CNN anchor Boris Sanchez spent over seven minutes on Tuesday trying to get a really simple answer out of the chairman of Maine’s Republican party. But even after seven attempts, he was unsuccessful.
All Sanchez wanted to know was why it was wrong for Maine’s Secretary of State Shenna Bellows (D) to disqualify former President Donald Trump from appearing on the state’s ballot. (A decision he announced Tuesday that he is appealing.) When she explained how she came to her decision on December 28, Bellows cited not just the United States Constitution, but Maine’s constitution as well. And a former Republican lawmaker in the state who was proactive in requesting Trump’s removal from the ballot, Tom Saviello, defended Bellows and her decision while declaring Trump to be “not qualified.”
But Maine’s GOP chair Joel Stetkis thinks she was wrong. Sanchez wanted to know why, legally speaking, Bellows was wrong — and he asked Stetkis seven times:
Sanchez: What is your response?
Stetkis: Well, Boris, I think the simplest way we could put this really is, you know, we’ve got an unelected bureaucrat who likes to pretend that she’s a lawyer, and she’s literally taking away the voters’ choices in Maine. You know, here in Maine and across the country, regardless of, you know, whether they like Donald Trump or not, you know, Bellows is wrong on so many levels. And it’s, it’s getting to the point of really being embarrassing.
Here’s the second attempt:
Sanchez: But if the state law, like the state constitution, makes it so that if someone has a complaint about a candidate, they take it up with the Secretary of State, who then is the arbiter, how could she be in the wrong for making a decision based on what was presented to her in that hearing?
Stetkis: Well, you know, her decision process was just wrong. You know, she’s there… uh… to… uh… To support, uh, Maine’s voter, Maine voting rights. And she’s doing exactly the opposite. You know, we’re going to fight this thing to the highest extent that we need to. And what she’s doing is just flat out wrong.
Third:
Sanchez: [W]hat’s your main argument against her decision?
Stetkis: Oh, this has so much more to do… uh… with the… uh… you know, the suppression of the vote as opposed to Donald Trump. We would, we would oppose this decision regardless of what Republican she decided that she was going to arbitrarily decide Maine voters aren’t going to be allowed to vote for.
Fourth:
Sanchez: Joel, you’re saying that it’s arbitrary, but what is it about her decision? What is it about her argument legally that you’re opposed to?
Stetkis: We’re just opposed to her taking away the rights of the voters, to be able to choose the leader that they want to vote for or not.
Fifth and sixth:
Stetkis: Her reasoning behind her decision is completely wrong.
Sanchez: So what is the reasoning that you object to?
Stetkis: No matter how you ask the question, her decision is completely wrong. There are, there are…
Sanchez: Joel, but give us the details. Why is it wrong? Why is it wrong?
Stetkis: So Boris, so Boris, this is the thing, right? There are, there are attorneys and judges, Democrats and Republicans across this country that have said that she is wrong.
Nice try citing “attorneys and judges,” Stetkis, but that doesn’t count! Here is the seventh and final attempt:
Sanchez: Is there any detail you can give us other than saying she’s flat out wrong, Joel?
Stetkis: So one of the things that we’ve seen in the last week are… are very highly respected lawyers and judges, Democrats and Republicans alike, that have come out and given plenty of legal argument on why that she’s wrong. You know, my job, my job here is to protect the voters in the state of Maine, and what she is doing just shows absolute contempt for the everyday American. They feel like we’re not smart enough to think for themselves, that she needs to pull somebody off of the ballot because we’re not smart enough to know whether we should vote for that person or not. And that’s just flat out wrong.
Either the segment ran out of time or Sanchez just gave up, but he ended the interview there by reminding Joel Stetkis that he never answered the one question he asked him:
I don’t think it’s a question of intelligence. I think there’s a legal argument to be made. It doesn’t seem like you have articulated the exact legal argument and the flaw that you see in her decision. Nevertheless, Joel, we’re grateful to have you and get your perspective.
Watch the video above via CNN.
