules were changed in a kosher way: they were not. The democrats seen an opening using the pandemic to do something that they have always wanted to do so they took the opportunity. What a shocker.

However, Trump, the people in the states in question and everyone else had a chance to sue and challenge the new rules. They chose not to do so until AFTER Trump lost. If the problem was the law then why wait until after you lose to challenge it?

Well obviously it was the conclusion and not the law that was the problem for Trump. I disagree with the rule changes, they were illegal, and yet I completely agree with the myriad of court decisions on the matter as well, crying the game was unfair AFTER you lose even though the laws were plain for everyone to see before the election was held is bullshit. You cannot hold onto a case to challenge a law in the hopes you can negate an election that may not go your way.

Had Pence chosen to defer to the advice he’d gotten rather than to his own understanding of what the Constitution seemed to require of him, he easily could have acted very differently. Then maybe the SCOTUS would have been compelled to step in.

I’m not so sure the Courts wouldn’t have ruled in accordance with that latter Constitutional argument (concerning the province of the State legislature). But we’ll never know now, because Pence perceived his sworn duty differently.

He could have acted very differently, yes.

And the results would have essentially been identical. Biden would still be POTUS.

 

[FA_Q2]

Democrap leadership should continue their prior opposition to eliminating the filibuster. But Schmucky Schumer is too blinded by partisan hackery to see the pitfalls of his current call for its elimination.

The ignorance here is breathtaking (on Schumer's part).

We JUST went through this where the democrats lost all possible input they had in choosing 3 SCOTUS nominees precisely because they made an asinine carve out. They are just setting themselves up for round 2 of the same mess. To pass a law that will likely, IMHO, be thrown out by SCOTUS.

 

[BackAgain]

If any of it worked in any fusion whatsoever it would have.

The idea that any of it would have worked is a silly narrative. The sky is always falling in and the end of the world near in partisan hack town and that is where the narrative 'our democracy was almost destroyed' lives.

Because it didn't. There has been a LOT of investigation into this. It is another narrative that only lives in partisan hack land.

And why is that?

It was not because the rules were changed in a kosher way: they were not. The democrats seen an opening using the pandemic to do something that they have always wanted to do so they took the opportunity. What a shocker.

However, Trump, the people in the states in question and everyone else had a chance to sue and challenge the new rules. They chose not to do so until AFTER Trump lost. If the problem was the law then why wait until after you lose to challenge it?

Well obviously it was the conclusion and not the law that was the problem for Trump. I disagree with the rule changes, they were illegal, and yet I completely agree with the myriad of court decisions on the matter as well, crying the game was unfair AFTER you lose even though the laws were plain for everyone to see before the election was held is bullshit. You cannot hold onto a case to challenge a law in the hopes you can negate an election that may not go your way.
He could have acted very differently, yes.

And the results would have essentially been identical. Biden would still be POTUS.

Maybe.

 

[Oddball]

And?

Everything said in the OP is still true regardless of how popular it may or may not be.

No it's not.

Nobody asked Pence to overturn the election...He's a fucking liar.

 

[Oddball]

I think so.

I also think he would merit a chapter in John F. Kennedy’s “Profiles in Courage.” Pence’s fidelity to his oath is inspiring, in my estimation.

Crap.

Pence used the distraction of the contrived riot to bypass the constitutionally allowed objections and debates over the disputed states, in order to just ram through the electoral count.

Pence is a coward and tool of the permanent oligarchy.