More stories

  • in

    The Trump Documents Case Puts the Justice System on Trial

    The former president’s efforts to defend against multiple felony counts by discrediting law enforcement pose a grave challenge to democracy.Former President Donald J. Trump has a lot at stake in the federal criminal case lodged against him. He could, in theory, go to prison for years. But if he winds up in the dock in front of a jury, it is no exaggeration to suggest that American justice will be on trial as well.History’s first federal indictment against a former president poses one of the gravest challenges to democracy the country has ever faced. It represents either a validation of the rule-of-law principle that even the most powerful face accountability for their actions or the moment when a vast swath of the public becomes convinced that the system has been irredeemably corrupted by partisanship.Mr. Trump, his allies and even some of his Republican rivals have embarked on a strategy to encourage the latter view, arguing that law enforcement has been hijacked by President Biden and the Democrats to take out his strongest opponent for re-election next year. Few if any of them bothered to wait to read the indictment before backing Mr. Trump’s all-caps assertion that it was merely part of the “GREATEST WITCH HUNT OF ALL TIME.” It is now an article of faith, a default tactic or both.Jack Smith, the special counsel, and his prosecutors knew that defense was coming and have labored to avoid any hint of political motivation with a by-the-book approach, securing the assent of judges and grand jurors along the way. Moreover, their indictment laid out a damning series of facts based on security camera video, text messages and testimony from within Mr. Trump’s own team; even some who have defended him in the past say it will be harder to brush aside the evidence in a courtroom than in the court of public opinion.In the public arena, though, it may be a one-sided fight. Mr. Trump and his allies can scream as loudly as they can that the system is unfair, but prosecutors are bound by rules limiting how much they can say in response. To the extent that Democrats defend prosecutors, it may only buttress the point Mr. Trump is trying to make to the audience he is trying to reach.“I think the verdict on democracy ultimately comes down to Republican leaders and Republican voters,” said David Jolly, a former Republican congressman from Florida who left the party during the Trump presidency. “Their current weaponization narrative is dangerous and destabilizing, but seems to reflect the party’s early consensus. If they don’t pivot soon to due process and faith in the system, I think we could have very dark days ahead. I do worry.”Mr. Trump has attacked the Justice Department and Jack Smith, the special counsel in the case, calling him a lunatic.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesPolls suggest that Mr. Trump has made headway in persuading at least his own supporters that any and all allegations against him are just political. After the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, brought state charges against him related to hush money paid to an adult film actress, the former president’s support among Republicans rose, rather than fell.While 60 percent of all adults surveyed by CNN afterward approved of the charges, 76 percent agreed that politics played a role in the prosecution. As for the effect on America’s system, 31 percent said the indictment strengthened democracy, while 31 percent said it weakened it.All of which indicates that the system’s credibility is on the line in a way it has not been before. Many have criticized American justice over the years for systemic racism, excessive punishment, mistreatment of women subjected to assault or other issues, but they did not command the bullhorn of the presidency. When past presidents like Richard M. Nixon or Bill Clinton got in trouble, they defended themselves aggressively, but did not call the whole system into question.“In 1972 to 1974, the Republicans participated as good-faith members of the process,” said Garrett Graff, the author of “Watergate: A New History,” published last year. “They saw their roles as legislators first and Republicans second. They definitely were skeptical” initially of the allegations against Nixon, “but they followed the facts where they led.”Even Nixon’s sharp-tongued vice president, Spiro T. Agnew, was careful about disparaging the justice system broadly. “Agnew, of course, was Nixon’s attack dog, but mainly against the press, not the F.B.I. or the special prosecutor,” Mr. Graff said.Mr. Trump, on the other hand, is holding nothing back as he assails “the ‘Thugs’ from the Department of Injustice” and calls Mr. Smith a “deranged lunatic.” Republicans like Representative Andy Biggs of Arizona have called for dismantling the F.B.I. “We have now reached a war phase,” he wrote on Twitter on Friday. “Eye for an eye.” Elon Musk said the authorities were showing “far higher interest in pursuing Trump compared to other people in politics.”Several of Mr. Trump’s competitors for the Republican presidential nomination joined in. Former Vice President Mike Pence compared the indictment to leaders of “third-world nations” who “use a criminal justice system in their country against their predecessors.” Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida said “the weaponization of federal law enforcement represents a mortal threat to a free society.”The former president’s defenders generally do not address the substance of the 37 counts against him, but instead make a case of selective prosecution that resonates powerfully among many Republicans: What about Mr. Biden? What about Hunter Biden? What about Hillary Clinton?They point to the origin of the Russia investigation against Mr. Trump, citing the recent report by the special counsel John H. Durham that harshly criticized the F.B.I. for its handling of the case even though it did not come up with any new blockbuster revelations of politically motivated misconduct nor result in the conviction of any major figure.They point to Republican congressional inquiries that they say hint at wrongdoing by the Bidens even without confirmation. They point to the continuing federal criminal investigation of the president’s son Hunter, suggesting it has been impeded. And they point to the fact that the president himself is also under investigation over retaining classified documents yet not charged.The differences between the cases, however, are stark, making apples-to-apples comparisons complicated. In the documents investigation, for instance, Mr. Biden’s advisers by all accounts so far returned the papers to the authorities promptly after discovering them. Mr. Pence did the same after a voluntary search found that the former vice president had kept classified documents, and he was recently cleared by the Justice Department because there was no evidence of willful violations of the law.Mr. Trump, by contrast, refused to hand over all the documents he had taken from the White House — even after being subpoenaed for them. According to the indictment, he orchestrated an expansive scheme to hide papers and feed lies to authorities seeking them. On two occasions, the indictment charged, Mr. Trump showed secret documents to people without security clearance and indicated that he knew he was not supposed to.As for seeking to weaponize the Justice Department, there was ample evidence that Mr. Trump sought to do just that while in office. He openly and aggressively pushed his attorneys general to prosecute his perceived enemies and drop cases against his friends and allies, making no pretense that he was seeking equal and independent justice. His friends-and-family approach to his pardon power extended clemency to associates and those who had access to him through them.He chipped away at so many norms during his four years in office that it is no wonder that institutions have faced credibility problems. Indeed, he has made clear that he does not respect the boundaries that constrained other presidents. Since leaving office, he has called for “termination” of the Constitution so that he could be returned to power without waiting for another election and vowed that he would devote a second term to “retribution” against his foes while pardoning supporters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to stop the transfer of power.There is no known evidence, on the other hand, that Mr. Biden has played any role in the investigations against Mr. Trump. Unlike the voluble Mr. Trump, he has made a point of not even publicly commenting on individual prosecutions, saying he respects the autonomy of the Justice Department.Attorney General Merrick B. Garland has been sensitive to the matter of perception and sought to insulate the inquiries by appointing Mr. Smith, a career prosecutor who is not registered with either political party, as a special counsel with a guarantee of independence absent manifest wrongdoing on his part.But that was never going to convince Mr. Trump or his most fervent supporters of the fairness of the process. At bottom, the former president and front-runner for his party’s nomination to be the next president is being charged by a prosecutor appointed by an appointee of the man he hopes to beat. It is a recipe for distrust, especially when stoked by a defendant who has mastered the politics of grievance and victimhood.Will that result in lasting damage to democracy? Even some who support charging Mr. Trump fear that it may. Still, some who have studied politically fraught investigations counseled patience. There will be fireworks. Many will doubt the credibility of the system. But in the end, they said, the system will survive just as it has for more than two centuries.“It’s messy and uncomfortable for the generation living through it, but the system is durable enough to win out,” said Ken Gormley, the president of Duquesne University and the author of books on Watergate and the Clinton investigations. “As painful as the next year is likely to be as the criminal justice system grinds forward toward a fair verdict in the Mar-a-Lago documents case — whatever that outcome may be — we are fortunate that our predecessors have spent 234 years shoring up the bulwark.” More

  • in

    Cheryl Hines Didn’t Expect to Be Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Running Mate

