Lawmakers in Michigan and Pennsylvania are making moves, in an official capacity, that send clear messages to members of the US Congress signaling they should seriously consider contesting the Electors from their respective states on January 6, 2021.
In Michigan, both the Senate and the House have authorized subpoena powers to their Oversight Committees for the purpose of investigating vote fraud, ballot tampering, and all election irregularities as they pertain to the City of Detroit and that city’s suburb of Livonia.
The measure passed overwhelmingly with one Senate Democrat crossing party lines to authorize the subpoena power.
The authorization by both chambers requires Detroit Clerk Janice Winfrey (D), and Livonia Clerk Susan Nash (D), to produce documents about how they ran their elections. The clerks will have to surrender hard drives, emails, absentee voter counting board laptops, and other election-related material.
Michigan legislature committees subpoena election evidence from Detroit and nearby suburb | Just The Newshttps://t.co/sagylUVRH3
— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) December 17, 2020
The Michigan legislative bodies actions tacitly admit they believe vote fraud and ballot tampering took place. The Republican majority legislature was repeatedly thwarted by the Executive Branch and the Michigan Supreme Court in their quest for relief for their complaints about election “irregularities.”
The action taken in Pennsylvania is less cryptic but just as demonstrative.
Lawyers for US Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA), and several GOP congressional candidates, have re-filed a petition to the US Supreme Court to take up their lawsuit that claims the 2020 election results in their state were uncertifiable.
The petition argues that Act 77, a law that made voting by mail devoid of specific reason legal in Pennsylvania, was illegally passed in violation of Pennsylvania’s constitution. Pennsylvania’s constitution prohibits absentee voting in Pennsylvania but for four specific circumstances.
“Pennsylvania does not permit electors and candidates to bring substantive constitutional challenges to laws governing the conduct of federal elections,” the group’s lawyer said in a statement. “An elector or candidate may not bring a challenge prior to an election for failure to meet standing requirements,” referring to the legal right – or standing – to bring the case. “To overcome such speculative harm requires waiting until after the election takes place.”
Both of these actions, initiated by elected officials from each of their respective states who are charged with representing base constituencies, indicate that the people’s representation in each state disagrees with the certification of votes in their states.
The final decision on the Electoral College vote comes on January 6, 2021, when both congressional chambers will meet in a joint session to count, certify the votes, and declare the winners of each state.
US Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL), Rep.-elect Barry Moore (R-AL), and Rep.-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), have said they are planning to file objections.
US Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), and US Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), have indicated they are both leaning toward contesting electors from four embattled states – Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Georgia – as well.
It is during the January 6, 2021, assembly that objections can be filed. Any objection must be endorsed by at least one US Senator and one US Representative.
If an objection is registered according to proper procedure, the joint session will be recessed, and each chamber will meet separately to debate and vote on the objection. A simple majority can uphold the objection, nullifying the electoral votes for the state in question.
This tosses the election of the President and Vice President of the United States to the US House of Representatives and a vote of delegations. In this contest, Republicans have a clear majority and President Trump would likely prevail.