Monthly Archives: March 2020

In 2016, Longwell opposed Trump in the Republican primaries but recognized the potency of his fear-and-anger platform. How could she not? It was as if he were working from Bermans playbook. During the campaign, Longwell happened to be the incoming board chair of the Log Cabin Republicans; she was the first woman to hold the post since the group was founded, in the late seventies, to advocate for gay and lesbian Republicans. The board felt intense pressure to endorse Trump, despite his selection of Mike Pence, an openly homophobic evangelical Christian, as his running mate. Longwell told me that she basically lay on the tracks to stop the group from backing Trump. Mostly, though, she watched the election unfold with dismay.

For me, the world changed in 2016, Longwell said. That summer, her first son was born. My wifes water broke the night of Melanias speech at the Convention, and a few nights later, after their sons birth, she watched on television at the hospital as Trump accepted the Republican nomination. I remember just how bad he made me feel, she said. Thats what I remember. I remember holding a new baby and feeling like this cant be whats happening. On Election Night, she was at a party in Washington, texting with another anti-Trump operative, Tim Miller, the former spokesperson for Jeb Bushs short-lived Presidential campaign. Hes going to win, Miller wrote to her. As the news sank in, she went outside and bummed a cigarette, although she no longer smoked.

Many people who opposed Trump in 2016 have their version of this story: the Election Night disbelief and shock, the litany of outrages that followed. But, unlike many others in Republican Washington, Longwell did not make her accommodations, political and moral, with the new President. When, on his second weekend in office, Trump issued an executive order banning entry into the U.S. for citizens of seven majority-Muslim nations, Longwell decided that Trump really was a danger to the country. I started thinking about: What can I do? she recalled. How can I get involved?

In the fall of 2017, Longwell was invited to a session of the Meeting of the Concerned, a semi-secret group of disaffected Republicans that had started gathering every other Tuesday in a basement conference room near Capitol Hill. The Never Trumpers were hardly a real movement, less an organized cabal than a cable-news-savvy alliance. Among them were longtime Party operatives, such as Steve Schmidt and Rick Wilson, who became regulars on liberal-leaning TV shows, and public intellectuals, such as Eliot Cohen, a former Bush Administration official who now teaches at Johns Hopkins University, and Max Boot, of the Council on Foreign Relations, who stopped writing for the Wall Street Journals increasingly pro-Trump editorial page and went to the Washington Post. With the exception of Senator John McCain, most Republican elected officials already either supported Trump or kept their mouths shut about him. Inside the Administration, some had qualms about the President, but they soon were fired or marginalized, or quit. The official Party apparatus had been taken over by the President, and Republican lobbyists, consultants, political operatives, congressional staffers, right-wing media commentators, and government job seekers quickly identified where their interests lay.

Jerry Taylor, who helped found the Meeting of the Concerned and the Niskanen Center, the think tank that hosts it, told me about the first time Longwell showed up. Sarah didnt know anyone in the group, he said. She had never really travelled in those circles before. Many of the attendees were well-known denizens of Washingtons TV greenrooms, who bonded over their disillusionment with the Party and saw the election of Donald Trump as just the thin blue line between us and the abyss, as Taylor put it. Longwell wanted more than this talky self-styled resistance. She told me, Everybody was sitting around having a conversation that I had heard lots of versions of at that point, which is: What happened to the Republican Party? When Bill Kristol, a Republican pundit and the founder of The Weekly Standard, spoke up, Longwell recalled, she interrupted him: Why dont we do something about it? And he was kind of, like, Well, what would we do? And I was, like, I dont know, but youre famous. Youre Bill Kristol.

Kristol has been a leader of the hawkish neoconservative wing of the Party since arriving in Washington, as a member of the Reagan Administration. In 2016, he made a well-publicized attempt to recruit a last-ditch independent candidate to run against Trump. Having failed to find anyone of stature, Kristol settled on an obscure former C.I.A. officer and congressional staffer named Evan McMullin, whose candidacy never rose above the level of obscurity. After their initial meeting, Kristol and Longwell went out for coffee, and she urged him to take action again. They started brainstorming regularly at the Madison Hotel.