    The “Curb Your Enthusiasm” actress is beloved in Hollywood. In supporting her husband’s campaign, is she normalizing his often dangerous ideas?On a quiet Thursday in May, there was almost no indication that anyone in Cheryl Hines’s house was running for president. A hockey stick poked out from a bush in front of the Spanish colonial home in the Brentwood neighborhood of Los Angeles. Leaning up against a wall outside were several surfboards, caked with wax, at least one of which belonged to her husband, the 69-year-old environmental lawyer and vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who had announced his candidacy for the 2024 Democratic nomination only four weeks earlier. In the foyer, the family’s three dogs wagged their tails near a portrait of Mr. Kennedy’s famous uncle and aunt, John F. Kennedy and Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, by the artist Romero Britto. Over the door hung an even larger portrait, of Ms. Hines and Mr. Kennedy, also by Mr. Britto, a friend of the couple.Ms. Hines, 57, has been in many spotlights during her three decades as a professional actress, most famously for her role as Larry David’s wife on “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” but this new one is different. After a lifetime of not being particularly political, she finds herself not only married to a man from a storied American political family, but also attached to his long-shot campaign for the highest office in the country. (Mr. Kennedy is the son of former United States Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy.) And it seems clear he will need Ms. Hines, who is in the unique position of being more recognizable to some voters than her candidate husband, to help soften his image for those put off by his crusade against vaccines and history of promoting conspiracy theories, such as the false narrative that Bill Gates champions vaccines for financial gain. “I support Bobby and I want to be there for him, and I want him to feel loved and supported by me,” said Ms. Hines, who is a registered Democrat. “And at the same time, I don’t feel the need to go to every political event, because I do have my own career.”Mr. Kennedy, in an interview with The New York Times a few weeks later, said that he sees his wife as crucial to his success. “I think ultimately if I get elected, Cheryl will have played a huge role in that,” he said. “She’s an enormous asset to me, and I don’t think we’ve really unveiled her in her true power yet.” He added: “She has a gift that she’s kind of mesmerizing when she’s on TV and she’s talking, because she’s so spontaneous and she has this what I would call a quick, a fast-twitch reflex when it comes to conversation.”Friends keep checking in on her. Elections can get ugly, and Mr. Kennedy’s campaign, seemingly by design, will put him in contact with many of this country’s more unconventional voters.After a lifetime of not being particularly political, Ms. Hines finds herself not only married to a man from a storied American political family, but also attached to his long-shot campaign for the highest office in the country.Sophie Park for The New York Times“I’m bracing myself for it,” said Ms. Hines of the public scrutiny that comes with campaigning, while sitting in her home office. On the bookshelf, there’s a plaque of her Hollywood Walk of Fame star and a humorous framed photo of Mr. David in a turtleneck and fake mustache, holding a pipe with a note congratulating her. “It is hard not to live in that space of, ‘Oh my gosh, what’s going to happen? And is it going to be as terrible as I think?’”In her first interview since her husband announced his candidacy, Ms. Hines initially appeared at ease. She has done hundreds of interviews throughout her career, and as a seasoned improv actress, is known to be quick on her feet and sharply funny. She cut her teeth in the Groundlings, a Los Angeles-based improv troupe; “Curb” is outlined but unscripted. In some ways, answering questions from a stranger is just another form of: “Yes, and.” With improv, “it’s challenging because you don’t know what’s coming next. You don’t know what the audience is going to shout out,” she said. “‘Where are these two people?’ ‘They’re scooping poop in the lion’s den at the zoo!’ Lights go down. Lights go up.”“You have to commit 100 percent,” she continued, “or it’s not funny or interesting.”But here’s a scenario that would challenge even an improv master: You are beloved by fans and peers, and have managed to steer clear of controversy your entire career, but fall in love with a man who touches it off regularly with his often outlandish claims — a man who was kicked off Instagram along with his anti-vaccine nonprofit, Children’s Health Defense, for spreading misinformation during the pandemic. (Instagram reinstated Mr. Kennedy’s personal account earlier this month, because of his candidacy.) Who last year drew criticism and later apologized when, at a rally against vaccine mandates in Washington, he spoke against 5G technology, surveillance and what he called “technological mechanisms for control” and said, “even in Hitler’s Germany, you could cross the Alps to Switzerland. You could hide in an attic like Anne Frank did.” Who just this week suggested “S.S.R.I.s and benzos and other drugs” might be responsible for America’s school-shooting problem. (Mr. Kennedy told The Times that assault rifles “clearly make the world more dangerous and we should figure out a way to limit that impact,” but added, “there’s something else happening.”)Now, he is running for president, and you — “a genuine ray of light,” says the producer Suzanne Todd, and whom actor Alec Baldwin has said “everybody loves” — are along for the ride. After years of being able to distance yourself from your husband’s most problematic views, you now risk being seen as at least tacitly embracing them by standing by and smiling if he says things on the campaign trail that are demonstrably untrue.A note of congratulations from Larry David for Ms. Hines’s star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.Chantal Anderson for The New York TimesA plaque for Ms. Hines’s star.Chantal Anderson for The New York TimesIntroduced by Larry DavidMs. Hines was raised in Tallahassee, Fla., a thousand miles away— geographically and culturally — from the Kennedy compound in Hyannis, Mass., where she and Mr. Kennedy wed in 2014. Her father, who worked in construction, and her mother, an assistant at the Department of Revenue, were private about their politics, if they even had any. “If I ever asked my mom who she voted for, she would tell me it’s nobody’s business and it was her own secret,” Ms. Hines said. “I don’t recall my dad ever once talking about politics or current events, so it was not part of my life. Really, the only thing I knew about the Kennedys was what I learned in public school, in history.”After cosmetology school and the University of Central Florida, her first acting job was at Universal Studios, where she performed the shower scene from “Psycho” up to 15 times a day for a live audience. It was a gig that involved standing in a flesh-colored body suit while an audience member stabbed her with a rubber knife. In her 30s — practically of a certain age in Hollywood years — Ms. Hines was still paying her dues: bartending, working as the personal assistant to the filmmaker and actor Rob Reiner and going to improv classes. Her break came in 1999, when she was cast in “Curb Your Enthusiasm.” In 2002, the show won the first of its many Emmys and Golden Globes. Ms. Hines recalled being backstage at the Golden Globe Awards and running into Harrison Ford. When he stopped to congratulate her, she extended her hand and said, “I’m Cheryl Hines. Harrison Ford said, ‘I know who you are,’ and I thought, Oh my God, what?”She and Mr. Kennedy met in 2006 when Mr. David, a longtime friend of Mr. Kennedy’s, introduced them at a ski-weekend fund-raiser in Banff, Canada, for Waterkeeper Alliance, an environmental nonprofit co-founded by Mr. Kennedy. Ms. Hines had no plans to ski, “but the next thing you know, we’re in skis and we’re on a ski lift,” she said. “I was looking at Larry like, ‘What is happening?’ He’s like, ‘Yeah,’ giving an indication like, ‘That’s Bobby.’” Ms. Hines said she was aware of Mr. Kennedy’s work as an environmental lawyer, but “I still didn’t know too much about the politics of it all.”By then, Ms. Hines was well entrenched in her own philanthropic work: for the nonprofit United Cerebral Palsy, after her nephew was diagnosed, and for under-resourced schools. “Cheryl was always reachable and accessible to me,” said Jacqueline Sanderlin, a former principal and district administrator of the Compton Unified School District. “She wasn’t a mercenary person. She wasn’t doing this for herself.”Ms. Hines’s break came in 1999, when she was cast in “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” the HBO show created by Mr. David.Jason Merritt/Getty ImagesMs. Hines and Mr. Kennedy spent time together at another ski event in 2011, when they each were going through a divorce, and eventually began dating long distance. Mr. David never intended for them to connect romantically, Ms. Hines noted. (“Poor Larry,” she said, looking up at the ceiling.) Mr. David told her the relationship was a bad idea, which she said was in jest. “It’s part of the fun of Larry. You just know no matter what you say to him, he’s going to say, ‘Why would you do that? Are you crazy?’”She was attracted to Mr. Kennedy’s wit. “Bobby is very smart and funny, although a lot of people don’t see the funny side,” she said. “He also has this sense of adventure that will catapult me outside of my comfort zone, which I find exciting most of the time.” (How about now, with him running for office? “It seems like, ‘What am I getting myself into?’ Yeah, but, scuba diving.”)Their relationship made headlines when tragedy struck: In May of 2012, Mr. Kennedy’s second wife, Mary Richardson Kennedy, died by suicide at her home in Bedford, N.Y. Ms. Hines stayed on the West Coast while Mr. Kennedy focused on his children. “I gave him the space and time to heal,” she said. “I think grief is very personal.”When Ms. Hines and Mr. Kennedy got married two years later, Mr. Kennedy gave a speech in which he repeatedly called Ms. Hines “unflappable.” “It was to the level where we joked about it afterward,” said Ms. Todd, a close friend of Ms. Hines. “But he’s actually right, because Cheryl is unflappable.”Her career had continued at a clip: “Curb” returned in 2017 after a six-year hiatus. She joined the cast of the film “A Bad Moms Christmas” along with Susan Sarandon and Christine Baranski, guest-starred in a slew of sitcoms and started a podcast about documentaries with the comedian Tig Notaro.Mr. Kennedy had also been busy. In 2016, he founded the World Mercury Project, which became the Children’s Health Defense, a nonprofit that advocates against vaccines for children. He co-wrote a book on vaccines and began posting anti-vaccine propaganda on social media.During the pandemic, Mr. Kennedy became an even louder voice in the anti-vaccine movement, encouraging people to “do your own research,” even as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization deemed the Covid vaccines safe and effective.Mr. Kennedy has long expressed skepticism about vaccines, but his intensity grew with his platform and audience. He published another book, “Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health,” which has blurbs from the former Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson, the director Oliver Stone and the lawyer Alan Dershowitz, among others. Ms. Hines stayed out of the fray for most of the pandemic. On her Instagram, she shared images of herself wearing a mask, as well as posts about her involvement with Waterkeeper Alliance — notably never mentioning Children’s Health Defense — and didn’t comment on her husband’s vaccine rhetoric. But then Mr. Kennedy made his Holocaust remark, and claimed that Dr. Anthony Fauci, the most visible public health leader fighting Covid, was orchestrating “fascism.”“My husband’s opinions are not a reflection of my own. While we love each other, we differ on many current issues,” Ms. Hines wrote on Twitter. The next day, she tweeted again, calling the Holocaust reference “reprehensible.” “The atrocities that millions endured during the Holocaust should never be compared to anyone or anything,” she wrote.Ms. Hines’s first acting job was at Universal Studios, where she performed the shower scene from “Psycho” up to 15 times a day.Chantal Anderson for The New York TimesMr. Kennedy said it was a difficult time for them. “I saw how it was affecting her life and I said to her, ‘We should just announce that we are separated,’ so that you can have some distance from me,” he said. “We wouldn’t really be doing anything, we would just — I felt so desperate about protecting her at a time where my statements and my decisions were impacting her.” He said he even wrote up a news release, though it never went out. Ms. Hines said that was never an option, although she was upset with Mr. Kennedy for his choice of words. “It was also frustrating to hear Bobby say things that could so easily be twisted into snippets that misrepresented his meaning and didn’t represent who he is,” she said.Several months later, Mr. Kennedy approached her to say he was considering running for office. “It was definitely a discussion,” Ms. Hines said, “because he said, ‘If you don’t want me to do it, I won’t.’” She ultimately agreed. On June 5, Ms. Hines was pulled into a Twitter Spaces conversation with Mr. Kennedy and Elon Musk, even though she hadn’t intended to participate. After she gave a measured comment about how she feels about her husband running for office — “It’s been really interesting,” she said, slowly, “and at times exciting” — Mr. Kennedy said that, to cope with the campaign, Ms. Hines had joked she was going to “invent a new kind of margarita that had Xanax in it.”Seeing ‘Both Sides’ on VaccinesMr. Kennedy’s traction has been surprising. A recent CNN poll found that Mr. Kennedy had support from 20 percent of Democratic or Democratic-leaning voters (though not the multiple members of his own family who have publicly said they will support President Biden.) Jack Dorsey, the former chief executive of Twitter, has endorsed him. Steve Bannon has been supportive of Mr. Kennedy’s campaign, floating the idea of a Trump-Kennedy ticket; Alex Jones and other right-wing conspiracy theorists have also expressed enthusiasm. Mr. Kennedy said he has never met Mr. Jones and has “never spoken to Mr. Bannon or Mr. Jones about my presidential campaign.” When asked twice if he would reject an endorsement from Mr. Jones, who lost a $1 billion lawsuit for repeatedly saying the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting that killed 20 first graders and six educators in Newtown, Conn., was a government hoax, Mr. Kennedy did not respond. Mr. Kennedy said that he would “love to go on Steve Bannon’s show, but Cheryl just can’t bear that,” so he has not. Back at her home in Los Angeles, what Ms. Hines seemed most excited to talk about was Hines+Young, the eco-friendly company she recently started with her 19-year-old daughter, Catherine Young. It is mostly skin care and candles, and one scent is called Hyannis Seagrass. This — the skin care, the podcast, the film and TV projects — was her world, not whatever was happening on the campaign trail.Ms. Hines does have issues she cares about, including school safety, and “bodily autonomy,” which she said includes abortion but more broadly is the ability to “make decisions about our body with a doctor, not with a politician.” (She declined to comment on whether that includes vaccines.) She had no canned answers prepared about her husband’s political career, but unlike in her improv, seemed unsure what to say. “Bobby is very smart and funny, although a lot of people don’t see the funny side,” Ms. Hines said about her husband. “He also has this sense of adventure that will catapult me outside of my comfort zone, which I find exciting most of the time.”Krista Schlueter for The New York TimesOn potentially being first lady: “I haven’t really spent time in that space, because we’re not there yet.” On how much she has prepped for the trail: “Every day I learn a lot.” On which current issues, specifically, she was referring to when she tweeted that she and her husband “differ”: “OK. Let me think here.” There was a 49-second pause then, which didn’t resolve in a clear answer. Ms. Hines, who appeared in a 2006 public service announcement encouraging people to get a whooping cough booster vaccine — and who had her own daughter vaccinated when she was young — had not previously commented on Mr. Kennedy’s views. “I see both sides of the vaccine situation,” she said. “There’s one side that feels scared if they don’t get the vaccine, and there’s the side that feels scared if they do get the vaccine, because they’re not sure if the vaccine is safe. And I understand that.”“So if Bobby is standing up and saying, ‘Well, are we sure that they’re safe and every vaccine has been tested properly? That doesn’t seem too much to ask,” she continued. “That seems like the right question to be asking.” Ms. Hines tried to dodge several questions about her views on vaccines, including “Do you think vaccines are dangerous for children?,” eventually answering in a manner that didn’t criticize her husband or reveal much about her own opinion.And Mr. Kennedy has been asking questions about the safety of vaccines for years, his family name and work as an environmental lawyer giving credibility to his skepticism, which he spreads through Children’s Health Defense. In 2019, family members wrote an open letter in which they said, in part, that although they love Mr. Kennedy, “on vaccines he is wrong” and called him “complicit in sowing distrust of the science behind vaccines.” In 2021, the Center for Countering Digital Hate asserted that Mr. Kennedy was one of 12 people responsible for the majority of anti-vaccine content on Facebook. Mr. Kennedy’s campaign website makes no mention of vaccines. Instead, he has positioned himself as a fighter for the middle class and a crusader against corruption, in an effort to appeal to what he has called “all the homeless Republicans and Democrats and Independents who are Americans first.” He wrote in an email to The Times that “the principal villain in the war in Ukraine is Vladimir Putin” but also blamed the war on “State Department and White House Neocons.” In May, he said on Russell Brand’s “Stay Free” podcast that Ukraine is “a victim of U.S. aggression” by way of a “proxy war.” Language included on his campaign website states his intention is to “make America strong again.”Upon learning that an opinion piece in The Washington Post had recently compared her husband to former President Donald J. Trump, Ms. Hines’s eyes widened. She tried to make sense of the observation.“His skin is much thicker than mine, let’s just say that,” she said. Mr. Kennedy’s father was killed while campaigning; his uncle was assassinated in office — a horrific loss for the country, but also for a family. “He doesn’t talk about that,” Ms. Hines said. “He’s not afraid of much. I can’t think of even one thing he’s afraid of.”In an interview with Breitbart News Daily — Mr. Kennedy has appeared frequently on right-wing cable shows and podcasts — he said, in response to a question that involved the phrase “cancel culture,” that Ms. Hines’s career had already suffered because of her support for his candidacy. Ms. Hines clarified: “I haven’t lost any jobs because of my support for his candidacy, but there was a project I’m involved in where there was a pause for discussion about how his candidacy might affect what we are doing but it has been resolved.” Mr. Kennedy added that so far, “I feel a lot of support and love from most of her friends, including Larry.” (In a text, Mr. David clarified: “Yes love and support, but I’m not ‘supporting’ him.”)“It was definitely a discussion,” Ms. Hines said about Mr. Kennedy’s decision to run for president, “because he said, ‘If you don’t want me to do it, I won’t.’”Chantal Anderson for The New York Times“But I’m sure there’s people who just don’t talk to me about it, who feel uncomfortable or, you know, whatever,” Mr. Kennedy continued. Ms. Hines said she was getting used to people wanting to talk to her about “their political feelings and thoughts.” Her strategy is to deflect. She said that she responds with a version of, “This is probably something you should talk about with Bobby, although I’m happy to hear your thoughts.” (The day after Mr. Kennedy announced his candidacy, Mr. Reiner, Ms. Hines’s friend and former boss, tweeted his support for President Biden.) Her industry friends, to her relief, are also consumed with their own affairs. “I went to this poker charity tournament the other night, and I thought everybody was going to be really talking to me about politics,” she said. But instead, “everybody was talking about the writers’ strike.”Ms. Hines isn’t a stiff person. Her personality comes out most in the lighter moments: While talking about a scene she recalled from her time with the Groundlings, Ms. Hines broke out into an impersonation of Cher singing “The Hills Are Alive.” She gushed as she talked about her love for her daughter, and how (not completely unlike her character in “A Bad Moms Christmas,” who sniffs her adult daughter’s hair) one of the reasons she wanted to work with her is to keep her close. Ms. Hines is used to talking about her work, too; her upcoming projects include the 12th season of “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” a new season of the music game show “I Can See Your Voice,” on which she is a judge and the comedic film “Popular Theory.”But when it comes to the campaign, Ms. Hines is more guarded. “This feels different, because it feels like every word is important,” she said. “Before this, really, my world was just about comedy, so I could make light of things. But now I understand people are listening in a different way, and I know that it’s really important to them. ”As the interview wound down, she laid out several Hines+Young body creams on the coffee table to smell. “It’s all about taking care of yourself and relaxing,” she said. “So it’s hilarious that it’s launching right now.”She then walked over to a bookshelf behind the sofa, where white T-shirts with “Kennedy24” printed across the front were rolled up and stacked, like towels at a gym. “I’m going to give you a T-shirt,” she said. “I don’t know who you’re voting for, and you can do whatever you want with it.”She looked around the room again, and then toward the door. “I have all these Kennedy T-shirts.” More

