If they weren't coming for Trump, Pence wouldn't likely get subpoenaed

[bigtree]

Last edited Fri Feb 10, 2023, 02:04 AM - Edit history (9)

...it's becoming hard, if not impossible to imagine DOJ won't indict Trump.

What I think is that Pence and O'Brien represent holdouts, entrenched enough behind their claims of privilege regarding their conversations and communications with then-Pres. Trump that nothing remains except to wrench everything they can from the two under oath and even charge them if DOJ has evidence either knows more than they're telling.

It has the scent of an end game. No self-respecting, honorable AG would drag the VP like this, unless he's already a puzzle piece in their prosecution.

Pence likely knew what Trump had planned, so the question to him is, 'what did he know, and when did he know it?' If he had prior knowledge and didn't tell anyone, he'd be complicit.

What's Pence hiding, and why does the SC have to subpoena it out of him?

I saw two attorneys musing that Pence might have asked for the subpoena, himself, as some sort of cover, or out of some principle. For the life of me, I can't understand this coddling of someone who is evidently obstructing the investigation. Pence had to be asked by Trump to participate in his fake elector scheme. He obviously refused, but let it unfold without telling anyone.

Subpoenas aren't invitations to a tete-a-tete. Pence is going before the Grand Jury as a primary witness to insurrection, as close to Trump as anyone in that administration; privy to more than he's telling, and clueless about what Jack Smith already knows. This is a big deal.

Pence had this subpoena coming, probably for refusing to say under oath what he'd written in his book, and what he wrote in the WSJ.

Me, I'd guess any senior WH indictments for the Jan. 6 insurrection would need to wait for the end of the Proud Boys trial, especially Enrique Tarrio who has ties to Roger Stone. As emptywheel pointed out, even though DOJ used Trump's 'Stand-Back-And-Stand-By' signaling in Oath Keeper's convictions, no mention has been made of any of that in the Proud Boys prosecution.

One reason she suggested, it may be to avoid double-jeopardy as they bring Tarrio up on other charges.

'Other charges,' like conspiracy with the Trump WH. That would square with coming indictments which would effectively sort out for good who is defendant or witnesses in the insurrectionist cabal.

Joyce Alene @JoyceWhiteVance
...Pence does feel like a late in the game witness. Someone you want to talk to you after you have all of the other testimony, and when you're just about ready to make a decision.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

emptywheel @emptywheel 5h
Let me suggest another thing to the journalists who are BREAKING NEWS JACK SMITH SAYS YOU WENT TO WSJ...

It is *possible* that Pence met with Smith, and Smith required he appear before the GJ, not least bc his operative story sounds like bullshit.

[Grasswire2]

1. Why doesn't anyone talk to Dan Quayle?

He's a material witness to Pence's state ot mind at that time.

[lindysalsagal]

2. Right. Whitie's too boring to be called in for his own actions.

Gotta be the best witness to testify intent to initiate and head the insurrection.

[bigtree]

3. yep, he's the linchpin of the fake electors scheme

...and knows more about what Trump said to him than he's revealed publicly.

[bigtree]

4. .