Iowa’s longest-serving member of Congress forgot that every mic is potentially a hot mic.
What Senator Chuck Grassley blurted out during a Judiciary Committee hearing this week highlighted an unwritten rule for Republicans: they must humor President Donald Trump’s lies and delusions.
“What would be wrong if they said Biden won?”
For those who haven’t seen the viral moment from the April 29 confirmation hearing, Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut was trying to pin down four nominees for U.S. District Court judgeships on a simple question: Who won the 2020 presidential election?
Michael Hendershot, Arthur Jones, Jeffrey Kuntz, and John Marck all refused to say Joe Biden won the election. Instead, they used weasel words like, “President Biden was certified the winner,” or “It has become a matter of political concern.”
Around the 1:17:20 mark of the official video, as Blumenthal is saying he’s “amazed and really appalled,” Grassley can be heard (off camera) asking, “What would be wrong if they said Biden won?”
Jennifer Bendery pointed out in her story for the Huffington Post, “Grassley’s question gets at the heart of why Democrats have been asking Trump’s nominees about 2020 at all: because it’s alarming they won’t say he lost and arguably disqualifying, as it raises red flags about their ability to be impartial judges versus loyalists to this president.”
Grassley has been part of that problem for years.
“The electoral college met and voted”
Iowa’s senior senator was quick to address “President-elect Trump” after the 2016 election. But in November 2020, he declined to congratulate the winner. His only official references to Biden were related to his investigations of alleged Biden family wrongdoing.
On December 14, the day the electoral college met, Grassley took to the Senate floor to describe what he called the “Democratic Cover-up of the Hunter Biden Investigation.” His office didn’t publish a news release congratulating Joe Biden.
As journalists reached out following the electoral college meeting, Grassley continued to avoid saying Biden was the legitimate winner. Siobhan Hughes of the Wall Street Journal asked him, “Is it time to acknowledge Biden as president-elect?” He dodged: “I don’t have to – the Constitution does.” When she asked if Grassley himself acknowledged Biden as president-elect, he replied, “I follow the Constitution.”
Stephen Gruber-Miller reported that day,
Separately, Grassley provided a one-sentence statement to the Des Moines Register on Monday evening.
“The Electoral College met and voted according to our constitutional process,” he said in the statement.
Asked if he acknowledges Biden as the president-elect, Grassley said “under the Constitution, that was decided by the Electoral College.”
What would be wrong if he said Biden won?
“Trump should have accepted President Biden’s victory”
In the aftermath of the January 6 coup attempt, Grassley voted to certify the electoral college count, saying, “I could not in good conscience vote to disenfranchise an entire state.”
But his official statement still didn’t admit Biden won fair and square. On the contrary: Grassley said, “I share the frustration of many Americans about the election outcome, and I’m also concerned about claims of irregularities that were exacerbated by states changing their rules at the eleventh hour.”
In form letters to constituents who contacted him about the January 2021 events, Grassley characterized the challenges to the electoral college vote as “not unprecedented.” He drew false equivalencies between Trump (who used mass disinformation to subvert the peaceful transfer of power) and the handful of Democrats in Congress who had objected to electoral college counts in 2001, 2005, and 2017.
The closest Grassley came to publicly admitting Biden won was in February 2021, after voting to acquit Trump of inciting an insurrection. Excerpt from his lengthy written statement (emphasis added):
To be clear, I wanted President Trump to win in November. […] I supported the exercise of this right in the hopes that allowing the election challenge process to play out would remove all doubt about the outcome. The reality is, he lost. He brought over 60 lawsuits and lost all but one of them. He was not able to challenge enough votes to overcome President Biden’s significant margins in key states. I wish it would have stopped there.
It didn’t. President Trump continued to argue that the election had been stolen even though the courts didn’t back up his claims.
Grassley was still trying to both-sides the issue, calling Trump’s language “extreme, aggressive, and irresponsible,” while also blaming others for “polluting our political discourse with inflammatory and divisive language.”
Yes, I think President Trump should have accepted President Biden’s victory when it became clear he won. I think Secretary Clinton should have done the same thing in 2016. But as recently as 2019, she questioned the legitimacy of Trump’s election […]
The comparison was absurd: Hillary Clinton conceded less than 24 hours after polls closed, filed no lawsuits challenging the results, organized no rallies to protest the election, and pressured zero officials to drum up more votes or fake electors.
