Vance Says He Wanted Jan. 6 To Last For Weeks

This is your TPM evening briefing.
WASHINGTON, DC - January 06: Rep. Paul Gosar(r-AZ), right, stands to object to the certification of his states election results as Sen. Ted Cruz(R-TX) waits to be recognized during the 117th Congress joint session t... WASHINGTON, DC - January 06: Rep. Paul Gosar(r-AZ), right, stands to object to the certification of his states election results as Sen. Ted Cruz(R-TX) waits to be recognized during the 117th Congress joint session to certify the Presidential election results, in Washington, DC on January 06. (Photo by Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Sen. JD Vance (R-OH) went all in this week on Trump’s effort to reverse his loss in the 2020 election.

In a video appearance on the All In podcast, Vance was asked whether he would have done what Mike Pence wouldn’t: refuse to certify the 2020 election. 

“I would have asked the states to submit alternative slates of electors and let the country have the debate about what actually matters and what kind of election we had,” Vance replied.

This response, which sounds extremely lawyerly, is of course an allusion to a key component of Trump’s bid to steal a second term.

And at a certain point, this answer isn’t surprising, though the fake elector plan has been the subject of criminal investigation in several states. Vance knows what happened to Pence; he effectively signed up for at least saying he’d do what Pence wouldn’t the moment he accepted the offer to be Trump’s running mate.

What’s more interesting is Vance’s justification that the fake electors plan would have allowed a “debate” to happen. In reality, by January 2021, the debate was long over: dozens of federal courts had thrown out ever-changing, chimerical claims of voter fraud, depriving the Trump campaign of a means to win. 

But the idea that the Vice President could have turned Congress into a venue of last resort to “debate” the issue is the exact argument that Ken Chesebro, the Trump attorney and architect of the fake elector scheme, laid out in dozens of private emails from the time that I obtained earlier this year. 

In Chesebro’s thinking, the Vice President refusing to certify would have indeed sparked a “debate” over election fraud. But blowing through January 6 would have masked what was really going on: Miring Congress in a “debate” about claims that everyone knew to be false would have demonstrated that Congress was “unable to act unless either the Court or the state legislature addresses claims re the state,” Chesebro wrote in one message. 

It was a brazen power play. Congress’ inability to function, Trump’s lawyers theorized, would have pressured what Chesebro saw as the last Constitutional actor standing — the Supreme Court — to intervene. The conservative majority would have then, theoretically, decided the election for Trump. That’s the debate we’re talking about. 

The Best Of TPM Today

More on Vance: How JD Vance Turned the Conspiracy Machine on Haitians in a Small Ohio City

Follow our live coverage of the debate tonight here: Harris, Trump Head To Debate Stage For Biggest Event On Campaign Calendar

NEW from Hunter Walker: How Harris Took Over The Campaign, Surged, And Still Faces A Tough Fight Against Trump

Yesterday’s Most Read Story

Trump’s Authoritarian Promise Is Distilled Into A Single Paragraph

What We Are Reading

Johnson forges ahead on spending plan as GOP support crumbles

Why Mike Lee Folded 

One of the most potent greenhouse gases is rising faster than ever 

Latest Where Things Stand
41
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Evidently Chesebro foresaw the corrupt compromised Supreme Court MAGA 6 would actively undo democracy. He was prescient, given the Court’s July 1 anoitment of Trump as dictator (if he wins in November) in the disastrous immunity decision.

    Luckily Vance is not VP and can’t even try to use the mechanism of government to steal the election, so the Supreme Court’s MAGA 6 won’t have a chance to “legalize” a coup.

  2. If Vance has a moral compass, he’s buried it under a huge pile of magnets.

  3. Yeah, Vance, we had an election. Trump lost. No reason for “further discussion”, you worthless shit.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

35 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for paulw Avatar for lowtechcyclist Avatar for becca656 Avatar for drriddle Avatar for danny Avatar for emjayay Avatar for lastroth Avatar for left_in_washington_state Avatar for tao Avatar for generalsternwood Avatar for riverstreet Avatar for jinnj Avatar for wintermoon Avatar for charlie6 Avatar for dannydorko Avatar for katscherger Avatar for demosthenes59 Avatar for jackyt Avatar for larrykoen Avatar for forcryinoutloud Avatar for eaharrison Avatar for dogselfie Avatar for BlueHen

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: