T O P

What do you think of Trump telling Pence, before the electoral college count, "You can either go down in history as a patriot, or a pussy"?

What do you think of Trump telling Pence, before the electoral college count, "You can either go down in history as a patriot, or a pussy"?

AutoModerator

AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they have those views. **For all participants:** * [FLAIR](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_flair) **IS REQUIRED BEFORE PARTICIPATING** * **BE CIVIL AND** [SINCERE](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/goodfaith2) * **REPORT, DON'T DOWNVOTE** **For Non-supporters/Undecided:** * **NO TOP LEVEL COMMENTS** * **ALL COMMENTS MUST INCLUDE A CLARIFYING QUESTION** **For Trump Supporters:** * [MESSAGE THE MODS](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23AskTrumpSupporters&subject=please+make+me+an+approved+submitter&message=sent+from+the+sticky) **TO HAVE THE DOWNVOTE TIMER TURNED OFF** Helpful links for more info: [OUR RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_rules) | [EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_exceptions_to_the_rules) | [POSTING GUIDELINES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_posting_guidelines) | [COMMENTING GUIDELINES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_commenting_guidelines) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskTrumpSupporters) if you have any questions or concerns.*


unintendedagression

Trump is right, however I don't know if he's quite realised which one of these terms will be applied to him. Pence is the best right hand man a president could ask for. Loyal, but not blindly so. A man with integrity, that bends but never breaks. He should be proud that such a man is part of his team. Turning against him is one of the biggest mistakes Trump has made in his term, perhaps his life.


shieldedunicorn

When did Pence contradict (even slightly) Trump before the election?


Databit

We don't know, what we do know is that the did it pretty blantant and firm this time, which we have to give kudos for. He could have been quitly trying to talk Trump straight this whole time. Makes you wonder how bad it would have been without Pence, right?


unintendedagression

For the record, I am in full agreement with this. This is my stance as well. Pence will bend, but he won't break. We're talking about a man that *never* has dinner alone with a woman that isn't his wife. He's been married for decades. That's commitment right there. Someone with backbone like that isn't gonna get bullied into walking back on his principles. Not by Trump or anyone.


the_man_i_loved

Can you understand why refusing to overthrow a democratic election in plain sight isn't exactly a highly admirable position to take in the mind of NS, considering it should basically be the bare minimum requirement of holding office?


unintendedagression

I could make a joke about the Russia hoax here, you know. Ask if that's why you specified "in plain sight" rather than in general. Because the Democrats attempted exactly this through clandestine means and you seem pretty alright with that... But I'll hold off.


CaptainAwesome06

Are there any people involved in determining the outcome of the Russia investigation that has called it a hoax? Or is that just rhetoric from the side of which the investigation was about?


TheThoughtPoPo

At least you had an investigation


CaptainAwesome06

I'm not sure what investigation I got. But didn't a Republican appoint a special council to investigate the Russian interference in the election? Didn't all the security agencies say that Russia interfered in our elections? Weren't there a bunch of indictments from it? What part is the hoax? At best, the final report said it couldn't squarely pin anything on Trump but didn't it also lay out some pretty good evidence for obstruction? At some point, don't you think it's more likely that Russia interfered in our elections rather than there being a huge conspiracy theory involving pretty much every department in the US government?


YellaRain

Which would you prefer, a lawful investigation or a chaotic insurrection? Your last comment makes the presumed answer less certain


TheThoughtPoPo

I preferred lawful investigation, but since institutions failed ill take civil disobedience.


AshingKushner

Is this a reference to the alleged 2020 voter fraud issues? Weren’t there over 60 cases rejected by judges because there wasn’t evidence that could be presented re: fraud?


