Will Mike Pence Betray Trump to Advance Himself?

For the record, I see Mike Pence as a dangerous opportunist who likes to wrap himself in the cloak of religiosity.  Yes, he is by all accounts a evangelical Christian extremists, but he has one thing more important to him than his processed religious belief: advancing himself and securing power - especially the presidency.  A very lengthy piece in The Atlantic looks not only at Pence but also his short lived effort in the immediate wake of the release of the Access Hollywood tape to stage a coup and replace Trump as the presidential nominee.  With Trump's approval levels hovering in the mid 30th percentile, his proposal to move the U.S. embassy to Israel to Jerusalem, and Trump's tweet storms increasing the risk of nuclear war with North Korea, one has to wonder when Pence may feel emboldened to push for a 25th Amendment move to remove Trump from the presidency.  While, Pence and the falsely styled "religious right" are plummeting in popularity along with Trump, one has to wonder when Pence's ambition will get the better of him.  Of course, all of this could be changed radically by Pence's numerous lies about the Trump campaign and transition team's communications with Russian operative.  Here are highlights:

No man can serve two masters, the Bible teaches, but Mike Pence is giving it his all. It’s a sweltering September afternoon in Anderson, Indiana, and the vice president has returned to his home state to deliver the Good News of the Republicans’ recently unveiled tax plan. The visit is a big deal for Anderson, a fading manufacturing hub about 20 miles outside Muncie that hasn’t hosted a sitting president or vice president in 65 years . . .

When the time comes, Pence takes the stage and greets the crowd with a booming “Hellooooo, Indiana!” He says he has “just hung up the phone” with Donald Trump and that the president asked him to “say hello.” He delivers this message with a slight chuckle that has a certain, almost subversive quality to it. . . . . It’s almost as if, in that brief, barely perceptible moment, Pence is sending a message to those with ears to hear—that he recognizes the absurdity of his situation; that he knows just what sort of man he’s working for; that while things may look bad now, there is a grand purpose at work here, a plan that will manifest itself in due time. Let not your hearts be troubled, he seems to be saying. I’ve got this.

As he nears the end of his remarks, his happy-warrior buoyancy gives way to a more sober cadence. “We’ve come to a pivotal moment in the life of this country,” Pence soulfully intones. “It’s a good time to pray for America.” His voice rising in righteous fervor, the vice president promises an opening of the heavens. “If His people who are called by His name will humble themselves and pray,” he proclaims, “He’ll hear from heaven, and He’ll heal this land!”

It’s easy to see how Pence could put so much faith in the possibilities of divine intervention. The very fact that he is standing behind a lectern bearing the vice-presidential seal is, one could argue, a loaves-and-fishes-level miracle. Just a year earlier, he was an embattled small-state governor with underwater approval ratings, dismal reelection prospects, and a national reputation in tatters. In many ways, Pence was on the same doomed trajectory as the conservative-Christian movement he’d long championed—once a political force to be reckoned with, now a battered relic of the culture wars. . . . But after eight years of Barack Obama and a string of disorienting political defeats, conservative Christians were in retreat and out of options. So they placed their faith in Trump—and then, incredibly, he won.

In Pence, Trump has found an obedient deputy whose willingness to suffer indignity and humiliation at the pleasure of the president appears boundless.

Meanwhile, Pence’s presence in the White House has been a boon for the religious right. Evangelical leaders across the country point to his record on abortion and religious freedom and liken him to a prophet restoring conservative Christianity to its rightful place at the center of American life.

But what does Pence make of his own improbable rise to the vice presidency, and how does he reconcile his faith with serving a man like Trump? Over the past several months, I’ve spoken with dozens of people who have known the vice president throughout his life—from college fraternity brothers and longtime friends to trusted advisers and political foes. . . . . for all his aw-shucks modesty, Pence is a man who believes heaven and Earth have conspired to place him a heartbeat—or an impeachment vote—away from the presidency. At some crucial juncture in the not-too-distant future, that could make him a threat to Trump.

For all Pence’s outward piousness, he’s kept the details of his spiritual journey opaque. Despite his conversion to evangelical Christianity in college, he married his wife, Karen, in a Catholic ceremony and until the mid‑’90s periodically referred to himself as an “evangelical Catholic.” That formulation might befuddle theologians, but it reveals the extraordinary degree to which Pence’s personal religious evolution paralleled the rise of the religious right.

