Archive for the ‘Mike Pence’ Category
The most important story about Trumps VP is why he needs a new one – Media Matters for America
The most important story about Donald Trumps incipient pick for his vice presidential running mate is the reason he needs to replace Mike Pence, who served as his vice president for four years. Reporting on Trumps decision, which will be announced within the next week, should emphasize that Pence has been removed from the ticket because he refused Trumps entreaties to overturn the 2020 election and that his substitute will be someone who would make a different choice.
Journalists have covered Trumps potential vice presidential pick from virtually every possible angle over the past several weeks. In addition to more traditional coverage of who the contenders are, the arguments for and against each, and which one is most likely to be the pick, the reporting has included conflicting stories about whether Trump likes Ohio Sen. J.D. Vances beard, discussions of whether Florida Sen. Marco Rubio would need to move to another state to accept the nomination, and illuminations of North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgums potential advantage in having great hair.
But what often falls out of veepstakes coverage is a simple question: Why does Trump need to pick a new running mate in the first place? Why isnt Pence, who shared the ticket with Trump in 2016 and 2020, still on the ticket?
Everyone knows the answer: Pence eliminated any hope of serving another term with Trump on January 6, 2021.
Trump spent the weeks after the 2020 presidential election lying that Democrats had rigged the vote against him through massive voter fraud and trying to subvert the results. He drew support from propaganda outlets like Fox News and a coterie of loyal kooks and charlatans. But courts rejected his arguments in dozens of cases, and state legislatures refused to go along with his plans.
The then-presidents fallback option was a scheme to pressure then-Vice President Pence, who would oversee the count of Electoral College votes during the January 6, 2021, joint session of Congress, to illegally reject electors from key states that supported Joe Biden and thus subvert the election to keep Trump in office. But Pence refused to play along, repeatedly telling Trump that he did not have the constitutional authority to take such actions.
But Trump nonetheless summoned thousands of his supporters to a rally at the White House that day, and he told the resulting assembly that Pence had the power to keep him in office.
If Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election, he told the crowd an hour before the joint session was scheduled to begin.
Pence held firm. He wrote in a letter released minutes before the session that my oath to support and defend the Constitution constrains me from claiming unilateral authority to determine which electoral votes should be counted and which should not.
The insurrection began. A Trumpist mob broke through police barricades and stormed the U.S. Capitol. The Secret Service rushed Pence to a safe location, Congress abruptly halted its constitutional duty to oversee the peaceful transition of power, and the building went into lockdown.
Trump responded to the assault on the democratic process by attacking Pence. The then-president, who was reportedly watching live Fox coverage of the attack, tweeted, Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution.
As video circulated that members of the mob were chanting Hang Mike Pence, Trump reportedly suggested that Pence deserved it. And with the building under siege, a Trump lawyer told one of Pences aides by email that Pence was responsible.
Pence kept his honor and stood strong against Trumps coup attempt. Law enforcement eventually cleared the building of rioters, Pence brought both houses of Congress back into session, the legislatures resumed their work certifying the electoral vote, and, at 3:42 a.m., the vice president announced that Joe Biden had a majority and would become president. And for a brief time, there was a widespread, bipartisan consensus that the days events had been horrific and that Trump bore responsibility for them.
But then the right-wings propagandists went to work. They created a counternarrative which downplayed the mobs violence and blamed it on federal agitators, winning over the Republican base and helping to rehabilitate the former president. Now the GOP has turned election denial into a core value and the party is about to return Trump to its presidential ticket, even as he continues to claim he won four years ago.
Pence wont be joining him, however. Indeed, Pence, who maintains that Trump was wrong and that the then-president bears responsibility for the insurrection, says he wont be supporting Trump at all in the general election.
Pence wouldnt pretend that Trump won the 2020 election, and he refused to help him remain in power unlawfully, and so he is off the ticket in 2024. And it beggars belief that Trump might pick someone without getting assurances that they would follow through where Pence balked. Journalists understand whats going on here, and they dont serve their viewers, listeners, and readers by hiding the ball.
Indeed, while the contenders have various pluses and minuses, they share two qualities. They all looked at what happened on January 6 and decided they were still willing to take the VP slot, and theyve all spent the last several months publicly supplicating to Trump by winking at 2020 election denial and pooh-poohing questions of whether they would accept the results of the 2024 race.
