So, the story does hold up, a quick google search brings us to this SCOTUS Amicus Brief, which tells us how to find the actual records about what they discussed!
Now we go to the Congressional Globe for the official records of the debate.
I highly recommend going to the middle of this page and start reading from the point I've marked out. It's quite titillating stuff! But I will summarize the important bits
So we are looking for what was the reasoning behind the decision to count the votes. This debate did last two days, but the important part, the mindset of the VP is explained up front.
4/
The Presiding Officer (acting VP) Notice how right off the bat the VP says that there is nothing to be done about the electors! He says that they have to be counted.
5/
Mr H Marshall makes the note that under the Constitution, the only role for the VP is to open and count the votes!
And then he states there needs to be a way to resolve these contested cases!
6/
Back to the VP: he himself makes the point that his only role is to OPEN and the votes be counted..
Right there, you know that even in 1856, the VP did NOT have any authority to change electors. 6/
The Vice President "Considers that the only duty imposed by the Constitution was, that the vote should be counted".
Again, we have another historical situation that proves that Pence CANNOT change the votes.
7/
Vice President: "the only functions to be discharged" by the Vice President is to "open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted".
8/
I just love this little moment, that in all the debate, the tellers forgot to make out the certificates, and they put "laughter" in the official record!
9/
Summary:
Once again, the very historical situation put forward by Trump's supporters again completely destroys the notion that the Constitution grants the Vice President the power to set aside votes!
10/
I highly recommend you read several pages of this document; not only do you get a good sense of why the Electoral Count Act was necessary, but you can see the interpretation of the Constitution at the time is exactly on par with ours today.
11/
@BenVAllison How did I do in the historical department?
This thread will debunk the notion that Pence can throw out electors on January 6th. This will be a super thread that goes over what the laws actually says..
Feel free to ask questions, I will try to answer as many as I can at the end of the thread!
1/
Quick overview (might not get to all of this tonight):
The actual law
Historical Examples
Specific conspiracy theories.
Q and A
2/
Election of 1886, Electoral chaos, Governors would sign one slate of Electors, Secretary of States would sign a different one, and in South Carolina you had no certified electors at all. The Constitution just wasn't clear on how to handle this.
"There has been no violation of the [Federal] Constitution"
Notice how this debunks the idea that Legislatures have to choose electors. Popular selection of Electors is the law (in all states), and it does NOT violate the Constitution. 3/
This is a good one to show people who think affidavits are good evidence. Notice how the affidavits don't actually say they saw fraud happen in Detroit.