Then Mueller happened, Longwell said, and the idea for their group, Republicans for the Rule of Law, was born. Trumps firing of the F.B.I. director James Comey, in the spring of 2017, had set off the first major crisis of his Presidency, leading to the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel. Longwell and Kristol decided that their group would try to insure that Trump did not fire Mueller or block the investigation; to do this they would pressure Republican officials in the capital. I did think someone needed to fight the fight within the Republican Party, that you cant just give up even though its a long shot against a Republican President, Kristol told me. Sarah agreed.

In February, 2018, as Trump was publicly attacking Mueller, Longwell set up Defending Democracy Together, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit that could accept donations without having to disclose donors. Defending Democracy Together became the umbrella organization for Republicans for the Rule of Law and other like-minded projects that sought to combat Trumps policies. Longwell and Kristol worked his contacts and raised substantial sums of money, including from liberal donors such as Pierre Omidyar, the tech billionaire who funds the left-wing Web site the Intercept.

Starting that March, whenever Trump threatened Mueller or opened a new front in his fight against the Russia hoax, the group ran TV ads defending the investigation, many of them featuring quickly produced clips of news footage or Trumps latest tweet, with urgent pleas to members of Congress to stop the President. All told, before the Mueller investigation was over, Republicans for the Rule of Law had run more than a hundred ads, aimed at a narrow but important segment of persuadable Republicans in key states, seeking to convince Party leaders that even Trumps base would not go along with his firing of the special counsel. In the hope of getting directly to the President, Longwell also ran the ads in Washington on Fox News, which Trump watches addictively.

In 2018, at a session of the Meeting of the Concerned, Longwell met George Conway, the husband of Trumps White House counsellor Kellyanne Conway. A prominent conservative attorney, he had accepted, then declined, a senior position in Trumps Justice Department. Earlier that year, Conway had started tweeting his dismay about Trump, thus setting off a marital-political drama worthy of a reality-TV Presidency. Like Longwell, Conway was invited into the capitals Never Trump circle, but he, too, decided that the meetings were often frustrating exercises in therapy. He craved action. (Look, theres a lot of benefit just to catharsis, Jerry Taylor joked to me, especially given that the alternative is to become an alcoholic, which is easy to do in this town now.)

More:

The Trials of a Never Trump Republican - The New Yorker

After all, it would be hard to justify giving any administration that kind of power to reward its friends and punish those it considers enemies. Its almost inconceivable that anyone would propose giving such authority to the Trump administration.

Remember, weve had more than three years to watch this administration in action. Weve seen Trump refuse to disclose anything about his financial interests, amid abundant evidence that he is profiting at the publics expense. Trumps trade war has been notable for the way in which favored companies somehow manage to get tariff exemptions while others are denied. And as you read this, Trump is refusing to use his authority to require production of essential medical gear.

So it would be totally out of character for this administration to allocate huge sums fairly and in the public interest.

Cronyism aside, theres also the issue of competence. Why would you give vast discretionary power to a team that utterly botched the response to the coronavirus because Trump didnt want to hear bad news? Why would you place economic recovery efforts in the hands of people who were assuring us just weeks ago that the virus was contained and the economy was holding up nicely?

Finally, weve just had a definitive test of the underlying premise of the McConnell slush fund that if you give corporations money without strings attached they will use it for the benefit of workers and the economy as a whole. In 2017 Republicans rammed through a huge corporate tax cut, which they assured us would lead to higher wages and surging business investment.

Neither of these things happened; instead, corporations basically used the money to buy back their own stock. Why would this time be any different?

