The Democrats doth protest too much, methinks. This twist on a Shakespeare line applies perfectly to a Sunday story.
That is, some Democrats want President Donald Trump criminally charged for calling for a vote-counting halt on election night 2020. The irony (and hypocrisy)?
This is even though Democrats did halt vote counting in numerous states on election night 2020 — thus violating the law.
It definitely was against the law, too, avers commentator Norman Krieg. In fact, he cites state statutes to make his case.
Democrats, though, have gotten away with it.
Legal Libertinism for Me, Lawfare for Thee
Krieg calls this case the epitome of chutzpah. It’s reminiscent, he writes, of the joke about the man who murders his parents and then pleads for mercy. Why? He deserves leniency, the defendant says, because he’s an orphan.
And in America today, Justice may feel like an orphan. As a case in point, Krieg mentions a 2023 Just Security article written by professors Andrew Weissmann and Ryan Goodman. Titled “An Overlooked January 6 Charge: The ‘Stop the Count’ Scheme,” the academics predicted Trump would be thus charged. With what specifically? The academics wrote that
the initial phase of the conspiracy to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power was a coordinated scheme to “stop the count” of ballots after polling stations closed on election night. That scheme can and should be charged under the [18 U.S.C.] 1512 obstruction statute as well as the … [18 U.S.C.] 241 statute [against conspiracy to deprive anyone of any constitutional right].
Now, Trump did call for the vote count to be halted. As Krieg points out, however, he wasn’t committing a crime.
He was responding to one.
That is, vote fraud and its subsequent cover-up.
However the Sausage Was Made, It Was Made
Quite notoriously now, there were vote-count stoppages in Georgia, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina. There also were suspiciously “frozen” return figures in Michigan and Wisconsin. Most striking was what transpired at the Fulton County Stadium in Atlanta. Officials apparently halted counting and sent other officials home, “on the specious justification of a non-existent water leak,” writes Krieg.
Moreover, make no mistake, it was these stoppages that inspired Trump to hold a wee-hour, election night press conference. It was then, at 2:29 a.m., that Trump said, “We want all voting to stop. We don’t want them to find any ballots in the morning and add them.”
Note here that this is a major reason two thirds of Republican voters believe the 2020 election was stolen. (Nearly three in 10 Americans overall say likewise.) In fact, also agreeing is a man who knows how the sausage is made: Democrat and ex-Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. He said at the time, witnessing the stoppages, that the Democrats were stealing the election.
More Than Suspicious
These halts were more than suspicious, too. Per Krieg:
In fact, those stoppages were illegal, and, therefore, the votes counted afterward were arguably voidable or even void. South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Nevada, inter alia, had explicit language in their election statutes forbidding stopping the count — assumedly, for the obvious reason that stoppages provide great opportunity for cheating.
For example, Pennsylvania’s §1222 states, “…The election officers shall forthwith proceed to canvass and compute the votes cast, and shall not adjourn or postpone the canvass or computation until it shall have been fully completed.” (Emphasis added.)
Section 630 of Georgia’s Elections Code provides even greater detail, pointing at the magnitude of the issue:
The poll officers shall immediately proceed to canvass and compute the votes cast and shall not adjourn or postpone the canvass or computation until it shall have been fully completed, except that, in the discretion of the superintendent, the poll officers may stop the counting after all contested races and questions are counted, provided that the results of these contested races and questions are posted for the information of the public outside the polling place and the ballots are returned to the ballot box and deposited with the superintendent until counting is resumed on the following day. (Emphasis added.)
Surprisingly, before the election, secretaries of state from across America were already contemplating stopping vote counts. In an October 2020 discussion held during an election night reporting roundtable, New Mexico’s Maggie Toulouse Oliver informed the nation’s other secretaries that she was planning in advance to stop the count to keep the vote-counter employees fresh, out of concern for “humanity.” Was her speech a tacit wink and a nod order to her fellow travelers? Was she the central authority figure coordinating the strange antics of election night?
Blaming the Victim
In other words, evidence of vote fraud (which certainly did occur) is not necessary to prove that 2020 was an illegal election. If Krieg’s interpretation of the relevant statutes is correct, and it seems plain enough, their violation alone made it illegal.
But this is why Krieg speaks of chutzpah, of gall. Democrats want Trump charged criminally — and would surely love to see him imprisoned — merely for calling for a vote-count stoppage. Yet Democrats actually did stop counting the votes, in explicit violation of the law. Again, too, Trump’s call was in response to the Democrats’ illegality.
Two more matters. As I’ve documented previously, there are cases of Democrats stealing elections from other Democrats (with court rulings to prove it). That grand-magnitude vote fraud occurs isn’t tinfoil-hat fantasy or even just opinion — it’s fact.
Second, having delayed election results as status quo is a perversion of the system. All during my youth and young adulthood, definitive election results were delivered on election night and were expected. Then there was the contested 2000 Bush/Gore election, with officials seen analyzing “hanging chads” on TV. We consequently heard complaints: The technology is antiquated. We need electronic voting machines to make the process quick, reliable, and seamless.
Now we have that tech — and delayed election results are the norm. Curiously, however, these delays are virtually always in Democrat-controlled swing states or areas. (Pro tip: The problem isn’t the technology; it’s the turpitude.)
Oh, one more bit of hypocrisy. Professors Weissmann and Goodman also write when making their case against Trump:
Spanning over a hundred years, the Department of Justice has used the 241 statute with great success to prosecute conspiracies to prevent the proper counting of ballots in federal elections.
Funny, isn’t it, that they didn’t apply it to 2020 Democratic-swing-state shenanigans?
Click here to join The John Birch Society in its campaign to Restore Election Integrity.