TheThoughtPoPo

Here I thought it was during the case you were supposed to present evidence. What you mean is the courts used bullshit reasons to not address the evidence. In I think it was arizona they created a phone bank to call voters and recorded them if they said they didnt votes. Thousands of people who were marked as voting claimed according to the phone bank that they hadn't voted. Judge threw it out since they didn't depose all the thousands of witnesses. I mean lets just ignore plain hard evidence of voter fraud for bullshit reasons. bUt RuLeS oF eVidEnce No fuck that. They are using every excuse to ignore evidence. They use this bullshit to suppress the truth. Joe Biden is an illegitimate president.


the_man_i_loved

Cosigning this... Our intelligence community warned that Russia interfered in our election and was involved in the hack of the DNC and Trump denied and defended them. A trump appointed Republican eventually had to mount a special counsel just to get the issue recognized formally and Trump and Republicans fought against its validity for two years, only to have Mueller prove definitively that Russia had, in fact, done exactly what Trump denied. How is that in any way comparable to Trump demanding Pence swear fealty to himself as a king and attempt to dismantle democracy as a personal favor for old times sake?


megrussell

>the Russia hoax You're repeating, verbatim, the words of the man who declared "I won the election" after he lost the Electoral College vote along with the popular vote. Why do you feel you can trust Trump's word on this when anyone tasked with investigating whether or not Russia has been interfering in the 2016 election eventually determined that Russia has, indeed, been interfering in the 2016 election?


Zwicker101

>Because the Democrats attempted exactly this through clandestine means and you seem pretty alright with that... But I'll hold off. What "clandestine" means are you referring too?


YellaRain

Let’s talk about false equivalency. On the one hand, we’ve got a mob of thousands of people who were calling for the death and kidnapping of democratically elected congresspeople. On the other hand we’ve got numerous pleas to open an investigation (after the election had already been conceded), which ended up finding a handful of criminals and circumstantial evidence of corruption and obstruction of justice. What meaningful analogy can you possibly draw between those things? Bear in mind, the context of all of this is *politics*, and it is well understood that disagreement is essentially the default. Do you really mean to imply that the calls for a russia investigation were as treasonous and contemptible as the Capitol riot?


hungoverlord

> I could make a joke about the Russia hoax Were you aware that multiple people close to Trump went down as a result of that investigation? It's not the slam dunk that the media had people hoping for, but it is not a HOAX just because Trump didn't personally fry as a result. Take a look at the indictments section here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017%E2%80%932019) "A total of thirty-four individuals and three companies were indicted by Mueller's investigators. Eight have pleaded guilty to or been convicted of felonies, including five Trump associates and campaign officials." I am so sick of you guys comparing all of this recent shit to the "Russia hoax" that wasn't a hoax at all. It's pathetic. You are parroting Trump.


more_sanity

Why didn't you read the Mueller Report? What did Democrats attempt through clandestine means?


parliboy

> When did Pence contradict (even slightly) Trump before the election? For someone like Pence, the rule is likely "criticize privately and support publicly." The electoral college count represented a situation where he really couldn't to that, according to the definition of support Trump wants.


duffman13jws

Were you surprised Trump kept Pence on as his running mate? IIRC there was pretty rampant speculation they would part ways for this election.


unintendedagression

For 2020? No I wasn't. But then I had not heard such rumors so I figured it was a lock.


