Nearly a dozen Republican senators announce plans to vote against counting electoral votes - CNNPolitics
Category: News & Politics
Via: gsquared • 3 years ago • 27 commentsBy: Jake Tapper, Lauren Fox and Veronica Stracqualursi (CNN)
In a further showing of obedience and fealty to the Dear Leader, more Republican Senators join the effort to overthrow the results of a fair and free election and disenfranchise millions of American voters.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
(CNN)Nearly a dozen Republican senators and senators-elect announced Saturday they will vote against counting electoral votes next week when Congress is expected to certify President-elect Joe Biden's victory -- despite no credible evidence suggesting widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.
The 11 Republican lawmakers said they intend to support an objection to the Electoral College votes, if one is brought, and propose an election commission to conduct an "emergency 10-day audit" of the election returns in the "disputed states." The group includes Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, James Lankford of Oklahoma, Steve Daines of Montana, John Kennedy of Louisiana, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, and Mike Braun of Indiana, and Sens.-elect Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Roger Marshall of Kansas, Bill Hagerty of Tennessee and Tommy Tuberville of Alabama.
"A fair and credible audit—conducted expeditiously and completed well before January 20—would dramatically improve Americans' faith in our electoral process and would significantly enhance the legitimacy of whoever becomes our next President. We owe that to the People," they said in a statement, adding that Congress' vote on January 6 is the "lone constitutional power remaining to consider and force resolution of the multiple allegations of serious voter fraud." Analysis: Trump and Hawley set off Republican meltdown with Georgia elections looming
As CNN has previously reported, the objection from President Donald Trump's Republican allies has virtually zero chance of changing the election outcome, only to delay for a few hours the inevitable affirmation of Biden's victory as the Electoral College winner and the next president.
There have been no credible allegations of any issues with voting that would have impacted the election, as affirmed by dozens of state and federal courts, governors, state election officials and the departments of Homeland Security and Justice. And not one of the Republican officeholders objecting to Biden's victory have objected to Trump's wins, or in some cases their own wins, on the same day.
On Wednesday, Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley became the first senator to announce plans to object to the results -- a significant move since both a House member and senator are required to mount an objection when Congress counts the electoral votes. CNN previously reported that at least 140 House Republicans are expected to vote against counting the electoral votes in Congress, according to two GOP House members.
Hawley on Saturday tweeted that he's "glad to see more Senators joining the fight."
In their statement, the 11 GOP senators and senators-elect did not specify the states they intend to reject, but Hawley has signaled that he plans to object to at least one state's certification, Pennsylvania.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell -- who has said the vote would mark one of the most significant, perhaps the most significant, he'd ever cast -- has told the Senate GOP conference to vote their conscience but has also privately urged members not to join the efforts. Some Republican senators have already publicly spoken out against the strategy.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, seemingly dismissed the announcement Saturday from the handful of Republicans, tweeting: "Joe Biden and Kamala Harris will be President and Vice President of the United States in 18 days."
The 11 Republican lawmakers appeared to acknowledge Saturday that their efforts may be futile, saying that they're "not naive" and "fully expect most if not all Democrats, and perhaps more than a few Republicans, to vote otherwise."
Mike Gwin, a spokesperson for Biden, completely dismissed the plan from the Republican senators, calling it a "stunt" on Saturday.
"This stunt won't change the fact that President-elect Biden will be sworn in on January 20th," Gwin said. "And these baseless claims have already been examined and dismissed by Trump's own Attorney General, dozens of courts, and election officials from both parties."
Trump has been pushing for Congress to try to overturn the election result, while his campaign's attempts to overturn the election through the courts have been repeatedly rejected.
On Friday, a federal judge threw out a lawsuit from GOP Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas and several Arizona Republicans seeking to force Vice President Mike Pence to help throw the election to Trump.
Tags
Who is online
426 visitors
There can be no doubt that whatever the outcome of their "emergency 10 day audit" would be, whether favorable to Trump or not, Trump and his acolytes will continue in their attempt to thwart democracy.
Referring to his intention to keep suing even after Congress confirms the Electoral College results, Trump was quoted today as saying: "Why should I give it up? What's in it for me?"
So you should be all behind this because the left has continuously DONE that for the past 4 years
Glad to know you are behind the effort .
Not for a minute. In fact, just the opposite. For the past four years, Trump and the Republican Party have tried to subvert our Constitution and our democracy. With all of their efforts at voter suppression, the Republican Party was at it for years, even before Trump.
You can post all meaningless comments you want. That's just another one.
Given that ridiculous outburst I'm tempted not to bother responding, but I will, briefly.
Start with Trump's attempt to extort the Ukrainian president into announcing a phony investigation of Biden for the purpose of influencing an American election, which lead to his impeachment.
