More stories

  • in

    These Trump-Backed Candidates Won’t Promise to Accept Election Results

    Six Republican nominees for governor and the Senate in key midterm states, all backed by Donald Trump, would not commit to accepting the November outcome. Five others did not answer the question.WASHINGTON — Nearly two years after President Donald J. Trump refused to accept his defeat in the 2020 election, some of his most loyal Republican acolytes might follow in his footsteps.When asked, six Trump-backed Republican nominees for governor and the Senate in midterm battlegrounds would not commit to accepting this year’s election results, and another five Republicans ignored or declined to answer a question about embracing the November outcome. All of them, along with many other G.O.P. candidates, have pre-emptively cast doubt on how their states count votes.The New York Times contacted Republican and Democratic candidates or their aides in 20 key contests for governor and the Senate. All of the Democrats said, or have said publicly, that they would respect the November results — including Stacey Abrams of Georgia, who refused to concede her 2018 defeat to Brian Kemp in the state’s race for governor. Mr. Kemp, now running against her for another term, “will of course accept the outcome of the 2022 election,” said his press secretary, Tate Mitchell.But several Republicans endorsed by Mr. Trump are hesitant to say that they will not fight the results.Among the party’s Senate candidates, Ted Budd in North Carolina, Blake Masters in Arizona, Kelly Tshibaka in Alaska and J.D. Vance in Ohio all declined to commit to accepting the 2022 results. So did Tudor Dixon, the Republican nominee for governor of Michigan, and Geoff Diehl, who won the G.O.P. primary for governor of Massachusetts this month.The candidates and their aides offered an array of explanations. Some blamed Democratic state election officials or made unsubstantiated claims that their opponents would cheat. In Alaska, a spokesman for Ms. Tshibaka pointed to a new ranked-choice voting system that has been criticized by Republicans and already helped deliver victory to a Democrat in a House special election this year.Kelly Tshibaka, a Republican candidate for Senate in Alaska, at a rally hosted by former President Donald J. Trump in Anchorage. She has also declined to say whether she will respect this year’s election results.Ash Adams for The New York TimesAn aide to Ms. Dixon, Sara Broadwater, said “there’s no reason to believe” that Michigan election officials, including Jocelyn Benson, the Democratic secretary of state, “are very serious about secure elections.”To some degree, the stances by these Republican candidates — which echo Mr. Trump’s comments before the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections — may amount to political posturing, in an effort to appeal to G.O.P. voters who do not believe the former president lost in 2020. An aide to one Republican nominee insisted that the candidate would accept this year’s results, but the aide declined to be publicly identified saying so.And unlike Mr. Trump two years ago, the candidates who suggest they might dispute the November results do not hold executive office, and lack control of the levers of government power. If any were to reject a fair defeat, they would be far less likely to ignite the kind of democratic crisis that Mr. Trump set off after his 2020 loss.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.Midterm Data: Could the 2020 polling miss repeat itself? Will this election cycle really be different? Nate Cohn, The Times’s chief political analyst, looks at the data in his new newsletter.Republicans’ Abortion Struggles: Senator Lindsey Graham’s proposed nationwide 15-week abortion ban was intended to unite the G.O.P. before the November elections. But it has only exposed the party’s divisions.Democrats’ Dilemma: The party’s candidates have been trying to signal their independence from the White House, while not distancing themselves from President Biden’s base or agenda.But they do have loud megaphones in a highly polarized media environment, and any unwarranted challenges from the candidates and their allies could fuel anger, confusion and misinformation.“The danger of a Trumpist coup is far from over,” said Rosa Brooks, a law professor at Georgetown University who in early 2020 convened a group to brainstorm ways Mr. Trump could disrupt that year’s election. “As long as we have a significant number of Americans who don’t accept principles of democracy and the rule of law, our democracy remains in jeopardy.”The positions of these Republican candidates also reflect how, over the last two years, some of those aligned with Mr. Trump increasingly reject the idea that it is possible for their side to lose a legitimate election.“You accept the results of the election if the election is fair and honest,” said John Fredericks, a syndicated talk radio host who was a chairman of Mr. Trump’s campaigns in Virginia in 2016 and 2020. “If it’s not fair and honest, you don’t.”Still, many Republican candidates, including several who have cast doubt on the 2020 outcome, said they would recognize this year’s results. Darren Bailey, the Republican nominee for governor of Illinois — who said in a June interview that he did not know if the 2020 election had been decided fairly — responded that “yes,” he would accept the 2022 result.In Nevada, the campaign of Adam Laxalt, the Republican nominee for Senate, said he would not challenge the final results — even though Mr. Laxalt, a former state attorney general, helped lead the effort to overturn Mr. Trump’s 2020 defeat in the state, spoke last year about plans to file lawsuits to contest the 2022 election and called voter fraud the “biggest issue” in his campaign.Joe Lombardo, left, a Republican running for governor of Nevada, and Adam Laxalt, center, the party’s nominee for the Senate, said they would not challenge the state’s results.Roger Kisby for The New York Times“Of course he’ll accept Nevada’s certified election results, even if your failing publication won’t,” said Brian Freimuth, a spokesman for Mr. Laxalt..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-ok2gjs{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-ok2gjs a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.And Dr. Mehmet Oz in Pennsylvania, who said during his successful Republican primary campaign for Senate that “we cannot move on” from the 2020 election, promised to uphold voters’ will.“Yes, Dr. Oz will accept the result of the PA Senate race in November,” Rachel Tripp, an Oz spokeswoman, wrote in a text message.Three other Republican Senate candidates — Herschel Walker in Georgia, Joe O’Dea in Colorado and Senator Lisa Murkowski in Alaska — committed to embracing their state’s election results. So did several Republicans running for governor, including Mr. Kemp, Joe Lombardo in Nevada and Christine Drazan of Oregon.Aides to several Republican nominees for governor who have questioned the 2020 election’s legitimacy did not respond to repeated requests for comment on their own races in November. Those candidates included Doug Mastriano of Pennsylvania, Kari Lake of Arizona, Tim Michels of Wisconsin and Dan Cox of Maryland.Ms. Lake was asked in a radio interview this month whether she would concede a defeat to Katie Hobbs, her Democratic rival and Arizona’s secretary of state. “I’m not losing to Katie Hobbs,” Ms. Lake replied.Ms. Hobbs’s spokeswoman, Sarah Robinson, said her candidate “will accept the results of the election in November.”Aides to Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Don Bolduc, the Republican Senate nominee in New Hampshire, declined to answer questions about acknowledging the results. Mr. Johnson has been a prolific spreader of misinformation about the 2020 election and the Capitol riot. Mr. Bolduc claimed that the 2020 contest was stolen from Mr. Trump until Thursday, when he announced two days after winning his primary that President Biden had won legitimately.During a Republican primary debate in Michigan in June, Ms. Dixon would not commit to honoring the results of the primary — which she went on to win — or the general election, pre-emptively accusing Ms. Benson, the secretary of state, of election fraud.“If we see the secretary of state running a fair election the way she should be, then that’s a different story,” Ms. Dixon said. “We have to see what she’s going to do to make sure it’s going to be a fair election.”In a statement, a representative for Ms. Benson said she and her staff “work tirelessly to ensure the state’s elections are secure and accurate, and expect every candidate and election official to respect the will of the people.”A crowd in Phoenix watched in September 2021 as the findings of a widely criticized Republican-led review of the state’s 2020 votes were presented to state lawmakers.Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York TimesIn Arizona — where Republicans spent months on a government-funded review of 2020 ballots that failed to show any evidence of fraud — Mr. Masters, the Trump-backed Republican nominee for Senate, baselessly predicted to supporters in July that even if he defeated Senator Mark Kelly, the incumbent Democrat, enough votes would somehow be produced to flip the result.“There’s always cheating, probably, in every election,” Mr. Masters said. “The question is, what’s the cheating capacity?”A Masters aide, Katie Miller, sent The Times an August article in The Arizona Republic in which Mr. Masters said there was “evidence of incompetence” but not of fraud in the state’s primary election. Ms. Miller declined to say if Mr. Masters would respect the November results.Mr. Kelly “has total trust in Arizona’s electoral process,” said a spokeswoman, Sarah Guggenheimer.An aide to Mr. Vance, Taylor Van Kirk, cited the candidate’s primary-season endorsement from Ohio’s Republican secretary of state, Frank LaRose. At the time, Mr. Vance predicted “a successfully run primary election.” But Ms. Van Kirk would not say if Mr. Vance would recognize the November outcome. Mr. Vance did not respond to messages.Mr. Vance’s Democratic opponent, Representative Tim Ryan, “will accept the results of the election,” said his spokeswoman, Jordan Fuja.In Alaska, Republican hesitancy to accept election results centers on the new ranked-choice voting system. After losing an August special election for the House, Sarah Palin warned baselessly that the method was “very, very potentially fraught with fraud.”Tim Murtaugh, a spokesman for Ms. Tshibaka, who is challenging Ms. Murkowski, a fellow Republican, said his candidate would not commit to honoring the race’s outcome. Mr. Murtaugh said — not without merit — that the new voting system “was installed to protect Lisa Murkowski.”Ms. Murkowski’s spokesman, Shea Siegert, said that “the Alaskan people can trust” the state’s elections.Jonathan Felts, a spokesman for Representative Ted Budd of North Carolina, the state’s Republican nominee for Senate — who in Congress voted against certifying the 2020 election — declined to say if Mr. Budd would uphold the state’s results and claimed without evidence that Cheri Beasley, the Democratic nominee and a former State Supreme Court justice, might try to disenfranchise voters.Ms. Beasley said, “I trust that our 2022 election will be administered fairly.”Officials on other Republican campaigns expressed worries that if voters heard too much skepticism about the validity of this year’s elections, it could lead to a replay of the Georgia Senate races in January 2021, when Democrats eked out two narrow victories after Mr. Trump spent weeks railing falsely about election fraud.“The most important thing is to not get depressed about the elections and say, ‘Oh, it’s going to be stolen, so what’s the point of doing this?’” Mr. Diehl, the Republican nominee for governor of Massachusetts, said in a recent radio interview. Mr. Diehl’s spokeswoman, Peggy Rose, replied “no comment” when asked if he would agree to the outcome of the November election.His Democratic opponent, Maura Healey, the state’s attorney general, said, “We will always accept the will of the people.” More