HopingToBeHeard

I don’t think is this is cool, but it wouldn’t shock me in the least if some version of this was true. This way of putting it supports my mental burnout, breakdown or cognitive decline theory, as Trump is turning into his worst self and showing little of his better angels. As inappropriate as this is, and hopelessly unpersuasive (if not intentionally self destructive), I think Trump probably has some valid anger that he’s been unable to articulate, but I was expecting him and Pence to have big falling out for sometime. Before the election, when Trump was letting McConnell fuck over Americans on stimulus, when he moved the party right and set it up to loose in the election by nominating authoritarian Amy Coney Barrett, when Trump was letting the party and the legal team set him up to fail in the legal side of things, when almost all of his campaigns efforts were focused on appealing to the religious right, when the GOP suddenly started getting super concerned about deficits again, appealing to the extreme libertarian wing and the prosperity gospel far right, and when they were going to rallies that were becoming ever more frequented by ever more violent proud boys, well, I’m pretty sure Pence was cheering Trump on and telling him that they were going to win by a landslide. When Pence was debating Harris, he faced the camera and lied to the American people, and he didn’t even try to hide it. He knew we knew but he wanted to lie anyways. He clearly wanted to ban abortion. He clearly wanted his pick on the court, and he’s close with the federalist society, many of whom have acted in ways counter to how they marketed themselves to conservatives, including after this election. Not Bill Barr. That man is a saint. Thomas isn’t far behind, but other than that, I’m genuinely baffled by how they can come to the conclusion that they do by using the methods and framings that they claim to. If I was Trump, I would be angry at Pence. I wouldn’t be angry about what he says he is, but I think Trump is being told that he lost by the very same guy who helped convince him that he must have won. I honestly think we’ve been framing a lot of this wrong. The GOP veered right and it ended in a terror attack and right now we have a lot to sort out. Trumps problem wasn’t that he held onto the belief that he won. Trumps problem was that he never dealt with the possibility that he lost. Even if Trump isn’t struggling mentally, it still has to be hard to have the same party elites that worked with you at the end of the election as if they were helping you win tell you that you didn’t. It doesn’t excuse anything, but if Trump genuinely thought that he was going to win big, and if he kept thinking it, then maybe he genuinely thought that he was sending a bunch of regular people to capital hill where they would actually listen to him and behave, showing congress how many people know that he won. I don’t think that’s an implausible scenario, especially if we find out that this event was exploited by a separate and organized terror operation that Trump didn’t know about. You can say that he should have been more vigilant, and I can’t say you are wrong. I didn’t predict this, but I predicted something bad would happen and scare people, and I can’t say it getting this bad surprised me. I knew this could turn bad, so i think he should have known. On the upside, Chris Wrays FBIs couldn’t prevent this, and they shouldn’t be expected to. What they can be expected to do is respond well, and so far their response has been exemplary by all indications. “Pro Trump” echo chambers hated Wray before Trump started feuding with him, and it seems like that dynamic became a pattern. Trump may not be influencing these people, he may have been tricked into being influenced by Wray. There seems to have been a feedback loop problem, all of which convinced Trump to move right while also convincing Trump that he was becoming a unifying candidate. I’m not saying Pence planned any of this, but if Trump is acting like he has delusions, Pence has contributed to them himself and failed to take action as the president’s decision making process collapsed.


Callmecheetahman

I'm very curious how you see Trumps role in what you yourself call a terror attack. I'm hesitant to call him directly and totally responsible because at a certain point it's out of his hands but given how the people who went down to DC are some of his most ardent supporters him denouncing it earlier could have gone a long way. He did the opposite. He actively encouraged them to come to DC, he *wanted* Pence to reject the results (which is a conspiracy theory at best, it's widely agreed he can't actually do that). How does that play to his base? >Trumps problem is that he never dealt with the possibility that he lost He still hasn't, he thinks he won but it was stolen from him. At least that's what he tells his supporters. Had he come out and said "come and show your support for the MAGA movement January 6th but keep in mind I lost and Biden won and we're not gonna change that"? Wouldn't things have gone different?


Nago31

Wow, great answer. Thank you for this. Do you think Trump was directly involved in the delays of deploying national guard?


HopingToBeHeard

Thanks. There’s a good chance that he was involved. It’s something that he might have done if he was acting maliciously, and it’s something that he might have done if he wasn’t thinking about the threat clearly. It comes down to the old question of was it malice or was it error. I don’t think we can know that just yet. I think a lot more is going to come out about this attack that could take the story in new directions and provide us with more clarity.


Happygene1

I don't think it absolves Trump of responsibility because he is the president and has been for four years so he is not a newbie, however, I wonder what you think of something I have been pondering. Trump relies on others for information he doesn't possess. Of course everyone does that but what I mean is he relies on others to verbally tell him what's what. He listens to those he trusts. I wonder if the information he has been getting is contrary to the constitution but trump is relying on his people to tell him the truth. The belief that Pence could do anything other than announce the results of the electoral counts, was being communicated to him and he believed it. That it was not legally possible for Pence to do anything else was not the message Trump was getting. His anger at Pence for not doing what he wanted may stem from being lied to by his people. Do you think it is possible that Trump really didn't understand that Pence couldn't change the vote? Second question, because why not? Do you think his erroneous belief was translated to his followers which created a higher level of outrage than it would have been if they knew that Pence couldn't actually change anything?


MattTheSmithers

Does it matter whether it was malice or error? Letting the Congress be sacked and allowing police officers to be killed is dereliction of duty whether it is due to malice or incompetence, no?


Exogenesis42

>it’s something that he might have done if he wasn’t thinking about the threat clearly Would this not be enough to demonstrate a danger to national security? That he can't think clearly about his own protests?