As I write this, Republicans are ranting that Democrats are sabotaging the economy by refusing to pass McConnells bill which is a bit rich for those who remember the G.O.P.s scorched-earth opposition to everything Barack Obama proposed. But in any case, if McConnell really wants action, he could get it easily either by dropping his demand for a Trump-controlled slush fund or by passing the stimulus bill House Democrats are likely to offer very soon.

And maybe that will happen within a few days. As I said, were now living on Covid time. But right now Republicans seem dead set on exploiting a crisis their own president helped create by his refusal to take the pandemic seriously.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

Read the original post:

Republicans Add Insult to Illness - The New York Times

Florida Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz said on Monday that Sen. Richard Burr has received unfairly favorable treatment in retaining his powerful position when compared to former Rep. Katie Hill, who resigned after having an inappropriate affair with a staffer.

Burr, a North Carolina Republican who is the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, was revealed last week to have sold up to $1.7 million in stocks last month just days ahead of the sharp market decline stemming from the novel coronavirus pandemic. He has asked the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate and has not stepped away from any of his roles.

.@KatieHill4CA gets run out of Congress for screwing a campaign staffer absent any complaint, Gaetz tweeted. @SenatorBurr stays as Intelligence Chairman after screwing all Americans by falsely reassuring us w opeds on #COVID while he dumped his stock portfolio early. This is not fair.

A week before his stock sell-off, Burr co-wrote an op-ed, titled Coronavirus prevention steps the U.S. government is taking to protect you, asserting that the US was better prepared than ever before to face emerging public health threats, like the coronavirus. Burr said Friday that he did not base his sales on any information he received as chairman of the Intelligence Committee and requested that an ethics investigation be opened into the trades.

A source familiar with the matter told CNN that the committee did not receive briefings on the virus the week of Burrs stock sales.

Burr refused to answer CNNs questions earlier on Monday about the controversial stock sales. When asked whether he could see that there would be an optics problem with the chairman of the intelligence committee making such sales, Burr replied, Ill leave that up the Ethics Committee.

Gaetzs tweet said that treament was not fair compared to the backlash Hill faced.

In October, the one-term California Democrat resigned from Congress days after she admitted to having an inappropriate relationship with a campaign staffer before coming into office.

The House Committee on Ethics had previously announced that it was opening an investigation into allegations Hill engaged in an improper relationship with a congressional staffer in possible violation of House rules banning relationships between members and their staff. The probe was announced after a conservative blog had released intimate photos of Hill, alleging she and her husband had a separate relationship with an unnamed female campaign staffer.

When the Ethics Committee announced its investigation, Gaetz defended Hill, writing in a tweet, Who among us would look perfect if every ex leaked every photo/text? Katie isnt being investigated by Ethics or maligned because she hurt anyone it is because she is different.

Hill was the first openly bisexual member of Congress from California.

Hill said that Kenny Heslep, her estranged husband of nine years, was trying to humiliate her by sharing the photographs after the couple filed for divorce. She expressed feelings of frustration over a double standard in her final speech on the House floor as a member of Congress.

I am leaving now because of a double standard, Hill said. I am leaving because I no longer want to be used as a bargaining chip. I am leaving because I didnt want to be peddled by papers and blogs and websites, used by shameless operatives for the dirtiest gutter politics that Ive ever seen.

View original post here:

Republican congressman thinks Burr is getting a better deal than ex-lawmaker who resigned: 'This is not fair' - KRDO

Martha McSallyMartha Elizabeth McSallyPolitics and the pandemic Republicans are rightly worried NRSC outraises DSCC in February Florida Republican becomes first lawmaker to test positive for coronavirus MORE complained it was "inexcusable" the president was so "unprepared" for the virus epidemic: "Real leadership means taking action before there's a crisis."

No, the Arizona Republican then a Congresswoman wasn't talking about President TrumpDonald John TrumpBlame game heats up as Senate motion fails Trump approves disaster declaration for coronavirus in California Why studying persistent post-traumatic headaches in soldiers matter MORE's tragic failure to respond early to the Coronavirus pandemic: It was 2014, and she was assailing Barack Obama on the Ebola scare.