  • in

    ‘A Crisis Coming’: The Twin Threats to American Democracy

    The United States has experienced deep political turmoil several times before over the past century. The Great Depression caused Americans to doubt the country’s economic system. World War II and the Cold War presented threats from global totalitarian movements. The 1960s and ’70s were marred by assassinations, riots, a losing war and a disgraced president.These earlier periods were each more alarming in some ways than anything that has happened in the United States recently. Yet during each of those previous times of tumult, the basic dynamics of American democracy held firm. Candidates who won the most votes were able to take power and attempt to address the country’s problems.The current period is different. As a result, the United States today finds itself in a situation with little historical precedent. American democracy is facing two distinct threats, which together represent the most serious challenge to the country’s governing ideals in decades.The first threat is acute: a growing movement inside one of the country’s two major parties — the Republican Party — to refuse to accept defeat in an election.The violent Jan. 6, 2021, attack on Congress, meant to prevent the certification of President Biden’s election, was the clearest manifestation of this movement, but it has continued since then. Hundreds of elected Republican officials around the country falsely claim that the 2020 election was rigged. Some of them are running for statewide offices that would oversee future elections, potentially putting them in position to overturn an election in 2024 or beyond.“There is the possibility, for the first time in American history, that a legitimately elected president will not be able to take office,” said Yascha Mounk, a political scientist at Johns Hopkins University who studies democracy.The second threat to democracy is chronic but also growing: The power to set government policy is becoming increasingly disconnected from public opinion.The run of recent Supreme Court decisions — both sweeping and, according to polls, unpopular — highlight this disconnect. Although the Democratic Party has won the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential elections, a Supreme Court dominated by Republican appointees seems poised to shape American politics for years, if not decades. And the court is only one of the means through which policy outcomes are becoming less closely tied to the popular will.Two of the past four presidents have taken office despite losing the popular vote. Senators representing a majority of Americans are often unable to pass bills, partly because of the increasing use of the filibuster. Even the House, intended as the branch of the government that most reflects the popular will, does not always do so, because of the way districts are drawn.“We are far and away the most countermajoritarian democracy in the world,” said Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard University and a co-author of the book “How Democracies Die,” with Daniel Ziblatt.The causes of the twin threats to democracy are complex and debated among scholars.The chronic threats to democracy generally spring from enduring features of American government, some written into the Constitution. But they did not conflict with majority opinion to the same degree in past decades. One reason is that more populous states, whose residents receive less power because of the Senate and the Electoral College, have grown so much larger than small states.The acute threats to democracy — and the rise of authoritarian sentiment, or at least the acceptance of it, among many voters — have different causes. They partly reflect frustration over nearly a half-century of slow-growing living standards for the American working class and middle class. They also reflect cultural fears, especially among white people, that the United States is being transformed into a new country, more racially diverse and less religious, with rapidly changing attitudes toward gender, language and more.The attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was the clearest manifestation of the growing movement in the Republican Party to refuse to accept defeat in an election.Ashley Gilbertson for The New York TimesThe economic frustrations and cultural fears have combined to create a chasm in American political life, between prosperous, diverse major metropolitan areas and more traditional, religious and economically struggling smaller cities and rural areas. The first category is increasingly liberal and Democratic, the second increasingly conservative and Republican.The political contest between the two can feel existential to people in both camps, with disagreements over nearly every prominent issue. “When we’re voting, we’re not just voting for a set of policies but for what we think makes us Americans and who we are as a people,” Lilliana Mason, a political scientist and the author of “Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity,” said. “If our party loses the election, then all of these parts of us feel like losers.”These sharp disagreements have led many Americans to doubt the country’s system of government. In a recent poll by Quinnipiac University, 69 percent of Democrats and 69 percent of Republicans said that democracy was “in danger of collapse.” Of course, the two sides have very different opinions about the nature of the threat.Many Democrats share the concerns of historians and scholars who study democracy, pointing to the possibility of overturned election results and the deterioration of majority rule. “Equality and democracy are under assault,” President Biden said in a speech this month in front of Independence Hall in Philadelphia. “We do ourselves no favor to pretend otherwise.”Many Republicans have defended their increasingly aggressive tactics by saying they are trying to protect American values. In some cases, these claims rely on falsehoods — about election fraud, Mr. Biden’s supposed “socialism,” Barack Obama’s birthplace, and more.In others, they are rooted in anxiety over real developments, including illegal immigration and “cancel culture.” Some on the left now consider widely held opinions among conservative and moderate Americans — on abortion, policing, affirmative action, Covid-19 and other subjects — to be so objectionable that they cannot be debated. In the view of many conservatives and some experts, this intolerance is stifling open debate at the heart of the American political system.The divergent sense of crisis on left and right can itself weaken democracy, and it has been exacerbated by technology.Conspiracy theories and outright lies have a long American history, dating to the personal attacks that were a staple of the partisan press during the 18th century. In the mid-20th century, tens of thousands of Americans joined the John Birch Society, a far-right group that claimed Dwight Eisenhower was a secret Communist.Today, however, falsehoods can spread much more easily, through social media and a fractured news environment. In the 1950s, no major television network spread the lies about Eisenhower. In recent years, the country’s most watched cable channel, Fox News, regularly promoted falsehoods about election results, Mr. Obama’s birthplace and other subjects.These same forces — digital media, cultural change and economic stagnation in affluent countries — help explain why democracy is also struggling in other parts of the world. Only two decades ago, at the turn of the 21st century, democracy was the triumphant form of government around the world, with autocracy in retreat in the former Soviet empire, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, South Africa, South Korea and elsewhere. Today, the global trend is moving in the other direction.In the late 1990s, 72 countries were democratizing, and only three were growing more authoritarian, according to data from V-Dem, a Swedish institute that monitors democracy. Last year, only 15 countries grew more democratic, while 33 slid toward authoritarianism.Some experts remain hopeful that the growing attention in the United States to democracy’s problems can help avert a constitutional crisis here. Already, Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election failed, partly because of the refusal of many Republican officials to participate, and both federal and state prosecutors are investigating his actions. And while the chronic decline of majority rule will not change anytime soon, it is also part of a larger historical struggle to create a more inclusive American democracy.Still, many experts point out that it still not clear how the country will escape a larger crisis, such as an overturned election, at some point in the coming decade. “This is not politics as usual,” said Carol Anderson, a professor at Emory University and the author of the book, “One Person, No Vote,” about voter suppression. “Be afraid.”The Will of the MajorityDonald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election failed, partly because of the refusal of many Republican officials to participate.Saul Martinez for The New York TimesThe founders did not design the United States to be a pure democracy.They distrusted the classical notion of direct democracy, in which a community came together to vote on each important issue, and believed it would be impractical for a large country. They did not consider many residents of the new country to be citizens who deserved a voice in political affairs, including Natives, enslaved Africans and women. The founders also wanted to constrain the national government from being too powerful, as they believed was the case in Britain. And they had the practical problem of needing to persuade 13 states to forfeit some of their power to a new federal government.Instead of a direct democracy, the founders created a republic, with elected representatives to make decisions, and a multilayered government, in which different branches checked each other. The Constitution also created the Senate, where every state had an equal say, regardless of population.Pointing to this history, some Republican politicians and conservative activists have argued that the founders were comfortable with minority rule. “Of course we’re not a democracy,” Senator Mike Lee of Utah has written.But the historical evidence suggests that the founders believed that majority will — defined as the prevailing view of enfranchised citizens — should generally dictate national policy, as George Thomas of Claremont McKenna College and other constitutional scholars have explained.In the Federalist Papers, James Madison equated “a coalition of a majority of the whole society” with “justice and the general good.” Alexander Hamilton made similar points, describing “representative democracy” as “happy, regular and durable.” It was a radical idea at the time.For most of American history, the idea has prevailed. Even with the existence of the Senate, the Electoral College and the Supreme Court, political power has reflected the views of people who had the right to vote. “To say we’re a republic not a democracy ignores the past 250 years of history,” Mr. Ziblatt, a political scientist at Harvard University, said.Before 2000, only three candidates won the presidency while losing the popular vote (John Quincy Adams, Rutherford Hayes and Benjamin Harrison), and each served only a single term. During the same period, parties that won repeated elections were able to govern, including the Democratic-Republican Party of Thomas Jefferson’s time, the New Deal Democrats and the Reagan Republicans.The situation has changed in the 21st century. The Democratic Party is in the midst of a historic winning streak. In seven of the past eight presidential elections, stretching back to Bill Clinton’s 1992 victory, the Democratic nominee has won the popular vote. Over more than two centuries of American democracy, no party has previously fared so well over such an extended period.Yet the current period is hardly a dominant Democratic age.What changed? One crucial factor is that, in the past, the parts of the country granted outsize power by the Constitution — less populated states, which tend to be more rural — voted in broadly similar ways as large states and urban areas.This similarity meant that the small-state bonus in the Senate and Electoral College had only a limited effect on national results. Both Democrats and Republicans benefited, and suffered, from the Constitution’s undemocratic features.Democrats sometimes won small states like Idaho, Montana, Utah and Wyoming in the mid-20th century. And California was long a swing state: Between the Great Depression and 2000, Democratic and Republican presidential candidates won it an equal number of times. That the Constitution conferred advantages on residents of small states and disadvantages on Californians did not reliably boost either party.Joe Biden campaigning in Los Angeles in March 2020. He went on to win California in the general election by 29 percentage points.Josh Haner/The New York TimesIn recent decades, Americans have increasingly sorted themselves along ideological lines. Liberals have flocked to large metropolitan areas, which are heavily concentrated in big states like California, while residents of smaller cities and more rural areas have become more conservative.This combination — the Constitution’s structure and the country’s geographic sorting — has created a disconnect between public opinion and election outcomes. It has affected every branch of the federal government: the presidency, Congress and even the Supreme Court.In the past, “the system was still antidemocratic, but it didn’t have a partisan effect,” Mr. Levitsky said. “Now it’s undemocratic and has a partisan effect. It tilts the playing field toward the Republican Party. That’s new in the 21st century.”In presidential elections, the small-state bias is important, but it is not even the main issue. A more subtle factor — the winner-take-all nature of the Electoral College in most states — is. Candidates have never received extra credit for winning state-level landslides. But this feature did not used to matter very much, because landslides were rare in larger states, meaning that relatively few votes were “wasted,” as political scientists say.Today, Democrats dominate a handful of large states, wasting many votes. In 2020, Mr. Biden won California by 29 percentage points; New York by 23 points; and Illinois by 17 points. Four years earlier, Hillary Clinton’s margins were similar.Vote Margins by State in Presidential Elections since 1988 More

