MSNBC host Chris Hayes has been one of the most vocal critics of President Trump, accusing him in recent weeks of undermining democracy by not conceding the 2020 presidential election, but resurfaced comments he made back in 2016 suggested he also did not respect the country's electoral process.
Back in December 2016, following Trump's Electoral College victory against Hillary Clinton, Hayes offered a "fun fact" that suggests that the 306 electors that handed the president-elect the White House didn't actually have to abide by their own state's ballot outcome.
"Fun fact: states decide how to apportion their electors. They could give them all to, say, whichever candidate won majority of counties!" Hayes tweeted.
When another Twitter user questioned whether electors would "still have to follow other parts of US Constitution," Hayes doubled down, replying "I'm not sure it's clearly justiciable! I mean, you could make the argument winner take all already does that."
In a 2016 MSNBC clip dug up by The Intercept journalist Lee Fang, the "All In" host further delved into the possibility of electors abandoning President-elect Trump in favor of Clinton during an interview with liberal filmmaker Michael Moore.
"There are people who have been pushing very hard who think that because of some of the constitutional perils of the emoluments clause, because of the popular vote margin, because of fundamentals they think threat to liberal democracy that electors should be persuaded and pressured on Monday and to part to what their pledge is and vote against Donald Trump," Hayes said.
"Yes, they absolutely should," Moore responded. "I believe that right now that there are electors — we only need 38 of them, who have a conscience or are worried about a man who won't attend daily security briefings, who we now know Russia was trying to help get elected."
Moore continued, "I mean, could you imagine if you or I been running for office and they showed that the Iranians were somehow involved in helping you or me get elected? What would happen to you or me, Chris? I'm just curious. What would happen?"
"I think it would be a totally chill situation," Hayes quipped.
Critics mocked the liberal host's apparent shift of attitude towards the Electoral College.
"I have no doubt Chris Hayes still considers this a 'fun fact,'" Daily Caller reporter Chuck Ross reacted to the tweet.
"Funny how @chrishayes completely memory holed this," National Review contributor Pradheep J. Shanker similarly expressed about the Michael Moore interview.
"But I was told Democrats didn't try to undermine the results of the election in 2016," RedState contributor Sister Toldjah quipped.
After seeing that his 2016 tweet was being circulated, Hayes responded to his critics, saying, "Wait this is still true! That's the whole problem."
"Anyway nothing was [being] *floated* here since the point is that if electors were to go to the winner of the majority of all counties would probably just give it to the Republican in every state. My point was that people should be able to vote for president," Hayes clarified on Wednesday.