[deleted]

Great analysis. I actually think this is spot on, but I spot something that doesn’t seem quite right. I’m not totally convinced that Trump thought he was going to win big. He spent months before this election cheapening the legitimacy of mail in voting and almost everyone on here defended it. I took a lot of crap on this very forum for daring to claim that it was obviously a ploy to de-legitimize a democratic victory. Why would he do something like that if he was gonna win big? Another thing, you talk about people influencing the president in your argument. It sounds like you’re at least skeptical of the voter fraud claims. I gotta ask, are you concerned at all that by your own account the president seems to be very easily swayed by others?


brass_manatee

Trump spent the last 4 years repeating statements like this - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3LJ9sNsXERU Why do you think it’s bad advisors that got Trump to become so deluded about his chances and not just Trump being the same person he’s always been? It’s extremely odd watching a few TS grapple with these things as if they’re new developments. Nothing that’s happened in the last 3 months has been a surprise. Trump has ALWAYS been litigious, he’s ALWAYS had a loose grasp on reality and his place in it. He’s been pandering to the religious right for nearly a decade. Whenever NS laid the evidence out for you (“you” meaning TS as a whole) we were laughed off, attacked, or accused of having TDS. And now here some of you are, coming to grips with nothing new at all.


Suckamanhwewhuuut

Couldnt it simply just be that Trump is no longer, nor was ever fit for the office or the job. It couldnt simply just be that he had no place in politics and has proven time and time again to be both incompetent and abrasive. Isn't is possible that maybe Trump deserves everything coming his way?


Quidfacis_

> Trump is turning into his worst self and showing little of his better angels. What are some examples of Trump's better angels?


welsper59

I truly appreciate this outlook of yours. It was a great read into potentials of the mind of Trump. My question though is whether or not you view this as something that should really have held him back from being POTUS? Specifically, due to how these perspectives summed up equate to dealing with someone with kiddy gloves or that he's mentally/emotionally unstable, that he can't handle being told the truth even if he wanted that. That he would lash out at others as a consequence of him being angry about the truth, something very commonly found in fictional villains and tyrants (probably real ones too).


glossiercub

From the daily beast. Unreliable source. Sorry.


JonTheDoe

Sounds like fake as fuck news.


CaptainNoBoat

Does it sound fake because of the sources (NYT says it was two people briefed on the conversation), because you don't believe that's something Trump would say, or both?


JonTheDoe

Both. He’s obviously spoken *like* that before he was president, no doubt. But there really hasn’t been anything like this during his entire presidency besides his accurate statements when containing the summer riots.


CaptainNoBoat

Do you think he may be more coarse in private conversations versus what he says publicly? Such as the Apprentice tapes?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sablemint

> If Trump was a Democrat, his VP would do whatever he asked, whatever it took to win. Even if it's unconstitutional and unprecedented, the Democrat would do it, because why not? "because why not?" are weasel words if you can't back them up. What makes you think a Democrat would do that?


KarateKicks100

> Trump is rightly frustrated that the GOP doesn't support its people as well as Democrats do. So since the dems will control the Presidency, the Senate, and the House soon, would you agree the the democrats should support their people, and by extension, their candidates as fervently as Trump has here? Should they be free "support" their president (Biden) in any and all ways available to them? As they would be the party in power, they should do their duty to support their people in Senate and House races as fervently and radically as possible to ensure that Biden remain in power? Since Trump did not do a good enough job to ensure that his party has "whatever it takes to win," should Democrats not do what they can to get in front of the opposition for 2024 using the same tactics?


Atilim87

Don't you think that if Trump was a Democrat that he would have been impeached and removed from office at this point? ​ > If Trump was a Democrat, his VP would do whatever he asked, whatever it took to win. Even if it's unconstitutional and unprecedented, the Democrat would do it, because why not? Care to come up with a example of where the party as a whole even did something clearly so illegal that it falls in your described category? Trump tried to overturn a entire election by having his VP just announce that he won the election, do you have something similar done by Biden for example?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Atilim87

Not sure your joking right now? Maybe you should read up on the details on where that operation happens and when (important details) before you start jailing people?