  • in

    Trump’s Indictment Puts Us Into Uncharted Waters

    Former President Donald Trump finds himself once again facing indictment, this time in federal court, after an investigation into his handling of classified documents after departing the White House. The prospect of putting Mr. Trump on trial for serious crimes and sending him to prison has many Americans feeling giddy: Finally, justice might be done.Such reactions are understandable, but news of Mr. Trump’s legal jeopardy shouldn’t blind us to the political jeopardy that now confronts the nation.Other countries have tried, convicted and imprisoned former presidents, but the United States never has. We’ve been fortunate in this regard. Legal processes establish and maintain legitimacy by the appearance of impartiality. But when a public figure associated with one political party is prosecuted by officials associated with another, such appearances can become impossible to uphold. This is especially so when the public figure is a populist adept at exposing (and accusing opponents of concealing) base and self-interested motives behind righteous rhetoric about the rule of law.This corrosive dynamic is even more pronounced when the public figure is not only a former official but also a potential future one. Mr. Trump is running for president against President Biden, whose attorney general, Merrick Garland, appointed the special counsel Jack Smith. That’s a scenario seemingly tailor-made to confirm and vindicate Mr. Trump’s longstanding claim that he’s the victim of a politically motivated witch hunt.We don’t have to speculate about the immediate political consequences. Public-spirited and law-abiding Americans believe the appropriate response of voters to news that their favored candidate faces indictment is to turn on him and run the other way. But the populist politics that are Mr. Trump’s specialty operate according to an inverse logic. Before the end of March, polls of the Republican primary electorate showed him hovering in the mid-40s and leading his nearest rival, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, by about 15 points. By the end of May, Mr. Trump was in the mid-50s and leading Mr. DeSantis by roughly 30 points.What happened at the end of March to elevate Mr. Trump’s standing? He was indicted by the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg.Hard as it may be for some of us to believe, Mr. Trump’s indictment by the special counsel on federal charges could well boost him further, placing him in a position of even greater advantage against his rivals for the Republican nomination.That possibility typically prompts one of two responses from Democrats: one narrowly political (not to say cynical), the other more high-minded and focused on the law and public morals.The political response sees Mr. Trump benefiting in the G.O.P. primaries from indictment as a good thing, because the former president appears to be the most beatable alternative for Mr. Biden to face in the fall of 2024, and that will be even truer when Mr. Trump is embroiled in a federal trial on major charges and facing possible prison time. What’s good for Mr. Trump in the primaries, in other words, will be terrible for him in the general election.This may well be true, but not necessarily. Anyone who becomes one of two major party nominees has a shot at winning the White House. That’s especially true in our era of stark partisan polarization and intense negative partisanship. That Mr. Trump would be running against an opponent with persistently low approval ratings who will be 81 years old on Election Day 2024 only makes a Biden-Trump matchup more uncertain.The other response dismisses such concerns entirely. Let justice be done, we are told, though the heavens fall. To weigh political considerations in determining whether someone, even a former and possibly future president, should be prosecuted is to supposedly commit a grievous offense against the rule of law, because no one is above the law and the consequences of holding him or her to account shouldn’t matter.This is a powerful argument and one seemingly vindicated in the case of Mr. Trump, who has now managed to get himself ensnared in legal trouble in multiple jurisdictions dealing with a wide range of possible crimes. At a certain point, the logic of the law applying to everyone equally demands that the process be seen through.But that doesn’t mean we should deny the gravity of the potential consequences. Mr. Trump is not a standard-issue politician who happened to run afoul of corruption statutes. He’s a man who rose once to the presidency and seeks to return to it by mobilizing and enhancing mass suspicion of public institutions and officials. That’s why one of the first things he said after announcing the indictment on Thursday night was to proclaim it was “a DARK DAY for the United States of America.” It’s why die-hard supporters like Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio tweeted: “Sad day for America. God Bless President Trump.” It’s likely that tens of millions of our fellow citizens agree with the sentiment.To most Americans, such a reaction to news of Mr. Trump’s indictment seems unimaginable. But it’s clearly something sincerely felt by many. Our country has a history of lionizing outlaws — folk heroes who defy authority, especially when they claim to speak for, channel and champion the grievances and resentments of ordinary people against those in positions of power and influence. From the beginning of his 2016 campaign, Mr. Trump has portrayed himself as just such a man of defiance, eager to serve as a tribune for those who feel left behind, denigrated and humiliated by members of the establishment.That’s why the more concerted opposition Mr. Trump has faced from law enforcement, the mainstream media, Congress and other prominent people in our country and culture, the more popular he has become within his party. Efforts to rein him in — to defeat him politically and legally — have often backfired, vindicating him and his struggle in the eyes of his supporters.There’s no reason at all to suppose the prospect of Mr. Trump’s ending up a convicted criminal would disrupt this dynamic. On the contrary, it’s far more likely to transform him into something resembling a martyr to millions of Americans — and in the process to wrest those devoted supporters free from attachment to the rule of law altogether.How politically radical could the base of the Republican Party become over the 17 months between now and the 2024 presidential election? There’s really no way to know. We are heading into uncharted and turbulent waters.Damon Linker, a former columnist at The Week, writes the newsletter Notes From the Middleground and is a senior fellow in the Open Society Project at the Niskanen Center.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    This Is Not the Time for a Third Presidential Candidate

    I’ve long been a fan of No Labels, the organization that works to reduce political polarization and Washington gridlock. I spoke at its launch event in 2010. I’ve admired the Problem Solvers Caucus, a No Labels-inspired effort that brings Republicans and Democrats in Congress together to craft bipartisan legislation. Last September, when No Labels wanted to go public with its latest project, I was happy to use my column to introduce it to people.That project is a $70 million effort to secure ballot access for a potential third presidential candidate in 2024. America needs an insurance policy, the folks at No Labels argued. If the two major parties continue to go off to the extremes, then voters should have a more moderate option, a unity ticket of Republicans and Democrats who are willing to compromise to get things done.In the nine months since my column appeared, No Labels analysts have conducted polling that they believe shows that their as yet to be selected third candidate could actually win the White House. Today, they argue, the electorate is roughly evenly split among those who lean Democratic, those who lean Republican and the unaffiliated. There’s clearly an opening for a third option.Furthermore, voters are repelled by the thought of a Joe Biden-Donald Trump rematch. Large majorities don’t want either man to run. Fifty-nine percent of voters surveyed in that No Labels analysis said if that happened, they would consider voting for a third moderate candidate. If the No Labels candidate won just 61 percent of this disaffected group and the remainder was split evenly between two other candidates, he or she would capture a plurality of the electorate and could win the presidency.This is a unique historic opportunity, the No Labels folks conclude, to repair politics and end the gridlock on issues like guns, abortion and immigration.Others disagree. Official Washington, especially Democratic Washington, has come down on No Labels like a ton of bricks.Moderates are now at war with one another. The centrist Democratic group Third Way produced a blistering research memo arguing that a third presidential candidate would have no chance of winning. It would siphon off votes from Democrats and hand the White House back to Trump.The analysts at Third Way point out that no third-party candidate has won any state’s electoral votes since 1968. There is no viable path to 270 electoral votes. The No Labels candidate would have to carry not just swing states, but also deep-blue states like Maryland and Massachusetts and deep-red ones like Utah and Montana, which is not going to happen.The simple fact is, the Third Way analysts argue, Democrats need moderates more than Republicans do. Because there are more conservatives than progressives in America, Democrats need to get 60 percent of the self-identified moderate votes to win nationally, they say, while Republicans need to get only 40 percent. You suck those voters away to a third party and you’ve just handed the keys to the Oval Office to Trump.Personally, I have a lot of sympathy for the No Labels effort. I’ve longed for a party that would revive the moderate strain in American politics exemplified by Alexander Hamilton, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, John McCain and contemporaries like Michael Bloomberg.If the 2024 election was Bernie Sanders versus Ron DeSantis, I’d support the No Labels effort 1,000 percent. An independent candidate would bring this moderate tradition into the 21st century, and if Sanders or DeSantis ended up winning, his agenda might not be my cup of tea, but I could live with him.Donald Trump changes the equation. A second Trump presidency represents an unprecedented threat to our democracy. In my view, our sole focus should be to defeat Trump. This is not the time to be running risky experiments, the outcomes of which none of us can foresee.Furthermore, I’m persuaded that a third candidate would indeed hurt Biden more. Trump voters are solidly behind him, while Biden voters are wobbly. Then there’s the group of voters called the “double-haters.” They dislike both candidates. The Wall Street Journal recently quoted Tony Fabrizio, a Republican pollster, who said Biden was up by 39 points with such voters.Finally, if America wants a relative moderate who is eager to do bipartisan deal making, it already has one. In fact, he’s already sitting in the Oval Office. Joe Biden doesn’t get sufficient credit, but he has negotiated a bunch of deals on infrastructure, the CHIPS Act, guns, the debt limit. As long as Biden is running, we don’t need a third option.I’m not saying my friends at No Labels have chosen the wrong strategy. I’m saying this is not the right election to carry out their strategy. I wouldn’t blame them for keeping their options open for a few more months (something unexpected might happen). But if it’s still a 50-50 Biden-Trump race in the fall, I hope they postpone their efforts for four years. With Trump on the scene, the potential rewards don’t justify the risks.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Chris Christie Is Running for the Nomination of a Party That Doesn’t Exist

