Trump's lawyers missed a really big opportunity. I think there's a reason they did.

Pundits are making a REALLY BIG DEAL over Trump's tweet on 1/6 regarding Pence, and the timing of it, and what it says about Trump.

I think they missed the boat entirely. I could be wrong.

1/16
Background (please read): The Capitol was assaulted. Anti-American invaders rampaged the halls searching for Senators and Congresspeople and the Vice President, at Trump's direction. At about 2:15 pm, Trump tried to call Senator Tuberville. (WHY HIM? No one has asked that.)

2/16
But Trump accidentally called Sen. Mike Lee instead. Lee handed the phone to Tuberville. At that moment, the Secret Service had hustled Pence out of the Senate chamber, wafting him off to a secure location, because the room was about to be overrun.

Pay attention here.

3/16
Tuberville told Trump, "Mr. President, they just took the vice president out, I’ve got to go," and he hung up.

So Trump knew at that moment what was happening.

Or did he?

Trump reacted about ten minutes later.

4/16

thehill.com/homenews/senat…
It often took Trump ten minutes or so to compose a tweet. At 2:24, this is what Trump tweeted (see below).

The House Managers took this to mean Trump is badmouthing Pence, because he thinks Pence is in danger and wants the seditionists to hunt him.

I think it's worse.

5/16
Trump's TV lawyers deny Trump made the call, deny he talked to Tuberville, and deny Trump knew Pence was in danger. In theory, they should know what Trump was doing and thinking, because they're his damn lawyers and they should have talked to him about it.

6/16
Trump's TV lawyers had the perfect opportunity here to defend Trump. They already made the argument that anything Trump said in public is protected by the First Amendment, and can't be taken as encouraging violence.

They COULD have admitted Trump talked to Tuberville.

7/16
Remember, Tuberville said, "they just took the vice president out," meaning, the Secret Service hustled him out of the Senate Chamber.

Trump's TV lawyers COULD have argued that Trump thought this meant Pence was now SAFE, having been moved to a secure location.

8/16
This would mean Trump's tweet ten minutes later--convinced Pence was safe--was simply a Constitutionally-protected bit of complaint about how Trump viewed Pence's willingness to count Electoral Votes, rather than a dark threat on Pence's life.

That's defensible, if scummy.

9/16
But no. Trump's TV lawyers denied that Trump knew anything AT ALL about the call Trump made to Tuberville. They seemed desperate to convince us Trump HAD NO IDEA PENCE HAD =EVER= BEEN IN DANGER.

Why?

Here's a theory.

10/16
Maybe Trump thought Pence was already dead, and was trying to give the MAGAts assaulting the Capitol additional encouragement to kill others.

Think about what Tuberville told Trump.

"Mr. President, they just took the vice president out, I’ve got to go."

11/16
Trump thinks like a mob boss.

What does it mean to a mobster to "take" someone "out"?

And who are "they" who "took" Pence "out"?

Maybe Trump thought the invading paramilitary mob he'd sent to the Capitol had assassinated Pence.

Tuberville said he himself had to go.

12/16
Tuberville was terrified and fleeing for his life. Trump knew that, too.

Trump's tweet takes on a darker meaning than merely sending his vicious mob after the Vice President.

Perhaps this is Trump EXCUSING the assassination and encouraging his militia to keep killing.

13/16
The logical tactic for Trump's TV lawyers to take would have been to argue that Sure, Trump knew Pence was in danger! But he thought the Secret Service had "taken him out" of danger, so it was safe to criticize Pence, because the mob couldn't get to him any more.

14/16
But Trump's TV lawyers didn't think of that, because they couldn't admit Trump knew Pence was in danger--because perhaps they know Trump thought Pence was already dead at that time.

What he did was worse than send the mob after Pence.

What Trump THOUGHT he was doing...

15/16
... was celebrating the Vice President's assassination, and encouraging the killers to continue their bloody rampage through the Capitol.

I could be wrong. This is mere speculation. But I can't otherwise imagine why Trump's TV lawyers didn't turn this to their advantage.

16/16

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with DCPetterson

DCPetterson Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @dcpetterson

12 Feb
Schoen is pretending courtroom "due process" must be followed--after meeting with some of the jurors to plan strategy last night.
Schoen accuses Democrats of editing videos and taking comments out of contexts, after showing edited videos of Democrats and taking their comments out of context. I guess he wanted us to know he knows what he's talking about.
Schoen is showing longer clips of Trump speeches. The additional footage doesn't help Trump's case, unless you're a racist insurrectionist.
Read 36 tweets
12 Feb
I was right. "Lawyer" starts out with name-calling and an insistence that trial is "unconstitutional". He's saying Trump's 1/6 speech was rather bland, and pretending that was the only thing the House managers talked about, and the managers were "slanderous."

Bilious bullshit.
"Lawyer" is arguing that since there were objections raised by Democrats to some of the vote counts in 2016, that means Trump didn't engage in sedition.

I'm not sure how that logic works.
Now they're running a Trump campaign commercial.
Read 15 tweets
11 Feb
Trump's "lawyers" have said they only need one day (tomorrow) to defend Trump.

My guesses for what they'll do:

Distract, lie, distort, and deflect.

1/11
First, they will spend lots of time arguing that the trial is unconstitutional since Trump is no longer in office--even though the Senate has already voted on that and settled that question. Trump's lawyers will ignore that vote, and make the argument anyway.

2/11
Second, they will insist nothing Trump said on 1/6 was any worse than various random statement by random Democrats (elected, unelected, or retired) and civil rights activists over the years. They'll also concentrate on Trump's one reference to "peaceful" protest.

3/11
Read 11 tweets
7 Feb
You're pretending @POTUS will make money from this. You're demanding President Biden "donate every cent to charity" for a book he didn't write, one that was contracted two years before his inauguration.

That's ridiculous, @waltshaub. Do better! Apologize and sit the fuck down.
And your question--"Would anyone be publishing this book if he wasn't the president's son?"--obviously yes. The contract was signed in 2019, long before Joe Biden became president. So shove your insane innuendo up whatever orifice of yours your head is in.
And what the fuck do you mean to imply by saying Joe "supports" the publication of this book? Are you hinting at some kind of dark influence? Spell out your insane conspiracy theory, you cowardly muckweasel.
Read 6 tweets
7 Feb
I think it is significant to consider how Speaker Pelosi reacted after the 1/6 Insurrection.

We know the insurrectionists targeted her specifically. Had they found her, we know they would have assassinated her. That's not even a question.

1/5
But after the event, Speaker Pelosi didn't make a point of the the danger to herself. She repeatedly told the story of her staff, cowering in terror under a table in a conference room as the insurrectionists battered on the locked door.

2/5
Speaker Pelosi didn't make this about herself. She made it about everyone else who was threatened. She made it about the threat to America. She made it about the assault on the Capitol, the Cathedral of Democracy.

3/5
Read 6 tweets
7 Feb
If Trump or his lawyers admit he lost the election, that's a confession his Jan 6 speech was a lie, and he was intentionally inciting insurrection.

If they don't admit he lost, as LB says here, the Republican "defense" becomes moot.
I suspect what Trump and his lawyers will try to argue is that he won the election, but had it stolen from him, and Biden was inaugurated illegally--thus making Trump no longer president now, so he can't be tried (even though he was impeached before the inauguration). However....
.... arguing this way perpetuates the Big Lie that Trump told on Jan 6 (actually, that he insisted upon every day starting Nov 3). This argument is a continuation of the incitement to insurrection for which Trump was impeached in the first place.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!