We will let the experts explain it to you. This is just some of the information readily available:
Apparently, you didn't read my comment or the links.
But you were capable of posting a meaningless response.
Perhaps you missed the operative word: TRIED.
Surely not even YOU can deny that Trump and his sycophants have TRIED to subvert the Constitution AND suppress the vote. There are over a dozen court filing by Trump alone that ask the court to throw out votes of entire counties and even whole states.
OK, I read most of what was in your links.
What stood out to me was that both articles are opinion pieces, so their feelings came into play before any facts, never mind that one of the writers is a professor from Berkley and the other is NPR, two of the biggest loon left locations on the planet.
For instance, the first article noted that Florida stopped felons from voting. What the good liberal professor did not tell you is that in order to regain their rights, they have to pay any fines first. Bloomberg paid off many of these fines during the 20 election, and Florida still remained strong red.
One of the interesting lines in the article was that blocking felons from voting "affected many people of color". Guess what "professor", if the law affected many people of color, it also affected many whites, so his trying to make it look exclusively a black issue is nothing more than a farce.
The NPR article looks like it is a couple of years old. The very first paragraph says "Since the 2010 elections, 24 states have implemented new restrictions on voting. Alabama now requires a photo ID to cast a ballot. Other states such as Ohio and Georgia have enacted "use it or lose it" laws, which strike voters from registration rolls if they have not participated in an election within a prescribed period of time:.
Big deal. There should be an ID to vote. Most Americans feel this way. We all know that when liberals cite this little nugget, they are referring to blacks, thinking that blacks have absolutely no way to get an ID, but damn sure are able to have one to buy alcohol, buy cigarettes, pick up prescription, etc.
Also, if someone is on the rolls, and they have not voted for a long period of time, then they should be taken notified they will be stricken unless they respond to the letter. Most red states operate this day.
Here in Florida, my wife did not vote for several cycles. She received a letter saying she would be stricken from the rolls unless she notified the state that she was still alive and when she voted in the next election, that little controversy went away.
So, to go back to MUVAs question...
What has Trump done to subvert the Constitution...and be specific with feelings not in play.
Thank God I have never had to hire an internet lawyer. Big waste of money.
Where in the impeachment charges listed these so called "offenses"?
OK, maybe YOU can give some facts to these allegations and not let your feelings get in the way.
Good luck..you'll need it.
I already have.
Thanks, though I don't need it, I rely researching facts instead.
Cite the cases you are talking about MUVA.
Then we can review the Trump cases...
7 is too many?
How is supporting your comment 'inane arguing' MUVA?
Tell you what, pick just a couple and get back to me...
Well, you haven't,...so, there's that.
Just saying you did doesn't make it so.
Oh I HAVE, many times.
Here, for your reading pleasure.
Go Bears.
This whole thing is such an utter load of gaslighting bullshit.
The statement that Cruz et al released is full of misrepresentations and outright lies.
They lie about the data they cited from the Reuters poll and they misrepresent the events of 1877.
Here's the press release:
It has a link to the Rueters poll which doesn't support their claim.
Oh an BTW, the poll is from the middle of November.
The Cruz claims:
The question asked in the poll was:
Being 'concerned' is a far cry from believing it happened, especially after 60+ court rulings and all 50 states certifying their electors.
Gaslighting bullshit is a perfect description.
The ones flailing are the ones trying to defend this shit. Some are saying there is proof of voter fraud yet never produce it. If they had proof of voter fraud, why are they saying the have to set up an inquiry to look into it?
So they have the proof (that is never there) yet they need a committee to look for it.
Uh huh.
Also, if there was wide spread voter fraud, why are the incoming freshman congress people being sworn in? The idiots are joining the fight for fraud yet they were part of the same election.
Wouldn't that mean that their own elections were fraudulent as well?
Face it, these people are lying to your face and you all take it.
Again, coming from you that's hilarious MUVA.
Instead of posting an unfounded proclamation, refute my comment.
Hence the accurate use of the term 'gaslighting'.
This is the same BS Trump tried with his 'Election Integrity Commission'.
They said:
'Despite all evidence to the contrary, we KNOW there is overwhelming proof that there is rampant voter fraud so just give us all of the data we want and we can prove it. You say that it's against your state's law to release that data. We don't care, give it to us anyway.'
Then:
'Even some of the 'Red states' refused to violate their state's law so they must be hiding the overwhelming proof from us. But hey, we gave our base some red meat to gnaw on and keep them quiet for a while.'
As I said, gaslighting bullshit.
Both the House and Senate that vote not to certify Biden's win should resign their seats because their names were on the ballots and were checked and counted exactly the same way as Biden.
If they're going to stand on principle I would expect them to return home and find a job since they are there illegally.
Moosh noosh's.
There must be something about Trump---or are these---deflections about something far more nefarious?