To his colleagues on Capitol Hill—an overwhelmingly secular place where even many Republicans privately sneer at people of faith—everything about the Indiana congressman screamed “Bible thumper.” He was known to pray with his staffers, and often cited scripture to explain his votes.

Pence didn’t have a reputation for legislative acumen (“I would not call Mike a policy wonk,” one former staffer told the Indianapolis Monthly), and some of his colleagues called him a nickname behind his back: “Mike Dense.” But he did have sharp political instincts. Before long, he was climbing the leadership ranks and making connections with key figures in the conservative-Christian establishment. The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer has documented Pence’s close ties to the Koch brothers and other GOP mega-donors, but his roots in the religious right are even deeper.

[I]in early 2015, Pence stumbled into a culture-war debacle that would come to define his governorship. At the urging of conservative-Christian leaders in Indiana, the GOP-controlled state legislature passed a bill that would have allowed religious business owners to deny services to gay customers in certain circumstances. Pence signed it into law in a closed-press ceremony at the statehouse, surrounded by nuns, monks, and right-wing lobbyists. A photo of the signing was released, and all hell broke loose. Corporate leaders threatened to stop adding jobs in Indiana, and national organizations began pulling scheduled conventions from the state. The NCAA, which is headquartered in Indianapolis, put out a statement suggesting that the law might imperil “future events.” The Indianapolis Star ran a rare front-page editorial under an all-caps headline: “FIX THIS NOW.”

To many Christians, the backlash against Indiana’s “religious freedom” bill was a frightening sign of the secular left’s triumphalism. Liberals were no longer working toward tolerance, it seemed—they were out for conquest. “Many evangelicals were experiencing the sense of an almost existential threat,” Russell Moore, a leader of the Southern Baptist Convention, told me. It was only a matter of time, he said, before cultural elites’ scornful attitudes would help drive Christians into the arms of a strongman like Trump.

After seven chaotic days, Pence caved and signed a revised version of the religious-freedom bill—but by then it was too late. His approval ratings were in free fall, Democrats were raising money to defeat him in the next gubernatorial election, and the political obituaries were being written. Things looked grimmer for Pence, and the religious right, than they ever had before.

Deliverance manifested itself to Mike Pence on the back nine of Donald Trump’s golf course in New Jersey. . . . True to form, Pence spent much of their time on the course kissing Trump’s ring. You’re going to be the next president of the United States, he said. It would be the honor of a lifetime to serve you. Afterward, he made a point of gushing to the press about Trump’s golf game. “He beat me like a drum,” Pence confessed, to Trump’s delight.

The consensus among the campaign’s top political strategists was that a Trump–Pence ticket was their best shot at winning in November. After a bitter primary season, Trump’s campaign had moved swiftly to shore up support from conservative Christians, who advisers worried would stay home on Election Day.

Even some of Trump’s most devoted loyalists marveled at what Pence was willing to say. There was no talking point too preposterous, no fixed reality too plain to deny—if they needed Pence to defend the boss, he was in.

On Friday, October 7, 2016, The Washington Post published the Access Hollywood tape that showed Trump gloating about his penchant for grabbing women “by the pussy,” and instantly upended the campaign. Republicans across the country withdrew their endorsements, and conservative editorial boards called on Trump to drop out of the race. Most alarming to the aides and operatives inside Trump Tower, Mike Pence suddenly seemed at risk of going rogue.  Trump’s phone calls to his running mate reportedly went unreturned, and anonymous quotes began appearing in news stories describing Pence as “beside himself” over the revelation.

It’s been reported that Pence sent Trump a letter saying he needed time to decide whether he could stay with the campaign. But in fact, according to several Republicans familiar with the situation, he wasn’t just thinking about dropping out—he was contemplating a coup. Within hours of The Post’s bombshell, Pence made it clear to the Republican National Committee that he was ready to take Trump’s place as the party’s nominee. Such a move just four weeks before Election Day would have been unprecedented—but the situation seemed dire enough to call for radical action.

The furtive plotting, several sources told me, was not just an act of political opportunism for Pence. He was genuinely shocked by the Access Hollywood tape. . . . . The couple was appalled by the video, however. Karen in particular was “disgusted,” says a former campaign aide. “She finds him reprehensible—just totally vile.”

Of course, Pence is far from the only conservative Christian to be accused of having sold his soul. Trump’s early evangelical supporters were a motley crew of televangelists and prosperity preachers, and they have been rewarded with outsize influence in the White House.

