While millions of Americans celebrate our democracy today, Trump’s MAGA Veepstakes contenders are standing behind his lawless actions and pledge to be a dictator on “day one.” In response, DNC Rapid Response Director Alex Floyd released the following statement: 

“This Fourth of July, while Americans are celebrating our democracy, Donald Trump’s MAGA veepstakes contenders are working overtime to help him tear it down after Trump’s handpicked Supreme Court justices opened the door for his radical, anti-democracy agenda. Trump’s potential running mates have made it clear they will put loyalty to him over our fundamental values as Americans and the rule of law, even if it means enabling a convicted felon to rule as a lawless dictator who wants to ‘terminate’ the Constitution. As Trump’s VP contenders prop up his campaign of revenge and retribution, it’s clear that our democracy is on the ballot this November — and the only way to stop them is by reelecting President Biden and Vice President Harris.”

Donald Trump’s MAGA veepstakes contenders have made clear that they support Trump’s attacks on our democracy, praising the Supreme Court’s decision that paves the way for him to be a dictator on “day one.”

Doug Burgum: “This is a big win for America, and it’s a big win for the Constitution.”

Tim Scott: “The Supreme Court has ruled in [Trump’s] favor, in opposition to the weaponizing of the justice system.”

J.D. Vance: “A massive win, not just for Trump but the rule of law. I’m still digesting but this may well destroy all of Jack Smith’s case against the president.”

Byron Donalds: “Without immunity, the President of the United States is unable to properly serve the American people and defend our nation.

“In today’s precedent-setting, 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court did right by President Trump, they did right by the American people, and they did right by the hallowed institution of the Presidency of the United States.

“Jack Smith’s indictment is a disgrace to our legal system and it’s time that our nation turns the page on this egregious lawfare because President Trump did nothing wrong.”

Ben Carson: “Today’s HISTORIC SCOTUS victory on presidential immunity has stopped Biden and the Department of ‘Justice’ from their attempt to twist the law in order to persecute his political opponents. They know they can’t beat him at the ballot box so they tried to tie him up in their campaign of lawfare. Luckily, SCOTUS held the line against this tyranny showing that America is still a country that upholds the rule of law.”

Elise Stefanik: “Today’s Supreme Court decision is a historic victory for President Donald Trump, the Constitution, the rule of law, and the American people. The President of the United States must have immunity, like Members of Congress and federal judges, which is necessary for any presidency to function properly. I look forward to continuing to work with President Trump to ensure his victory and Save America.”

Tom Cotton: “The Supreme Court today upheld the rule of law and protected our Constitution. Our Founders intended for the president to have immunity, especially from lawless, political prosecutions.”

Kristi Noem: “Looks like @realdonaldtrump was right, again. He DOES have immunity for official actions that he took as our President.”

Vivek Ramaswamy: “The Supreme Court just held that a U.S. President ‘may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled, at a minimum, to a presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.’ It’s a decision that would make our Founders proud.”

Trump’s VP contenders are desperately parroting his baseless election denialism and refusing to commit to accepting this November’s election results…

Washington Post: “Top Republicans, led by Trump, refuse to commit to accept 2024 election results”

“The question has become something of a litmus test, particularly among the long list of possible running mates for Trump. … The GOP’s desire to appease Trump’s fixation on 2020 now appears to loom over his search for a running mate.”

NBC News: “Burgum, like other contenders, has declined to comment on whether he would accept the 2024 election results.”

HuffPost: “[J.D. Vance] said he would accept a Biden win only if he considered the election to be legitimate.”

Washington Post: “Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who has been floated as a possible running mate for former President Donald J. Trump, on Sunday refused to commit to accepting the results of the 2024 presidential election and repeated conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.”

Washington Post: “Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) was pressed at least six times in a TV interview Sunday on whether he would accept this November’s results. He repeatedly declined to do so … He continued to evade the question even as the interviewer, NBC News’s Kristen Welker, reminded him that a ‘hallmark of our democracy is that both candidates agree to a peaceful transfer of power.’”

NBC News: “In an appearance on NBC News’ ‘Meet the Press’ in January, Stefanik declined to commit to accepting the 2024 election results.”

Laura Coates, CNN: “Will you accept the results of the 2024 election regardless of who wins, yes or no?”

Ben Carson: “I will accept the results if it’s done in a fair and transparent way. … let me put it this way: In the 2020 election, there were a lot of irregularities.”

Abby Phillip, CNN: “If Donald Trump loses the election in 2024, will you accept the results of that election?”

Byron Donalds: “My answer has been very clear on this.”

Phillip: “It’s a yes or no question.”

Donalds: *refuses to commit to accepting the results*

Phillip: “So your answer is conditional on– based on?”

Donalds: “My answer is always conditional.”

Daily Beast: “Sen. Tom Cotton Says He’ll Accept 2024 Election Results—With a Condition”

…while continuing to downplay his role in the January 6 insurrection and whitewash the violence of that day.

The Hill: “JD Vance says he is ‘skeptical’ Pence’s life was in danger on Jan. 6”

Kristen Welker, NBC: “Donald Trump has yet to concede. Is that not undemocratic? Particularly for someone who is running to be the leader of this country and the free world again?” 

Doug Burgum: “Donald Trump at the end of his term on January 20, left the White House, we had a smooth transition [after the 2020 election].”

Welker: “January 6 was not exactly a smooth transition, governor.”

Burgum: “Well I think we have to say that there was a smooth transition.”

Newsweek: “‘There was no way they were going to overthrow the government,’ said Rubio. … ‘I also do not think people should be misled to think this somehow was on the verge of overthrowing the government.’ Rubio also explained another reason why the events of January 6 should not be considered an insurrection. That was because Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s win in the 2020 presidential election eventually resumed after protesters broke into the Capitol building.”

Tim Scott: “99 percent of the people who showed up were there to exercise their First Amendment rights. What I said then is what I’ll say now. I don’t hold those people at harm.”

Politico: “Elise Stefanik calls Jan. 6 defendants ‘hostages’”

Astead W. Herndon, New York Times: “Do you see [Trump’s] rhetoric as at least connected to the events that happened on January 6, even if you don’t see them affecting trust in the democratic system overall?”

Byron Donalds: “No, I don’t.”

Associated Press: “Noem defends Trump legacy, deflects blame for Capitol mob”

Roll Call: “Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas consistently has staked out a tough-on-crime stance during his time in the Senate, but he and other congressional Republicans have sided with the defendants in a Supreme Court case about the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.”

Ben Carson: “I think it would have been appropriate, perhaps, to look at all of the alternative theories seriously because there was significant controversy about what had happened in the election.”

NBC News: “Vivek Ramaswamy promotes Jan. 6 conspiracy theory by suggesting it was ‘an inside job’”

Fox News: “Tulsi Gabbard slams the Jan 6 hearings: It’s ‘political interest’”