lennypartiv
Diamond Member
- Jul 16, 2019
- 26,522
- 20,342
English must be your second language. I'm not surprised since you're a liberal Democrat.Ignirabt lie from someone who has no idea what he is talking about.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
English must be your second language. I'm not surprised since you're a liberal Democrat.Ignirabt lie from someone who has no idea what he is talking about.
Yea, Jussie Smollett is exactly the same thing as 100 Republican congressman, the president and a dozen other Trump admin folks trying to overthrow the election...Sincerely,
He should have used that power on January 6.Except, the text does state that Pence has the power to declare the votes invalid..
“On January 6, 2021, Vice President Mike Pence, as President of the Senate, should call out all the electoral votes that he believes are unconstitutional as no electoral votes at all."
What part of this is Constitutional??
The VP does not have the authority to declare ANYTHING unconstitutional.....or are we saying the VP is now on par with the federal courts?
Furthermore....would you have that same energy if Kamala does EXACTLY WHAT GYM JORDAN asked Pence to do?
The law is clear on how objections are handled. The VP has no say on the matter unless perhaps there is a tie in in the Senate on whether or not to accept an objection. He has no unilateral power to disregard the certified vote of a state, period.Clearly that IS what the VP is supposed to do if he believes necessary.
Otherwise, why bother mentioning the VP as certifying.
But then if the VP is unhappy with the vote, it is the states who then resolve it, not the VP.
Someone has to be able to pull the alarm, and clearly that is the VP.
The fact the VP then no longer has any part in it, is irrelevant.
Nobody asked him to disregard any certification.The law is clear on how objections are handled. The VP has no say on the matter unless perhaps there is a tie in in the Senate on whether or not to accept an objection. He has no unilateral power to disregard the certified vote of a state, period.
that’s been debunkedThe law is clear on how objections are handled. The VP has no say on the matter unless perhaps there is a tie in in the Senate on whether or not to accept an objection. He has no unilateral power to disregard the certified vote of a state, period.
Liar. He was specifically asked to ignore electoral votes certified by the States.Nobody asked him to disregard any certification.
Isn't the process designed to throw out fraudulent votes?The VP does not have the authority to declare ANYTHING unconstitutional.....or are we saying the VP is now on par with the federal courts?
no he wasn’t. when parody is all you have you have nothingLiar. He was specifically asked to ignore electoral votes certified by the States.
Just shut up idiot. Your embarrasing cultism is only matched by your ignorance.
Link?Three states sent legally valid requests to allow them another ten days to investigate and review the validity of their certifications.
Link?
but you said "legally valid." There's a date for certification, and it had passed.State lawmakers ask Pence for more time to address election results
/PRNewswire/ -- Scores of state lawmakers from the pivotal presidential battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have...www.prnewswire.com
The states have every right to review the validity of certifications, which is all they were asking.but you said "legally valid." There's a date for certification, and it had passed.
Hahaha Those aren't States that did that. Those were partisan legislators doing the bidding of the Neo-GOP. None of what they presented represented a legal, legitimate or valid challenge to the States certified EC vote. There was no valid challenge in any state.State lawmakers ask Pence for more time to address election results
/PRNewswire/ -- Scores of state lawmakers from the pivotal presidential battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have...www.prnewswire.com
there is nothing illegal about their request. It was legally valid to request more timebut you said "legally valid." There's a date for certification, and it had passed.
If they had any evidence, an ongoing valid court proceeding could have been used like in 1960 when Hawaii had issues certifying and there were ongoing court challenges at the time......there is nothing illegal about their request. It was legally valid to request more time
this just proves the states were very concerned