"That doesn't prove they would have killed him."

Aguilar reveals that a confidential informant from the Proud Boys told the FBI that the group would have killed Pence if they got the chance.

"I found it interesting today hearing there has been 800 trials connected to Jan 6 and not one has been convicted of sedition."

Oh geez, here we go again. The trials for seditious conspiracy haven't taken place yet.

"I mean...what would killing Pence have accomplished?"

They considered him a traitor for not doing as Trump asked and stopping the steal. What would killing him have accomplished? Death to traitors!

Probably wuold have delayed certification
#32 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

Wasn't Trump toying with the idea of declaring martial law? We know Flynn was encouraging him to. Insurrectionists killing the VP (and Pelosi, Schumer, Nadler, AOC et al) would given him the grounds.

"Now convince me they would have killed Pence."

No one can convince you but yourself. You really should watch the hearings if you are going to comment on them. As Laura pointed out, why should anyone care about your uniformed opinions, which at this point are based on willful blindness on your part?

#38 Today's hearings included several references to Pence's religious faith and how they influenced his decision to reject Trump's attempts to bully him into doing what he wanted him to do. As a Christian, you might have found that part of today's testimony of special interest.

"Even the pillow man thought he should declare martial law based on his note pad.
But Trump didn't so it's a moot point."

Nobody killed Pence or Pelosi either and gave him the excuse.

Trump reportedly asked Pence that if White House lawyers said he had the power to reject the results of the election, "wouldn't you want to?"

"I wouldn't want any one person to have that authority," Pence told Trump, according to the book.

"But wouldn't it almost be cool to have that power?" Trump asked.

"No," Pence replied. "Look, I've read this, and I don't see a way to do it. We've exhausted every option. I've done everything I could and then some to find a way around this. It's simply not possible."

The president was insistent.

"No, no, no, you don't understand, Mike. You can do this," he told Pence, adding: "I don't want to be your friend anymore if you don't do this."

In video testimony shown during Thursday's hearing, Marc Short, Pence's former chief of staff, told the committee that the vice president had also told him he would not want the power to overturn the election "bestowed on any one person."

When I heard this conversation read out loud today, I thought to myself that Pence should have said to Trump, figuratively: "Get thee behind me Satan!"

One way or another, it's obvious Trump et al wanted Pence out of the picture. Remember this?:

Grassley suggests he may preside over Senate debate on Electoral College votes

Grassley was asked how he plans to vote.

"Well, first of all, I will be--if the Vice President isn't there and we don't expect him to be there, I will be presiding over the Senate," according to a transcript of his remarks sent by a spokesperson.

So now we learn:

Rudy Giuliani's emails reveal scheme to push Mike Pence out on Jan. 6

Giuliani's ally concocted a scheme to have Pence recuse himself from the vote count to overturn the election

A former ally of Rudy Giuliani, Donald's Trump's ex-attorney, reportedly concocted a scheme to have former Vice President Mike Pence relinquish his role in the January 6 vote-counting ceremony to a top Senate Republican, who was then expected to overturn the election by blocking the electoral votes in several battleground states.

The plan, CBS News reports, was outlined in a December 2020 email sent by attorney Kenneth Chesebro to Trump and Giuliani. In it, Chesebro details that Pence would hand over the baton to Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the Senate president pro tempore, by claiming that he has a "conflict of interest" as a result of being on the 2020 ballot. In theory, the plan would have effectively had Pence ignore the procedures outlined by the Electoral Count Act of 1878, which required that the vice president open all the electoral votes and hand them to Congress to be officially counted. Once Grassley takes over, the memo detailed, he "opens the two envelopes from Arizona, and announces that he cannot and will not, at least as of that date, count any electoral college votes from Arizona because there are two slates of votes."

According to Chesebro's interpretation of the 12th Amendment, Grassley would then have "enormous leverage" to enact whatever solutions to the logjam he saw fit.

And then there's this testimony from today's hearing:

"Tim, I know you and trust you but you're not the one behind the wheel."--VP Pence to his Secret Service detail after evacuating his office, refuses to get into his car.
Gives you a sense what Pence really thought Trump was capable of at that point on #January6th.

"I'm piecing together all I'm seeing in this thread.
Jan 6 was instigated by Trump.
The objective was to delay the certification by killing Pence."

No, the objective was to delay certification.

Excellent thread on Trump's culpability on January 6:

Indeed, the hearings have actually presented enough evidence, IMO, charge Trump with (incitement to) rebellion, 18 U.S.C. 2383, the criminal analog of what he was impeached for. The impeachment committee presented a circumstantial case, but now we have a causal link, to wit: 1/

We learned yesterday that Trump KNEW, by January 5, that Pence was *not* going to go along with the Eastman plan. But he released a statement to his supporters telling them that Pence was "on the same page" and ready to reject the slates of electors from several states 2/

This reveals not just an intention to pressure Pence, but also to psychologically prime his base -- especially the ones coming to D.C. -- and raise their expectations that Pence would overturn the election (knowing otherwise). 3/

He reinforced this expectation in his speech at the ellipse, telling the audience *repeatedly* that Pence just had to "do the right thing" and that they would all be "happy." Remember -- Pence couldn't hear that speech, that was intended for his followers. To get them riled up 4/

Having gathered this dry tinder at the ellipse, and having made them believe that Pence would deliver -- despite knowing full well he was't going to -- he sends them off to the Capitol. To repeat: HE directs them to march on the Capitol 5/

The critical piece of evidence we heard yesterday is that AFTER Trump knew that the Capitol had been breached, he tweeted out to his followers that Pence had failed them because he didn't have the "courage to do what needed to be done." He knew this would light the fire 6/

And the direct relationship was clear from yesterday's videos. Right after Trump sent the tweet, the mob reacted *directly* to it, booing Pence, and saying explicitly that that was the reason they were storming the Capitol. We know that the Proud Boys were ready to kill Pence 7/

What's important about 18 U.S.C. 2383, rebellion and insurrection, is that it carries as its penalty a prohibition from holding any office (including as president). The other crimes which have been floated, e.g. conspiracy to obstruct/defraud, don't. So it's worth considering END

Check out this morning's lead front page headlines in the print editions of the @nytimes and
@washingtonpost

Gal,
I read your headline.
Since Trump and Putin as such buds as liberals say, why didn't he just get some poison from Putin and put in Pence's coffee.
I'm sure Putin has some laying around.
#73 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

Trump never does his own dirty work but gets underlings to do it for him for reasons of plausible deniability. Popping polonium he borrowed from Putin into Pence's coffee isn't Trump's style.

Trump was *not* being childish when he told Pence he would not be his "friend" anymore.
@MichaelCohen212 tells us Trump was putting a hit on Pence using the coded language of the Mob.