I think he did. I think trump told him what he had planned and wanted him to stay in chambers and work with the rioters. I think it was a private conversation we will never know for sure. I cant believe he didnt run this by Pence before Pence rejected it. My conclusion... Pence knew this was coming. And said nothing to anyone which makes him complicit.

I think in this day and age, we need to guard against rampant speculation. We've seen the damage it has done from the other side.

Agreed .... I just hope when it's all said and done, that the whole truth comes out, but I doubt it.

I don't see how you can come to any logical conclusion that would tie Pence into what happened yesterday. I have seen from both a Republican and a Democrat law maker who both said they had an idea this was coming yesterday. The question is, what could anyone other than Trump have done to stop it?

You see, all of the basic elements were there for this to happen. Pence wasn't on that stage kindling the fire that led to this. But common sense dictates that the possibility of this was very real. As it turned out, too real.

Actually from every report I've seen, Pence was the first one to leave the chamber. He was nowhere around to "work with the rioters".

He was the first one ushered out. I just cant imagine trump not clueing him in on his plans before he rejected trump.

jc

Let's make up imaginary stories now, and call it truth. Then blame Trump for our imaginary stories.

So you honestly think it is logical to believe that Trump made a call to the senate chamber to tell them to take Pence to safety?

Look, I'm not saying it's impossible. I just think it's a very far fetched conspiracy sounding idea.

No I do not think trump made a call . I assume it was standard operating procedure for a breach incident.

That makes the most sense to me.

"I think...... My conclusion"

If Pence didn’t know he’d have invoked the 25th by now.

you should bone up the Constitution.
as it is,your statements make you look foolish.

'Where is Pence?' Pro-Trump mob tried to hunt down vice president, lawmakers in Capitol siege.
Peter Weber
Thu, January 7, 2021, 7:05 AM EST

Shortly after President Trump urged his supporters at Wednesday's "Stop the Steal" rally in Washington, D.C., to march on the Capitol, they set off down Pennsylvania Avenue, using alternative social media sites like Gab and Parler to discuss "directions on which streets to take to avoid the police and which tools to bring to help pry open doors," as well as how to carry guns into the halls of Congress, The New York Times reports. QAnon, the Proud Boys, and other pro-Trump groups have used such sites for months to openly call for violence against members of Congress and seizing the Capitol building.

Once the mob breached the Capitol building, one of the dozens of Trump supporters roaming the Capitol halls asked, "Where are they?" The Associated Press reports. At that point, the lawmakers were crouching on the floor of the House chamber or under tables, hiding out in secure locations, or sheltering in their offices, praying and telling their loved ones they were alive. At about 2:00 p.m., Vice President Mike Pence and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) were evacuated from the Senate, and police cleared the chamber about half an hour later.

"At 2:24 p.m., after Mr. Trump tweeted that Mr. Pence 'didn't have the courage to do what should have been done,' dozens of messages on Gab called for those inside the Capitol building to hunt down the vice president," the Times reports. "In videos uploaded to the channel, protesters could be heard chanting 'Where is Pence?'"



Pence, it turns out, was busy. "Throughout the day, Pence appeared to take on much of the coordination that would traditionally be led by the president in a moment of crisis," Politico reports. "In addition to speaking with defense officials about the deployment of National Guard troops, Pence fielded phone calls from Trump allies who appeared eager to erase the president from the picture." Wednesday marked "the beginning of the end" of Pence's loyalty to Trump, one Pence ally told Politico, and it "may very well be the end of his political career, too."

If you put out the alarm, us good ole boys will hunt about anything!

Correct. You can't just invoke the 25th amendment like that. That's not how it works at all. Also if I were Pence and I were involved then I wouldn't have made the statement I did that he put out there so there's that.

You're reading too much into the situation and trying to conjure up your own story...maybe for fiction writing? I don't know, I'm not sure....

I agree until you start talking about "other" side.

That is the fundamental problem in this country. We have sides, sides created by the media.

Me, I am an American. I am uncertain about what side you are talking about.

trump has divided this country like no other president that is a fact. This problem has always existed but trump has made it the CenterPoint of his presidency. So blame is squarely on trump. The media is just reporting it.

I think you're reading into it what you want to read into it.

I have railed against bipartisan politics and media outlets, but you know that already.

But, to entertain your notion, "sides" on this issue doesn't refer to parties, but to a dynamic. It's denoting irrational Trump support bolstered by what we saw two days ago vs a notion of irrational accusations levied against him.

Like I've said before, I think Trump has pushed the divide like nobody else. Weaponized it for his own gain. The divide was already there, though. Look at what some people were saying during Obama's terms. That group just lacked a leader and focus.

Kind of like Pelosi talking about impeachment from the very beginning? Investigation after investigation, all unfounded?

That kind of behavior?