    GOFFSTOWN, N.H. — After watching Chris Christie lambaste Donald Trump at the standing-room-only town hall where he announced his presidential campaign, Catherine Johnson, who grew up in Republican political circles, was delighted. “It was vintage Chris Christie and I loved it,” said Johnson, a 63-year-old retiree. “I believe I know where he stands on the issues. And I love where he stands on Donald Trump.”Johnson, whose father, William Johnson, was once the head of New Hampshire’s Republican Party, supported Chris Christie, the former New Jersey governor, when he ran for president in 2016. She’s planning to volunteer for him this time around. “Governor Christie still reminds me of what a moderate Republican is,” she said. She was happy that he hadn’t spoken about banning books or critical race theory; at the packed event, which went on for more than two hours, culture war issues barely came up. “Honestly, we don’t care about that stuff very much,” Johnson said. “I know I don’t.”But to vote for Christie in the primary, Johnson would have to change her voter registration, because during Trump’s presidency she became a Democrat. And though she’s not thrilled with Joe Biden — “It’s hard for me to watch him give a speech because he’s so prone to gaffes,” she said — she’s not even sure she’d vote for Christie in the general, because she fears a Republican president would empower the “crazy” Republicans in the House and the Senate. “If Chris Christie is the nominee,” she said, “I’m going to have to think really hard about my vote.”Christie’s problem is that he’s running for the nomination of a party that no longer exists. In a G.O.P. where people like Johnson still felt at home, his pitch, a wholesale rejection not just of Trump but also of Trumpism, would make sense. But that Republican Party is dead; by backing Trump in 2016, Christie helped kill it. So it’s hard to figure out what he thinks he’s up to, even if his kamikaze attacks on the ex-president — “a lonely, self-consumed, self-serving mirror hog” — are fun to watch.The ex-governor certainly has fans. At his launch event here, you could almost see how he’d convinced himself that he might have a chance. A standing ovation will do that for you. I’d expected at least a few wary conservatives, if not outright MAGA trolls, in the crowd. But while there were Trump supporters protesting outside, the auditorium at Saint Anselm College was full of people hungry for Christie’s message. I asked David Dickey, who’d voted for Trump twice but turned against him after Jan. 6, what he’d do if Trump was the nominee again. He’d never vote for Biden, he said. Instead, he just wouldn’t cast a ballot.Mark Peterson for The New York TimesMark Peterson for The New York TimesThere aren’t nearly enough people like this, however, for Christie to win the Republican nomination. One March poll found that while only 40 percent of registered voters view Trump favorably, 81 percent of Republicans do. Christie seems to believe he can change these numbers. He argued, in fact, that there are no such things as “Trump voters,” only people who voted for Trump. “I don’t think he owns them,” he said during the town hall. “He thinks he owns them.” After 2016, Christie said, Trump also thought he owned the general electorate. “And what did they show him in 2020? Not so fast.”But the general electorate changed only around the edges between 2016 and 2020. Whereas to have a chance, Christie would have to catalyze a moral and ideological revolution inside his party.His central insight, that the only way to beat Trump is by taking him on directly, is almost certainly correct. It was a pleasure to watch him mock his passive-aggressive competitors with their coded criticisms of the ex-president. He intoned, with mock earnestness, “We need a leader who looks forward, not backwards.” The crowd burst out laughing. Then, as if solving a puzzle, he exclaimed: “Oooh! You’re talking about the way he still thinks the 2020 election was stolen! And you won’t say it wasn’t stolen!”It was even more amusing listening to Christie tear into Trump. He called him a “bitter, angry man who wants power back for himself” and told a story about Trump urging him, when he was governor, to declare bankruptcy for the State of New Jersey. He imitated Trump like Alec Baldwin would on “Saturday Night Live.” He even went after Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner — whose father, you’ll remember, he helped put in prison when he was a prosecutor — for the $2 billion investment Kushner secured from a fund led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia. “The grift from this family is breathtaking,” he said.But my enjoyment of his newfound Resistance shtick doesn’t bode well for Christie. The people he needs to win over are not liberal New York Times columnists, but voters who hate liberal New York Times columnists. The trick, for a Republican, is going to be painting Trump as a weak loser who will sabotage right-wing priorities. At times Christie tried to do this, as when he criticized Trump for his failure to build the border wall and repeal the Affordable Care Act. But many of his criticisms were decidedly centrist. He attacked Trump for “idolizing” Vladimir Putin and trying to extort President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, admitting, in an offhand line, that Biden deserves admiration for uniting Europe against Russian aggression. He praised John McCain, expounded on the necessity of compromise and agreed with one questioner that Trump had “traumatized” the country.At one point, in response to a question about drug prices, Christie spoke about the need to protect pharmaceutical innovation, lauding Pfizer’s investment in mRNA vaccines. I appreciate that he won’t pander to his party’s Covid skepticism, but I also can’t imagine this going over well with the Republican electorate. Later, in response to a question about “reproductive justice” from a young woman who appeared to be pro-choice, he said the matter should be entirely left up to the states, which should be free to enact laws as permissive or as restrictive as they wish. That might be a good stance for a general election, but it is sure to alienate influential right-wing activists.So what is Christie up to? One theory is that he wants to redeem himself after his humiliating embrace of Trump by filleting him on the debate stage, much as he did to Marco Rubio in 2016. But to qualify for the debates, Republican candidates must have at least 1 percent support across several polls, have at least 40,000 individual donors from 20 states or territories and pledge to support whoever wins the Republican nomination. Even if Christie clears the polling and donor thresholds, he’s already sworn never to back Trump again, and his entire campaign is premised on Trump’s total unfitness.Maybe Alan Steinberg, a former Bush administration official and a columnist for Insider NJ, was on to something when he speculated that Christie might eventually run as an independent. “Given the virtual impossibility of Christie winning the 2024 G.O.P. presidential nomination, would he be willing to accept the role of the presidential candidate of a 2024 center-right independent party?” Steinberg wrote in April. After all, if Trump is ultimately nominated to face Biden, a contest most Americans do not want to reprise, the clamor for third-party candidates is likely to be intense.Or maybe Christie really thinks the force of his personality is so great that he can single-handedly turn his party around. “I’ve seen some of the press coverage of me getting ready to run, and there’s this thing like, ‘Christie doesn’t really care about winning, all he cares about doing is destroying Trump,’” he said. “Now let me ask you something. How are those two things mutually exclusive?” The crowd burst into applause. A test for Christie will be whether he can sustain his bluster in front of an audience that doesn’t start out on his side.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Mike Pence Hasn’t Grown Less Conservative, but Republicans Have Shifted