On the infinitely more serious current crisis, McSally now a Senator gushes about Trump's "decisive" leadership.

The politics of Coronavirus, which isshutting down much of the country, throwing the economy into a tailspin and threatening the health of perhaps millions of Americans, will play out in the weeks and months ahead. The downside is with Trump and Republicans.

This may be especially troublesome for a half dozen embattled incumbent Republican senators who savaged Obama for his handling of the Ebola health scare six years ago. Today, they are rallying behind the president.

That's not easy.

Few presidents have botched a crisis the way Trump did for almost two months. The administration already had downgraded resources for addressing a pandemic, an issue of little interest to Trump until it finally dawned on himthat the United States faces the most severe health crisis since the Influenza of 1918 which killed 675,000 Americans.

As enumerated by David Leonhardt for the New York Times, Trump repeatedly and recklessly dismissed this pandemic as a nothingburger. On Jan. 22, he declared it was "totally under control." Over the next few weeks he insisted only a handful of Americans would be affected by the virus, that when spring arrives it miraculously goes away, that it was a fiction of fake news and a Democratic hoax," like impeachment.

Only two weeks ago, he falsely claimed there was sufficient testing for everyone.

Eleven days ago finally he gave an address to a nervous country. The speech, apparently crafted by his often-clueless son-in-law Jared KushnerJared Corey KushnerPolitics and the pandemic Republicans are rightly worried In the Saudi-Russian oil price war, the US blinks first Coronavirus could keep Trump in the White House MORE, lacked a sense of crisis and made misrepresentations which had to be corrected.

As our American Nero calculated the political impact on his reelection, here's what transpired: The first reported case in the U.S. was on Jan. 20 in two months, this has soared to more than 26,000 cases with 340 deaths. These numbers are expected to climb sharply over the next few months. Worldwide, the total now over 316,000 cases.

Let's contrast that with the Republican uproar over the Ebola scare in 2014. That was chiefly an African plague affecting 28,000 people, a fraction of the toll Coronavirus already has taken. In the United States there were a grand total of 11 people infected and four deaths.

Yet in mid-October of that year, I was in North Carolina covering a Senate race at an event dominated by Republican Thom TillisThomas (Thom) Roland TillisPolitics and the pandemic Republicans are rightly worried Brady PAC endorses Biden, plans to spend million in 2020 McConnell cancels Senate break over coronavirus MORE's denunciation of Obama's dangerous dereliction on the Ebola crisis, putting he claimed a political hack in charge of meeting the challenge.The so-called hack was Ron Klain, a business executive and former Supreme Court clerk as well as political counselor; he's widely credited with successfully marshaling a multi-billion effort to stem the epidemic.

Six years later, Tillis is singing a different tune for an infinitely more serious matter; running for reelection, he praises Trump's "decisive leadership," and calls for the countrys leaders "to set aside our partisan differences."

Tillis and McSally aren't the only two-faced politicians on this score.In 2014, Iowa Republican Senate candidate Joni ErnstJoni Kay ErnstPolitics and the pandemic Republicans are rightly worried Ernst calls for public presidential campaign funds to go to masks, protective equipment GOP lukewarm on talk of airline bailout MORE was outraged at Obama being "apathetic" and merely "reactive" and questioned whether he really cared about the safety of the American people. She has been silent on Trump's dawdling and denying and wants a bi-partisan partnership.Georgia Republican Sen. David Purdue six years ago bemoaned a "lack of leadership." Now he says Vice President Pence, who is in charge of the administration's policies, is doing a "fantastic job."

Republicans enjoy a 53-47 Senate advantage, and the conventional wisdom is they'll lose no more than a net of one or two seats and retain control. Those odds changed a few weeks ago when Montana's popular Democratic Governor, Steve BullockSteve BullockPolitics and the pandemic Republicans are rightly worried The Hill's Campaign Report: Biden moves to unify party before general election Poll shows Daines, Bullock neck and neck in Montana Senate race MORE, after resisting for a year, jumped in the Senate race to face a colorless Republican incumbent.