But the president has also enjoyed overwhelming support from rank-and-file conservative Christians. He won an astonishing 81 percent of white evangelicals’ votes, more than any Republican presidential candidate on record. And while his national approval rating hovers below 40 percent, poll after poll finds his approval rating among white evangelicals in the high 60s.

On one side, there are those who argue that good Christians are obligated to support any leader, no matter how personally wicked he may be, who stands up for religious freedom and fights sinful practices such as abortion. . . . On the other side of the debate is a smaller group that believes the Christians allying themselves with Trump are putting the entire evangelical movement at risk. . . . . “This is really a sea change in evangelical ethics,” Robert P. Jones, the head of the institute and the author of The End of White Christian America, told me. “They have moved to an ends-justifies-the means style of politics that would have been unimaginable before this last campaign.”

But even as the debate rages on, there is one thing virtually all conservative Christians seem to agree on: Mike Pence.

The religious right began reaping the rewards of Trump’s victory almost immediately, when the president-elect put Pence in charge of the transition. Given wide latitude on staffing decisions, Pence promptly set about filling the federal government with like-minded allies. Of the 15 Cabinet secretaries Trump picked at the start of his presidency, eight were evangelicals. It was, gushed Ted Cruz, “the most conservative Cabinet in decades.” Pence also reportedly played a key role in getting Neil Gorsuch nominated to the Supreme Court.

Pence understood the price of his influence. To keep Trump’s ear required frequent public performances of loyalty and submission—and Pence made certain his inner circle knew that enduring such indignities was part of the job.

In an embattled White House, the question of the vice president’s ambition for higher office is radioactive. When The New York Times reported last summer that Pence appeared to be laying the groundwork for a 2020 presidential bid, he denied the “disgraceful and offensive” story with theatrical force. But Pence has shown that his next move is never far from his mind—and he’s hardly the only one weighing the possibilities. One senior GOP Senate aide told me that pundits miss the point when they speculate about what kind of scandal it would take for the president to face a serious defection from lawmakers of his own party. “It’s not a matter of when Republicans are ready to turn on Trump,” the aide said. “It’s about when they decide they’re ready for President Pence.”

What would a Pence presidency look like? To a conservative evangelical, it could mean a glorious return to the Christian values upon which America was founded. To a secular liberal, it might look more like a descent into the dystopia of The Handmaid’s Tale. Already, in some quarters on the left, it has become fashionable to fret that Pence’s fundamentalist faith and comparative political savvy would make him an even more “dangerous” president than Trump. He has been branded a “theocrat” and a “Christian supremacist.”

What critics should worry about is not that Pence believes in God, but that he seems so certain God believes in him. What happens when manifest destiny replaces humility, and the line between faith and hubris blurs? What unseemly compromises get made? What means become tolerable in pursuit of an end?

Trump and Pence are both extremely dangerous.  Both need to be removed from office as soon as possible. 

“Everybody Knew”: Inside the Fall of Today’s Matt Lauer

With the firing yesterday of Matt Lauer, NBC News apparently decided that it needed to clean its own house before other news outlets reported on what "everybody knew" about Lauer's transgressions.  As the repercussions of sexual misconduct roil across the nation - excerpt for in the White House where the molester-in-chief is now denying the accuracy of the Access Hollywood tape he previously admitted to - what is striking is that in most instances the news of the transgressions were known to others before hand , sometimes by many people. Personally, I cannot grasp the mindset of the men involved who due to their positions of power thought they could force themselves on anyone they wanted.  A piece in Vanity Fair looks at the situation of Lauer which tracts this same pattern (a piece in Variety gives more lurid details here).  Here are excerpts:

For weeks, amidst the deluge of revelations about sexual misconduct by powerful men in media, executives at NBC News had been hearing rumors of stories being reported at Variety and The New York Times about Lauer’s alleged sexual relationships with NBC bookers and producers. Those executives asked Lauer “if there was anything that he thought we should know or could fit into this category, and he adamantly denied that there was.” According to one NBC insider, Lack reported to other top executives that Lauer had denied any sexual impropriety.

Then, on Monday, a woman who had already met with The New York Times, but who wished to remain anonymous, went with her lawyer to meet with representatives from NBC’s human-resources department to lodge a formal complaint about Lauer. According to a person familiar with her complaint, neither “rape” nor “assault” was used in her complaint to NBC. Nevertheless, the complaint was serious and specific enough to result in the firing of NBC News’s biggest star and most powerful figure. The allegation related to an inappropriate sexual relationship that started when the colleagues were covering the Olympics in Sochi.

