Trump Indictment Pence
Vice President Mike Pence speaks alongside President Donald Trump at the White House in Washington on March 22, 2020. Photo: AP file
world

Pence, Trump attorney clash over what Trump told his VP ahead of Jan 6, 2021

43 Comments
By DAVID KLEPPER

Donald Trump's defense attorney says the former president never asked Mike Pence to overturn the will of the voters in the 2020 election, but only wanted the former vice president to “pause” the certification of votes to allow states to investigate his claims of election fraud. Those baseless claims had already been rejected by numerous courts.

Speaking on several Sunday morning news shows, Trump attorney John Lauro said Trump was within his First Amendment rights when he petitioned Pence to delay the certification on Jan. 6, 2021.

“The ultimate ask of Vice President Pence was to pause the counts and allow the states to weigh in,” Lauro said on CBS' “Face the Nation.” He added that Trump was convinced there were irregularities in the election that needed to be investigated by state authorities before the election could be certified.

Pence, who like Trump is seeking the Republican nomination for president in 2024, flatly rejected that account during an interview Sunday, saying Trump seemed “convinced” as early as December that Pence had the right to reject or return votes and that on Jan. 5, Trump's attorneys told him “'We want you to reject votes outright."

“They were asking me to overturn the election. I had no right to overturn the election,” Pence said on CNN's "State of the Union."

Pence's role in certifying Joe Biden's win over Trump in the 2020 election makes him a central figure in the prosecution against Trump on charges that he sought to overturn the will of the voters and remain in office even after the courts had roundly rejected his claims of electoral fraud. Federal and state election officials and Trump's own attorney general also had said there were was no credible evidence the election was tainted.

Last week's indictment chronicles how Trump and his allies, in what special counsel Jack Smith described as an attack on a “bedrock function of the U.S. government,” repeatedly lied about the results in the two months after he lost the election and pressured Pence and state election officials to take action to help him cling to power. Those efforts culminated on Jan. 6, 2021, when Trump supporters violently stormed the Capitol in an effort to stop the certification.

Trump pleaded not guilty to those charges. Separately, he also faces charges that he falsified business records relating to hush money payments to a porn actor in New York and improperly kept classified documents at his Palm Beach, Florida, resort and obstructed an investigation into their handling.

Speaking on ABC's “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” Lauro said Pence's testimony will show Trump believed the election was rigged and that he was listening to the advice of his attorneys when he sought to delay the certification. Pence, who appeared before the grand jury that indicted Trump, said he will comply with the law if asked to testify.

“I cannot wait until I have the opportunity to cross examine Mr. Pence,” Lauro said. “He will completely eliminate any doubt that President Trump firmly believed that the election irregularities had led to an inappropriate result.”

The 45-page indictment details how people close to Trump repeatedly told him he had lost and that there was no truth to his claims of fraud. In one encounter days before the riot, Trump told Pence he was “too honest” after the vice president said he didn’t have the authority to reject electoral votes, the indictment says.

Former allies of Trump have said Trump knew he lost but spread false claims about fraud anyway. After he failed to convince state officials to illegally swing the election, Trump and his allies recruited fake electors in swing states to sign certificates falsely stating Trump had prevailed.

“He knew well that he had lost the election,” Trump’s former Attorney General Bill Barr told CNN last week.

Lauro said Trump's defense team will seek to move the case from Washington because it wants a more diverse jury. He said he would support televising the trial, and dismissed speculation that it could wrap up before the 2024 election.

“In 40 years of practicing law, on a case of this magnitude, I’ve not known a single case to go to trial before two to three years,” Lauro said on CBS' “Face the Nation.”

Responding to questions about whether Trump can get a fair trial in the nation's capital, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a former federal prosecutor and a Republican, said he can.

“Yes, I believe jurors can be fair. I believe in the American people,” Christie said Sunday on CNN.

A slew of people charged in the Jan. 6 riot have tried to get their trials moved out of Washington. Yet judges have rejected those motions in every case, saying fair jurors can be found with proper questioning.

Trump's legal team has until 5 p.m. Monday to respond to the prosecution's request for a protective order limiting Trump's ability to publicly disclose information about the case. The decision is up to U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan.

Protective orders are common in criminal cases, but prosecutors said it’s “particularly important in this case” because Trump has posted on social media about “witnesses, judges, attorneys, and others associated with legal matters pending against him.”

