Mike Pence, Leader of the Resistance?
He could be in real trouble if the Trumpist media ever actually reads the Mueller report.
Mike Pence might be the most enigmatic figure in the executive branch. Notwithstanding his team-spirited demeanor, professions of loyalty, and message discipline, he was never really the MAGA-type. The vice president fits a more traditional Republican mold.
He supports free markets and free trade. Heās been outspoken in opposition to tyranny abroad. His record defending life, religious liberty (for all religions), and the constitutional right to bear arms is distinguished. The career of Mike Pence is in many ways a testament to a āfusionistā pact that unites national security, economic, and social conservatives.
The president could do worse than to listen to him more often.
Vice President Pence has quarterbacked the American response to the deepening crisis in Venezuela, rallying allies and signaling support for opposition leader Juan GuaidĆ³. While the outcome of the uprising remains to be determined, the administrationās Venezuela policy has been managed prudentlyāunder the guidance of the vice president and special envoy Elliott Abrams ā and it aligns with both our interests and values. One hopes the president, who reportedly called Venezuelan dictator NicolĆ”s Maduro a ātough cookie,ā doesnāt go wobbly.
Pence worked tirelessly to forge a compromise spending deal last December, balancing the presidentās political interest in funding his long-promised border wall against other national priorities. When a deal was in grasp, the president, bowing to demagogic outside voices, carelessly discarded the vice presidentās efforts, leading to a pointless and self-defeating shutdown.
And when the president threw caution to the wind, overruling the advice of numerous senior officials not to seek total repeal of the Affordable Care Act in the courts, the vice president was among the dissenters. Again, we donāt know how this will play out, but judging by the reaction by Hill Republicans, it looks like Pence got this one right too.
When Donald J. Trump won the Republican nomination in 2016, some conservatives decidedāas a matter of principleāthat they could not support the presidential ticket.
While the decision by some conservatives to withhold support for Trump has been vindicated, othersāmen and women of honorātook a different path. Recognizing that there was more at stake than the occupant of the White House, people like James Mattis, Rex Tillerson, Jeff Sessions, H.R. McMaster, Don McGahn, Gary Cohn, and Dina Powell heeded the call. There can be little doubt that the country is better for their dutiful service.
But theyāre all gone. Officials motivated by a higher calling are being replaced with has-beens, toadies, incompetents, and charlatans.
The case for a primary challenge to the president is, if youāll pardon the expression, unimpeachable. The Republican Party is in danger of sacrificing its fidelity to conservatism, the U.S. Constitution, and the American creed at the altar of a personality cult. If this is the direction the party wishes to take, it should do so in the open, and only after a robust and honest debate.
However, the report of special counsel Robert Mueller is a wild card, presenting Washington with a unique and unpredictable moment. And as the House of Representatives launches investigations that will take us through the spring and summer ā possibly leading to impeachment proceedings in the fall ā the vice president will find himself in a peculiar, even dangerous, position.
He might also find opportunity.
For a sense of whatās to come, note this event from last month. Senators Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson sent a letter to the attorney general, asking that the Department of Justice investigate an alleged āattempt by the FBI to conduct surveillance of President-elect Trumpās transition team.ā What caught the eye of many Trump supporters was this text message from former FBI official Peter Strzok:
Strzok: If Katieās husband is there, he can see if there are people we can develop for potential relationships.
Who is āKatieās husbandā? Sara Carter, an āinvestigative reporterā for Foxās Hannity, explains:
The texts and sources reveal that Strzok had one significant contact within the White House ā Vice President Mike Penceās Chief of Staff Joshua Pitcock, whose wife [Katie] was working as an analyst for Strzok on the FBIās investigation into Hillary Clintonās use of a private server.
Carter goes on to imply that the vice presidentās office may have used Pitcock as a back-channel to the FBI.
During the time Pitcock served as chief of staff, [then-National Security Advisor] Flynn became the highest profile target of the now debunked investigation into the campaign.
Was the vice president secretly working with the ādeep stateā against Michael Flynn? Inquiring minds want to know.
For his part, Pence felt compelled to respond forcefully to the senatorsā letter, telling Axios:
I was deeply offended to learn that two disgraced FBI agents considered infiltrating our transition team by sending a counter intelligence agent to one of my very first intelligence briefings only 9 days after the election.
https://twitter.com/EmeraldRobinson/status/1122136850754408448
The president would be correct to wonder if there would even be a special counsel if not for Michael Flynn. The former national security adviserās pre-inauguration communications with the Russian ambassador, which effectively undermined U.S. efforts to respond to Russian election interference, were inappropriate and may have been illegal. His deception about those contacts ā to the FBI, the vice president-elect, the chief of staff, and the press secretary ā exposed him to blackmail. The presidentās later attempts to interfere with the investigation into those contacts opened him to a federal investigation, and may lead to his impeachment.
