Unraveling Patriot Day, Pence, and Gaetz

Not sure anyone really had a plan that day

This almost never happens to me: I had a whole column written yesterday, then deleted it. No, not by accident. I just thought there was no reason to challenge Matt Gaetz, who appeared on Steve Bannon’s “War Room,” as he’s a great congressman and a top MAGA star. But in discussing the actions of Vice President Mike Pence on and before January 6, known forever now as Patriot Day, Gaetz laid out what was apparently the MAGA plan to challenge the electors. It does not appear to be well thought out.

First, the Pence controversy. Mike Pence has come out and accepted Biteme’s election as legitimate, and said essentially that his hands were tied on Janurary 6. MAGA has denounced him roundly for that. I think he failed to do the minimum to follow Constitutional procedures. I think he lied about it beforehand, then later. And I think nothing that he could have done would have changed things one iota.

But at a speech before the Federalist Society on Friday, Pence said “"There are those in our party who believe that as the presiding officer over the joint session of Congress that I possessed unilateral authority to reject Electoral College votes. And I heard this week that former President Trump said I had the right to 'overturn the election . . . . President Trump is wrong. … I had no right to overturn the election," he said. "The presidency belongs to the American people, and the American people alone.”

Except on December 22 at the Turning Point USA event, Pence said: “I’ll make you a promise. We’re going to keep fighting until every legal vote is counted. We’re going to keep fighting until every illegal vote is thrown out. we’re going to win Georgia.” It gets worse for Pence. On January 4 in a speech in contested Georgia, he said “I promise you, come this Wednesday, we’ll have our day in Congress. We’ll hear the objections. We’ll hear the evidence,”

So what was the plan? How would anyone “hear” the evidence? Most MAGA wrongly thought that a second slate of electors would be submitted, and that Pence would accept those instead of Biteme’s fraudulent elector slate.

Has this ever happened? In 1876, the legislatures of three southern states sent in fraudulently obtained slates (which denied blacks the right to vote) and Congress itself with a joint committee stepped in to overturn these results. But that was so messy, and so dangerous (it could have revived the Civil War) that Congress in 1887 attempted to fix the loopholes that led to the chaos. Electors were to be placed in “safe harbor” by December 8, and the legislators voted six days later to advanced the electoral slate by each state legislature and certified by the governor; then sent to a) the U.S. Senate; b) the U.S. Archivist; and c) the federal judge in the district in which the legislature met. There was no other path to introduce electors.

For example, in 1960 there was a challenge in Hawaii, which appeared to go for Vice President Richard Nixon. The governor signed the legislature’s certification of the election for Nixon. But . . . a recount found that John Kennedy had won a narrow election there. A judge ordered a statewide recount, which confirmed Kennedy won. A second set of electors from Kennedy was authorized by the legislature and signed by the governor and sent via the process described above.

Nixon, who stood to win Hawaii (but would still lose the election) only acknowledged the Kennedy slate to forego a legislative battle over the matter.

So when we come to the 2020 election, there were no alternative slates that Pence could acknowledge, let alone “choose” over the officially submitted slates that were in “safe harbor” as of December 8. No other “slates” had come to the Senate; no other “slates” had been submitted to the U.S.Archivist; and no other slates had been certified and sent to the federal judge in the five states in contention.

Instead, what others—-including Gaetz—-thought would happen is that Pence would acknowledge “challenges” to the slates. These have come on multiple occasions: Jesse Jackson, Jr. and others challenged the acceptance of the electoral slate from Florida in 2000. The Vice President, Al Gore, denied those challenges, even though he, like Nixon, stood to gain from allowing them to go forward.

What was the procedure if Pence accepted the challenges to Arizona (which had to come from any single senator and any single representative, not just someone from the state being challenged)? The ECA calls for each chamber to retire and discuss the challenges. Where’s where it gets a little goofy.

As Gaetz laid out the scenario, “we would have 24 hours to get our evidence in front of the American public” he told Bannon. Each house supposedly has 12 hours for debate and discussion. This, Gaetz reasoned, would have not changed the January 6 vote, but would have put pressure on the state legislatures to (apparently in less than two weeks’ time) be so convinced by the evidence they would rescind their certification of the electoral slate.

Gaetz has been on the Hill long enough—-and in the minority long enough—-to know this was simply fruitloops. First, in the House, Botoxic would order two votes. The DemoKKKrats, you recall, had about 20 more seats then than they do today, as the new GOP members weren’t seated yet. With the DemoKKKrat majority she would have ordered total secrecy, prohibited any media at all, and certainly not allowed any video. Then, sufficiently hidden from the public, the second vote would be to amend the rules so as to toss out the challenge.

”IS THAT CONSTITUTIONAL?” you ask. Who knows? Each chamber can pretty much write its own rules. But let’s assume it WAS NOT. So what? A Republican like Gaetz could run out looking for a judge to rule the proceedings unconstitutional and said judge in almost every case would side with the rule-making body. Moreover, this quest for legal justice would take weeks, and by that time, Biteme would be safely in office.

So right there, 50% of Gaet’s claimed “exposure time” would vanish. He wouldn’t get one minute of evidence read in the House, nor would Botoxic’s rule making allow anything to be read into the Congressional Record!

Well, what about the Senate? There was a little more leeway there, as Republicans held a 52-48 edge—-but realize that the margin of victory lay in the hands of Minion Romney, “Tom” Collins, MurCowSki, Bob Corker, Ben Sasshole, and other “stalwarts.” Do you really think they would allow any debate on this? If so, please, I dare you:

find me one senator who has said the election was stolen. Even the Cruzer lambasted the protesters, though he later waffled on whether the election was a fraud. But this is a year later!

At the time, there wasn’t one single Senator who would go on record saying the election was stolen. So what do you think would happen in that chamber’s vote? My guess is, the exact same thing as in the House.

But let’s says in fact the Senate did agree to hear some evidence. It would almost certainly have been limited to no more than the five states in question (5 hours)—-but the DemoKKKrats would have demanded, and thanks to Minion and Collins and MurCowSki, received an agreement to allow the DemoKKKrats to get half the time. So at the very best—-still, I think highly improbable—-the “plan” would have yielded 2.5 hours of evidence presentation, countered by DemoKKKrats, entirely in secret.

How was that supposed to put spine in the state legislators in Arizona, Michigan, and so on?

But none of that happened because Pence was both a coward (as Bannon correctly labeled him) and a liar. While I don’t condone it, I can certainly understand cowardice. None of us knows what we’ll do when threatened. We can’t say for sure how we’ll behave until the moment arises. (Remember Peter, who had promised to “die” with Jesus then who denied Him three times! Are you better than Peter?) I therefore at least understand Pence’s caving.

Lying is another matter. He knowingly made promises that he wasn’t going to keep, gave a false sense of assurance that evidence would be presented (which he had no control over at all once the challenge left his hands), and pretended to agree that the election was stolen. In reality, he didn’t accept any challenges, didn’t deny any electoral slates (which again, I don’t think he was empowered to do), and didn’t really believe there was fraud.

Which leaves us here: I don’t know for sure if Gaetz or any of the President’s troops had any viable plan for Patriot Day. I don’t think what Gaetz says he had planned would have gotten to first base. But I do know that Mike Pence bore false witness on two occasions and . . .

he will NEVER. BE. PRESIDENT.

Larry Schweikart

Rock drummer

Film maker

NYTimes #1 bestselling author

Political pundit

For even more truth-based current events, politics, and history content + resources, check out my VIP membership below

https://www.wildworldofhistory.com/vip