In an interview that aired on Sunday, House Speaker Mike Johnson rejected to confirm that President Joe Biden had won the 2020 election, but he did call accusations that he denies the results “nonsense.”
In an interview with CBS’s Margaret Brennan for “Face The Nation,” the Republican from Louisiana stated that the 2020 election was a “clearly violated” instance of the Constitution.
After Trump’s 2020 loss, Johnson urged his congressional colleagues to join an amicus brief in support of a Texas lawsuit that sought to nullify the results in four states: Wisconsin, Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The case was a last-ditch effort to remedy the situation.
President Biden had been in office for three years, after being certified as the winner of the election, as President Johnson informed Brennan. However, he insisted that the election was illegal.
Not all of the violations of the Constitution occurred in ill faith; however, following COVID-19, numerous states amended their election rules in ways that went against that clear language, and these violations continued leading up to the 2020 election. “That’s simply the truth,” Johnson stated.
Once Johnson said that it was all “water under the bridge,” he went on to say that he now worked “with President Biden as the President of the United States.”
There were scores of lawsuits filed after the 2020 election that cast doubt on Biden’s triumph, but none of them were able to invalidate his victory over Trump.
Johnson was heavily criticised by former Rep. Liz Cheney in her book “Oath and Honour” for leading what Cheney saw as a constitutionally questionable campaign by House Republicans to back a challenge to the 2020 election results in the Supreme Court.
“Upon perusing the poorly drafted amicus brief, it became evident that Mike was being dishonest with our colleagues,” she penned. “Indeed, the brief was rife with specific allegations of fraud, but he was trying to trick members into thinking otherwise by saying that it made no claims about them.”
Johnson expressed his astonishment at Cheney’s criticisms during Sunday’s interview, asserting that she briefly contemplated endorsing the brief.
I was startled that she offered that criticism because Liz and I were constantly talking about it during that process. And she seriously contemplated endorsing that measure at one point. According to Johnson, “that is a fact” in relation to the amicus brief. (Quite the opposite, according to Cheney’s memoir.)
The basic language of the Constitution, however, has remained unchanged throughout the years. A breach of the Constitution occurred in several states when election laws were changed without approval by the state legislatures. “That’s a plain fact that no one can dispute,” he said.