Why wasn't Mike Pence on the stage last night?

[goaded]

Updates

1 y

Trump picked J. D. Vance to be his vice president because Vance has publicly said he’d do what Mike Pence refused to do — overturn democracy to place America under MAGA control.

Updates

1 y

https://youtu.be/NvIsNuD2xtM

[DryGermanGuy]

Certainly Mike Pence doesn't appreciate the Trump/MAGA humor, right? As the "Hang Mike Pence" chants were this sophisticated humor that he and we just don't understand, right?

[goaded]

"Your VP has been rushed to a secure location by the secret service" - Trump: "So what?"

[OddBeMe]

Because Trump tried to kill him

[AI Opinion]

Mike Pence did not appear on stage last night due to personal reasons or political strategy, depending on the context. In some cases, it may be due to scheduling conflicts, or he might have chosen not to attend specific events. In political scenarios, staying off stage might be a strategic move aligned with broader campaign considerations. If more context is available, the specific reason can be clearer.

[goaded]

LMAO! It's because Trump didn't care if he was lynched for not declaring him god emperor against the will of the people!

[Jamie05rhs]

Because one person can only take so much of Donald Trump. And 4 years was enough for Mike.

[goaded]

40 out of 44 Trump cabinet members, too. (At least one of the four probably only supports Trump still because they're co-conspiritors in a criminal trial.)

[NathanDavis]

Momma didn't approve...

wait... didn't they try to crucify him that other time they wanted him on stage?

[msc545]

I'm sure Pence was not asked to be there and would have declined if he was.

[Juxtapose]

Trump made some bad picks during his first term but his VP pick now is so much better.

[goaded]

Yeah, this one's prepared to break the law for him.

[Juxtapose]

More socialist gaslighting.

[goaded]

No, Vance explicitly said he would have stolen the presidency for Trump.

[Juxtapose]

HAHAHAHA 🤣

You gaslighters are something else.

[Friendlybro79]

@Juxtapose Did you not catch JD Vance saying o
If he has to lie to the public (about pets being eaten by haitians in OH) he will? He's so much dumber than Pence is what you meant to say. I also love how everyone can dismiss how badly Vance despises Trump and what he has said about him in the past. He just wants power.

I can't wait to hear your excuse how didn't mean it or that's not what he meant bs.

[Juxtapose]

Ask him what he meant yourself. I don't really care what socialist gaslighters think. Okay, worst case scenario, he misspoke and said something stupid. Cool.

Worst case for Harris? She implements price controls and we have bread lines.

Yeah, I will take Vance any day even if he becomes some weird otherkin and dresses up as a furry elk.

[Friendlybro79]

Or he actually meant it. Republicans are constantly not able to be taken at their word then I guess. Anytime they say what they mean and it's horrible it's just easy to say they doesn't mean it. Who's gaslighting now? And worse case for Trump is that the courts that found him liable of rape is true, courts found him guilty on 30+ felony counts, tried to overturn an election... etc. I can't type it all out it's too much. You're brainwashed brother. But hey you do you while the rest of the grown ups deal with it. So sick of lies about them being socialist, communist, Marxists, and all the ists at the same time when your stupid orange god constantly says ridiculous hateful regurgitated rhetoric from past authoritarians. You keep calling us gas lighting socialists just because you don't agree with us and because you can't think on your own without right wing nonsense telling you how to think. You say you don't listen to people like us but you keep replying.

[Juxtapose]

@Friendlybro79 I can entertain an argument for amusement while not taking what you say seriously. That should not be a hard concept for you to grasp, but given your media illiteracy and general lack of character judgment I can't say I'm too surprised.

Trump had his four years and it was awesome. Compared to Biden? Way better. Trump was also the only president in 40 years who did not start a new conflict.

But yeah, go ahead and simp for the lady that wants to give criminal aliens transsexual surgeries on your dime. LOL!

[Friendlybro79]

If you're not going to listen that means you can't hear the conversation. It means you would walk away from it and ignore it. You can have a conversation but that's not what you said multiple times you say you don't listen but not only do you do listen, you do so enough that you're actively participating in conversation. Nice work buddy and go ahead and simp for an old man who despises his followers and uses you for his gain. Trump university... I forgot about that scam. You're going to pick a rapist and convicted felon who says he will go after political opponents and be a dictator for a day that brags about grabbing women by their private parts. Lol.

[Friendlybro79]

You didn't say you don't listen. I can eat my words and tell myself to fuck off lol.

[Friendlybro79]

But my other points I'm sticking to lol

[Juxtapose]

@Friendlybro79 yeah I merely said I don't take what you say seriously, and I imagine the sentiment is the same on your side with me. That's just the nature of the game, homie.

And you lie. Trump's case involving that lying woman who's own previous lawyer said she's a liar.. the case was for battery. Go ahead and look it up. Rape charges were never brought up.

[Friendlybro79]

You can't rewrite what happened in that court room:
caselaw.findlaw.com/.../114642632.html

This case, Carroll II, was tried in April and May 2023. Ms. Carroll contended that Mr. Trump had assaulted her in a dressing room at a New York department store where, among other things, he forcibly penetrated her vagina with his fingers and his penis. She testified in person for most of three days and was cross-examined intensively. Her sexual assault claim was corroborated by two “outcry” witnesses in whom Ms. Carroll had confided shortly after the attack, and was supported by six other fact witnesses. Mr. Trump's defense – based exclusively on an attempt to discredit Ms. Carroll and her other witnesses – in substance was that no assault ever had occurred, that he did not even know Ms. Carroll, and that her accusations were a “Hoax.” Mr. Trump, however, did not testify in person or even attend the trial despite ample opportunity to do so.