  • in

    Trump’s Lawyers Could Face Legal Troubles of Their Own

    Several of the former president’s lawyers are under scrutiny by federal investigators amid squabbling over competence.To understand the pressures, feuds and questions about competence within former President Donald J. Trump’s legal team as he faces potential prosecution on multiple fronts, consider the experience of Eric Herschmann, a former Trump White House lawyer who has been summoned to testify to a federal grand jury.For weeks this summer, Mr. Herschmann tried to get specific guidance from Mr. Trump’s current lawyers on how to handle questions from prosecutors that raise issues of executive privilege or attorney-client privilege.After ignoring Mr. Herschmann or giving him what he seemed to consider perplexing answers to the requests for weeks, two of the former president’s lawyers, M. Evan Corcoran and John Rowley, offered him only broad instructions in late August. Assert sweeping claims of executive privilege, they advised him, after Mr. Corcoran had suggested that an unspecified “chief judge” would ultimately validate their belief that a president’s powers extend far beyond their time in office.Mr. Herschmann, who served on Mr. Trump’s first impeachment defense team but later opposed efforts to reverse the results of the 2020 election, was hardly reassured and sounded confused by the reference to a chief judge.“I will not rely on your say-so that privileges apply here and be put in the middle of a privilege fight between D.O.J. and President Trump,” Mr. Herschmann, a former prosecutor, responded in an email, referring to the Justice Department. The exchange was part of a string of correspondence in which, after having his questions ignored or having the lawyers try to speak directly with him on the phone instead, Mr. Herschmann questioned the competence of the lawyers involved.The emails were obtained by The New York Times from a person who was not on the thread of correspondence. Mr. Herschmann declined to comment.Mr. Herschmann’s opinion was hardly the only expression of skepticism from current and former allies of Mr. Trump who are now worried about a turnstile roster of lawyers representing a client who often defies advice and inserts political rants into legal filings.Mr. Trump’s legal team just won one round in its battle with the Justice Department over the seizure of documents from his residence and private club in Florida, Mar-a-Lago, and it is not clear whether he will face prosecution from the multiple federal and state investigations swirling around him even as he weighs another run for the presidency.Mr. Trump has also just brought on a well-regarded lawyer, Christopher M. Kise, the former solicitor general of Florida, to help lead his legal team, after being rejected by a handful of others he had sought out, including former U.S. attorneys with experience in the jurisdictions where the investigations are unfolding.Mr. Kise agreed to work for the former president for a $3 million fee, an unusually high retainer for Mr. Trump to agree to, according to two people familiar with the figure. Mr. Kise did not respond to an email seeking comment.But Mr. Trump’s legal team has been distinguished in recent months mostly by infighting and the legal problems that some of its members appear to have gotten themselves into in the course of defending him.In a statement, a spokesman for Mr. Trump, Taylor Budowich, said that “the unprecedented and unnecessary weaponization of law enforcement against the Democrats’ most powerful political opponent is a truth that cannot be overshadowed and will continue to be underscored by the vital work being done right now by President Trump and his legal team.”Two members of the Trump legal team working on the documents case, Mr. Corcoran and Christina Bobb, have subjected themselves to scrutiny by federal law enforcement officials over assurances they provided to prosecutors and federal agents in June that the former president had returned all sensitive government documents kept in his residence and subpoenaed by a grand jury, according to people familiar with the situation.That assertion was proved to be untrue after the search of Mar-a-Lago in August turned up more than 100 additional documents with classification markings..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-ok2gjs{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-ok2gjs a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}What we consider before using anonymous sources. Do the sources know the information? What’s their motivation for telling us? Have they proved reliable in the past? Can we corroborate the information? Even with these questions satisfied, The Times uses anonymous sources as a last resort. The reporter and at least one editor know the identity of the source.Learn more about our process.Investigators are seeking information from Ms. Bobb about why she signed a statement attesting to full compliance with the subpoena, and they have signaled they have not ruled out pursuing a criminal inquiry into the actions of either Ms. Bobb or Mr. Corcoran, according to two people briefed on the matter.The attestation was drafted by Mr. Corcoran, but Ms. Bobb added language to it to make it less ironclad a declaration before signing it, according to the people. She has retained the longtime criminal defense lawyer John Lauro, who declined to comment on the investigation.It is unclear whether the authorities have questioned Ms. Bobb yet or whether she has had discussions with Mr. Trump’s other lawyers about the degree to which she would remain bound by attorney-client privilege.Mr. Corcoran and Mr. Rowley did not respond to emails seeking comment.Mr. Corcoran, a former federal prosecutor and insurance lawyer, represented the former Trump aide Stephen K. Bannon in his recent trial for refusing to comply with a subpoena issued by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. In that case, Mr. Bannon claimed he believed he had immunity from testimony because of executive privilege; Mr. Trump later said he would not seek to invoke executive privilege for Mr. Bannon.Mr. Corcoran, the son of a former Republican congressman from Illinois, has told associates that he is the former president’s “main” lawyer and has insisted to colleagues that he does not need to retain his own counsel, as Ms. Bobb has.But several Trump associates have said privately that they believe Mr. Corcoran cannot continue in his role on the documents investigation. That view is shared by some of Mr. Trump’s advisers, who have suggested Mr. Corcoran needs to step away, in part because of his own potential legal exposure and in part because he has had little experience with criminal defense work beyond his stint as a federal prosecutor for the U.S. attorney in Washington more than two decades ago.Mr. Trump has at least 10 lawyers working on the main investigations he faces. Mr. Corcoran, Ms. Bobb and Mr. Kise are focused on the documents case, along with James M. Trusty, a former senior Justice Department official. Three lawyers on the team — Mr. Corcoran, Mr. Rowley and Timothy Parlatore — represent other clients who are witnesses in cases related to Mr. Trump’s efforts to stay in power.To the extent anyone is regarded as a quarterback of the documents and Jan. 6-related legal teams, it is Boris Epshteyn, a former campaign adviser and a graduate of the Georgetown University law school. Some aides tried to block his calls to Mr. Trump in 2020, according to former White House officials, but Mr. Epshteyn now works as an in-house counsel to Mr. Trump and speaks with him several times a day.Mr. Epshteyn played a key role coordinating efforts by a group of lawyers for and political allies of Mr. Trump immediately after the 2020 election to prevent Joseph R. Biden Jr. from becoming president. Because of that role, he has been asked to testify in the state investigation in Georgia into the efforts to reverse Mr. Biden’s victory there.Mr. Epshteyn’s phone was seized by the F.B.I. last week as part of the broad federal criminal inquiry into the attempts to overturn the election results and the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol. That prompted alarm among some of Mr. Trump’s allies and advisers about him remaining in a position of authority on the legal team.It is not clear how much strategic direction and leadership Mr. Kise may provide. But he is joining a team defined by warring camps and disputes over legal issues.In his emails to Mr. Corcoran and Mr. Rowley, Mr. Herschmann — a prominent witness for the House select committee on Jan. 6 and what led to it — invoked Mr. Corcoran’s defense of Mr. Bannon and argued pointedly that case law about executive privilege did not reflect what Mr. Corcoran believed it did.Mr. Herschmann made clear in the emails that absent a court order precluding a witness from answering questions on the basis of executive privilege, which he had repeatedly implored them to seek, he would be forced to testify.“I certainly am not relying on any legal analysis from either of you or Boris who — to be clear — I think is an idiot,” Mr. Herschmann wrote in a different email. “When I questioned Boris’s legal experience to work on challenging a presidential election since he appeared to have none — challenges that resulted in multiple court failures — he boasted that he was ‘just having fun,’ while also taking selfies and posting pictures online of his escapades.”Mr. Corcoran at one point sought to get on the phone with Mr. Herschmann to discuss his testimony, instead of simply sending the written directions, which alarmed Mr. Herschmann, given that Mr. Herschmann was a witness, the emails show.In language that mirrored the federal statute against witness tampering, Mr. Herschmann told Mr. Corcoran that Mr. Epshteyn, himself under subpoena in Georgia, “should not in any way be involved in trying to influence, delay or prevent my testimony.”“He is not in a position or qualified to opine on any of these issues,” Mr. Herschmann said.Mr. Epshteyn declined to respond to a request for comment.Nearly four weeks after Mr. Herschmann first asked for an instruction letter and for Mr. Trump’s lawyers to seek a court order invoking a privilege claim, the emails show that he received notification from the lawyers — in the early morning hours of the day he was scheduled to testify — that they had finally done as he asked.His testimony was postponed.Michael S. Schmidt More

  • in

    Searching for Common Ground in a Fractured Political Landscape

    Astead Herndon, who hosts “The Run-Up” podcast, discussed his approach to the show and why voters’ voices matter.Times Insider explains who we are and what we do and delivers behind-the-scenes insights into how our journalism comes together.In the first episode of “The Run-Up,” a podcast focused on the 2022 midterm elections, the host Astead Herndon calls a voter and asks how she’s feeling about the political climate.“I’m not expecting a whole lot from this conversation,” she says, “but I’ll give it a shot.” By later in the episode, she has opened up about her beliefs, and her doubts of whether her vote will actually matter.“The Run-Up” — which began in August 2016, three months before Donald J. Trump was elected president, and returned this month — can dig deep into the heart of the issues that shape American democracy. In early 2020, Mr. Herndon, a national political reporter for The New York Times, traveled through Iowa to take the temperature of Democratic caucusgoers, sharing his findings as a guest on “The Field” podcast, an offshoot of “The Daily.” The experience helped him understand the power of audio in journalism. Now, through frank conversations with Times colleagues, political insiders and voters of different parties, Mr. Herndon will explore shifting politics and what they mean for the country.As “The Run-Up” kicks off and the midterms approach, Mr. Herndon spoke about the reboot of the podcast and how he’s tackling fraught topics. This interview has been edited.What’s your philosophy for this podcast?Sometimes, the way that political reporting talks to voters presumes that parties and insiders have all the knowledge, where I often think that what we have learned, particularly in this current political era, is that party insiders often have missed core things about the country and are surprised come Election Day.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.Midterm Data: Could the 2020 polling miss repeat itself? Will this election cycle really be different? Nate Cohn, The Times’s chief political analyst, looks at the data in his new newsletter.Republicans’ Abortion Struggles: Senator Lindsey Graham’s proposed nationwide 15-week abortion ban was intended to unite the G.O.P. before the November elections. But it has only exposed the party’s divisions.Democrats’ Dilemma: The party’s candidates have been trying to signal their independence from the White House, while not distancing themselves from President Biden’s base or agenda.Good political journalism can do both at the same time: We both get a better understanding about how Washington and parties and candidates are coming to an election, and you also have a good understanding of where the country and constituents are.We’re trying to come from a place that does not lecture down to voters, but actually affirms how they feel through connecting dots.What’s the process for reaching out to voters for interviews on the podcast?I did not want to make a midterm show where only people who already understood the midterms’ importance would listen. I think that there are a lot of podcasts and a lot of political media that already exists for those people.We are trying to do something that is not just for those people, but that is for everyone else who doesn’t know if it matters. This is a podcast for everyone involved — we are not coming from a place that assumes language or assumes knowledge.That’s informed by my own experiences. I come from communities that were ignored by parties. I know what it’s like to live in places that feel neglected. And I know what it’s like when political media is not reflecting your concerns.What can listeners expect in future episodes?We want to deal with: How did we get here? How deep do these fractures go? And what is our commitment to democracy, really? Every one of the episodes will ask one of those questions.People deserve an answer about whether the system might hold, and what real cracks are there. I think that voters actually respond when political media is honest and transparent. When I am at a Trump rally versus when I am at a Bernie Sanders rally, that sentiment is universal — concern and anxiety about what democracy means, and whether it’s going to hold. They’re not coming from a universal agreement about the why, but it is a universal feeling that somebody is taking democracy from you.In that moment, to ask any question besides those core, fundamental ones is missing the point. The central question here has to be one that wrestles with democracy’s meaning and value for voters. I don’t think it’s hyperbole to say that those things are being more defined right now.Astead interviews Bishop Theodore Myers, founding pastor of Temple of Faith Bible Way Church.Clare Toeniskoetter/The New York TimesI think we have a democracy that has frequently had crossroads moments that forced the country to decide what it really means by that word. I think this election is another one of those moments.How do you cut through the noise in political media and get to the core of an issue?In some ways, I disagree with the premise — there is a lot of political media and noise out there, but there’s not a lot out there that is framed from the basis of voters’ concerns being justified. There’s not actually a lot out there that deals with whether our commitment to democracy is real. The reason that a lot of politics journalism has skirted from these questions is because they’re hard questions that have messy and nonlinear answers. The power of this podcast and the power of audio is that you can deal with messy, nonlinear stuff in a better way. More