The vice president must have wondered why Michael Flynn lied to him about his conversations with the Russian ambassador. According to the special counsel, Flynnās deputy K.T. McFarland was informed in real time. Was the president himself in the loop? Circumstantial evidence presented in the Mueller report suggests he may have been. (Emphasis mine.)
McFarland had spoken with incoming Administration officials about the [Obama Administration-announced] sanctions and Russiaās possible responses and thought she had mentioned in those conversations that Flynn was scheduled to speak with Kislyak. Based on those conversations, McFarland informed Flynn that incoming Administration officials at Mar-a-Lago did not want Russia to escalate the situation. At 4:43 p.m. that afternoon, McFarland sent an email to several officials about the sanctions and informed the group that āGen [F]lynn is talking to russian ambassador this evening.ā
Approximately one hour later, McFarland met with the President-Elect and senior officials and briefed them on the sanctions and Russiaās possible responses. Incoming Chief of Staff Reince Priebus recalled that McFarland may have mentioned at the meeting that the sanctions situation could be ācooled downā and not escalated. McFarland recalled that at the end of the meeting, someone may have mentioned to the President-Elect that Flynn was speaking to the Russian Ambassador that evening. McFarland did not recall any response by the President-Elect. Priebus recalled that the President-Elect viewed the sanctions as an attempt by the Obama Administration to embarrass him by delegitimizing his election. Itās evident that senior officials on the Trump transition team, if not the president himself, knew about Flynnās discussions about sanctions with the Russian ambassador. But why did Flynn lie to the vice president? Is it because Flynn feared Pence would have seen his actions as contrary to the national interest?
On January 26, 2017, Acting Attorney General Sally Yates informed the presidentās inner circle about Flynnās deception of both the FBI and senior officials. Yet as the Mueller report describes, no immediate action was taken. The false information relayed to the public by Vice President Pence and Press Secretary Sean Spicer was allowed to stand.
Conspiracy-minded defenders of the president will zero in on what happened next. As described by the Mueller report: (again, emphasis mine)
On February 9, 2017, the Washington Post reported that Flynn discussed sanctions with Kislyak the month before the President took office. After the publication of that story, Vice President Pence learned of the Department of Justiceās notification to the White House about the content of Flynnās calls. He and other advisors then sought access to and reviewed the underlying information about Flynnās contacts with Kislyak. FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who provided the White House officials access to the information and was present when they reviewed it, recalled the officials asking him whether Flynnās conduct violated the Logan Actā¦
After reviewing the materials and speaking with Flynn, McGahn and Priebus concluded that Flynn should be terminated and recommended that course of action to the President. Here we have a vice president who, having been betrayed and deceived, meets with FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe to learn the truth about Flynnās actions. Pence and others then use the information obtained from the FBI to call for the national security adviserās firing. Recall that Trump later accused McCabe of ātreasonā for āplotting a coupā against him.
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1121844586366865410
In his book The Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and Trump, McCabe expressed appreciation for the vice president, calling Pence āa gentleman. And manners count for a lot.ā Also note the former FBI officialās description of the vice presidentās demeanor when he learns about Flynnās treachery.
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1097980453162704897?s=21
This may not have been the end of the vice presidentās behind-the-scenes maneuvering against Flynn. As reported by veteran investigative journalist Murray Waas, when Pence and senior aides asked Trump to fire his national security adviser, he ārefused to commit to doing so.ā
To the vice president, his chief of staff, and the White House counsel, the presidentās refusal to fire Flynn was inexplicable. Priebus, McGahn, and a White House attorney named John Eisenberg, who had listened to the intercepts six days earlier, were concerned that Trump was protecting Flynn, and speculated among themselves and with their subordinates that this might be because the president knew in advance of Flynnās dubious, back-channel diplomacy with Russia, or had even authorized it. Priebus and McGahn then shared their views with Pence. Their concerns were intensified because if this was the case, Flynn had significant leverage over Trump, even the power to subtly blackmail him, to keep his job.