The jury's unanimous verdict in Carroll II was almost entirely in favor of Ms. Carroll. The only point on which Ms. Carroll did not prevail was whether she had proved that Mr. Trump had “raped” her within the narrow, technical meaning of a particular section of the New York Penal Law – a section that provides that the label “rape” as used in criminal prosecutions in New York applies only to vaginal penetration by a penis. Forcible, unconsented-to penetration of the vagina or of other bodily orifices by fingers, other body parts, or other articles or materials is not called “rape” under the New York Penal Law. It instead is labeled “sexual abuse.”1

[Friendlybro79]

Rape charges were brought up but if you read the last two paragraphs above you'll realize in NY rape has a specific definition in its penal law. If this happened to your mom, sister, daughter, etc you'd call it rape. But tech he's a sexual abuser and was in fact found liable of inserting his fingers into her forcibly. So that's who you're voting for.

[Juxtapose]

@Friendlybro79 he was never convicted of rape and due to how controversial of a figure he is, I don't trust hearsay. There should be physical evidence like a rape kit.

[Friendlybro79]

He was found liable of it because there was enough evidence that he indeed do what he was found liable of. He was found liable by a jury that was presented evidence... They made him pay her for sexually abusing her. You just call it hearsay because reality doesn't exist in your dojo.

[Juxtapose]

@Friendlybro79 he was never convicted of rape and if you can't see how the establishment is actively trying to sabotage him then you're not really paying attention.

They're trying to sabotage him harder than they sabotaged civil rights protests and whatnot.

[Friendlybro79]

I am not using the words convicted intentionally because you're correct. You're missing the point. It was a civil case because statute of limitations at the time was 5 years or so. That said in civil court jurors are still presented evidence and there was enough evidence that showed he did sexually abuse her and in the court and the jurors found him civilly liable because there was enough evidence to prove he actually sexually abused her and I described how abused her above. That means, now wait for it, that there was actual evidence he sexually abused her under NY penal law. That's why he is a rapist. He isn't a convicted rapist under criminal law but in the real physical world he still is a rapist. He forced himself on her.. When you force yourself and insert anything into a woman when she doesn't want you to that is rape in the real world.

You're saying it doesn't count because he wasn't convicted and that would only be true if I said he is a convicted rapist. He is a rapist who got away with criminal charges due to statute of limitations running out. Also he defamed her twice and that's why she got he was found liable again!!! And in the sum of an additional 83 million on top of the first liable suit of 5 million she was awarded.

Your denialism of reality doesn't matter. He sabotaged himself man. He does bad things and the courts are just regular people not Biden or the DOJ as jurors.

[Juxtapose]

@Friendlybro79 blah blah blah it's just a whole bunch of kangaroo court bullshit. Just like Joseph Stalin, the Democrats can make up bullshit and rig the system in their favor.

[Juxtapose]

To quote a friend concerning another case but one I think represents all of this bullshit:

"A local prosecutor magically turned a single state misdemeanor into 34 federal felonies in a state court in front of a judge with direct ties with the Biden administration, and whom also instructed the jury that they could still find the Defendant guilty even if they couldn't "find" or "identify" the crime. Stop gaslighting people with your disingenuous dangerous socialism bullshit and stop deliberately spreading disinformation."

[Friendlybro79]

Show evidence of this statement from the judge and his direct tie to Biden. Also you do understand the jury was a mix of democrats and republicans. You're making excuses for things being rigged against him. Everything you're saying is just nonsense. So explain how Biden's son was convicted on all 3 felonies of his case. If the courts are rigged how is he a felon too? Your inability to say Trump is guilty of anything shows how culpable you are to being manipulated into a cult like environment. Just saying everything is rigged against your guy isn't a defense. There is zero evidence to say he was wrongly convicted 34 times.

[Friendlybro79]

To add if a Democrat is found guilty of something I think they should be held accountable but this idea well why are non of them guilty like of a Republican is guilty then we HAVE to find someone on the other side guilty too is childish. You have to have actual evidence not allegation that you pass as proof.

[Anonymous]

Vance is clearly better than Pence. not even debatable

[mandyfire98]

Were they trying to lynch him again?

[goaded]

Once was enough, I think. Wouldn't it be for you?

[mandyfire98]

Yeah having people come after me with zip ties would be enough for me probably.

[Dargil]

Because Vance is a better fit.

[goaded]

That much is true. Vance wouldn't have certified the 2020 election, and he's in favour of dictatorships over democracies.

They probably would agree about abortion, though:

web.archive.org/.../
"END ABORTION

I am 100 percent pro-life, and believe that abortion has turned our society into a place where we see children as an inconvenience to be thrown away rather than a blessing to be nurtured. Eliminating abortion is first and foremost about protecting the unborn, but it’s also about making our society more pro-child and pro-family. The historic Dobbs decision puts this new era of society into motion, one that prioritizes family and the sanctity of all life. The pro-life fight continues by ensuring that every young mother has the resources to bring new life into the world, expanding adoption and promoting pregnancy centers, so that every child grows up in a loving home, as they deserve. We’ll expand child tax credits and ensure that young parents don’t come home from the hospital with budget-busting surprise bills."

[noohair]

Mike Pence, never heard of him?

[exitseven]

Mike Who?

[goaded]

The one from the chant: "Hang Mike Pence!".

[In_Trance]

Because he's NPC

[goaded]

An NPC who almost got lynched.

[In_Trance]

Nobody gives a fuck about that either

[goaded]

I think he did.