We've already seen how hypocritical Democrats can be when it comes to questioning elections.
Democrats have been questioning/denying the results of elections/objecting to electoral counts for decades. Yet, if Republicans raise questions, that's somehow a threat to "democracy" and "treason." You see it constantly on X, along with all the other Russia conspiracy theories from those on the left. It's a cultish insanity.
But our sister site, Townhall, pointed to an incredible article in The Atlantic. That article reveals there are no bounds to how far that hypocrisy will go.
Check out this headline and subhead.
"How Democrats Could Disqualify Trump If the Supreme Court Doesn't"
"Without clear guidance from the Court, House Democrats suggest that they might not certify a Trump win on January 6."
So wait, the people screaming about "democracy" and former President Donald Trump are now mulling over the question of not certifying Trump if he wins? And if they do it, they'll likely do it, claiming they would be doing it "for democracy,"
According to the story, senior House Democrats wouldn't commit now to certifying his win without a decision on Trump's eligibility from the Supreme Court. So even if he wins, it sounds like they're considering playing games.
As their victory in a House special election in New York last week demonstrated, Democrats have a serious chance of winning a majority in Congress in November, even if Trump recaptures the presidency on the same day. If that happens, they could have the votes to prevent him from taking office.
In interviews, senior House Democrats would not commit to certifying a Trump win, saying they would do so only if the Supreme Court affirms his eligibility. But during oral arguments, liberal and conservative justices alike seemed inclined to dodge the question of his eligibility altogether and throw the decision to Congress.
So they think they could decide — all on their own — to disqualify him.
Here's what Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) said.
Contesting a presidential election by claiming that the winner is ineligible, however, has no precedent. “It’s very murky,” Lofgren said. She believes that Trump is “clearly ineligible,” but acknowledged that “there’s no procedure, per se, for challenging on this basis.”
Lofgren said she might be one of the lawmakers who would seek to disqualify Trump.
While Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) conceded that there could be violence, he said it wouldn’t necessarily stop them from trying to disqualify him. “We might just decide that’s something we need to prepare for.”
So much for "democracy" or any principles they claim to be adhering to on the question. They are truly shameless if they would go this route. And yes, that would result in a crisis of unimaginable proportions if they tried that. But I wouldn't put it past them. It's always and only about their own power.