CeramicsSeminar

You mention "Democrats" 10 times in this post, regarding a question about Trump and Pence. If possible, could you answer my question without whataboutism, but rather speak to your thoughts regarding Trump? Do you think that perhaps Pence, as well as Barr, jumped ship because Trump will be facing a criminal prosecution as well? And they don't want to ruin their lives for Trump?


1sagas1

Even then his whataboutism is entirely speculative, talking about what Democrats would do (more like what he thinks they would do) and no example of what any of them have done. Seems rather unhinged, no?


LetsGetRowdyRowdy

> If Trump was a Democrat, his VP would do whatever he asked, whatever it took to win. Even if it's unconstitutional and unprecedented, the Democrat would do it, because why not? > > If that's the case, why didn't the Democrats in 2016 just say "nah, man" when Trump won, and convinced then-VP Biden to declare Hillary president?


Prince_of_Savoy

Are you aware of the fact Biden himself as Vice President ratified Trumps win in 2016? Are you aware Gore ratified Bush's more than controversial win in 2000? Why do you think they would do the opposite of what they have been doing historically?


DogCatSquirrel

Can you give a single real world example of what you are describing about Dems?


Callmecheetahman

You're right in that Trump has not always had the full support of the party behind him but why is that not on Trump? At least partly? I used to be a supporter, I voted for him in 2016 and this is in part what turned me off. What's the point of blaming Paul Ryan for the lack of pushing through key agenda points prior to the midterms? Trump has the biggest bully pulpit in the world and an unprecedented amount of support from his voters. He could've leveraged that to pressure the likes of Paul Ryan and McConnell.


tunaboat25

I think the part that stuck out to me is when you said Democrats would support a Trump Jr. nom in 2028 if they could get something out of it. How do you see Trump’s run in 2016? Did he have a lot of support from republicans at first or did they all...literally fall in line behind him when they realized they would get something out of it?


-6h0st-

You don’t think GOP did support Trump more than it actually was morally acceptable? They supported him for same reason some still support idea of mass election fraud with no proof presented - threat to lose voters and threat of some delusional right extremist to end their lives over feeling cheated, no? Sometimes looking up-close and you lose big picture step back and see where American politics diverted into, how divided nation is, there are reasons behind his 2 x impeaching, maybe, just maybe he wasn’t the right man with right skills to be a president?


AndyGHK

>because why not? In this case? Because it’d be illegal and grossly unconstitutional to do so? >Who’s gonna hold you to task? Congress? Considering they just impeached Trump, holding him to task? Al Franken was ousted for making a sexist joke, lol. Biden literally ratified Trump’s 2016 victory!


YellaRain

> who’s going to hold you to task? *the media*? That’s a good joke. For real? Al Franken immediately comes to mind. You know, a congressional democrat who was held to task by *the media* (during Trump’s term) for something that wasn’t even remarkable next to Trump’s litany of missteps and poor choices. Did you just forget about him?


duffman13jws

> People like to say "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line," but that is absolutely not true anymore. Democrats fall in line, hard. > > Isn't that line supposed to be illustrative of the voters of both parties rather than the elected officials?


MEDICARE_FOR_ALL

>If Trump was a Democrat, his VP would do whatever he asked, whatever it took to win. Even if it's unconstitutional and unprecedented, the Democrat would do it, because why not? Why do you believe a democrat VP would perform an unconstitutional action?


dagnabitsc

Reportedly, allegedly? I’ll need proof of the “pussy” allegation before believing.


CC_Man

Agreed. However, would it surprise you if he said it?


dagnabitsc

It doesn’t matter.


dagnabitsc

It would surprise me if he said it where one could hear it.


xmanref

Why?


Marionberry_Bellini

Wait.. you just said you need proof that he said it to believe it, but then right after you say that if he did it you don’t believe he would have been in ear shot. So you do believe there’s a chance he said it and there’s no evidence, but you wouldn’t believe he would say something like that without evidence? Am I getting this clearly?


dagnabitsc

And you don’t? Did you here him say it? Do you believe he could have? Two different things. It’s possible anyone could say something you didn’t hear, but you never heard him say it did you?