Prosecutors pointed specifically to a post on Trump’s Truth Social platform from Friday in which Trump wrote, in all capital letters, “If you go after me, I’m coming after you!”

© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.


43 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

“I cannot wait until I have the opportunity to cross examine Mr. Pence,” Lauro said. “He will completely eliminate any doubt that President Trump firmly believed that the election irregularities had led to an inappropriate result.”

Interesting. The case, however, doesn't rely on this lie. If you think someone defrauded you, it's still a crime to steal from them.

And that's what Trump attempted to do: steal the election.

Of course, nobody believes that he didn't know that he lost. It's just not necessary to prove it.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

but only wanted the former vice president to “pause” the certification of votes to allow states to investigate his claims of election fraud. 

This is a public admission of a crime by an agent of defendant Trump and it is admissible in court.

So say multiple former federal prosecutors and criminal defense analysts, so I’ll take their word over that of the goobers on Faux

As for discrepancies in interpretation, Pence is on the record under oath and will be testifying at the trial.

Defendant Trump? Will he man up and get on the stand? Not likely.

The jury will make its determination of whose “claim” is more credible. I’m betting on milk-toast Mike coming off looking more truthful, “too honest” to use Defendant Don’s own words, than stupid Voldemort.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Interesting. The case, however, doesn't rely on this lie. If you think someone defrauded you, it's still a crime to steal from them.

If you walk into a bank thinking you have $5000 in that bank, and they tell you you don't, but you're you do, it does not justify robbing that bank.

Trump tried to rob the bank.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

“In 40 years of practicing law, on a case of this magnitude, I’ve not known a single case to go to trial before two to three years,” Lauro said on CBS' “Face the Nation.”

What a hopeless liar. The case is purposely small!

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Pretty lame that the loud screams of ‘stop the steal’ have diminished into a whiny little ‘I didn’t say that’ whimper.

At least have some integrity on your way down.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

All of these chaps are cads and bounders of the highest order. If you elect people like Trump and have Pence a dangerous religious maniac as VP what can you expect. Now there is Bidet with an awful son who indulges in vile and immoral behaviour and takes many drugs and daddy gets him off the hook. It defies belief what has happened to the world doesn’t it.

-19 ( +0 / -19 )

falseflagsteve

Now there is Bidet with an awful son who indulges in vile and immoral behaviour and takes many drugs and daddy gets him off the hook.

How is this relevant? It's not even correct.

It defies belief what has happened to the world doesn’t it.

No.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Bidet

Well, I suppose he has had to clean up the poo left behind by the previous president.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Prosecutors pointed specifically to a post on Trump’s Truth Social platform from Friday in which Trump wrote, in all capital letters, “If you go after me, I’m coming after you!”

Trump seems to be fixed into making his lawyers' job as difficult as possible.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

He said he would support televising the trial, and dismissed speculation that it could wrap up before the 2024 election

Imagine this happening and with Trump in the Oval Office.

Guaranteed he would just go full dictator, as his conservative corporate backers are looking forward to.

https://prospect.org/politics/2023-07-18-donald-trump-plotting-make-himself-dictator/

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Lauro said Trump's defense team will seek to move the case from Washington because it wants a more diverse jury. He said he would support televising the trial, and dismissed speculation that it could wrap up before the 2024 election.

Actually, this trial could go ahead before the others, say, around the start of next year, and be done in a couple of months. Jack Smith has said that he will afford Trump a speedy trial, and that's what he will get.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

I will believe Pence before Trump who is a known serial liar.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

It is funny to see how the fat-right crowd on JT who spent four years saying, “Mike Pence is wonderful! Even if Trump is removed from office, President Pence would be even better! All the Trumpism, no baggage!” have turned on him he second he defied heir Lord and master. Same with Burr. Same with Bolton. Same with Cohen.

Sad.

15 ( +15 / -0 )

William Barr calls Trump guilty and unfit for office.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

President Trump firmly believed that the election irregularities had led to an inappropriate result.”

Trump couldn’t stand facing the truth of his loss, and sought the counsel and action of those who would overturn the result so that he could get his way. What a loser.

Always playing the victim.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

John Bolton said Trump is unfit for office.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

wallace

Isnt Mr Bolton also a rather shady chap?

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

Isnt Mr Bolton also a rather shady chap?