    The polls say the former vice president, who announced his 2024 candidacy in a video on Wednesday, has little chance. But he is driven by his faith.Mike Pence is the most conservative candidate competing for the presidency. The former vice president wants abortion banned from the point of conception. He’s the only major candidate calling for cuts to Social Security and Medicare. And he has the most hawkish foreign policy, especially on confronting Russia.Being the most conservative used to matter in Republican presidential primaries.Not anymore.The president Mr. Pence served under, Donald J. Trump, transformed the G.O.P. electorate, making the path to a Pence presidency visible only to the truest of true believers. Mr. Pence has not really changed all that much since he was governor of Indiana less than a decade ago, but his party has. It’s the same Mike Pence but a different G.O.P., and it’s a different G.O.P. because of his former boss.The Republican Party’s intense focus on character and morality during the Bill Clinton years has been replaced by a different credo — articulated by a former Justice Department official, Jeffrey B. Clark, during a recent Twitter squabble over Mr. Trump’s fitness for office.“We’re not a congregation voting for a new pastor,” argued Mr. Clark, the one senior Justice Department official who tried to help Mr. Trump overturn the 2020 election. “We’re voting for a leader of the nation.”By this way of thinking, it doesn’t matter that Mr. Pence has been married only once and is so determined to honor his vows that he doesn’t allow himself to dine alone with a woman who is not his wife. Nor does it matter how many affairs Mr. Trump has had or whether he paid hush money to a porn star. Mr. Trump silences all of that, in a way, with one blunt social media post: “I was able to kill Roe v. Wade.”Mr. Pence, who announced his candidacy in a video early Wednesday, hours before a planned rally in a Des Moines suburb, is given little chance by anybody outside of his core team. Republican pollsters and strategists have written him off. Faced with Mr. Pence’s situation — being both dominated and burdened by Mr. Trump — most politicians would have concluded, after reviewing polls and focus groups, that there was no “theory of the case” for him to win the nomination.But Mr. Pence appears to have no use for statistical analysis.Mr. Pence in Des Moines on Saturday. Even in heavily evangelical Iowa, he polls around just 5 percent.Jordan Gale for The New York Times“Our country’s in a lot of trouble,” Mr. Pence says in his nearly three-minute-long announcement video, accusing “President Joe Biden and the radical left” of weakening America “at home and abroad.”Citing “runaway inflation,” a looming recession, a southern border “under siege,” unchecked “enemies of freedom” in Russia and China “on the march,” and what he calls an unprecedented assault on “timeless American values,” he promises to deliver what he says the nation sorely needs.“We’re better than this,” Mr. Pence says. “We can turn this country around. But different times call for different leadership. Today our party and our country need a leader that’ll appeal, as Lincoln said, to the better angels of our nature.”Whereas some Republican politicians use God as a talking point and have little acquaintance with the Bible, Mr. Pence makes every decision through the filter of Scripture. When he says he has prayed on a decision, he means it, and that includes running for president. Throughout his political career, according to people who have worked for him, Mr. Pence has gathered around his staff and his family in frequent prayer. If his theory of the case in this race seems to rely more on faith than data — that’s because it does.Mr. Pence served as Mr. Trump’s yes-man for three years and 11 months. In that final month, Mr. Pence refused to follow a presidential order that was plainly unconstitutional: to single-handedly overturn the 2020 election. His loyalty to the Constitution was rewarded with people in a pro-Trump mob chanting “Hang Mike Pence” as they stormed the Capitol, while Mr. Pence and his family rushed to a barely secure room.Instead of punishing Mr. Trump for how he treated Mr. Pence, Republican voters have made him their front-runner. More than 50 percent of Republicans support the former president in national polls. Mr. Pence draws around 4 percent. Even in heavily evangelical Iowa, where Mr. Pence is staking his candidacy, he polls around 5 percent.Mr. Pence and Nancy Pelosi, then the House speaker, began certifying the results of the 2020 election on Jan. 6, 2021, before a pro-Trump mob attacked the Capitol, chanting “Hang Mike Pence.”Erin Schaff/The New York TimesMr. Pence has no trouble explaining his policy positions. He will run for president as a national security hawk, a staunch social conservative, a free-trader and a fiscal conservative. Nobody who knows him well doubts his sincerity on any of these issues. He may be running the least poll-tested campaign in the Republican field.The problem is that the Mike Pence known to most Republicans is a man whose job for four years was to cheer Mr. Trump through policies and actions that often contradicted his professed principles. If Mr. Pence, in a moment of introspection, wonders why the party he has long aspired to lead no longer seems interested in being led by someone like him, he may shoulder some portion of the blame himself.The Trump-Pence administration added around $8 trillion to the national debt. So much for fiscal conservatism. The Trump-Pence administration had a trade policy that, for the most part, delighted protectionist Democrats. So much for free trade. And while Mr. Trump spent his first three years in office largely listening to his more conventional national security advisers, in his final year he laid the groundwork for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan that Mr. Pence did not support.Mr. Trump’s current articulation of his “America First” foreign policy — which involves dropping U.S. support for Ukraine and musing about giving away chunks of Ukrainian land to the Russians — could not be further removed from Mr. Pence’s Reaganite vision of America defending freedom across the globe.But it’s not just Mr. Pence’s anti-populist policies that hobble him. It’s that Republican voters have sharply different expectations of their leaders than they did during Mr. Pence’s political rise as a member of Congress and then governor of Indiana.For the past seven years, Mr. Trump has trained Republican voters to value a different set of virtues in their candidates. He has trained them to value Republicans who fight hard and dirty, using whatever tactics are necessary to vanquish their opponents. He has also trained them to avert their gazes from behaviors that were once considered disqualifying.Mr. Pence averted his gaze for four years as Mr. Trump’s vice president, sticking with him through various controversies.Al Drago for The New York TimesFor four years, Mr. Pence, too, averted his gaze. He stuck with Mr. Trump through numerous controversies including the leak of the “Access Hollywood” tape, in which Mr. Trump boasted about grabbing women’s genitalia. He vouched for Mr. Trump’s character with skeptical evangelicals with whom Mr. Trump ultimately forged his own relationship.When Mr. Trump, as president, showered praise on the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, his vice president, bound by loyalty, stayed silent. Yet recently on the campaign trail, after Mr. Trump had congratulated Mr. Kim for his country’s readmission to the World Health Organization’s executive board, Mr. Pence scolded his former boss for “praising the dictator in North Korea.”Mr. Pence may finally feel liberated to tell voters what he really thinks about Mr. Trump. His problem is that most Republicans don’t want to hear it. More

  • in

    Los retos de la edad de Joe Biden y su reelección

    En algún momento del invierno pasado, durante un viaje a Asia, despertaron al presidente Joe Biden a las 3 a. m. para decirle que un misil había impactado en Polonia, lo que desató el temor de que Rusia hubiera extendido la guerra de Ucrania a un aliado de la OTAN. En cuestión de horas, en medio de la noche, Biden consultó a sus altos asesores, llamó al presidente de Polonia y al secretario general de la OTAN y reunió a otros líderes mundiales para enfrentar la crisis.Y luego, hace unas cuantas semanas, cuando Biden era el anfitrión de algunos niños en el Día de Llevar a Tu Hijo al Trabajo, se confundió cuando intentó enumerar a sus nietos. “Pues déjenme ver. Tengo uno en Nueva York, dos en Filadelfia, ¿o tres? No, tres porque tengo una nieta que es… ya no sé. Me están confundiendo”. También se quedó en blanco cuando le preguntaron cuál era el último país que había visitado y el nombre de su película favorita.Estos dos Joe Biden coexisten en el mismo presidente octogenario: sagaz e inteligente en momentos cruciales como resultado de décadas de experiencia, capaz de estar a la altura de las circunstancias para hacer frente a un mundo peligroso, incluso en la quietud de la noche. Pero un poco más lento, más blando, con más dificultades auditivas, más vacilante en su andar y un poco más proclive a fallas ocasionales de memoria que pueden resultar habituales para alguien que ha llegado a la novena década de su vida o que tiene algún progenitor que haya alcanzado esa edad.La difícil realidad del presidente más viejo de Estados Unidos fue resumida el jueves cuando el Congreso aprobó un acuerdo bipartidista que él negoció para evitar un incumplimiento del pago de la deuda nacional. Incluso el presidente de la Cámara Baja, el representante republicano por California, Kevin McCarthy, declaró que Biden había sido “muy profesional, inteligente y duro” durante las conversaciones. Pero justo antes de que se pusieran en marcha las votaciones, Biden se tropezó con un saco de arena en la graduación de la Academia de la Fuerza Aérea y cayó al suelo. El video se hizo viral, sus partidarios se abochornaron y sus detractores arremetieron.Cualquiera puede tropezarse a cualquier edad, pero es inevitable que si le ocurre a un presidente de 80 años haya preguntas incómodas. Si fuera cualquier otra persona, tal vez no serían notorios los signos de la edad, pero Biden es el jefe del país más poderoso del mundo y se acaba de lanzar a una campaña para que los electores lo mantengan en la Casa Blanca hasta que cumpla 86 años, lo cual atrae una mayor atención a un problema que, según las encuestas, preocupa a la mayoría de los estadounidenses y es motivo de gran zozobra entre los líderes del partido.“¿Ustedes dicen que soy viejo?”, dijo en una cena de la Asociación de Corresponsales de la Casa Blanca en abril. “Yo digo que soy sabio”.Yuri Gripas para The New York TimesLa imagen que surge de las entrevistas realizadas durante varios meses con decenas de funcionarios y exfuncionarios, y con otras personas que han pasado algún tiempo con el presidente, es una mezcla entre la caricatura de un anciano aturullado y fácilmente manipulable promovida por los republicanos y la imagen que difunde su personal de un presidente con gafas de aviador que dirige la escena mundial y gobierna con brío.Es la de un hombre disminuido por la edad de maneras más marcadas que solo el encanecimiento del cabello que ha sido común entre los presidentes más recientes durante sus mandatos. En ocasiones, Biden confunde las palabras y parece mayor que antes por su modo de andar torpe y su voz débil.No obstante, las personas que habitualmente tratan con él, incluso algunos de sus adversarios, afirman que sigue siendo sagaz e imponente en las reuniones privadas. Los diplomáticos comparten anécdotas de viajes a sitios como Ucrania, Japón, Egipto, Camboya e Indonesia, en donde casi siempre tiene más resistencia que sus colegas más jóvenes. Los legisladores demócratas destacan una larga lista de logros como prueba de que sigue haciendo bien su trabajo.Sus amigos señalan que sus desaciertos verbales no son nada nuevo; toda su vida ha tenido problemas de tartamudez y, en sus propias palabras, era una “máquina de desatinos”, mucho antes de tener acceso a las prestaciones de jubilación. Sus asesores afirman que su criterio sigue siendo tan bueno como siempre. Así que muchos usan la frase “afilado como una hacha” para describirlo, lo que se ha convertido en una especie de mantra.Biden dice que la edad es un tema válido, pero sostiene que su longevidad es una ventaja y no una desventaja. “¿Ustedes dicen que soy anciano?”, dijo en una cena de la Asociación de Corresponsales de la Casa Blanca en abril. “Yo digo que soy sabio”.Sin embargo, pocas personas dejan de notar los cambios en una de las personas más públicas de la nación. Hace una decena de años, cuando era vicepresidente, Biden se enzarzaba cada verano en enérgicas batallas con pistolas de agua con los hijos de sus colaboradores y los periodistas. Más de una década después, cruzó con paso rígido el puente Edmund Pettus de Selma, Alabama, para conmemorar el aniversario del Domingo Sangriento.Las encuestas indican que a los estadounidenses, incluso a los demócratas, les preocupa muchísimo la edad de Biden. En un grupo de debate reciente organizado por The New York Times, varios electores que apoyaron a Biden en 2020 manifestaron su preocupación y uno afirmó: “He visto a veces esa mirada ausente cuando está pronunciando algún discurso o dirigiéndose a la multitud. Parece como si perdiera la línea de pensamiento”.En los círculos demócratas, el malestar por la edad de Biden es generalizado. Un destacado demócrata de Wall Street, que como otras personas habló con la condición de mantener su anonimato para no ofender a la Casa Blanca, señaló que entre los donantes del partido no se hablaba de otra cosa. En una pequeña cena celebrada a principios de este año con antiguos senadores y gobernadores demócratas, todos de la generación de Biden, los asistentes coincidieron en que era demasiado mayor para volver a postularse. Los líderes locales llaman a menudo a la Casa Blanca para preguntar por su salud.En privado, los funcionarios reconocen que hacen lo que consideran que son ajustes razonables para no exigirle mucho físicamente a un presidente que envejece. Su personal programa la mayor parte de sus presentaciones en público entre el mediodía y las 4 p. m. y lo deja descansar los fines de semana tanto como es posible. Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, jefa adjunta de gabinete de la Casa Blanca, insistió en que su edad no ha obligado a modificar su agenda. “Nada más allá de lo que se hace para cualquier presidente, independientemente de su edad”, dijo.Un análisis de los horarios de Biden con base en la información recabada por Axios y ampliada por el Times reveló que el mandatario tiene un ritmo de trabajo matutino parecido al del presidente para el que trabajó, Barack Obama, quien tampoco tenía muchos eventos públicos antes de las 10 a. m.: solo el 4 por ciento durante su último año en el cargo en comparación con el 5 por ciento en los primeros dos años y medio de Biden en la presidencia. Pero la verdadera diferencia se ve en la noche. Obama tenía casi el doble de probabilidades que Biden de acudir a eventos públicos después de las 6 p. m., el 17 contra el 9 por ciento.Los asesores evitan exponer a Biden a entrevistas con los medios cuando es posible que cometa algún error que lo perjudique políticamente. Biden solo ha brindado una cuarta parte de las entrevistas que dio Donald Trump en el mismo periodo y una quinta parte de las que concedió Obama, pero ninguna a los reporteros de algún diario importante. Biden no ha concedido entrevistas al departamento de noticias del Times, a diferencia de todos los presidentes desde por lo menos Franklin D. Roosevelt además de Dwight D. Eisenhower. Y en los últimos 100 años, solo Ronald Reagan y Richard Nixon dieron tan pocas conferencias de prensa.A diferencia de otros presidentes, los funcionarios de la Casa Blanca no han autorizado al médico de Biden para que conceda entrevistas. En febrero, Kevin C. O’Connor, el médico de la Casa Blanca, emitió una carta de cinco páginas en la que afirmaba que el mandatario está “apto para el servicio y ejecuta plenamente todas sus responsabilidades sin exenciones ni adaptaciones”.Pero también escribió que la tendencia del presidente a caminar rígido es “de hecho el resultado de cambios degenerativos (‘desgaste’)” en su columna vertebral, y en parte el resultado de “isquiotibiales y pantorrillas más tensas”. La carta decía que “no había hallazgos que fueran consistentes con” un trastorno neurológico como un derrame cerebral, esclerosis múltiple o enfermedad de Parkinson. Toma medicamentos para la fibrilación auricular, el colesterol, el ardor de estómago, el asma y las alergias.Al igual que muchas personas de su edad, Biden repite las frases y vuelve a contar una y otra vez las mismas anécdotas viejas que a menudo son de veracidad cuestionable. También puede ser estrafalario; cuando lo visitan los niños, es posible que saque al azar un libro de William Butler Yeats de su escritorio y comience a leerles poesía irlandesa.Al mismo tiempo, es elegante y está en forma, hace ejercicio cinco veces a la semana y no bebe. En algunas ocasiones, ha mostrado una resistencia asombrosa, como cuando fue a Polonia y luego emprendió un viaje de nueve horas en tren para hacer una visita secreta a Kiev, la capital de Ucrania, donde estuvo varias horas en tierra. Luego soportó otras nueve horas en tren y tomó un vuelo a Varsovia. Un análisis de su horario proporcionado por sus colaboradores muestra que en los primeros meses de su tercer año en la presidencia viajó un poco más que Obama en ese mismo periodo.El viaje de Biden a Kiev, en el que se reunió con el presidente de Ucrania, Volodímir Zelenski, requirió una agenda ininterrumpida.Daniel Berehulak/The New York Times“¿Que divaga? Así es”, señaló el gobernador de Nueva Jersey, Phil Murphy, un demócrata que rechaza categóricamente la idea de que Biden sea demasiado mayor para ser presidente. “¿Siempre ha divagado? Sí, así es. En público y en privado. Siempre es el mismo. Literalmente —y no lo digo a la ligera— en mi vida no he conocido a nadie más que sea tanto la misma persona en público como en privado”.El hecho de que se le preste tanta atención a su edad es algo que les molesta a algunos de sus amigos. “Creo que la razón por la que esto es un problema es principalmente porque los medios de comunicación hablan de ello constantemente”, dijo Ted Kaufman, exsenador por Delaware que desde hace mucho tiempo es asesor de Biden. “En mi trato con él no veo nada que demuestre que la edad sea un problema. Ha hecho más de lo que ningún presidente ha podido hacer en toda mi vida”.Andrew Bates, portavoz de la Casa Blanca, señaló que los republicanos de línea dura se quejaban de que Biden había derrotado a McCarthy en el acuerdo fiscal. “Es revelador que los mismos congresistas extremistas que han estado hablando de su edad se quejaran esta semana de que fue más listo que ellos en el acuerdo presupuestario”, dijo Bates.Desde luego que el tema de la edad de Biden no viene aislado. Trump, su contrincante republicano más probable, solo es cuatro años menor y era el presidente más viejo de la historia antes de que Biden lo sucediera. Si Trump gana el próximo año, tendría 82 años al finalizar su presidencia, mayor de lo que será Biden al final de este mandato.Mientras estuvo en el cargo, Trump generó preocupación acerca de su agudeza mental y su condición física. No hacía ejercicio, su dieta consistía principalmente en hamburguesas con queso y carne, y oficialmente pesaba 110 kilos, peso que, para su estatura, ya se considera obesidad.Después de quejarse de que tenía demasiadas reuniones en las mañanas, Trump dejó de llegar al Despacho Oval antes de las 11 u 11:30 a. m. todos los días para quedarse en su residencia a ver la televisión, hacer llamadas telefónicas o enviar tuits iracundos. Durante una presentación en la Academia Militar de Estados Unidos en West Point, tuvo problemas para levantar un vaso de agua y parece que le costó trabajo bajar por una sencilla rampa.Más sorprendente era el rendimiento cognitivo de Trump. Era errático y tendía a divagar; los expertos constataron que había perdido elocuencia y que su vocabulario se había reducido desde su juventud. En privado, sus colaboradores decían que Trump tenía problemas para procesar la información y distinguir la realidad de la ficción. Su segundo jefe de gabinete, John F. Kelly, compró un libro que analizaba la salud psicológica de Trump para entenderle mejor, y varios secretarios del gabinete, preocupados por su posible incapacidad mental, se plantearon invocar la Enmienda 25 para destituirlo.En la opinión pública, los problemas cognitivos del expresidente Donald Trump no se asocian tan a menudo con la edad como los de Biden, quizá porque el estilo ampuloso de Trump proyecta energía.Doug Mills/The New York TimesPero quizá porque su estilo ampuloso transmite energía, los problemas de Trump no se asocian tanto con la edad, en la mente del público, como los de Biden. En una encuesta reciente de Reuters/Ipsos, el 73 por ciento dijo que Biden es demasiado mayor para ser presidente, frente al 51 por ciento que dijo lo mismo de Trump.Biden gestiona su jornada con más disciplina que su predecesor. Jill Biden, que da clases en el Northern Virginia Community College, se levanta alrededor de las 6 a. m., mientras que el presidente se despierta una hora más tarde, según lo que suele decir. Biden le ha dicho a sus colaboradores que, a veces, su gato lo despierta en mitad de la noche cuando camina sobre su cara.A las 7:20 a. m. la primera dama se va a trabajar. El mandatario hace ejercicio a las 8 a. m.; tiene una bicicleta Peloton en la residencia y es conocido por ver programas como Morning Joe en MSNBC. Llega al Despacho Oval a las 9 a. m. para tener una mañana por lo general repleta de reuniones. Para comer, alterna entre ensaladas, sopas y sándwiches.Biden hace ejercicio cinco días a la semana y no bebe.Al Drago para The New York TimesTras los eventos de la tarde, el presidente regresa a la residencia a eso de las 6:45 p. m. Para cenar, su platillo favorito es la pasta. De hecho, según un antiguo funcionario, siempre que viaja, sus ayudantes se aseguran de que haya salsa roja a mano para la pasta con la que termina el día, incluso cuando suele rechazar el salmón que su esposa insiste en que coma.A partir de las 8:00 p. m., los Biden suelen leer juntos sus libros e informes en el salón de la residencia. La primera dama suele acostarse a las 10:30 p. m. y el presidente media hora más tarde.Sus colaboradores dicen que, por las preguntas que hace después, está claro que él lee los informes. “No hay nadie mejor a la hora de hacer preguntas para llegar al fondo de un asunto, para detectar una vaguedad o hacer preguntas difíciles”, dijo Stefanie Feldman, secretaria de personal de la Casa Blanca. “Hace preguntas igual de difíciles que hace 10 años”.Algunos de los que le acompañan en el extranjero expresan su asombro por su capacidad para mantener el ritmo. Cuando la nueva líder de Italia presionó para que se celebrara una reunión mientras el presidente estaba en Polonia, éste accedió de buena gana y la añadió a su agenda que estaba repleta. Durante un viaje a Irlanda, las personas que le acompañaban dijeron que estaba lleno de energía y que quería hablar largo y tendido en el Air Force One en vez de descansar.Sin embargo, tras agotadoras jornadas en sus viajes, faltó a cenas con líderes mundiales en Indonesia el año pasado y de nuevo en Japón cuando fue de visita en mayo. Algunas personas que lo conocen desde hace años dicen en privado que han notado pequeños cambios. Según un exfuncionario, cuando se sienta suele apoyar una mano en el escritorio para sostener su peso y rara vez vuelve a levantarse con su antigua energía.El personal de Biden programa la mayoría de sus apariciones públicas entre el mediodía y las 4  p. m. y, en la medida de lo posible, le libera los fines de semana.Doug Mills/The New York TimesHabla tan bajo que resulta difícil oírle. Para los discursos, sus ayudantes le dan un micrófono de mano que se acerca a la boca para amplificar su voz, incluso cuando está ante un atril con micrófonos.Biden y Jill Biden, su esposa, suelen tener un horario similar.Doug Mills/The New York TimesSin embargo, sus colaboradores dicen que, aunque puede olvidar momentáneamente un nombre o un hecho, conserva una formidable memoria para los detalles. Cuando se disponía a viajar a Shanksville, Pensilvania, en el vigésimo aniversario de los atentados del 11 de septiembre de 2001, se sintió frustrado porque los funcionarios le habían dado un plan equivocado para sus desplazamientos. Ya había estado en el monumento conmemorativo y sabía que el plan no tenía sentido porque recordaba la disposición del terreno.Funcionarios de la Casa Blanca se quejan de que la preocupación por la edad se ve exagerada por las fotos de internet, que a veces son falsas o están muy distorsionadas. Cada semana, los estrategas realizan un análisis de la nube de palabras con un panel de votantes preguntándoles qué habían oído sobre el presidente, bueno o malo. Después de que el año pasado se le enganchara el pie en el pedal de la bicicleta y diera una voltereta, durante semanas las palabras de la nube fueron “caída de la bicicleta”, lo que resultaba aún más frustrante para los asesores que señalaban que Trump apenas parecía capaz de montar en bicicleta.Últimamente, Biden ha recurrido al humor autocrítico para atenuar el asunto, al igual que lo hizo Reagan en su reelección de 1984, la cual ganó a los 73 años gracias, en parte, a una oportuna broma durante el debate acerca de no aprovecharse de “la juventud e inexperiencia del oponente”.Algunos de los que le acompañan en el extranjero expresan su asombro por su capacidad para mantener el ritmo. Sin embargo, tras agotadoras jornadas en sus viajes del año pasado, faltó a cenas con líderes mundiales en Indonesia y eso también le pasó cuando estuvo en Japón en mayo.Doug Mills/The New York TimesEn la cena de los corresponsales, Biden aseguró al público que respaldaba la primera enmienda y “no solo porque la redactó mi buen amigo Jimmy Madison”, en referencia al político del siglo XIX. Durante el evento del Día de Llevar a Tu Hijo al Trabajo, reflexionó acerca de “cuando yo era más joven, hace como unos 120 años”.Asimismo, hace algunos días, en la Academia de la Fuerza Aérea, Biden bromeó al decir “cuando iba a graduarme del bachillerato hace 300 años, hice mi solicitud para entrar a la Academia Naval”. Después de tropezar con el saco de arena, también trató de tomárselo a broma. “Me metieron el pie”, dijo.Peter Baker es el corresponsal jefe de la Casa Blanca y ha cubierto a los últimos cinco presidentes para el Times y The Washington Post. Es autor de siete libros, el más reciente The Divider: Trump in the White House, 2017-2021, con Susan Glasser. @peterbakernyt • FacebookMichael D. Shear es un corresponsal experimentado de la Casa Blanca y dos veces ganador del Premio Pulitzer que también formó parte del equipo que ganó la Medalla de Servicio Público por la cobertura de la COVID-19 en 2020. Es coautor de Border Wars: Inside Trump’s Assault on Immigration. @shearmKatie Rogers es corresponsal de la Casa Blanca y cubre la administración Biden, la cultura de Washington y la política interna. Se unió al Times en 2014. @katierogersZolan Kanno-Youngs es corresponsal en la Casa Blanca y cubre una variedad de temas nacionales e internacionales en la gestión de Biden, incluida la seguridad nacional y el extremismo. Se unió al Times en 2019 como corresponsal de seguridad nacional. @KannoYoungs More