  • in

    Book Review: ‘The Divider’ Is a Sober Look at the Trump White House

    In “The Divider,” political journalists keep their cool as they chronicle the outrageous conduct and ugly infighting that marked a presidency like no other.THE DIVIDER: Trump in the White House, 2017-2021, by Peter Baker and Susan Glasser“His job wasn’t to get things done but to stop certain things from happening, to prevent disaster.” This line from Peter Baker and Susan Glasser’s detail-rich history of the Trump administration, “The Divider: Trump in the White House, 2017-2021,” technically applies to his first secretary of state, Rex Tillerson. But in truth it describes any of several dozen beleaguered helpmates to the former president, whose propensity for petulant rage kept Washington in a fit of indignation and the White House in a mode of perpetual damage control for the better part of four years. Comprehensively researched and briskly told, “The Divider” is a story of disasters averted as well as disasters realized.Squeezing the tumultuous events of the long national fever dream that was the Donald Trump presidency between two covers — even two covers placed far apart, as is the case with this 752-page anvil — would tax the skills of the nimblest journalist. Yet the husband-and-wife team of Baker and Glasser pull it off with assurance. It’s all here: the culture wars and the corruption, the demagogy and the autocrat-love, the palace intrigue and the public tweets, the pandemic and the impeachments (plural).To be sure, asking readers in 2022 to revisit the Sturm und Drang of the Trump years may seem like asking a Six Flags patron, staggering from a ride on the Tsunami, to jump back on for another go. But those with strong stomachs will find a lot they didn’t know, and a lot more that they once learned but maybe, amid the daily barrage of breaking-news banner headlines, managed to forget.Baker, The New York Times’s chief White House correspondent, and Glasser, a staff writer at The New Yorker, are the perfect pair to write this book, with a combined 60 years of Washington reporting experience and two other jointly authored books to their names. (I know both of them through professional circles; when Glasser edited Politico Magazine, she hired me to write a history column.) For a book produced so quickly, they draw on an impressively broad array of materials: hundreds of original interviews, reams of contemporary daily journalism, and an already-fat library of memoirs and journalistic accounts of the Trump years, including those by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker, and Alexander Burns and Jonathan Martin. (Something about writing a Trump book seems to call for two reporters.)Even while cataloging Trump’s most outrageous behaviors, Baker and Glasser strive to maintain a professional, dispassionate tone: analytical but not polemical. Inevitably, however, their low opinion of Trump shines through, occasionally garnished with a soupçon of snark. Of the president’s curiosity about whether nuclear bombs might deter tropical storms, they write, “Trump’s plans to deal with Hurricane Dorian thankfully did not involve atomic warfare.” Apart from the landmark Abraham Accords of 2020, which opened diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab nations, they devote only fleeting attention to Trump’s concrete achievements, of which even critics must concede there were a few. The strength of the pre-Covid economy — for which Trump doesn’t deserve full credit but which still helped millions of voters look past his failings and failures — is little discussed. Trump fans will surely object to the consistently negative judgments about their tribune.But the authors are persuasive in arguing that in this White House, “impulse and instinct ruled.” Given the sheer number of crises and conflicts that erupted on Trump’s watch, herding them all into a narrative isn’t easy. To impose order on the chaos, the authors center each chapter on its own topic or story line — Trump’s rocky relationship with foreign allies, for example, or the 2018 budget battle over the Mexico wall. Other chapters focus on key supporting players, who are rendered with deft portraits, such as Jared Kushner, Trump’s widely reviled but fireproof son-in-law, or the president’s antagonist-turned-sycophant, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.Some of the weightiest chapters take up Trump’s relationship with Russia. Former Moscow correspondents and longtime Russia jocks, Baker and Glasser eschew the wilder conspiracy theories that were bandied about in left-wing circles during Robert Mueller’s probe of the 2016 campaign’s Russia connections.Instead, “The Divider” soberly and carefully reconstructs events to reveal anew Trump’s shocking deference to the Russian president, Vladimir Putin — notably at the 2018 Helsinki summit, where, the authors pointedly write, “Trump acknowledged that he would accept the word of Putin over that of his own intelligence agencies.” The chapters on the 2019 Ukraine scandal, when Trump linked aid to its government to delivery of dirt on Joe Biden, re-establish the gravity of the first impeachment, which has since been overshadowed by the second.If “The Divider” has a dominant theme, it may be the struggle within the “almost cartoonishly chaotic White House” by people more reasonable and ethical than Trump to rein in his most dangerous instincts. Because everyone had different ideas about where to restrain and where to encourage Trump, the White House became a den of “ongoing tribal warfare,” they write — an “Apprentice”-style reality-TV show in which the parties vied to win Trump’s favor and outlast their rivals, even while at times sabotaging the president’s agenda as they saw fit..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-ok2gjs{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-ok2gjs a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.The dishy gossip and mocking nicknames the Trumpies coin for one another (Kushner is the “Slim Reaper,” Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen “Nurse Ratched”) make for amusing reading; they also highlight a dysfunctionality rare for even the Washington freak show. Every chapter, it seems, has a sentence like this: “While Priebus, Bannon and Kushner disliked each other, the one thing they agreed on was they all loathed [Kellyanne] Conway.” Or: “In public, Mattis, Tillerson and McMaster were portrayed as fellow members of the Axis of Adults. In private, there was pettiness that at times suggested a middle school cafeteria.” The backbiting — and the sub rosa efforts to thwart their own president — led to constant personnel turnover, a dreary parade of firings, resignations and defenestrations. Trump would cashier one aide in favor of someone presumably more compliant, only for the new guy to find that Trump was even more willful and heedless of rules than he had dreamed. Time and again, staffers debate whether to stay put in hopes of mitigating Trump’s basest impulses or to run screaming from the room. Even more stunning is the number of onetime loyalists who, after their tours of duty, emerged as among the president’s most strident critics.Many Trump aides — even some, like National Security Adviser John Bolton or Attorney General William P. Barr, who might deserve harsh criticism on other grounds — did intervene valiantly at times to keep Trump in check. Without their small acts of resistance, things could have gone even worse. Yet Baker and Glasser seem to endorse the view of the Democratic congressman Adam Schiff, who, during the first impeachment, warned Republicans, “You will not change him, you cannot constrain him.” They write: “So many had told themselves that they could manage the unmanageable president, that they could keep him from going too far, that they could steer him in the direction of responsible governance. … They had justified their service to him or their alliances with him or their deference to him on the grounds that they could ultimately control him. And what Schiff was saying is that three years had shown that was not possible.” In this instance, Schiff was talking specifically about Trump’s plans to “compromise our elections,” and his words proved tragically prescient. “The Divider” concludes with a riveting few chapters on Trump’s mad scheming to hold onto power after his November 2020 defeat — resulting in the deadly Jan. 6, 2021, storming of the Capitol.In the book’s final passages, we see Trump lurking in exile in Mar-a-Lago like a movie villain, having escaped Washington by the skin of his teeth, defeated but not altogether vanquished. In Hollywood, such endings serve to leave the door open to another installment. But as good as this book is, let’s hope Baker and Glasser won’t be writing a sequel.David Greenberg is a professor of history and of journalism and media studies at Rutgers University. He is writing a biography of the late congressman John Lewis.THE DIVIDER: Trump in the White House, 2017-2021 | By Peter Baker and Susan Glasser | 752 pp. | Doubleday | $32 More