My point is it goes both ways and pointing fingers doesn't sooth any feelings.

We tend to look at one tree, or at most one kind of tree when we enter the forest, exactly the way the media wants it. They want you to pick sides based on what they report rather than the quality of the reporting. Edit here: more on point, they report what their viewers want to hear. People want dirt on the other person and gloss over their side.

Believe it or not there was a time when it didn't really matter which newscast you watched. All were more or less reporting the same facts, in a unbiased, balanced, truthful manner.

It's not like that today, so people choose sides.

And the problem now is you have some heads turned by some on the Republican side (read: Cruz and Hawley) who are looking to be the Bill Walsh to his Paul Brown after they study his meteoric rise...in one of those cases after they actually fought against it initially in the 2016 primaries.

I can't stand Pelosi one bit. McConnel either for that matter. I don't think they are AS divisive as Trump, but they are awful and two of the biggest players, IMO, in building the dynamic that got Trump elected.

Agree with most of everything else you said. I would like to add too that the media has had a rippling effect. Now, it's not just "pick a side" but it's expanded to "you haven't picked this side enough."

Regardless of what you think of his politics, I think Andrew Yang had a good point on this topic. He highlights Fox as a culprit because they fall against his policies, but I would expand the same narrative to MSNBC, etc. I'll just post his tweet, rather than bastardizing it with my own paraphrasing:

How is that a problem? A lot of people liked what President trump has done....as a whole.

I don't like President Trump. Never have, but I like many of the things he stood for, so he got my vote.

To me, it's not that they are behind him for the right reasons. Look at Lindsey Graham. He's done whatever is convenient for him that day. I don't think it's that they like what he has done and want to further his policies.

I think they want his base...disingenuously. I think they want to further the ugly aspects of Trump to maintain a radicalized element (as I see it), to further their own self gain and ambitions.

Well, on another thread I read you talking about not vilifying the Trump base, and here I read about other politicians wanting to secure his base to continue a ugly, radical element.

I guess I am confused.

No.

Let me distinguish first of all. There are people who voted for Trump, which I refer to in the other thread, and then there is his base, which I consider to be pretty much his unwavering supporters. I think this subset is constituted by people who are nearly as disenfranchised with the Republican party as they are with the Democrats. I think people like Ted Cruz see an opportunity to maintain their garden variety Republican constituents while also bringing aboard the "base" that I am referring to. They see it in terms of "votes" not in terms of ideologies. It's tactical and opportunistic.

When you are inferring "ugly" and "radical," I am not directing that at the people constituting the base, but rather the dynamic of strategy I see being utilized by Trump - such as the claims of a "rigged election" and not disavowing QAnon, etc. - in order to maintain galvanization of that subset.

The NY Times article that Luke Yoda posted the other day addressed this with great insight.

There are Republicans who voted for Trump much like yourself who do not behave as if they belong to a cult. They are not extremists and willing to do anything to overthrow an election including violence against our country.

I don't blame you for what those people did. I don't lump you in with the cult of trump. But there is a cult of Trump. A dangerous subsection of Americans who listen to his rhetoric as if it were gospel or their marching orders. I implore you as a friend not to deny they exist or defend them in any way.

You can certainly blame a certain portion of the division in our nation on the media. As long as you're willing to distribute that blame in both directions of the media.

Here's where the problem lies. If you're not willing to see and admit that what we're seeing right now isn't a result of Trump pouring gasoline on that fire resulting in a raging inferno, I don't believe you're being honest with yourself or objective.

I hope moving forward that when you vote you look for at least an ounce of honesty, decorum, dignity and compassion in the candidate you support. You can easily find a man or woman who espouses your values with that minimum degree of humanity.

I mean think about it for a minute. Here's what Trump has netted you. Georgia is gone. First you lost the presidency in Georgia. Then both senate seats were lost in Georgia. Let me ask you a question. Ten years ago what percentage of people who live in Georgia would have bet their home that a Jewish man would never win a senate seat in Georgia? Yet here we are.

I know some people will feel offended by that question. But neither one of us really care about what anyone else thinks.

You know exactly what I'm talking about. If your party doesn't start thinking at least a little bit about the character of the candidate you won't be helping yourself in the future. And look, I'm not talking about the perfect human being here. A lot of questionable characters have been elected president. But when you get to the point that you elect someone who personally attacks anyone who disagrees with him and acts like a 12 year old on the playground, everyone can plainly see who and what he is. At that point you can't fool anyone. And in the end you pay the price for it.

At the present time that price is the House of representatives, the senate and the White House. An unfettered open path for Democrats to do whatever they wish. When I try to look at it from your perspective, I guess your consolation prize is that it's Biden and not Bernie or you wouldn't be able to sleep at night.

Pot, meet Kettle.

Trump does that all the time

Still waiting for Voter Fraud Proof