But at least Grassley was saying in a long-winded way that Trump lost and Biden won.
It didn’t take long for the senator to revert to MAGA world’s preferred framing.
“Biden’s president of the United States”
Trump returned to Iowa for a rally at the state fairgrounds in October 2021. He made news by endorsing Grassley’s re-election campaign, with a truthful observation: “When I’ve needed him for help he was always there. […] He was with us all the way, every time I needed something.”
At the same rally, Trump spent a long time rehashing his false claims about the supposedly “rigged” election. Asked about the lies a few days later, Grassley said Trump is “a private citizen. He can say anything he wants to.” Brianne Pfannenstiel reported for the Des Moines Register,
But Grassley would not say outright whether he agrees with Trump’s continued false claims of fraud.
“I spoke to that on December the 13th when the electoral votes were cast, and I said ‘President Biden’s president of the United States,'” he said.
What would be wrong if he said Biden won?
“Legally accurate answers”
Bendery’s report on Wednesday’s Judiciary Committee hearing noted, “Grassley’s remark caught on the mic undermines his public criticisms of Democrats for asking Trump’s nominees this question at all.”
In his opening statement at the committee’s April 15 hearing, Grassley chastised Democrats who “have relentlessly attacked nominees for their responses about election results.”
He claimed it was “factually and legally” correct—not “evasive”—for Trump’s appointees to say Biden was certified the winner in 2020, as Trump was in 2024. He accused Democrats of staging “political theater” by asking about the popular vote. “Of course, none of the nominees counted ballots. They lack any first-hand knowledge of the vote counts.”
He is purposefully missing the point. You don’t need to have counted ballots to know Biden received 7 million more votes than Trump in 2020.
The evasion is also part of a pattern. The advocacy group Demand Justice has tracked responses from everyone Trump has nominated for judgeships since returning to the White House. They found “all 44 respondents provided answers about the 2020 election and January 6, 2021 that were dishonest or misleading,” often using “nearly identical” language.
A few minutes before Grassley’s hot mic incident, Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware tried without success to get the four nominees to say whether the 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits Trump from seeking a third term in 2028.
At the April 15 hearing, reading remarks drafted by his staff, Grassley praised the would-be judges who refuse to say Biden won the election: “The nominees’ answers demonstrate they are constitutionalists. And that’s exactly what we should want – judges who uphold the Constitution and do not bend to political attack or insult.”
The senator’s spontaneous question this week hinted at the truth: these future judges would rather indulge Trump’s fantasies than accept inconvenient facts.
Appendix: Excerpt from Senator Chuck Grassley’s prepared opening remarks at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s April 15 hearing
Some of my Democratic colleagues have relentlessly attacked nominees for their responses about election results.
I think a civics lesson is in order.
Under Article II and the 12th Amendment of our Constitution, the electoral college dictates who wins presidential elections.
Those electors cast ballots, and the Vice President certifies their vote count at a joint session of Congress.
Don’t take my word for it.
Let me read to you what the 12th Amendment states: “The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors.”
When recent judicial nominees have been asked who won the 2020 election, they’ve correctly stated that President Biden was certified as the winner and served for four years.
When asked about the 2024 election, they’ve correctly acknowledged that President Trump was certified as the winner and is currently in office.
These answers are correct – both factually and legally.
For some reason, my Democratic colleagues consider these correct legal answers to be evasive. One of them called it a “loyalty test.” But these attacks are misguided.
Under our Constitutional system, whoever is certified as receiving the majority vote from the electoral college is the winner of the election.
There’s no other way to “win the election.”
Not accepting this basic principle of our Constitution, some of my Democratic colleagues have followed up with political theater, asking who won the popular vote in these elections.
Of course, none of the nominees counted ballots.
They lack any first-hand knowledge of the vote counts. And why should they? The popular vote doesn’t determine the president under our Constitution.
Still, some of my Democratic colleagues have insulted the nominees for giving legally accurate answers by describing them as “monkeys or puppets.”
This is unfair and beneath our office.
The nominees’ answers demonstrate they are constitutionalists. And that’s exactly what we should want – judges who uphold the Constitution and do not bend to political attack or insult.
Top image is a screenshot from the official video of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s April 15 hearing.