  • in

    MyPillow’s Mike Lindell Is Served Search Warrant

    Mike Lindell, a prominent promoter of 2020 election misinformation, was served with a search warrant, and his cellphone was seized, by F.B.I. agents who questioned him about his ties to a Colorado county clerk who is accused of tampering with voting machines, Mr. Lindell said.Tina Peters, the county clerk in Mesa County, Colo., is under indictment on state charges related to a scheme to download data from election equipment after the 2020 presidential contest. Ms. Peters has pleaded not guilty to the charges.The search is a sign that a federal investigation into Ms. Peters has reached a prominent figure in the national movement to investigate and overturn the 2020 election. Mr. Lindell, the chief executive and founder of MyPillow, is a major promoter of debunked theories that keep alive the false notion that the election was stolen from former President Donald J. Trump.The Mesa County episode is one of several instances in which local officials and activists motivated by those theories have gained access to voting machines in hopes of proving the theories true. Prosecutors in Michigan and Georgia are also investigating whether data was improperly copied from machines.It is not clear if Mr. Lindell is a target of the investigation. The F.B.I. field office in Denver confirmed late Tuesday that the bureau had served Mr. Lindell with a warrant, but Deborah Takahara, a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Denver, said the office had no further comment. It is also unclear whether others were served search warrants on Tuesday.In an interview with The New York Times on Tuesday night, Mr. Lindell said that he had been in a drive-through line at a Hardee’s fast food restaurant in Mankato, Minn., on Tuesday afternoon, while returning with a friend from a duck-hunting trip in Iowa, when his vehicle was surrounded by several cars driven by federal agents. The agents presented him with a search and seizure warrant and interviewed him for about 15 minutes.The agents asked him about his relationship to Ms. Peters, he said, and about an image copied from a voting machine in Mesa County that had appeared on Frank Speech, a website and hosting platform that Mr. Lindell operates.A letter handed to Mr. Lindell by the F.B.I. asked that he not tell anyone about the investigation, but he displayed a copy of the letter and the search warrant on his online TV show Tuesday evening, reading portions of it aloud. “Although the law does not require nondisclosure unless a court order is issued, we believe that the impact of any disclosure could be detrimental to the investigation,” read the letter, signed by Aaron Teitelbaum, an assistant U.S. attorney.A copy of the search warrant, parts of which were also read aloud by Mr. Lindell, said the government was seeking “all records and information relating to damage to any Dominion computerized voting system.”Prosecutors have accused Ms. Peters of attempting to extract data from voting machines under her supervision in Mesa County and of enlisting help from a network of activists, some close to Mr. Lindell. The effort was ostensibly an attempt to prove that voting machines had been used to steal the 2020 presidential election. Data that was purported to have come from the machines was later distributed at a conference hosted by Mr. Lindell last year at which Ms. Peters appeared onstage.The F.B.I. agents “asked if I gave her any money after the symposium,” Mr. Lindell said.Mr. Lindell once told a local reporter that he had funded Ms. Peters’s legal efforts directly. He now says he was mistaken about his contributions and that he did not directly contribute to her defense. “I was financing everything back then,” he said, referring to the various lawsuits that had been filed in relation to the 2020 election. “I thought I’d financed hers, too.”Mr. Lindell earlier told The Times that he had funneled as much as $200,000 to her legal defense via his legal fund, the Lindell Legal Offense Fund, through which he had said third-party donors supported various lawsuits and projects. Ms. Peters had directed supporters to donate to that fund.On his web TV show, which is streamed on Facebook and several other platforms, Mr. Lindell claimed that in their brief interview, F.B.I. agents had also asked about his connection with Douglas Frank, an activist who claims to have mathematical proof that the 2020 election was stolen. Lindell said that the F.B.I. had asked him whether he had employed Mr. Frank.Mr. Lindell is the target of a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit filed by Dominion Voting Systems, which provides voting machines to Mesa County and other jurisdictions and which Mr. Lindell has claimed was responsible for changing the outcome of the 2020 election. He said the warrant had specifically sought data related to Dominion and its machines.“They think they’re going to intimidate me,” Mr. Lindell told The Times. “That’s disgusting.” More

  • in

    Is Ron DeSantis the Future of the Republican Party?