Happygene1

Quite frankly, I don't think him calling Pence a Pussy is such a big deal. He likes that word. I would say Pence would be more upset about having Trump send up his hooligans after having riled them up about what a pussy Pence is. "Hang Mike Pence".... Trumps erroneous belief that Pence had any legal way to ignore the electoral college vote led him to tell his insurrectionists that Pence held the key to trumps reelection and just refused to do it. Oddly, none of trumps followers wondered why the syncophantic Pence would want to screw Trump over. If he had the legal ability to do what trump wanted, he would have. Pence is as ambitious as they come and if it were legally possible to do what was asked of him, he would have. If you don't agree, can you tell me why Pence would have screwed over his own chance to be Vice again?


dagnabitsc

How many times have your heard Trump use the word “pussy”? Simple question, simple answer. Once we get past this, we can continue.


Helpwithapcplease

It is one of his most famous lines isn't it? donald "Grab them by the pussy" trump?


dagnabitsc

Soooo, one time, when he wasn’t even president, that’s it? That’s all you have?


A_Voe

You asked, so now that’s answered please, continue?


SgtMac02

I'm pretty sure it was a reference to the VERY well documented case where he said he liked to "grab 'em by the pussy." Not sure there are other well documented cases of his usage. But it wouldn't shock me to learn that he calls people pussy regularly. It fits with his tough guy/bully image. Would you be surprised to learn that he regularly calls people pussy behind closed doors? Do you think that would somehow not fit with his well established demeanor and temperament?


A_Voe

More than I’ve heard any other politician use it, so continue?


franz4000

Isn't "refusing to believe anything one hasn't personally experienced" what flat-earthers do? What sets you apart from them?


QuantumComputation

Don't you think that Pence would've heard it? Don't you think that now that Pence is angry enough with Trump, this info is likely to find its way to the press?


dagnabitsc

Nope. Maybe he said it, maybe he didn’t, but what can be proved. Confirmation bias will reveal whatever you want, but what is reality?


QuantumComputation

>Nope Are you saying Pence wouldn't have heard it if Trump said it? Are you saying Pence wouldn't leak something like this to get back at Trump? >Confirmation bias will reveal whatever you want You claimed: " I*t would surprise me if he said it where one could hear it*". My questions are simply trying to establish whether you would find it surprising if we discovered that Pence was at the source of the report. What I think of this is irrelevant at this point.


krazedkat

Pence is 61 years old, why the heck is the Daily Beast saying he was "bullied"? If this is what was actually said, it's not bullying in the slightest. I chuckled when I heard it. I liked Pence during the debates, and it kind of saddens me too that their relationship seems to have soured so much, but them's the breaks I guess?


[deleted]

[удалено]


krazedkat

I don't view the VP as "vulnerable" to the President.


Th3_Admiral

Are you implying that adults cannot be bullied? Is there a different term used when talking about adults instead of kids?


krazedkat

No, and I really wish I had worded my whole response quite a bit better. What I mean is that specific quote is not bullying when you're talking to a grown man. Other things could be, sure.


SgtMac02

I just want to note that I appreciate your walking back of the verbiage there. It really seemed like that was your implication. I'm glad you don't feel that way. How's your day?


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


internetornator

More fake news


nomadhunger

Is it not it becoming a cliche to divert any news as fake news when the news does not suit you?


internetornator

No sources. No proof. It’s made up. Just like all the other clickbait “news”.


500547

He's correct and Pence made his choice.


CaspinK

How is calling anyone a pussy the correct way to convince them of your side?


500547

Being correct and being a nice guy don't always overlap.


tiensss

Do you think calling Pence pussy was persuasive?


500547

I wouldn't know.


Zwicker101

Is that a persuasive tactic?


500547

Frequently.


rydaler

You should stop supporting Trump or history will remember you as a pussy. Was that convincing? Or does it embolden you in your position?


500547

Depends on who's saying it and why.


rydaler

I would think it would never work on any adult. I think I can remember peer pressure as a teenager convincing to do something with the do it you pussy line, but as an adult if someone tried that I would lose all respect for them and I would consider their opinion about me is irrelevant. Why would who they are matter?


CeramicsSeminar

What should Pence do?


500547

I don't particularly care at this point but it would be hilarious if he came out as trans and became the first female VP.


CeramicsSeminar

Ha! That would make sense wouldn't it? :)


[deleted]

Is he correct if it doesn't get him what he wants?


500547

Being correct and prevailing doesn't always overlap. Hence the 2020 election so far.


