When Pence was sheltering in a secure location during the Capitol attack, the Secret Service advised Pence and his aides to get into vehicles to evacuate. Pence refused.
Pence told the head of his security detail “Tim, I know you, I trust you, but you’re not the one behind the wheel”
The fact that that happened in DC is just insane
IFYP
Nicholas Luna, a former Trump assistant, added in his own testimony that “I remember the word ‘wimp.’ I remember he said, ‘You are a wimp. You’ll be a wimp.”
From the man who took shelter from BLM protesters on the street in a WH bunker.
No it isn’t. There is this narrative that has been promoted that it is one’s patriotic duty to take violent action to a government that is perceived a tyranical. In this case the intent was to prevent the assumption of power by a government some felt was illegitimate. We were fortunate that it didn’t become bloodier than it was.
But the VPOTUS being afraid to leave the Capitol building because he’s not sure he can trust the driver of his convoy to a safe place? That’s next level developing nation political unrest type of thing.
I think you’re both right. Yes, lots of gun owners think they are going to use those guns to oppose an authoritarian gov’t.
Also, it’s insane that so many Americans would believe that there was such massive fraud in the 2020 election that the incoming gov’t was tyrannical.
The greatest risk of an tyrannical government in the US right now comes from a wannabe dictator who is supported by the gun owners who say they have their guns to oppose tyrannical governments.
Talk about an upside down world.
Also seems like Pence had good reason to fear his own President in addition to the mob
I didn’t read Pence’s refusal to be evacuated in that way.
I disagree with many (most?) of his stances, and I don’t like the guy…but I don’t see Pence as wacko, the way may folks in the prior administration were.
If he said "Tim, I know you, I trust you, but you’re not the one behind the wheel”, hard to read that without thinking he might not trust everyone on the detail.
Agree with the above completely.
I parsed the “behind the wheel” comment as, “I’m the person in charge, not you.”
In other words “I respect your opinion, but it’s my decision to make, not yours.”
I suppose that’s a reasonable interpretation. Since the context was about getting into the vehicles and evacuating, I took “behind the wheel” literally.
Uh, based on watching the hearing yesterday, I understood the exchange similar to MS. Pence didn’t want to leave because of the optics of fleeing. The head of his detail told him that they wouldn’t leave without his permission just because he got in the car. Pence was saying that he trusted the head of his detail to follow through on that, but not others.
This was presented as being about Pence’s determination not to be whisked away to safety, not fear of a hit…
Whom I took to be a different individual than the security head.
Optics and desire to accomplish the certification in a timely manner from what I read.
As far as the VP’s safety, his Chief of Staff DID feel the need to contact the secret service to let them know that there may be a very public blow up and that the VP may be in physical danger. Completely separate from the “behind the wheel” thing though.
Yes, I agree.
As an aside, I’ve watched all 3 of the hearings and they’ve been much more interesting than I expected. There has been plenty of new info (for me anyway) and they’ve organized pieces of info that I already knew in such a way as to make it more meaningful. It’s also good to hear it in each person’s own words.
On one hand, the bad actors were even worse than I realized, but on the other hand, the examples of people doing the right thing (many of them conservatives) and not cowing to pressure are good to remember as well. Not everyone has minimized the event over time.
Pence acted honourably during 1/6. My problem with Pence was his social conservatism but that is not what we are assessing him on here.
With the former, I think his concern was also whether the driver would refuse to bring him back citing safety concerns that might have been abated. Then Grassley, as pro tem, could do the job that Pence refused, which was alluded to in the 7 point plan. It’s unclear (publicly for now) if Grassley had agreed to Eastman’s plan.
Has Grassley ever explained why he said on 1/5 that Pence wasn’t expected to be there to preside over the electoral college results?