Now the terrible pandemic crisis will complicate the election prospects for the likes of Tillis, McSally and Ernst, maybe others.

Their only hope on this issue is voters have a short memory.

Al Hunt is the former executive editor of Bloomberg News. He previously served as reporter, bureau chief and Washington editor for the Wall Street Journal. For almost a quarter century he wrote a column on politics for The Wall Street Journal, then the International New York Times and Bloomberg View. Follow him on Twitter@AlHuntDC.

Read the rest here:

Politics and the pandemic Republicans are rightly worried | TheHill - The Hill

The Maine Republican Party will move ahead with a petition drive to try to block a ranked form of voting as much of the state shuts down due to coronavirus.

Mainers are scheduled to use ranked-choice voting in a presidential election for the first time in November.

The voting system allows people to pick second-choice candidates, and redistributes votes in a run-off style ranked round.

Republican opponents of the voting method have been gathering signatures to try to force a peoples veto vote about the law that allows ranked-choice presidential elections. They need 63,000 signatures by June to get the veto on the ballot. If its on the ballot, Maine wont use ranked choice for the presidential election this year.

Signature gatherers had been turning up at public events, such as Election Day polls, but Maine Republican Chair Demi Kouzounas said they will now bring petitions direct to potential signers. They will take necessary precautions in doing so, she said.

We are doing drive-thru stop-and-sign events in areas where people can stop and sign while following social distancing guidelines, pens are single-use, hand sanitizer being used, everything is outside, etc., Maine Republican executive director Jason Savage said. Tactical shift.

For most people, COVID-19 results in only mild or moderate symptoms, such as fever and cough. People with mild illness recover in about two weeks, while those with more severe illness may take three to six weeks to recover, according to the World Health Organization.

Maines the only state in the U.S. with ranked-choice voting. Petitioners are about half way to their signature goal, the Maine Republican Party said.

Invalid username/password.

Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.

Previous

Read more:

Maine Republicans to continue petition drive to block ranked-choice voting - Press Herald

His aides had never been told Mr. Paul might have been exposed to the virus or had been tested for it, according to a person familiar with the situation, and some began to fear that they could have contracted it and spread it to their friends and family before the office began working remotely, days after Mr. Paul attended the fund-raiser. Mr. Paul attended the fund-raiser on a Saturday and arrived in Washington the next Monday evening. His office closed to work remotely three days later.

Senior officials in Mr. Pauls Washington office told their staffs that none of them were at risk, the person said. But the aides remained livid that they were informed of Mr. Pauls exposure only minutes before their office publicly announced his positive test results.

Despite the panic prompted by Mr. Pauls announcement, on Monday, debate on the Senate floor proceeded mostly as usual albeit in more fiery terms with lawmakers filing into the chamber to vote and sitting in their desks next to one another. But the specter of the coronavirus weighed heavily over the proceedings.

As Mr. Durbin concluded a speech with his call for remote voting, Senator Jim Risch, Republican of Idaho, approached him. Both men kept their arms crossed, and Mr. Durbin slowly backed away step by step as they spoke, creating more and more distance between them.

Mr. Pauls announcement appeared to have won over some converts for the idea of remote voting. Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, who had previously shrugged off the suggestion, took to Twitter to offer his support for the idea.

We should make this change before the Senate leaves town, Mr. Graham wrote.

There is no indication that House or Senate leaders are moving toward doing so. A report released Monday night by Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts and the chairman of the House Rules Committee, underscored the hurdles both technical and legal such a move would create, and instead recommended using existing practices, like adopting legislation by unanimous consent.

For now, senators are maintaining their routine albeit from a substantial distance, and under considerably more stress.

See the article here:

Rand Pauls Positive Coronavirus Test Sets the (Still Meeting) Senate on Edge - The New York Times