Yeah, she wanted to.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...on-push-to-overturn-iowa-election/ar-BB1eQLIS
Notice where democrat Dean Phillips says "overturning it (the election) in the HOUSE would be even more painful for America".
How can the HOUSE try to overturn an election if Pelosi wasn't in favor or leading the charge.
And this is MSN reporting so you can't whine about Fox news bias.
First of all, that is not MSN's reporting: it's an article from the Washington Examiner which is a far right publication noted for its conservative bias.
Overall, we rate the Washington Examiner Right Biased based on editorial positions that almost exclusively favor the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to several failed fact checks.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-examiner/
Secondly, it's the
WA Examiner that claims the
Dems are pushing the investigation when it was Hart who filed with the Committee. That phrasing is not unintentional.
On Monday, Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips became the first congressional Democrat to voice firm opposition to the push to have the House Administration Committee investigate the election and decide whether freshman Republican Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks did indeed win the election.
Third, this is the
entirety of Dean Phillips' statement:
“Losing a House election by six votes is painful for Democrats. But overturning it in the House would be even more painful for America. Just because a majority can, does not mean a majority should," Phillips said in a tweet
.
Notice he says the HOUSE shouldn't overturn the election where it would have gone for a majority vote if the Committee had found in Hart's favor. You know...where the entire HOUSE votes, including Republicans.
As I previously explained to you but which, apparently, you failed to comprehend, it was Rita Hart herself who contested the election results and filed her challenge with the House Adm. Committee, not Pelosi. And, as I also explained to you, Pelosi could have refused to seat Miller-Meeks until the matter was settled but she chose to seat her. That hardly sounds like she was out to overturn the election which Hart, not Pelosi, was contesting.
And, unlike Trump, Hart made no allegations of cheating or rigging the election. Her complaint was that 22 ballots were "legally cast but unlawfully excluded".
Those are the same links. American Lookout is another far right rag which uses the words "steal" and "outright theft" to describe a legal process to contest an election won by 6 votes. They also write: "This is what they used to call a “threat to democracy.”
But everything is different when THEY do it."
The stunning hypocrisy of that is mind boggling but I bet you can't see that, can you?
MediaBias has this to say about American Lookout which it rates as "extreme bias":
Some of the sources they link to are the Mixed factual Daily Caller, the Questionable Breitbart, RedState, and Townhall. Wording denigrates Democrats such as this Democrats Panic As Suburban Vote Begins Slipping Away From Joe Biden, while other stories glorify Republican President Trump such as this President Trump Nominated For Nobel Peace Prize AGAIN For Helping Broker Deal Between Kosovo And Serbia. In general, all stories favor the right and mostly denigrate the left while consistently using very poor sources who frequently fail fact checks.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-lookout/
"House democrats rejects Pelosi push tp overturn Iowa election"
Oh and stacyhs, this was a state certified election. Basically Pelosi was trying to overturn a certified election.
Nope. Rita Hart was contesting the election results and followed correct procedure by filing her request for review with the House Administration Committee. Pelosi said she would respect the findings of the Committee and seated Miller-Meeks.
The same thing democrats accused Trump of doing.
ACCUSED him of doing?
That is exactly what he has been doing since last November when he lost the election and has been declaring himself the victim of a 'rigged and stolen' election, tried to get Pence not to allow the vote to certify the election and encouraged a mob to 'stop the steal' and is STILL whining trying to get the election overturned.
Yeah....he's been accused of doing exactly what he's doing.
You are dead wrong on this issue. (Or being untruthful)
Nope. Stop reading right wing crap sites. As for being "untruthful" quote one thing I've said that you claim is false and then prove it was false.
The DNCC paying for a lawyer to represent a Democrat who is legally contesting an election is just so outrageous!!
From you link: " Only this time, Republicans might not have much credibility on this issue — especially those who objected to the Electoral College results, at Trump’s request.
"Pelosi funding partisan effort to overturn certified election"
The Sun News in the UK calls Pelosi a hypocrite.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14458106/pelosi-hypocrite-iowa-republican-win-mace/
The Sun? THE SUN?! Wow, you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel, aren't ya?
But to sum this all up, the Dems didn't vote to overturn the election, did they? Hart withdrew her challenge: "After many conversations with people I trust about the future of this contest, I have made the decision to withdraw my contest before the House Committee on Administration.” And just who do you think those conversations were with? HUH?
Maybe Trump should take a lesson from that instead of continuing to rip this country apart with his insane claims of a stolen election that his idiot followers have swallowed whole.
