Hawley defends decision to object saying he would 'not bow to a lawless mob'

Hawley defends decision to object saying he would 'not bow to a lawless mob'

COLUMBIA, Mo. (KRCG) — Republican Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley released a statement on Friday defending his decision to object to the Electoral College's certification of President-elect Joe Biden's victory after violence broke out at the U.S. Capitol last week.

For the first time since last week's riots at the U.S. Capitol, Hawley has released a public statement defending his decision to object to the certification of Biden's election victory.

"Some wondered why I stuck with my objection following the violence at the Capitol. The reason is simple: I will not bow to a lawless mob, or allow criminals to drown out the legitimate concerns of my constituents," Hawley said in his statement.

Hawley was among the first to announce he would object. Following his announcement,at least a dozen Republican senators and more than 100 House members announced they would be following suit.

Objecting to the certification of the Electoral College votes is not unusual. Democrats have raised objections in 2004 during the Electoral College's certification of former President George Bush. They also raised objections during the certification of President Trump.

What was unusual were the events that took place when Congress met to certify the votes.

When Congress met, chaos ensued. A mob of President Donald Trump's supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol building following the president's rally. The building was quickly overrun by Trump's supporters who marched upon the building causing lawmakers and staff to shelter in place.

When the protesters gained entry to the building, Congress' proceedings were quickly abandoned as the protesters smashed windows, marched through hallways and rummaged through lawmakers' desks. The chaos resulted in five deaths, which included the death of a Capitol police officer.

It took authorities four hours to secure the Capitol after the breach and, eventually, Congress returned to the proceedings. When they did, Hawley followed through with his promise to object to the results of several contested states.

Following his objection, Hawley has received a slew of criticism, waning support from donors, and calls for his resignation.

"These are difficult days for our country. All I can promise you is that I will do my best, day in and day out, to represent your voice, no matter who criticizes me," Hawley said in his Friday statement.

Hawley argued he objected in order to "have a debate on the issue of election integrity." He explained this isn't out of the ordinary and that others have done the same as him and "they were within their rights to do so."

In fact, dozens of Democratic members of Congress have lodged objections in precisely the same forum over the last three decades.

To be specific, Democrats objected after the elections of 2000, 2004 and 2016 — in other words, every time a Republican has won the White House in the last 30 years. And they were within their rights to do so. The Joint Session is the forum where concerns about an election can be raised, debated, and ultimately resolved with a vote.

Ironically, some of the lawmakers criticizing Hawley were themselves praising Democrats in 2004 for challenging the Electoral College's certification of former President George Bush.

Former Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. was one of the senators whoobjected to Bush's 2004 electoral votes in Ohio. Although their objections were ultimately overruled, they paved the way for Congress to rehash history on Jan. 6.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said in a tweet Wednesday that Hawley's objections were the "political equivalent of barking at the moon," adding: "This won't be taken seriously, nor should it be."

Durbin expressed a different opinion in 2004.

"I thank her for doing that because it gives members an opportunity once again on a bipartisan basis to look at a challenge that we face not just in the last election in one State but in many States," he said on the Senate floor of Boxer's objection.

Hawley noted the irony of him getting criticized by the same people who celebrated others who objected in previous elections.

The difference between those past instances and this year, however, is striking. In the past, when Democrats objected, they were praised for standing up for democracy.

This time around, anyone who objected has been called an “insurrectionist.” Sadly, much of the media and many members of the Washington establishment want to deceive Americans into thinking those who raised concerns incited violence, simply by voicing the concern. That’s false. And the allegation itself is corrosive and dangerous.

Irony aside, this year's Electoral College proceedings were unlike any that have been held in the past.Following the riot in the Capitol, more than half of those who had signed on to object decided to instead vote "no."

In addition to this, critics argue that Hawley played a role in inciting the violence at the Capitol. To these criticisms, Hawley condemned the violence and said those involved should be prosecuted. He also argued that his decision to object did not incite violence. On the contrary, Hawley said democratic debate is "how we avoid that violence."

Let me say again, as I have said before: the lawless violence at the Capitol last week was criminal. There can be no quibbling about that. Those who engaged in it should be prosecuted and punished. Lawless violence undermines the democratic process by which we settle our disputes and threatens our democratic life. That applies to mobs of any and all political persuasions. Mob violence is always wrong.

But democratic debate is not mob violence. It is in fact how we avoid that violence.

Hawley and President Trump have continuously claimed there was widespread fraud in the election after multiple legal efforts to challenge the results have failed. In his statement, Hawley said he objected to give a voice to the citizens who have expressed concerns about election integrity.

Many, many citizens in Missouri have deep concerns about election integrity. They have a right to be heard in Congress.

Specifically, Hawley said he objected to the votes in Pennsylvania because "the state failed to follow its own constitution" pointing out claims of irregularities in the state's mail-in voting efforts.

Hawley went on to say he objected to point out what he claims was "unprecedented interference of the Big Tech corporations" that was "in favor of the Biden campaign, not just in Pennsylvania but everywhere."