Shady knows shady, like respectable knows respectable. It's why you can trust a shady person when they tell you someone is shady, but can't trust a shady person when they tell you someone is trustworthy. But you can trust a trustworthy person who tells you someone is trustworthy.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Stranger

Please read up on Mr Bolton and his fiendish behaviour especially a couple of decades ago, almost as bad as Trudeau and Jimmy Savile.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

ffs

John Bolton is a hawk.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Please read up on Mr Bolton and his fiendish behaviour especially a couple of decades ago, almost as bad as Trudeau and Jimmy Savile.

Proves my point, doesn't it:

It's why you can trust a shady person when they tell you someone is shady

4 ( +6 / -2 )

falseflagsteve

Stranger

Please read up on Mr Bolton and his fiendish behaviour especially a couple of decades ago, almost as bad as Trudeau and Jimmy Savile.

A very queer comparison you see.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Supposed “Crime”: Trump “knew” that he lost the election! But said he didn’t.

proof: random untrustworthy people around him told him he lost!

doesnt work that way.

Joe knew the laptop was real and Joe knew Hunter got paid by CCP. People around him told him it was true. But he said that was false. Joe “knew” he attended meetings he claimed he didn’t.

When’s his trial?

-15 ( +0 / -15 )

Wallace

He he, good one old chap, I like your style.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

The article is not about Biden or Hunter.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Pence's testimony will show Trump believed the election was rigged and that he was listening to the advice of his attorneys when he sought to delay the certification. 

Proven by those same attorneys being supposed “co conspirators” in the case. So he was obviously told this by them.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Blacklabel

Supposed “Crime”: Trump “knew” that he lost the election! But said he didn’t.

proof: random untrustworthy people around him told him he lost!

doesnt work that way.

The case isn't about whether he believed that he had lost. It's about conspiring to steal the election that Biden had won. His mental state is irrelevant.

Joe knew the laptop was real and Joe knew Hunter got paid by CCP. People around him told him it was true. But he said that was false. Joe “knew” he attended meetings he claimed he didn’t.

When’s his trial?

Remind me what crimes Joe has committed?

11 ( +11 / -0 )

you have every right to start an armed insurrection on that bank.

yet no charges filed related to insurrection whatsoever. No sedition either? Why not?

It’s that he supposedly “lied” because he “knew” he lost. If it were a lie, free speech covers that too.

he doesn’t “know” he lost. That much is obvious based on the last few years of rigged election talk. 70% of Republicans agree.

more like he went to the bank, claimed he had money and when a bank worker said he didn’t he is just supposed to say ok and leave? rather than asking his lawyers to look into what happened?!

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

Remind me what crimes Joe has committed?

I don’t have all morning to type those out.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

Amazing how bad Trump is at picking lawyers....

He picks Giuliani who besides admitting three times (twice under oath) that "we have no evidence of fraud", when asked in an interview if he (and Trump) used military aid to squeeze Zelensky to investigate Hunter said "of course I did"....

He picks Evan Corcoran who takes copious notes and was found to have conspired with Trump in his classified steal and stash and all those notes are now in the hands of Jack Smith...

He now picks this guy John Lauro who goes on multiple TV shows and openly lies about Trump "suggesting a pause" when Pence, Meadows, Giuliani, Kushner, Corcoran's notes, and other "turncoats" have all said Trump demanded Pence throw out the electors and let the states replace them with their fake lists....

Besides being incompetent, they also have in common they're all being paid by money sent by the MAGA-faithful to Trump campaign PAC, then siphoned off to pay his lawyers...

MAGA-world is a cesspool of kooks, crooks, and "rats"....all now turning on one another...

The result? Bye-Don, Hello Leavenworth...

9 ( +9 / -0 )

proof: random untrustworthy people around him told him he lost!

Random? Untrustworthy?

Mike Pence, senior Justice Department leaders including the AG who was a stalwart Trump defender,, Director or National Intelligence, Department of Homeland Security, senior White House attorneys, senior Trump campaign staff, state legislators and officials, state and federal courts—all told Trump he lost. If he couldn’t trust their counsel, who could he trust? Almost all of these people were Republicans and most were working for him.

doesnt work that way.

Alright, how does it work?

