Congressman Jamie Raskin (D.-MD.) called the Electoral College and the constitutionally mandated manner in which presidents have been elected since George Washington an “accident waiting to happen.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin cited a need for legislative changes and altering the structure of American elections to prevent people from "seizing" the presidency post-Trump on MSNBC's "All in with Chris Hayes" on Friday. https://t.co/wwesGt1287
— Axios (@axios) September 11, 2022
Raskin was on with MSNBC host Chris Hayes when, as reported by Axios, he “cited a need for legislative changes and altering the structure of American elections to prevent people from “seizing” the presidency post-Trump.”
In what can only be called irony, Raskin is a constitutional law professor who, as can be seen in the video below, has been a vocal opponent of the methodology of one of the constitution’s primary functions: a succession plan for the office of president.
Raskin’s disdain for the electoral college is well documented and has been known for a long time now. His belief is that electing a president in this way leaves too much room for human error while a popular vote would leave the power in the hands of the voter.
Much of Raskin’s interview with Hayes, however, focused on President Donald Trump specifically. At one point Raskin said, “We have to look at the way that the electoral system itself is vulnerable to strategic bad faith actors like Donald Trump.”
Raskin is a member of the “bipartisan” Jan. 6 committee, and after spending time discussing Raskin’s views on the Electoral College and the potential vulnerabilities of that institution, he turned to the topic of the president himself.
“Final question for you. You were a constitutional law professor before you were a United States Congressman. I wanted to hear you talk about these different aspects of an inquiry or making the case here,” Hayes began. “Your committee doesn’t have criminal prosecutorial power, and nor should it, it’s a congressional committee.”
Still not having asked a “final question,” Hayes continued, “There’s a difference between what I would call the great crime of Donald Trump, which was a frontal assault on the core of American democracy, and whatever statutory violation of the U.S. code he may have committed. Sometimes, it can feel a little bit like a mismatch there, and I wanna know what you think about those two lanes.”
Raskin then spent the rest of the interview hitting the talking points of Democrats who want Trump to lose the ability to run for elected office again because of Jan. 6. He said the riot was planned beforehand, that Trump was trying to “seize” the Presidency, and that some legislative changes need to be made to stop Trump, or someone like him, from doing it again.