Happygene1

If what Trump was asking for was not legally possible wouldn't calling Pence a pussy for not breaking the law be verbal bullying?


500547

As a general rule I don't engage with wild hypotheticals.


CaspinK

Calling someone a name because they don’t agree with you doesn’t make you ‘not a nice guy,’ it just makes you petty and ineffective at articulating your points. Don’t you agree?


500547

Not at all.


CaspinK

How do you think a boss should respectfully talk to their staff? And if your boss called you a pussy, how would you react?


500547

Depends on the stakes and what the person is doing.


[deleted]

[удалено]


500547

Pence would have been upholding it. He decided not to.


Happygene1

If Pence could have legally done what you suggest then wohooo. Luckily, it is Democrats who are in power once we understood this. From now on the Democrats at the end of their term will just have the democratic vice president announce that the Democrat won, fuck the actual votes. The problem for your side if this is true is that you will never ever get the presidency again. Do you want Harris to be able to throw out the electoral college results and just declare herself president?


500547

If the GOP has rendered the election questionable then by all means, invoke the 12th.


bluehat9

Will there ever be an un-questionable election?


500547

Sure. We've had plenty. You render them no longer questionable by actually answering the questions rather than hiding from them and ramming an illegitimate candidate through.


bluehat9

Do you think that’s a matter of perspective/bias?


500547

That's why debate and interrogation of the issues matters. It helps to unify views of events. As it is Dems bullied their way through this and the courts abdicated their roles as arbiters. As such we're left with two unaccepted "presidents".


bluehat9

Do you think it’s possible that the dems and the courts correctly saw that there was nothing untoward that would have changed the result of the election?


[deleted]

[удалено]


QuantumComputation

On what basis would the 12th be invoked? Are the courts not the arbitrator in deciding whether an election should be viewed as questionable?


500547

Nope.


QuantumComputation

So what is the criteria which determines whether an election has been rendered questionable thereby allowing for the 12th to be invoked?


500547

Massive unresolved questions regarding malfeasance sufficient to exceed the margin of victory.


QuantumComputation

Could the losing party simply stay in power by unilaterally declaring questions to be unresolved even when the courts have stated otherwise?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Salmuth

>He's correct Was he correct because he was right (about the widespread election fraud and the overall election being literally stolen from him) or because not supporting your boss when you disagree with is a pussy move?


500547

Neither of these suppositions quite fit. The election was questionable at best and that's enough for Pence to do his job. We literally have a constitutional provision for just that.


xmanref

What's the check on that provision? Or can any VP change the votes with impunity?


[deleted]

[удалено]


xmanref

So do you not know the checks? Jefferson is dead as far as I know so I'm not sure if I can ask him. How would you stop a vice president from running and just accepting the votes for themself?


500547

Jefferson did just that.


xmanref

In the election of 1800 right? What exactly are you claiming Jefferson did? And do you have an answer to my second question?


500547

We already have mechanisms for removing public officials.


xmanref

What are you claiming that Jefferson did? And also how is that a check on the vice president's ability here. Don't they have discretion to accept whatever votes they want?


Zwicker101

How was the election "questionable at best"?


[deleted]

Do you find it at all concerning that Trump seems to expect complete loyalty while giving none in return?


500547

I might if that were the case.


62smith52

What do you make of reports that Trump isn’t paying Rudy for his work attempting to overturn the election?


500547

Sucks to suck, Rudy.


62smith52

Would you consider that Trump being loyal?


500547

Yes, and consistent.


62smith52

What about refusing to pay and employee is loyal to that employee?


500547

Sounds like a hypothetical to me.


62smith52

And I’m guessing you don’t entertain hypotheticals unless it’s about the left?


Akuuntus

Trump is refusing to pay Rudy Giuliani for his time representing Trump in court. You said that was an instance of Trump being loyal and consistent. Can you explain why this is an instance of Trump being loyal and consistent?


MattTheSmithers

What would you have had Pence do differently? If you were Mike Pence, what would you have done?


500547

Do what the founders did in this scenario. Recognize the significant regularities and attempts by Dems to threaten election officials and their families. Send it to the house to vote on president via the 12thA.


A_serious_poster

Why did trump assign multiple deep state judges, a bunch of turn-coat cabinet members and a pussy vice president? Did he think it'd help the terrorist attack he called for in some way?