Trump's coup failed because brave Republicans Pence above all were willing to put their loyalty to the Constitution over their personal loyalty to Trump. By definition, anyone who wants to be his vice president today is saying they would make a different choice. Journalists should keep those stakes front and center as they cover Trumps running mate pick.
The rest is here:
The most important story about Trumps VP is why he needs a new one - Media Matters for America
Trump v. United States Opines On Whether The Vice President Is a Legislative Officer – Reason
In February, 2023, former Vice President Mike Pence invoked the Speech or Debate Clause to challenge a subpoena from the Special Counsel. I explained that, as a matter of text, this argument didn't fly. The Speech or Debate refers to "Senators and Representatives." The Vice President is the President of the Senate, but is not a Senator. However, there are a string of precedents which could support a more functional reading of the Speech of Debate Clause. And, in June 2023, Judge Boasbergfound that Vice President Pence received some protections under the Speech or Debate Clause for his role on January 6. I did not find that decision persuasive as a textual matter, but there is some precedent on point that the court followed.
Part III-B-2 ofTrump v. United Statesreminded me of Pence's case. Here, Chief Justice Roberts discussed whether President Trump's communications with Vice President Pence leading up to, and during, January 6, would be immune from prosecution.
To be sure, the President has an interest in legislation that is being considered in the Senate. And, as President of the Senate, the Vice President plays a unique role in that process. If the Senate is evenly divided, the Vice President can cast a tie-breaking vote. Chief Justice Roberts explains that with respect to legislation, the President has an important role in having communications with the Vice President. These communications would be presumptively immune from any congressional regulations:
[O]ur constitutional system anticipates that the President and Vice President will remain in close contact regarding their official duties over the course of the President's term in office. These two officials are the only ones "elected by the entire Nation." Seila Law; see Art. II, 1. . . . And Article I of course names the Vice President as President of the Senate and gives him a tiebreaking vote. 3, cl. 4. It is thus important for the President to discuss official matters with the Vice President to ensure continuity within the Executive Branch and to advance the President's agenda in Congress and beyond. The Vice President may in practice also serve as one of the President's closest advisers.
I think that argument is correct when discussing legislative sessions. But does it work with regard to the joint session? The Constitution assigns the President of the Senate particular functions during the joint session of Congress. Roberts acknowledges that the President does not have a role in that process:
The question then becomes whether that presumption of immunity is rebutted under the circumstances. When the Vice President presides over the January 6 certification proceeding, he does so in his capacity as President of the Senate. . . . Ibid. Despite the Vice President's expansive role of advising and assisting the President within the Executive Branch, the Vice President's Article I responsibility of "presiding over the Senate" is "not an 'executive branch' function." Memorandum from L. Silberman, Deputy Atty. Gen., to R. Burress, Office of the President, Re: Conflict of Interest Problems Arising Out of the President's Nomination of Nelson A. Rockefeller To Be Vice President Under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the Constitution 2 (Aug. 28, 1974). With respect to the certification proceeding in particular, Congress has legislated extensively to define the Vice President's role in the counting of the electoral votes, see, e.g., 3 U. S. C. 15, and the President plays no direct constitutional or statutory role in that process. So the Government may argue that consideration of the President's communications with the Vice President concerning the certification proceeding does not pose "dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch." Fitzgerald.
Yet Roberts signals that the President's interest in legislation could still extend to the Vice President's role in the joint session:
At the same time, however, the President may frequently rely on the Vice President in his capacity as President of the Senate to advance the President's agenda in Congress. When the Senate is closely divided, for instance, the Vice President's tiebreaking vote may be crucial for confirming the President's nominees and passing laws that align with the President's policies. Applying a criminal prohibition to the President's conversations discussing such matters with the Vice Presidenteven though they concern his role as President of the Senatemay well hinder the President's ability to perform his constitutional functions.