Indeed, it would take several more days and a bombshell report in the Washington Post ā headlined āJustice Department warned White House that Flynn could be vulnerable to Russian blackmail, officials sayā ā for the national security adviser to finally be dismissed. Did the vice president and top White House officials authorize this leak? Again, Murray Waas:
I have learned that, in order to force the presidentās hand in firing Flynn, two senior government officials instructed aides over the weekend that followed to leak sensitive information to The Washington Post and other news organizations in order to underscore that Flynn had likely lied about his conversations with Kislyak, and that there were concerns at the highest levels of the Justice Department and the FBI about Flynnās conduct. These two officials believed that they were, in the words of one person familiar with the effort, āprotecting Trumpās presidency from himselfā and the countryās ānational security from the president.ā I have no information that Vice President Pence was involved in the leaking of this information, but Pence had certainly by then become a strong advocate of Flynnās firing and, together with Priebus and McGahn, was extremely frustrated that the president had taken no action.
The leak to the Washington Post would break the dam of the presidentās resistance. Flynn resigned later that day, setting in motion events that led to the appointment of a special counsel and talk of impeachment. As noted by Waas,
The very next day, February 14, the president met privately in the Oval Office with then-FBI Director James Comey and, according to Comeyās testimony to Congress, pressured the FBI director to shut down an investigation of Flynn.
How will the president and his loyalists respond when they put the pieces together?
A text message from the FBIās Peter Strzok which could be interpreted to reference an intelligence relationship with the vice presidentās chief of staff;
The vice president and top White House aides ā both deceived by the national security adviser ā secretly meeting with the FBIās Andrew McCabe, then demanding Flynnās firing;
And when the president doesnāt move quickly enough, a mysterious leak to the Washington Post, which has the intended effect.
And to top it all off, the very day after the New York Times reported that President Trump asked FBI Director James Comey to ālet[ ] Flynn go,ā the vice president filed papers to organize a Leadership PAC. Trump adviser and notorious dirty trickster Roger Stone responded by tweeting āno vice president in modern history had their own PAC less than 6 month into the president's first term...Hmmmm."
Thereās more than just the vice presidentās troubled relationship with the presidentās national security adviser.
Remember when WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange tweeted that Hillary Clinton was advocating a āPence takeoverā?
Clinton stated privately this month that she is quietly pushing for a Pence takeover. She stated that Pence is predictable hence defeatable.
Two IC officials close to Pence stated privately this month that they are planning on a Pence takeover. Did not state if Pence agrees. The vice president denied Assangeās claims.
Former FBI deputy director McCabe also told CBSā Scott Pelley that Department of Justice officials discussed āwhether the vice president and a majority of the cabinet could be brought together to remove the president of the United States under the 25th Amendment.ā Again, Vice President Pence denied any involvement in those discussions.
This is all catnip for an increasingly paranoid pro-Trump media. āThe resistance is coming from inside the Naval Observatory!ā
And donāt even get them started on the mysterious use of the word ālodestarā in the infamous New York Times op-ed by a senior āPart of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration.ā
One can only imagine the vice presidentās sense of vindication when Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI. That must have been reinforced when troubling allegations emerged about Flynnās undisclosed work on behalf of the Turkish government, and his reported involvement in a conspiracy to kidnap a Turkish exile who now lives as a permanent American resident.
Did the vice president feel betrayed again when a report indicated the president wished he could hire Flynn back? Or when the president asked Flynnās former deputy to tell him to āstay strongā? Does it offend Penceās honor that so many of the presidentās defenders see Flynn as a victim, while ignoring how he abused not only the vice presidentās trust, but the publicās? Did the president even apologize for the shabby way Pence was treated?
Itās only a matter of time before these dormant resentments are brought into the open. The more vulnerable and unpopular Trump feels, the more likely he is to lash out. It seems likely that Trump and his allies will blame the vice president for their political predicament. That he behaved honorably will not protect him. Quite the contrary. Trumpās outside supporters might soon be agitating to have Pence replaced by a more loyal, canine running mate.
Does Pence have it in him to flip? Will he seize the moment and position himself as the Gerald Ford to Trumpās Nixon? Itās fun to speculate, but the prospect seems doubtful.
Nevertheless, an increasingly feverish Trumpist media is going to connect these dots, and even if Pence isnāt leading the Deep State Resistance, theyāre going to suspect he might be. With re-election already looking difficult (if you believe matchup polling) it'll be one more strike against Pence. Which is a shame, because the vice president has been sincerely helpful to the cause of governing.