  • in

    Do Christie and Pence Make It 2016 Again? Not Yet.

    A bigger field in the G.O.P. primary could chip away at DeSantis’s chances of overtaking Trump.A crowded field could help Donald Trump, as it did in 2015-16. Mark J. Terrill/Associated PressIt’s been feeling a bit like 2016 lately.Back then, the opposition to Donald J. Trump was badly divided. The party couldn’t coalesce behind one candidate, allowing Mr. Trump to win the Republican primary with well under half of the vote.With Mike Pence and Chris Christie bringing the field up to 10 candidates this week, it’s easy to wonder whether the same conditions might be falling into place again. Despite high hopes at the start of the year, Ron DeSantis has failed to consolidate Trump-skeptic voters and donors alike. Now, the likes of Mr. Pence and Mr. Christie — as well as Tim Scott and Nikki Haley — are in the fray and threatening to leave the Trump opposition hopelessly divided, as it was seven years ago.In the end, Mr. Pence or Mr. Christie might well break out and leave the opposition to Mr. Trump as fractured as it was in 2016. But it’s worth noting that, so far, the opposition to Mr. Trump has been far more unified than it ever was back then. It’s not 2016, at least not yet.So far this cycle, polls have consistently shown Mr. DeSantis with the support of a majority of Republican voters who don’t support Mr. Trump. Nothing like this happened in that past primary, when at various points five different candidates could claim to be the strongest “not-Trump” candidate, and none came even close to consolidating so much of the opposition to Mr. Trump. Ted Cruz got there eventually, but only after a majority of delegates had been awarded and it was down to him and John Kasich.Perhaps surprisingly, Mr. DeSantis’s share of not-Trump voters has remained constant, even though his own support has dropped. This suggests Mr. DeSantis has mainly bled support to Mr. Trump, not to another not-Trump rival. It also suggests that the other not-Trump candidates may have bled support to Mr. Trump over the last half year as well.Consolidation of Not-Trump Voters More