Lauer had been dogged by stories of infidelity for years, so much so that he had become a regular target of the tabloid press. That focus narrowed his world, according to a former colleague. “His pattern was that of a beleaguered person who was constantly being pursued by The National Enquirer,” the former colleague told me. . . . . “So I think the only place he could really operate was in his office and then when he was on the road. And there was a lot of him bringing attractive young women into his office for counseling and where he would talk to them about their career.” The Variety story about Lauer’s sexual misconduct, published Wednesday, based on the accounts of more than 10 current and former employees, reports that he could lock the door to his office from his desk.

There were, according to the former colleague, two groups of women that Lauer seemed to focus his attention on: interns, pages, and production assistants in charge of running scripts in the morning; and also bookers.

Insiders at NBC remained incredulous that NBC’s top brass was not aware of Lauer’s behavior with women. “The real focus right now should be on this complete disingenuous behavior by NBC to say, ‘I’m shocked,’” one former NBC colleague told me. Lauer has been prized and protected by a succession of NBC News presidents. . . . . “I don’t know what everyone is so surprised by,” said one high-level industry source. “This has been going on for months and months and everybody knew it and it was just going to be which girl came forward, and who reported it first.”

Lauer’s downfall could have been hastened by any number of his current or former colleagues, or at least that was the word inside NBC circles. “There’s a lot of speculation that Megyn Kelly was directly involved in getting women to come forward,” the former colleague told me. Kelly, who reportedly came to NBC with a whopping $23 million package and who has struggled to get traction at 9 a.m., reportedly felt the heat from Lauer’s disapproval, this person said. (An insider close to Kelly disputed both claims.) “Even if she wasn’t going to replace him, he was going to have a shiv in her back any day. You could already see reports of him saying that it was a mistake.”

Similarly, NBC insiders saw the hand of Ann Curry, whom Lauer ousted, in his demise, and possibly even Billy Bush. (Curry and Bush could not be reached for comment.) The repercussions inside NBC are unlikely to stop with Lauer.

As the national reckoning with sexual harassment continues, the question of Lauer’s improprieties looms large over NBC’s editorial decision to pass on Ronan Farrow’s reporting on Harvey Weinstein. “They were sitting in a glass house and they knew it,” Lauer’s former colleague said.

Why Do Weinstein, Rose and Moore Deserve Banishment, But Not Donald Trump?

Perhaps it is because I have two daughters and three granddaughters but I find it outrageous - as well as disgusting - that while many men now find themselves without jobs and subject to a state akin to being a societal outcast, Der Trumpenführer, who is on tape boasting of his sexual harassment of women, is not facing similar consequences for his misdeeds.  To make matters worse, evangelical Christians, the very same element of society that wants to police everyone else's bedrooms and sexual activities, continue to support a man who has demonstrated that he is amoral at best.  To me, this state of affairs reveals the utter moral bankruptcy of today's evangelicals as well as that of the Republican Party.  A column in the Washington Post asks the question that every moral and decent person who values the women in their life should be asking.  It also makes the case that Trump needs to face consequences for his self-professed foul behavior.  Here are column highlights:

Let’s stipulate that all alleged cases of sexual harassment are not the same. Kevin Spacey is alleged to have sexually assaulted male minors. Glenn Thrush of the New York Times allegedly made unwelcome passes at adult women. These are not in the same moral universe. Likewise, we can acknowledge that crude behavior, including an unwanted kiss and alleged groping of women, as Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) is accused of, are unacceptable and obnoxious. Still, a 30-something district attorney allegedly preying on teenage girls is in another category. Harvey Weinstein is accused of rape and other sexual abuses as he wielded his power to make and break careers of vulnerable women. President Trump is accused of groping and forcibly kissing women over a period of time — which one could say is less heinous than Weinstein but worse than Franken (as the facts are now known).

And, then there’s Charlie Rose. The Post now reports: PBS said Tuesday it was parting ways with Charlie Rose and CBS announced it fired the 75-year-old broadcaster for “extremely disturbing and intolerable behavior” following an extensive Washington Post report that detailed his alleged unwanted sexual advances toward women.
 The severity of the offense(s) and the need to protect the integrity of institutions (the press, the Congress, the presidency) should warrant permanent banishment for repeated actions of unwelcome physical conduct, even as we understand morally that some actions are worse than others. Congress is entitled to and should have a higher standard than Hollywood or even a run-of-the-mill workplace where an offending employee might be docked pay, demoted or suspended rather than dismissed. We still hold out hope that the White House should be held to at least that standard.