Justice Sotomayor responds in her dissent:
The majority admits that the Vice President's responsibility "'presiding over the Senate' " is "'not an "executive branch" function,'" and it further admits that the President "plays no direct constitutional or statutory role" in the counting of electoral votes. Yet the majority refuses to conclude that Trump lacks immunity for his alleged attempts to "enlist the Vice President to use his ceremonial role at the January 6 certification proceeding to fraudulently alter the election results." Instead, it worries that a prosecution for this conduct might make it harder for the President to use the Vice President "to advance [his] agenda in Congress." Such a prosecution, according to the majority, "may well hinder the President's ability to perform his constitutional functions." Whether a prosecution for this conduct warrants immunity should have been an easy question, but the majority turns it into a debatable one.
If the District Court is correct about the Vice President's role, with regard to the Speech or Debate Clause, I think it would be harder to make the case that the President's discussions with the Vice President about the joint session would not be immune.
Read more here:
Trump v. United States Opines On Whether The Vice President Is a Legislative Officer - Reason
Former Pence adviser blasts Trump trying to distance himself from Project 2025: Ludicrous – Washington Examiner
Olivia Troye, formerly a national security adviser to Vice President Mike Pence, criticized former President Donald Trumps efforts to distance himself from Project 2025 as ludicrous, highlighting its extensive ties to his administration.
This is preposterous, Troye said in a CNN interview. If you look at the collaborators and the authors of this plan, a lot of these people came directly from people that served in Trumps Cabinet during this administration.
Project 2025, a Heritage Foundation initiative, aims to institutionalize Trumpism in the federal government by leveraging executive authority and dismantling some federal agencies.
Democrats have raised objections to several proposals within the project, notably the replacement of civil service positions with political appointees.
Last week, Trump said he knows nothing about Project 2025 but also voiced disagreement with several of its pillars, arguing that some of the ideas are ridiculous and abysmal.
Paul Dans, former chief of staff at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management under Trump, leads the project.
Troye said former Trump administration officials Ben Carson and Ken Cuccinelli are actively involved in Project 2025.
Ben Carson, come on! Hes been out there on the campaign trail with the president, Troye said. So I think this is just ludicrous.
In addition, Trump campaign spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt appeared in one of Project 2025s videos.
This initiative has also garnered support from allies such as Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT)
But I think what this is telling us is that Donald Trump knows that what is written in this plan is so extreme that it is damaging to his possibility of getting elected, Troye said. And thats what hes concerned about.
Troye argued that some of the projects proposals, such as limits to abortion medication and plans to eliminate the Department of Education, are actually harmful to Trumps campaign, which explains his distance from them.
I am a conservative-leaning individual. I am a lifelong Republican. But when I think of the traditional tenets of the GOP, I think of fiscal conservatism, I think of individual liberties, she said.
And quite honestly, if you go through and really read through this plan, this is complete overreach by the federal government on our individual liberties, she said.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Bidens campaign condemned Project 2025 as something that should scare every American.
Hes trying to hide his connections to his allies extreme Project 2025 agenda, Biden said. The only problem? It was written for him by those closest to him.
Continued here:
Former Pence adviser blasts Trump trying to distance himself from Project 2025: Ludicrous - Washington Examiner
Pence slams RNC platform changes on abortion – Washington Examiner
Former Vice President Mike Pence slammed the new Republican National Committee platform on abortion as a profound disappointment in a statement Tuesday.
The RNC platform is a profound disappointment to the millions of pro-life Republicans that have always looked to the Republican Party to stand for life, Pence said.
Now is not the time to surrender any ground in the fight for the right to life, he continued. The 2024 platform removed historic pro-life principles that have long been the foundation of the platform. I urge delegates attending next weeks Republican Convention to restore language to our partys platform recognizing the sanctity of human life and affirming that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed.
The RNCs platform committee approved a 2024 GOP platform on Monday that abandoned language advocating federal abortion limits. The updated platform comes a week before the party is expected to confirm as its presidential nominee former President Donald Trump, who says abortion regulations should be left up to the states.
We proudly stand for families and Life, the platform reads. We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights.
Pence described the new platform as part of a broader retreat in our party, trying to remain vague for political expedience.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
But beyond the politics of the issue is the immorality of ending an unborn human life. We must never lose the moral clarity to say that abortion is wrong, the former vice president added. The GOP platform may be retreating, but we in the pro-life movement never will.
Pence previously called Trumps softened abortion stance a slap in the face and condemned the former president for leading the Republican Party astray on the issue in an April New York Times guest essay.
See the original post here:
Pence slams RNC platform changes on abortion - Washington Examiner