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Trump submitted many tens of court cases claiming election fraud and every one was rejected.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

he doesn’t “know” he lost. That much is obvious based on the last few years of rigged election talk. 70% of Republicans agree.

Yes! And same as if you robbed a bank you mistakenly thought had money of yours, 70% of us Republicans agree you should be allowed to rob that bank for the money you think they have.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

The case isn't about whether he believed that he had lost.

Trump sought to ‘exploit the violence and chaos’ of Jan. 6 with lies, indictment says”

so yeah it actually is. As he wasn’t charged with anything directly related to Jan 6 such as the supposed insurrection or sedition all of you been screaming about for 2.5 years.

“Exclusive: Barr obliterates Trump’s defense: ‘He knew well that he had lost the election’”

why is this his “defense” then? The indictment is that he lied about knowing he lost and asked Mike pence to do what he could to look into it.

Which Mike lied and said he would but didn’t.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

he doesn’t “know” he lost. That much is obvious based on the last few years of rigged election talk. 70% of Republicans agree.

He’s a lifelong con artist and there are a lot of gullible people in America, especially those who consume right wing disinformation. Doesn’t hold up in a court of law.

Fact is the election wasn’t rigged. Trump lost and in private admitted so.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Blacklabel

yet no charges filed related to insurrection whatsoever. No sedition either? Why not?

They'll come later, maybe.

It’s that he supposedly “lied” because he “knew” he lost. If it were a lie, free speech covers that too.

And explicitly in the indictment, it says that he has the right to lie about the election. That isn't even in dispute.

he doesn’t “know” he lost. That much is obvious based on the last few years of rigged election talk.

How do you know Trump's state of mind?

70% of Republicans agree.

The are a gullible lot.

more like he went to the bank, claimed he had money and when a bank worker said he didn’t he is just supposed to say ok and leave? rather than asking his lawyers to look into what happened?!

Sure. And Trump asked his lawyers what happened and they said, time to face up to the fact that you are a loser.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Yes! And same as if you robbed a bank you mistakenly thought had money of yours, 70% of us Republicans agree you should be allowed to rob that bank for the money you think they have.

In your dumb analogy, there is no bank robbery charge in this indictment. It’s simply that he “lied” after he supposedly “knew” he lost.

he didn’t and still doesn’t “know” that.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Sure. And Trump asked his lawyers what happened and they said, time to face up to the fact that you are a loser.

did they? Then why are they “co-conspirators” in the indictment?

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

Blacklabel

The case isn't about whether he believed that he had lost.

Trump sought to ‘exploit the violence and chaos’ of Jan. 6 with lies, indictment says”

so yeah it actually is.

Sure, but proving his state of mind isn't actually required, which is the point. Although, I'm sure Jack Smith has that covered too.

As he wasn’t charged with anything directly related to Jan 6 such as the supposed insurrection or sedition all of you been screaming about for 2.5 years.

Who's been screaming? I'm actually more concerned with the conspiracy to steal the election. And by the way, it was actually predicted before the election, that if he lost, fake electors may be a way that he would do it.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Who's been screaming? I'm actually more concerned with the conspiracy to steal the election. And by the way, it was actually predicted before the election, that if he lost, fake electors may be a way that he would do it.

How dare you guys focus on the big picture of his overall intent to defraud the government instead of focusing on the one little bit of the whole thing about starting the insurrection? You libs are so mean to Trump. He's the most persecuted man since Jesus.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Blacklabel

Sure. And Trump asked his lawyers what happened and they said, time to face up to the fact that you are a loser.

did they? Then why are they “co-conspirators” in the indictment?

Because, they said, 'Well you lost, but don't worry, we can steal the election back for you with these fake electors and coercing Mike Pence".

5 ( +6 / -1 )

So why is one of the charges related to civil war era people who wear disguises on the highway to intimidate black people to not vote?

seems so many things they didn’t charge that the left claims happened but they charged this instead?

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

Blacklabel

Yes! And same as if you robbed a bank you mistakenly thought had money of yours, 70% of us Republicans agree you should be allowed to rob that bank for the money you think they have.

In your dumb analogy, there is no bank robbery charge in this indictment. It’s simply that he “lied” after he supposedly “knew” he lost.

Sure there is. Conspiracy to fraud. You know: the fake electors to overturn the election, using the DOJ for sham election crime investigations, pressuring Pence not to certify the election. Have you read the indictment?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites