A letter to me from Congressman Kelly Armstrong:
On Tuesday, January 5, 2021, 02:10:48 PM CST, Congressman Kelly Armstrong <nd00kaima@mail.house.gov> wrote:
 |
Dear Ms. Morris,
Thank you for contacting me with your concerns regarding the joint session of Congress to count Electoral votes on January 6, 2021. Your thoughts are important to me as I work to represent you in Congress.
Like you, I am deeply concerned about voting irregularities that occurred during the 2020 election. All levels of government must work to answer these questions and it is essential that we strengthen election integrity.
I have also been a consistent and passionate supporter of President Trump both as Chairman of the North Dakota Republican Party and as a Member of Congress. As a member of the House Judiciary Committee, I defended President Trump during the Mueller investigation and was one of two Republicans to manage impeachment debate on the House floor. I will continue to support President Trump’s agenda in Congress.
On January 6, 2021, Congress will convene for a joint session to count the electoral votes pursuant to the Electoral Count Act of 1887. If there is an objection raised to an Electoral College vote from any state by at least one Member of the House and the Senate, each body will separately convene to consider the merits of the objection. After the debate, each Representative and Senator will vote on the objection with the outcome determined by a simple majority.
The Constitution is clear with respect to presidential elections, both Article II and the Twelfth Amendment do not give Congress the authority to reject duly certified electors or make its own determinations about voter fraud. The Twelfth Amendment provides that “The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice President…” and Congress’ role is to “open all the (electoral) certificates and the votes shall then be counted…”.
An effort to reject the electors on January 6 leads toward the nationalization of elections where the federal government would dictate to North Dakota how to administer its elections. It would also endanger the Electoral College, which is vital to ensure national unity and provide North Dakotans with a meaningful role in presidential elections.
My career has consisted of defending conservatism, federalism, the Electoral College, and the principles of limited government. I took an oath to defend the Constitution as a lawyer, state senator, and as a Member of Congress. That oath requires that I act in accordance with the clear text of the Constitution.
Again, thank you for contacting me on this issue. I appreciate having the opportunity to represent you in the U.S. House of Representatives. Please feel free to visit my website at Armstrong.house.gov to sign up for my newsletter or contact me with any other concerns you may have.
| |
Sincerely,
|
|
Kelly Armstrong
Member of Congress
My reply:
January 5, 2021
Congressman Armstrong:
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my message concerning the election. With all respect, however, I must differ with you. I think it is a mistake to regard this election as a "federalist"/"federal" issue. I fully understand the importance of maintaining a federalist structure. This has been breached in any ways however, and in most for far less reason than this. Our governors, for example, should not accept FEMA money or disaster relief. That is anti-federalist. Our federal income tax is anti-federalist. Our highway funding is all anti-federalist. I seriously doubt you could sell "federalism" to Governor Burgum.
This election, however, is not one of those federalist issues. We are all going to be subject to an election STOLEN from the people, not only in a limited area (such as Cook County, Illinois) but basically nationwide. When nearly half a million votes are pilfered directly from vote totals in Pennsylvania, North Dakota suffers. If we look at this as a sterile, federalist issue, we can count on never having another meaningful election. You surely can see this. The only future for any party to ascend to the White House or, for that matter, to any other high office worthy of the attention of those who do the stealing - whether for Congressional seats or Senate seats or governorships - would be to be better at stealing than the people who stole this election - which means, practically speaking, which candidate is willing to sell more of America to whomever controls the current "smart technology" or whichever foreign power offers the best deal. Can you see the problem here? We can give up for all time the idea of principled leadership because the only pathway would be to be a better thief than the other candidate.
We cannot let this stand. I hope you will revisit this issue yourself. The future will be denied to freedom unless we address this unpleasant matter. While I understand perfectly and respect federalism and I have long championed this concept, we are now in another dimension here. When people are disenfranchised through total dilution of their votes, outright theft of their votes and the growing evidence of dangerous foreign involvement in our election, this cannot be ignored on the pretext of respect for federalism. We cannot use the normally beneficial aspects of federalism to avoid dealing with an existential threat to our nation's future. We cannot use this to hide behind, our heads in the sand, while our nation itself is stolen from us. We have seen a lot of phony power-grabbing on the excuse of an "emergency" based on a virus. That has never been an actual emergency. This, however, this election and its blatant theft by ill-doers in America and abroad, especially in enemy nations of China and Iran, cannot be ignored or allowed to take care of itself.
Federalism can not be used to hide from these threats. Federalism cannot excuse cowardice or self-serving behavior. Those who stand firmly now against the subversion of our electoral process will be our leaders. Those who hide out from it, the "summer soldiers" - they will be remembered as well. I would expect all of them to be primaried, regardless of who is sworn in as president.
As to the issue of the Electoral College, I have consistently defended the Electoral College. I think your devotion to the concept, however, is misplaced if you intend not to vote to reject the illegitimate electors. One of the priorities of the incoming Democrat administration will be to abolish the Electoral College. You surely are aware of this. You are being disingenuous in this claim to respect the EC. And in what way were the voters of North Dakota "protected" in the case of an election which was easily stolen in four cities in the eastern United States - Philadelphia, Atlanta, Detroit and Milwaukee? Oh, and out west, in Arizona and Nevada? Their criminal state officials not only robbed their own states' constituents, but North Dakota voters as well.
If our elections are ever to mean anything again, this kind of election fraud MUST BE STOPPED. Unfortunately people such as yourself think that if we just all sit back the thieves will simply stop themselves. Is this intelligent? Of course not. And you are not stupid. You know this as well as I and all of North Dakota know it, Democrat and Republican. You are simply being dishonest here. You said in your letter, and I quote, "All levels of government must work to answer these questions and it is essential that we strengthen election integrity." What does this even mean? To what purpose would all levels of government work to answer "these questions"? I think we all know the answer to "these questions". We also all know that under a Biden administration, the answer to "these questions" will be buried.
I look forward to some kind of explanation. Again, thank you for responding and putting your position on record.
It is my hope that you will review this matter with an eye to a realistic outcome rather than a baseless expectation that we can go forward in freedom while allowing an egregious subversion of our electoral process to obtain. I also hope that upon reflection you recognize your erroneous and thoughtless assertion that this is a "federalist" issue. That argument is, in fact, a fiction, a fig-leaf for avoidance of confronting a matter of principle. There is no federalist allowance made for election fraud. Our free and fair elections are the expression of the people's consent to be governed. If this is undermined we can no longer be said to be a free, self-governed people.
Sincerely,
Sally Morris
Comments? (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
DakotaBeacon