    Listen to This ArticleAudio Recording by AudmTo hear more audio stories from publications like The New York Times, download Audm for iPhone or Android.For most of the last year, Ron DeSantis would not indulge the speculation. Yes, he made clear to donors, he might seek the presidency. But pressed with the obvious follow-up — would he still run in 2024 if Donald Trump does? — DeSantis, the governor of Florida, begged off. “He’ll be completely, completely open about whatever, but then the Trump stuff — he suddenly starts to act like he’s being recorded,” Dan Eberhart, a prominent Republican donor and a DeSantis ally, told me in March.By the summer, though, the governor seemed to be testing the beginnings of a pivot in private settings. He would praise Trump’s record — “You think Ukraine would have been invaded if Donald Trump were president?” — suggesting the former president would win a rematch with President Biden decisively on the policy merits. “But it’s not going to be just the record,” DeSantis has added, according to a person present, performatively ruing this fate. “And that’s a shame.”Left unspoken is the figure DeSantis believes is best suited to carry the party’s banner without the former president’s baggage. Across the Republican factions unsure if they are approaching an eventual Trump-free future or still living in an interminable Trump present, DeSantis has been permitted to subsist as a kind of Schrödinger’s candidate, both Trump and Not Trump. He can present as an iron-fisted imitation, touring the country in August with a slate of Trump endorsees who lie about the 2020 election. He can cosplay as the post-Trump choice for those desperate for a post-Trump party — a Yale- and Harvard-educated man of letters just winking at the party’s extremes. He can pitch himself, especially, as the “Trump, but …” candidate — an Evolutionary Trump, the 2.0 — defined most vividly by what DeSantis has learned by watching: Here is Trump, but more strategic about his targets; Trump, but restrained enough to keep his Twitter accounts from suspension; Trump, but not under federal investigation.“It’s like going to the races and watching a race, but you don’t have to make your bet until your horses are coming around the turn,” John Morgan, a Florida Democratic megadonor who has praised DeSantis’s savvy and appeared at an event with him early in his tenure, told me. “That’s how he does it. He watches Trump like a hawk.”In an extensive examination of his life and record — across more than 100 interviews with aides, allies, antagonists and peers who detailed several previously unreported episodes spanning his decade in elected office — the most consistent appraisal was that DeSantis, who turns 44 this month, believes his raw instincts are unrivaled and that he may well be correct. He has for years merrily shunned the perspectives of moderating influences and gentle dissenters and found himself validated at every turn, his recent history a whir of nominally risky choices — expert-snubbing Covid policies, an uppercut at one of his state’s largest private employers, a long-shot bid for the office he holds — transmogrified to pure political upside as he seeks to position himself as his party’s rightful heir.“You have a moment,” Casey DeSantis, his wife and closest adviser, has said privately in recent months, nodding at past would-be candidates who failed to seize their chance. The person speaking to her interpreted the remark unambiguously: The DeSantis family thinks this moment is theirs.Before the F.B.I.’s search and document seizure at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, DeSantis allies expected the governor to run for president no matter what Trump decided. While the episode at least initially rallied the party to Trump’s defense, with DeSantis joining the chorus of Republicans scorning “the raid” as the stuff of banana republics, there is little to suggest that the governor’s plans have changed. He still appears poised to capitalize on perceptible shifts inside Republican power centers that Trump often frustrated but generally tamed while in office. From the cable airwaves to the New York Post editorial page, Murdoch media properties have betrayed an interest in moving beyond the former president, at one point in July posting an indiscreet Fox News Digital montage of erstwhile Trump voters defecting to DeSantis. “I had a guy here in Utah who just came up to me and said, ‘DeSantis 2024,’” Jason Chaffetz, a Republican former congressman and a Fox News contributor, told me. “That doesn’t happen in Utah.”Republican donors, a reliable party weather vane, have likewise turned his way. Some, leery of missing their chance to ingratiate themselves early, have offered the ultimate good-will gesture: submitting to a midsummer day in North Florida. “National donors are wanting 15 minutes in front of DeSantis more and more, and people are willing to fly to Tallahassee to do that,” Eberhart told me. “It almost feels a bit like the period right before Trump won the nomination in 2016. There was a moment when the donor class was like, ‘Oh, wow, the train is leaving the station.’”DeSantis, who was never considered a leading culture warrior as a young congressman — once privately dismissing the party’s old-guard preoccupation with sexuality — has steered his state to the vanguard of right-wing social causes, responding nimbly to political market forces and enlisting a small conservative college in Michigan to help guide Florida classroom standards. He has proved willing to stir the far-right fringe, raising conspiracy theories about the F.B.I.’s “orchestrating” the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and saying of the federal medical official Anthony Fauci, whom he has suggested belongs in jail, “Someone needs to grab that little elf and chuck him across the Potomac.” Matt Gaetz, the trollish Florida congressman, was a friend and a close adviser, but DeSantis has kept a public distance amid a sex-trafficking probe into the legislator. (Gaetz has denied wrongdoing.)On and off camera, DeSantis has forged relationships not only with Fox, where a producer once gushed to a member of the governor’s staff that he could host a show, but with edgelord media types who have flocked to his state and boosted him online. (A former aide told me DeSantis regularly read his Twitter mentions.) In January, invitees to a dinner at the governor’s mansion included Dave Rubin, a popular right-wing web talk-show host, and Benny Johnson, a Newsmax host. Fellow DeSantis-heads from the Extremely Online right include Alex Jones — who in August declared him “way better than Trump” before begging the former president for forgiveness — and Elon Musk, with whom the governor has dined.DeSantis’s canniest feat as a shadow candidate has been dazzling this sphere of Republican influence while heartening party elites who see him as one of their own, celebrated by throwback organs like The National Review and the Club for Growth, where one of his former top congressional aides now works. “There’s a lot riding on trying to make Ron DeSantis happen,” Sarah Longwell, a Republican operative and publisher of the anti-Trump conservative site The Bulwark, told me. “They see him as somebody who gets them out of having to defend Trump.”DeSantis is already beloved in right-wing legal circles. He recently told the radio host Hugh Hewitt that he had moved Florida’s courts to the right in part with out-of-state help from “pretty big legal conservative heavyweights.” DeSantis’s general counsel is a former clerk for Justice Samuel Alito. His chief of staff is a former Trump Commerce Department counsel and an alumnus of Jones Day, a firm with deep ties to Republican power. Justice Clarence Thomas has communicated a number of times with DeSantis, according to an email to the governor’s staff from Thomas’s wife, Ginni Thomas, obtained by the watchdog group American Oversight. Her message, sent in June 2021, invited DeSantis to address a “cone of silence coalition” of “conservative patriots.” She noted that her husband had contacted DeSantis “on various things of late.” Introducing Thomas at a Federalist Society event in Florida in 2020, DeSantis called him “our greatest living justice.”Yet what distinguishes DeSantis, elevating him for now above the Cruzes and Cottons and Mikes Pompeo and Pence, is a central insight into where the party is and where it is headed. If a DeSantis campaign would be a referendum on which parts of Trumpism voters value most — the burn-it-all fury at elites? The perpetual grievances? The blunt-force magnetism of Trump himself? — DeSantis’s read is that the signal trait worth emulating, and then heightening, is more elemental. It is about projecting the political fearlessness to crush adversaries with administrative precision.Perhaps no current officeholder has been more single-minded about turning the gears of state against specific targets. Trump groused about local Democrats who defied him; DeSantis dug up a 1930s precedent in suspending an elected prosecutor who, amid the overturning of Roe v. Wade and a state crackdown on providing gender-affirming treatment to minors, vowed not to criminalize abortion or transgender care. Other governors denounced Covid-vaccine mandates; DeSantis’s administration threatened the Special Olympics, hosting a competition in Orlando, with tens of millions in fines if the organization refused to lift a requirement for athletes and staff. (The group backed down.) Conservatives have long condemned creeping progressivism in classrooms and boardrooms; DeSantis last spring signed the “Stop W.O.K.E. Act” (short for “Stop the Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees”) aimed at race-conscious teachings. “For years, many conservatives understood culture war as lamentation: They believed that complaining about progressive ideology and hypocrisy was a victory in itself,” Christopher Rufo, a conservative activist who by invitation advised DeSantis’s policy team on “Stop W.O.K.E.” and appeared with the governor to promote it, told me. “Governor DeSantis understands culture war as public policy.”That DeSantis has made enemies in these endeavors is clearly part of the point. He has become Democrats’ favorite governor to despise — nothing less than an aspiring authoritarian, many say, their criticisms only further galvanizing his fans. His persistent conflict with reporters is so ingrained in his public identity that he cast himself in a recent ad as Maverick of “Top Gun,” “dogfighting” the “corporate media” in shades and a bomber jacket. He has made useful foils of academics; a Roman Catholic archbishop; the state of California; purveyors of “woke math”; a trans collegiate swimmer; a professional baseball team, the Tampa Bay Rays, after its official account tweeted about gun violence. “People say it’s that Ron DeSantis hates the right people,” says Longwell, who has conducted focus groups gauging his 2024 appeal and sees a path for him. “It’s the opposite: The right people hate Ron DeSantis.”Wherever he appears lately, DeSantis generally takes the stage to customized walk-up music produced by two grateful constituents: Johnny Van Zant of Lynyrd Skynyrd and his brother Donnie. “Down in swee-eeet Florida,” the chorus goes, greeting DeSantis as he stepped into a cavernous hotel ballroom in Pittsburgh on Aug. 19. “Our governor is red, white and blue. Down in swee-eeet Florida. He’s shootin’ us straight, tellin’ us the truth.”He had imported this re-election anthem to a campaign appearance with Doug Mastriano, the far-right Trump endorsee for Pennsylvania governor. Approaching the microphone, DeSantis held a small collection of autographed hats printed with his name and flung them into a crowd dotted with red Trump gear. “Hello, Western Pennsylvania!” DeSantis said, sounding every bit the national candidate. He ticked through a slide show as he narrated life highlights: taking his youth baseball team from Dunedin, Fla., to the Little League World Series; joining the military; scolding a television reporter during the pandemic. The final image showed DeSantis, whose father is from the area, decked in Pittsburgh Steelers garb as a child.DeSantis has few analogues as a public performer. He is by turns blustering and kvetchy, better at reading rooms than electrifying them. Some of his observations seem to be culled from hate-scrolling. “People would put in their Twitter profile a mask and a syringe, and that was, like, their identity,” he fumed at a recent news conference. In Pittsburgh, DeSantis’s denouncement of “gender-affirming care for minors,” which he introduced with scare quotes, was accompanied by air-slicing hand gestures as he accused doctors of “chopping off private parts” with impunity. He unfurled a Biden impression: staring at a phantom teleprompter, mouth open and mind blank. “Honestly, it’s sad,” he said to howls.Though DeSantis has been more reserved on matters of “election integrity” than Mastriano, a leading proponent of Trump’s 2020 election lies, the Pennsylvania event seemed designed in part to have it all ways: By standing with the candidate at all, DeSantis could prove himself one of the guys, darkly recounting Pennsylvania’s pace of ballot-counting in 2020 and talking up Florida’s first-of-its-kind election-crime police without saying outright that Trump was robbed. But mostly, the event gave DeSantis a swing-state venue for playing the hits, with a special emphasis on one. “There was a company that people may have heard of in Orlando,” he said, inviting a rush of knowing cheers.Of all DeSantis’s chosen skirmishes, his collision with Disney stands apart. For those seeking to understand the de facto governor of Red America in his latest form, this is the skeleton key — the full realization of his bid to fuse cultural clashes and executive vengeance-seeking as his national signature. Not long ago, DeSantis did not seem deeply invested in the feud’s origin text, Florida House Bill 1557, named the Parental Rights in Education Act. As the bill wended through the Legislature early this year — proposing to ban instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades — he has said he did not follow its particulars closely.Little in his record suggested strong personal feelings about L.G.B.T.Q. issues. “I don’t care if somebody’s gay,” he told a counterpart several years ago as a 30-something congressman, according to a person present, who — like some others interviewed — requested anonymity to avoid provoking a famously retaliatory governor. “I don’t know why people get caught up in that.” But soon the Florida legislation acquired the right enemies, and DeSantis’s attention. Critics labeled it the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, a phrase echoed often in media accounts. Activists pressed businesses to object, reprising a template from Georgia a year earlier, when outrage over a restrictive voting law prompted rebukes from several corporations.But in Florida, Disney was so cozy with the Tallahassee power structure that it employed more than three dozen local lobbyists. Its chief executive, Bob Chapek, had shown little appetite for partisan politics before he and DeSantis discussed the bill in March, a reluctance the governor seemed to encourage. “I told them, ‘You shouldn’t get involved,’” DeSantis recalled in an interview with Rubin, the right-wing talk-show host, months later. “ ‘It’s not going to work out well for you.’”Though Disney appeared most concerned with appeasing disenchanted workers and partners — eventually issuing a forcefully toothless statement calling for the law’s repeal after its final passage — DeSantis was not content to declare victory and move on. Publicly, he has positioned himself as a latter-day Winston Churchill, fighting on the beaches that never should have been closed, standing firm against a “Burbank, California-based company” that does business with the Chinese Communist Party. “We must fight the woke in our schools, we must fight the woke in our businesses,” DeSantis thundered in Pittsburgh, echoing Churchill’s stirring 1940 speech to the war-weary Brits. “We can never, ever surrender to woke ideology.”Privately, he can sound less furious than bemused at having gained such a bumbling foe, repurposing an oft-repeated Michael Jordan quotation about Republicans and sneaker sales in an aside to one associate: Conservatives go to Disney, too. When Rufo, the conservative activist, published video last spring of an internal Disney meeting — during which a producer spoke of injecting “queerness” into programming and proclaimed her “not-at-all-secret gay agenda” — DeSantis cited the footage as grounds to revoke Disney World’s 55-year-old designation as a special tax district. The company’s tumbling market capitalization became an applause line in his speeches. “You don’t have a right to force me or my citizens to subsidize your woke activism,” DeSantis said in Pittsburgh, looking down at his lectern with practiced stoicism through extended applause.Back home, DeSantis-friendly lobbyists have welcomed a growing cottage industry: advising clients who fear becoming the next Disney. “Companies that have otherwise taken big stands on cultural issues are now worried,” Nick Iarossi, a lobbyist and a DeSantis fund-raiser, told me. “You know: ‘Florida’s a big state. This guy could be president one day. How do we stay off the shit list?’” He added, “If you want to make a point, you make a point by punching the biggest guy in the room.”The local ramifications are both unsettled and largely immaterial to DeSantis’s prospects. The finer details around the company’s tax status are expected to be sorted out after his probable re-election in November. To the extent that he has antagonized voters in counties that might be adversely affected, those areas are generally blue anyway. But it can be said that some 400 miles away in West Palm Beach, the episode registered with Florida’s most famous resident.