We should in other words have a zero tolerance for any sexual harassment or abuse but a graduated scale for doling out punishment. So far in Hollywood and the media, the accused generally have paid a steep price, in some cases suffering a career-ending moment when the accumulated accusations are too gross and too credible to ignore.

Inside the Beltway the precedent has yet to be set in stone.  . . . . . Moreover, we have an unknown number of cases settled with taxpayer money in which the identities of the accused are unknown. Lawmakers would be wise to set a zero-tolerance standard to which they hold members of both parties. While they may choose to spare some the equivalent of the political-career death penalty, no decent public servant should welcome someone of Moore’s ilk into office or disregard Trump’s complainants. As to the latter, is it unreasonable to demand an independent investigation in advance of the 2020 election — if Trump is still in office? Trump’s opponents should do so and remind voters that it is not too late to establish or reestablish a standard for the presidency.

Decent Americans should not avert their eyes from the harm perpetrated on multiple women over decades. Alabama will send an important message, but unless politicians start self-policing and demonstrating greater transparency, the voters in 2018 may decide to throw the whole lot of them out of office.

The complete moral ruin of the GOP is now evident to all who care to see. It seems, contrary to Kellyanne Conway’s previous statement, that the GOP officials will trade a child — many children and women, too — for a vote on the tax bill. Decent Americans will have to reject this mentality on Dec. 12 and in a series of elections and primaries over the next three years.

Conservative Christians Look the Other Way as Trump Debases the Presidency

It is Sunday morning and across America fundamentalist and evangelical Christians will be flocking to fill church pews and feign piety, many wearing their professed religiosity on their sleeves.  Many are against drinking alcohol, some won't even engage in dancing, and, of course they view loving same sex couples who are responsible members of their communities as an abomination to be annihilated.  Yet some 81% of them voted for Donald Trump and continue to support him largely because he appealed to their hatred of others and their desire to destroy the religious freedom of other citizens.  If one wants a reason to walk away from the Christian brand, these people are a strong argument that only hate-filled hypocrites call themselves Christian nowadays.  And the Millennials ARE paying attention: nearly one third have disavowed any religious affiliation, largely thanks to these self-anointed "godly folks."  A column in the Washington Post calls these so-called Christians out and ask the question of whether there is any debasement that Trump can do to the presidency or decency in general that might make these people disavow him.   Here are highlights:  

No group has been as blindly loyal to President Trump as Christian conservatives. They have not let religion or values get in the way of their support. Consider the “Access Hollywood” tape, the attack on a Gold Star family, a mass of inexplicable ties between Trump’s campaign and Russian officials (and the president’s open invitation to Russia to continue hacking), the firing of the FBI director, the humiliation of evangelical-favorite Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the politicization of the Boy Scouts, the threats to the special counsel and now an interview with Trump’s out-of-control, potty-mouthed communications director.

What about Trump, exactly, reflects their values? (Taking Medicaid away from millions and separating families to deport law-abiding immigrants?) The Trump administration is a clown show — but it’s the evangelicals who supplied the tent, the red noses and the floppy shoes. Each day presents a new insult to the office of the presidency and a repudiation of civilized behavior.

Cumulatively — let’s not forget the erratic, impulsive declaration that he was throwing transgender military personnel out of the armed services — it is not clear whether Trump has reached a tipping point when Republicans decide he actually has to leave office. Yet if Trump nevertheless proceeds to fire Sessions and then order Justice Department officials to fire Mueller (or fire them if they won’t), Republicans will have no remedy at their disposal other than impeachment; they may very well choose not to use it, but then we have the makings of a constitutional crisis on our hands.

And the religious right, which intones “Judge Gorsuch, Judge Gorsuch!” when confronted with the series of Trump abominations, should do some soul-searching. Was this trashing of the White House, assault on civil language and conduct and contempt for the Constitution (the one the religious right thinks is so important that the new Supreme Court justice must protect it) worth it? And if it gets worse, is there any point at which the religious might put country above tribe, morality above partisanship? No, I don’t think it will do so ever. 

Last evening I was at a small, intimate fundraiser with mostly members of the local Indian community and the contrast between their expectations and what they looked for in a politician could not be a more stark contrast with the evangelical Christian crowd:  they look for the personal honesty, integrity and personal morality of a candidate and whether that candidate will seek to do the best for all citizens and not deliberately harm targeted citizens.  This versus the evangelicals and their support for Trump.  In my experience, these non-Christians time and time again reflect the values of the Gospel message more than the purported Christians of Trump's base.