MattTheSmithers

1) Do you have proof of Democrats threatening election officials and their families? 2) What is your legal basis for suggesting that VP can unilaterally sustain the objection of a minority, over the vote of the Congress dismissing the objection so as to invoke the 12th? 3) Are you an attorney?


500547

1. Yes, it's on video and was widely reported though not on CNN for some reason... 2. The US Constitution and precedent set by the founders themselves. 3. Nope.


xmanref

How did the founders set that precedent?


500547

By having the president of the Senate unilaterally decide which electors to accept.


xmanref

When was that precedent set? Why would we even have certification of the vote and the process of accepting the vote by congress if it's all down to the VP?


500547

The fact that we're discussing the founders themselves should answer that question. >Why would we even have certification of the vote and the process of accepting the vote by congress if it's all down to the VP? We don't have that. We have the president of the Senate counting votes.


xmanref

>The fact that we're discussing the founders themselves should answer that question. It doesn't though. Did they do this? Go against the votes due to unproven allegations? >We don't have that. We have the president of the Senate counting votes. So congress doesn't have a role in accepting the votes? Why would we have rules in place for some electors to be thrown out, rules that were used on 1/6? You think the VP can overrule Congress on this?


MattTheSmithers

In regard to point 3, I am. Would you surprised if I told you your understanding of point 2 is factually and legally incorrect and there is not a single credible legal authority in the country who would ascribe to it? As to point 1, can you please provide these reports?


500547

Not really, you'd just be mistaken and that's not uncommon.


Akuuntus

Can you show some of these videos, or some of the reports given on them? Can you point me to where exactly in the Constitution it says that the President of the Senate has the sole unilateral authority to decide which electors are accepted?


[deleted]

this is not ok but I don't blame Trump for saying that, almost everyone in the republican party turned against him, even his own VP and cabinet members. All of a sudden his supporters in congress and the senate turned their backs to him and I don't understand why


upgrayedd69

You don't think it has anything to do with the fact we have exhausted all legal means to certify the election as legitimate but Trump won't accept any result that doesn't show him winning?


[deleted]

i'm saying that that is why, but what I'm saying is that they turned against him in his impeachment also, most of them already didn't agree with him but the rest of them turned their backs on him in the impeachment


upgrayedd69

They turned their backs on him over impeachment because they were the ones in the line of fire during the shit at the Capitol. Trump has shown he doesn't care about the law or the constitution the way he has talked about contesting the election, and his rhetoric directly led to Trump flag waving protestors breaking windows and searching out "traitors" in the Capitol. Trump has a pretty strong grip on a non insignificant amount of his supporters to the point they trust him above anyone and anything. It's not really surprising to me they have turned on him?


nomadhunger

Turned on him or rather telling the truth on his face? If a man can't tolerate the truth, do you call it turning on him? Then every criminal in this world will think that the judges, the police officers, and the jury turned on him.


Mister-Seer

He is somewhat right. Even if there was tampering or not, there was some majorly suspicious activity that lead to investigations. You either bitch-out and take the loss on a fucked election... or you fight it to the end. Even if it means you lose anyways. History will remember how hard of a fight that was.


CaptainNoBoat

>History will remember how hard of a fight that was. What was hard about the fight? Trump's legal team lost 60+ lawsuits, got cases tossed out by SCOTUS. Trump's AG said there was no widespread fraud, and Trump's own administration called it the "most secure election in history." Trying to get Pence to overturn the election was completely beyond his power, as Pence told Trump many times. I really doubt history books will put it in much of a positive light. I think it will come off as desperate and excessive to anyone reading about this in the future.


Mister-Seer

I mean you’re making an aiding piece in the recording, no?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Lawyerstout847

How did you reconcile his personality with the policies he espouses to?


ballerrr123

Seeing as this is #1 and #2 is about how Trump told his aids not to pay Rudy after Rudy made it clear he works for free id say more then likely Trump never said that.


drunkhighfives

But didn't Giuliani ask for [$20,000 a day?](https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/latest-updates-biden-trump-election-2020/card/833dRy8NX7D2GlYjFBKI)


ballerrr123

Uhhh no... did you even read that article?


drunkhighfives

I did. What do you think I missed?