“What happened to Disney?” Trump asked an associate recently, struck by the company’s misfortunes.The thing that happens when Ron DeSantis believes you are in his way.DeSantis is surely not the first elected official who told friends from his youth he would be president one day — the son of a Nielsen-rating box installer and a nurse outside Tampa, imagining a path to high prominence through politics. But he might be the only Gen X-er who paired such ambitions with impressions of a disgraced forebear. “He would always do Richard Nixon,” Brady Williams, a childhood friend and baseball teammate who now manages the AAA Durham Bulls (a Rays affiliate), told me. “He would put up the two fingers on both hands and act like he was the president. If he won a card game or something, he would do it.”When DeSantis first sought office in 2012, eyeing a redrawn congressional district in northeast Florida, supporters called him “the résumé”: Yale baseball captain, Harvard Law, Navy man who deployed to Iraq as an adviser to a SEAL commander. “He was thinking about this for years,” Williams said. “He knew the steps that he had to take to get a résumé that was good enough to be in politics, to become a president.” DeSantis’s initial pitch to voters registers now as a time capsule of pre-Trump Republicanism, with references to the Federalist Papers, Tea Party-pleasing diatribes against the Affordable Care Act and warm allusions to John Bolton.“There’s a lot riding on trying to make Ron DeSantis happen,” Sarah Longwell, a Republican operative and publisher of the anti-Trump conservative site The Bulwark, said. “They see him as somebody who gets them out of having to defend Trump.”Photo illustration by Jamie Chung for The New York Times. Source photographs: Allison Joyce/Getty Images (Trump); Joe Raedle/Getty Images (DeSantis).After he won, DeSantis could appear almost ostentatiously ill at ease in Washington: lawyerly, tetchy, averse to eye contact, it seemed, as if avoiding an eclipse. He spent nights on a couch in his office — “I slept on worse in Iraq,” he told staff members — and made few friends. “I don’t think he intended to stay in the House very long,” Carlos Curbelo, a former Republican congressman from Florida, told me. Though DeSantis was a founding member of the hard-line Freedom Caucus, he was rarely its public face. A veteran of the group told me DeSantis had a way of “dipping out and disappearing” from meetings if a leadership fight or funding battle was not playing well. Neither did DeSantis, who is Catholic, distinguish himself as a social crusader. Asked about bathrooms and “the transgender issue” at a 2018 candidate forum, he said, “getting into the bathroom wars, I don’t think that’s a good use of our time.” “It’s not what I wanted to hear,” John Stemberger, president of the Florida Family Policy Council, told me. When pressed further at the event, DeSantis pledged to veto any bill that would allow a transgender person to use the bathroom of their choice.DeSantis’s low profile inside the Capitol belied grander designs statewide. For a time, friends talked him up as a possible Florida attorney general, plugging his stint with the Judge Advocate General’s Corps at Guantánamo Bay. He entered the 2016 Senate primary to succeed Marco Rubio, who initially vowed to become president or retire trying, before stepping aside when Rubio reconsidered. “He kind of understood,” Rubio told me, describing DeSantis as “very gracious, very low maintenance about it.” But that rare flash of deference — or, at least, recognizing that the math would be prohibitive — briefly obscured an upside: DeSantis would soon have a cleaner shot at a better job, even if many Republicans did not like his chances. His 2018 primary opponent to be the Republican nominee for governor, Adam Putnam, Florida’s agriculture commissioner, carried statewide name recognition and an early fund-raising edge. “We were patting him on the back saying, ‘Good luck,’” Chaffetz, the former congressman, told me of DeSantis. Jeb Bush, a two-term Florida governor, asked him how he planned to win. “He goes, ‘I’m going to nationalize the primary and localize the general,’” Bush recalled at a Wall Street Journal event after the election. “Pretty smart strategy, it turns out.”DeSantis would essentially shrink that nationalized primary to an electorate of one. “Trump’s going to endorse me,” he told skeptical Republicans flatly, according to someone who heard it, “and I’m going to win.” DeSantis established himself as one of the president’s most visible cable-news defenders, a role Trump seemed to value more than most cabinet posts, the congressman’s face unmissable across Fox News segments on the unfairness of the Mueller probe or the wisdom of the commander in chief. Putnam, his opponent, called him “the ‘Seinfeld’ candidate,” ducking Florida voters from a TV studio in a campaign about nothing. But DeSantis recognized that in the Trump era, all politics were national anyway. The voters he needed were likelier to watch “Hannity” than WBBH Fort Myers — and far likelier to warm to DeSantis because Trump told them to than through any town-to-town glad-handing.Among DeSantis’s most trusted advisers was Gaetz, a fellow young Florida congressman and Fox super-regular who had Trump’s ear. They could make an unlikely pair, the temperate candidate of humble origin and the hard-living rogue whose father once ran the Florida Senate. A former DeSantis aide recalled Gaetz’s showing up to a campaign office one morning in shorts and sunglasses with Joel Greenberg — the friend with whom he is now enmeshed in the sex-trafficking investigation — leaving staff to wonder if they had slept the night before. A Gaetz spokesman said that DeSantis and the congressman maintain a “productive working relationship,” adding that Gaetz had conducted a 2018 DeSantis campaign staff audit in “an acceptable Florida Man political uniform” of flip-flops and shorts. “The little brother I never wanted,” Casey DeSantis has said of Gaetz, according to a person present.But Ron DeSantis respected Gaetz’s political antenna, particularly when it came to negotiating Trump. In December 2017, the two congressmen flew on Air Force One with Trump to a rally in Pensacola, where the president endorsed Roy Moore, the Alabama Republican Senate candidate accused of sexual misconduct with minors. (Moore has denied wrongdoing.) Trump tweeted favorably about DeSantis’s campaign later that month after watching one of his Fox appearances. Vice President Mike Pence was among the Putnam allies who later worked to prevent Trump from formalizing his support. But in DeSantis, Trump had identified the kind of “central casting” candidate he preferred: Ivy League, military, manifest fealty.When Trump visited House Republicans on Capitol Hill months later, he strained to find DeSantis in the room. “Where’s Ron?” he asked. “How’s the campaign going?” A voice called back from the crowd. “It would be a lot better,” DeSantis said, according to a person who was there, “if I could get another tweet.” Trump obliged, posting an unequivocal endorsement two months before the primary about a “top student at Yale and Harvard Law School” now seeking the governorship.Cutting the race’s defining ad, the campaign saw little value in subtlety. DeSantis’s wife, a former local news anchor he met at a driving range, would narrate. Their children — Madison, not yet 2, and Mason, a few months old — would participate. But the real star was off camera. “People say Ron’s all-Trump,” Casey DeSantis said dryly, between scenes of her husband in the delights of fatherhood: “building the wall” out of blocks with Madison, reading from “The Art of the Deal” at story time, putting Mason to bed in a MAGA onesie. “But he is so much more.” One ally recalled DeSantis’s rolling his eyes, dismissing the ad as a necessary gag, when they discussed it a short while later. “I don’t think you’ll ever see that again,” the person told me.DeSantis’s party on primary night, when he enjoyed a 20-point victory, was a celebration of a strategy vindicated. “A lot of Matt Gaetz and DeSantis hugging it out,” Eberhart, the donor, told me. The next day, DeSantis opened the general election — the first (and still only) test of his political mettle in a nationally watched fall campaign — by warning voters not to “monkey this up” by supporting his opponent, Andrew Gillum, a Black Democrat who was then mayor of Tallahassee. Democrats heard a racist dog whistle. Some advisers urged DeSantis to make a qualified apology, a terse acknowledgment that his word choice had given the left ammunition to distract from his planned general-election pivot to local priorities like ocean red tide mitigation. DeSantis viewed any admission of fault as unacceptable. “This is exactly what they want,” he told his team, according to someone with knowledge of the conversation. “This is what they do to conservatives.”Ron and Casey DeSantis with Donald Trump in Estero, Fla., in October 2018, while DeSantis was campaigning for governor.Photo illustration by Jamie Chung for The New York Times. Source photograph: Joe Raedle/Getty Images.Casey DeSantis volunteered a way out of the controversy during a debate prep session weeks later, according to a person present: “She said something like, ‘Would it be helpful for people to know that that was on the top of his mind because he was reading a children’s book to one of the kids the night before and it said, ‘Don’t monkey it up?’” The group was uniformly unpersuaded, the person told me. “Everyone said no.”DeSantis’s ultimate triumph in November — by some 30,000 votes, less than half of a percentage point — was not especially impressive in what was becoming a right-leaning state, against a rival who, as DeSantis pointed out regularly, was already connected to an F.B.I. investigation into Tallahassee corruption. (This June, Gillum surrendered to federal authorities on fraud and conspiracy charges; he has pleaded not guilty.) But a win was a win and, to DeSantis, an answer to every argument. “Even today, the political and media class seem eager to write our obituary,” he said in a score-settling victory speech. Now he had the power to set about writing theirs.Early in the Tallahassee transition, DeSantis burrowed into some essential reading material: a binder enumerating the powers of the office. “He was soaking that up,” Scott Parkinson, the transition’s deputy executive director, told me. DeSantis’s aim, he has said, was to understand all the “pressure points” within the system: what required legislative cooperation, what he could do unilaterally, which appointments needed which approvals. Precisely what kind of governor he might like to be was less certain.Some initial pursuits seemed to feint at center-rightism — Everglades restoration, a bump in new teachers’ pay, the appointment of a Democrat to lead the Division of Emergency Management — helping to lift early approval ratings into the 60s. One of DeSantis’s first events as governor featured John Morgan, the Democratic donor who bankrolled a successful ballot measure on medical marijuana in 2016 and was tangled in litigation with state Republicans who sought to restrict access to the drug in smokable forms. “I get a call from Matt Gaetz, and he goes, ‘The governor is interested in getting rid of this lawsuit,’” Morgan told me. “ ‘Would you be willing to do a press conference with him?’ I said, ‘Hell, yeah.’”DeSantis kept his circle small in the executive suite; his wife maintained an office not far from his. Some senior officials had barely interacted with him months into his tenure. A running joke took hold among lawmakers, sizing up the two names on his list of trusted advisers: Casey DeSantis and Jesus Christ. Some visitors to his office told me he did not bother adjusting the volume on Fox News programming to accommodate live conversation. One Tallahassee veteran summarized a typical hourlong session with the governor as a 50-minute DeSantis monologue. “All good?” he would ask in closing. Hearing no objection quickly enough, he would leave.Covid represented the purest possible stress test for DeSantis and his political instincts: a go-it-alone thinker suspicious of expert consensus; a leader uncomfortable with empathy, dealing with a pitiless killer; a Republican disinclined, at least initially, to buck the president who made him. DeSantis, who has since suggested he regrets not pushing back forcefully on federal lockdown guidance, issued a stay-at-home order in April 2020 like so many peers, a bit of history now elided in the governor’s retelling. His preferred account, true in several respects, is that his state was caricatured as a heedless death cult, its beaches and bars brimming with good cheer and infection, as liberal critics waited for him to fail. “You got a lot of people in your profession who waxed poetically for weeks and weeks about how Florida was going to be just like New York,” DeSantis told reporters in May 2020. “Well, hell, we’re eight weeks away from that, and it hasn’t happened.”That a vicious outbreak soon followed — and eventually several more, with Florida for some time leading the country in per-capita hospitalizations — proved politically irrelevant for DeSantis. The people he needed were with him, reveling in what he now grandly calls the “free state of Florida”: the Republican base that elected him and the blue-state expats bristling at Covid restrictions elsewhere; the parents of children demoralized by remote learning and the right-wing personalities thrilling to DeSantis’s instinct for confrontation. Florida Republicans would overtake Democrats in active voter registrations in 2021 for the first time on record. After being largely absent on Fox News in 2019, the governor returned to the network’s airwaves in force, encouraged by Casey DeSantis, a careful student of the conservative media. “Casey would say, ‘We have to get him on Mark Levin and “Hannity” once a week,’” an aide told me. “ ‘Frequency is very important.’”This imperative was, of course, platform-dependent. DeSantis seemed to emerge from the early months of Covid wholly persuaded that even gesturing at bygone norms of politician-reporter relations was a misread of the Republican moment. DeSantis’s team did not make him available for an interview for this article and declined to answer written questions. He has not spoken extensively to a major nonconservative publication since summer 2020, remarking this February that the best federal officials “can put hit pieces from The New York Times on their wall like wallpaper.” “Republicans have to understand,” DeSantis said in an interview last November with Ben Shapiro, the popular conservative commentator, in the governor’s office. “Don’t try to get these people to like you.”When the governor interacts with the Tallahassee press corps, it is almost exclusively at news conferences for which he sometimes gives little notice, often flanked by state officials or supportive locals who applaud his answers. His most ferocious and ubiquitous public defender, Christina Pushaw, a re-election campaign aide who was the governor’s public-salaried press secretary until August, was hired last year after writing a lacerating article for a conservative publication about the credibility of Rebekah Jones, a former Florida health official who accused the DeSantis administration of hiding Covid data (and is now the Democratic nominee opposing Gaetz).Pushaw has sometimes distressed people in DeSantis’s orbit, once suggesting that a Covid policy in Georgia (the country; she previously worked for the former president Mikheil Saakashvili) was influenced by the Rothschild family, a target of longtime anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. She later apologized. When an Associated Press article placed the governor’s support for a monoclonal antibody treatment in the context of a donor’s ties to the drugmaker, Pushaw urged followers to “drag them,” sending a flood of threats the reporter’s way. Some allies backchanneled with DeSantis, hoping he might be willing to intervene on the reporter’s behalf. “She’s doing her job,” he said of Pushaw, according to a person with direct knowledge of the discussions.DeSantis’s disdain for journalists feels authentic and visceral, distinguishing him from Trump, who has spent a lifetime courting reporters, and even Republican contemporaries like Rubio and Ted Cruz, whose 2016 campaigns were generally happy to play ball. It also has clear advantages. While flattering articles can be useful enough, the governor benefits far more, in reputation and fund-raising possibilities, from a perceived hit, a sort of heads-I-win-tails-fake-news construction for which his supporters have been conditioned. In April, he celebrated the anniversary of a widely criticized “60 Minutes” segment, which suggested corruption in the state’s vaccine rollout, with a tweet promising to “always punch back” against the media.With his early bet on reopening and his concede-nothing posture, DeSantis has plainly won the political argument on Covid. The economic advantages and day-to-day freedoms of his hands-off approach were undeniable, and state-to-state virus statistics are rarely as clean as his opponents would like. While DeSantis has said he is more cleareyed about the Covid science than his detractors, his inputs have been heavily curated — and often opposed or debunked by the “medical establishment” he has derided with air quotes. He has conferred with Scott W. Atlas, a radiologist and Trump White House health adviser who embraced a “herd immunity” theory of Covid, and Jay Bhattacharya, a Stanford health-policy professor critical of lockdowns and mask mandates.Some health authorities do offer qualified praise for key DeSantis decisions. Unlike New York, Florida refused to send discharged Covid patients to long-term care facilities. Federal officials pointed approvingly to the state’s walk-up testing sites. Schools reopened with single-minded drive. But many scientists still hold the governor responsible for a large fraction of Florida’s more than 80,000 Covid deaths, especially as he progressed from lockdown-lifter to apparent vaccine skeptic, aligning himself with a segment of the Republican base that jeered even Trump late last year when he told a crowd in Dallas about getting a booster.DeSantis initially promoted vaccine availability, joking that he might give reporters a biceps “gun show” by getting the shot publicly. Then he did so privately. In September 2021, he stood by without objection at a news conference where a featured speaker said the vaccine “changes your RNA.” Days later, he installed a new surgeon general, Joseph A. Ladapo, who declined to say whether he was vaccinated. In January, an Orange County health official was placed on leave after emailing employees to criticize internal vaccination rates, prompting a state investigation into whether he violated Florida’s anti-mandate law. In March, Florida became the first state to recommend against the vaccine for healthy children.The governor, who has still not said whether he received a booster, is not unaware of his high esteem in the vocal and politically potent anti-vaccine community. “Does he know that? Of course,” Iarossi, the lobbyist and DeSantis ally, told me, before insisting, “He’s not courting the anti-vax crowd.” And if DeSantis has lost support recently among some early-term fans outside the traditional Republican coalition, some of these Floridians had grown alarmed by the political company they were keeping anyway. “I’ve decided that America is full of people with oppositional defiance disorder that you find in some unruly children,” Morgan told me. “DeSantis’s base has a lot of it: Don’t. Tell. Me. What. To. Do.”DeSantis’s relationship with Larry Arnn began around 2014 with an unsolicited gift: “Dreams From Our Founding Fathers,” the congressman’s censorious book about Barack Obama. As the president of Hillsdale College in Michigan, a small school influential in modern conservative thought, Arnn had grown accustomed to books and letters from Republican strivers. This one — “James Madison was a freedom man,” read one characteristic line in the book. “Barack Obama is a government man” — impressed him more than most. “I went, ‘Wow, this is pretty good,’” Arnn said in February, introducing DeSantis as “one of the most important people living” at a Hillsdale event in Naples, Fla. Arnn said he took further notice of DeSantis’s focus on “school reform” in the 2018 campaign, which included an emphasis on constitutional teachings.Since then, Florida has consulted with Hillsdale as part of an overhaul of the state’s civics education standards. Some educators have attacked the new rubric as a slavery-sanitizing jumble of Christian-infused teachings; according to reporting by The Miami Herald and The Tampa Bay Times, several training slides emphasized the “misconception” that the founders “desired strict separation of church and state.” (“They need to understand,” DeSantis has said of students, “that our rights come from God, not from the government.”) While Hillsdale has been a “prime influence” on education in several states, Arnn noted, Florida was an especially “competent” partner. “They said, ‘We want to use your deal,’” he recalled. “And I replied, ‘Good.’”The governor’s affiliation with Hillsdale reflects a tenet of his rise: diligently cultivating the right allies in conservative politics and figuring out which policies they might collaborate on as they came. If he has proved himself a true believer, it is in himself more than any cause. “I think he stumbled into this,” Curbelo, the former Florida congressman, told me of DeSantis’s forays into culture warfare, crediting the governor for his political dexterity in making conservative red meat sound like common sense. “He’s picked issues that are safe in the sense that the majority of people are on his side. Most parents would agree that children in grades K through three should not be exposed to conversations about sex or sexuality in the classroom. And then he uses aggressive rhetoric to keep that Trump base, those Republican primary voters, excited and motivated.”For all his eager enemy-making, DeSantis’s state approval rating is around 50 percent — no small thing in a hyperpolarized climate where many national figures, including Biden and Trump, are underwater with American voters. And over the past year especially, two data points seemed to reinforce for DeSantis the power of clashes over the classroom: school-board-level passions around his Covid policies and the 2021 governor’s race in Virginia, where Glenn Youngkin won an upset victory for Republicans after consistently invoking “parents’ rights.”In Florida, DeSantis has aligned closely with Moms for Liberty, a nonprofit formed last year “to stand up for parental rights,” joining DeSantis to oppose school mask and vaccine mandates and “woke” incursions into the classroom. Appearing in July at the group’s national summit in Tampa, where signs read, “STOP WOKE” and “We do NOT CO-PARENT with the GOVERNMENT,” DeSantis was presented with a Roman-inspired sword. “It is what the gladiators were awarded with after they had fought a long hard battle for freedom,” Tina Descovich, a Moms for Liberty founder, told DeSantis, who swung his gift with a half-chop that resembled a baseball check-swing.Speaking over the gentle clang of breakfast consumption in a second-floor Marriott ballroom, with dozens of cellphones raised to record him, DeSantis saluted his own foresight in resisting school closures. (“ ‘Oh, my God, the devastating effect of school closures, who could have predicted it would be this bad?’” he said, affecting a pseudo-newscaster’s voice, before dropping the act: “Yeah, we predicted.”) He suggested that Stephen Douglas had been “doing the C.R.T.” in his wrongheaded slavery debates against Abraham Lincoln. He railed against “baby Covid vaxes,” whose mention produced “noooooo”s from the room, and shared that Florida’s many seniors were agog at the left’s “woke gender ideology.” “They don’t know what the heck any of this is,” he said. “They’re like, ‘This is crazy.’”DeSantis with the activist Christopher Rufo, right, in Hialeah Gardens, Fla., on April 22, before publicly signing the Stop W.O.K.E. Act.Photo illustration by Jamie Chung for The New York Times. Source photograph: Daniel A. Varela/Miami Herald, via Associated Press.The governor’s high interest in transgender issues is both relatively recent and entirely consistent with trendlines in the party, drawing in traditional religious conservatives and a newer breed of online brawlers attuned to viral snippets of perceived liberal excess. The subject has become a proxy for what DeSantis has called a “mind virus” sending Democrats of all gender identities well beyond the cultural mainstream. His team has been known to track Libs of TikTok, a popular social-media clearinghouse for clips and commentary depicting liberals (and often L.G.B.T.Q. people and their allies) as dangers to society. Pushaw, his campaign aide and former press secretary, suggested in March that opponents of the Parental Rights in Education bill condoned “grooming” young kids, tweeting weeks later that Libs of TikTok “truly opened my eyes” to the number of educators readily discussing sex, sexuality and gender identity with students. After footage shared by Libs of TikTok showed a child in Miami beside a drag performer in lingerie, the state filed a complaint in July against the proprietor, citing in part a 1947 Florida Supreme Court finding that “men impersonating women” in “suggestive and indecent” performances constituted a public nuisance.The governor’s expanded focus on transgender issues has included calls for doctors who “disfigure” kids with gender-affirming care to be sued. His administration has urged schools to ignore federal guidance aimed at buttressing Title IX protections for transgender students. The state’s medical board voted in August to move toward banning gender-affirming treatment for minors. A new state rule would bar Florida Medicaid coverage of gender dysphoria treatment for adults.DeSantis’s war on “woke math” has followed a similar trajectory. After his administration rejected 28 textbooks in April for trafficking in “prohibited topics,” a Miami Herald and Tampa Bay Times investigation found that a vast majority of state reviewers reported no evidence of such issues. But two of the handful who objected came from Hillsdale, including a sophomore student listed as the secretary of the Hillsdale College Republicans. It is unclear how such reviewers were selected. “We have unqualified people given access to determine what textbooks are permissible,” Anna Eskamani, a Democrat in the Florida House, told me. “It’s about instilling a hyperconservative, Christian-nationalistic generation. That’s 100 percent what their goal is.”Eskamani is among a large segment of Democrats who now call DeSantis “borderline fascist,” as she put it, a selective protector of freedoms more interested in pummeling opposition than shrinking government. He is a defender of “parents’ rights” who has floated sending child protective services after people who take their kids to drag shows. He has pushed an “anti-riot” measure, passed after the George Floyd protests, that could expose peaceful demonstrators or bystanders to punishment if a gathering turns violent. A blizzard of court challenges and some legal setbacks for DeSantis have heightened the uncertainty around what some policies might ultimately look like in practice and done little to assuage opponents who feel targeted. “He’s at war with a subset of people who happen to live in his quote-unquote ‘free state,’” Shevrin Jones, a Democratic state senator, told me.The governor’s approach to voting issues is especially instructive. Shortly after taking office, he moved to restrict the recently restored voting rights of people with felony convictions, enshrined in a 2018 ballot measure, by requiring those with serious criminal histories to fully pay court fines and fees before re-enfranchisement. His emphasis on scattered episodes of possible fraud has appeared to be situational, highlighted by the creation of an Office of Election Crimes and Security and an announcement in August that more than a dozen former felons were being arrested for illegally voting. (In media interviews and court filings, some of the offenders have claimed they were effectively entrapped, encountering no issue when they sought to determine if they could vote and learning of an eligibility problem only upon their arrest.) When several people from the Villages, the vast Central Florida retirement community that skews Republican, were arrested for trying to cast multiple ballots in the 2020 election, DeSantis did not convene a news conference.As a matter of national signaling, the voting effort stands as another argument to Republicans that Florida is supplanting even Texas as the consensus capital of American conservatism. Lawmakers expect the profile of future down-ballot Republicans to closely resemble the governor’s, reflecting his endorsements in legislative and especially school-board races and allowing him to shape the state’s agenda effectively unchecked. (His school board endorsees, including some connected to Moms for Liberty, were broadly successful in their August primaries.) The governor’s grip on the Legislature is already firm. Signing the state budget in June, DeSantis sounded almost taunting while congratulating himself for vetoing line items prized by the Republicans standing behind him. “They may not be clapping about that,” DeSantis said, “but that’s just the way it goes.”A short time later, Wilton Simpson, the Senate president who had hundreds of millions in spending on his own priorities slashed by the man introducing him, had his turn to speak. “How about Ron DeSantis?” Simpson began, clapping in his direction. “America’s governor.”Robert T. Bigelow, a Nevada space entrepreneur with little history of prolific donations to Republican causes, decided earlier this year to make what appears to be the largest single political contribution from an individual in Florida history: $10 million. (The state places no limit on donations to a political committee.) Bigelow was not steeped in Florida politics. Though he liked what he had seen of DeSantis on the news, singling out his Disney fight, Bigelow said he did not realize the governor was up for re-election until a friend informed him earlier this year. “I thought, Gee, what an excellent time to, early on, contribute to the man and pay him that respect,” Bigelow told me, in his first extended public remarks on the matter.A short time later, on July 7, according to Bigelow, the governor was on a plane to meet him in North Las Vegas. DeSantis stayed for “at least three hours,” Bigelow said, touring his aerospace facility and settling in a conference room for sandwiches. “I told him, ‘You know, if you run for president, you’re going to be the people’s president,’” Bigelow told me. “He says, ‘I like that.’”For years, DeSantis was an acquired taste for donors. Contributors used to observe to one another that his clothes never quite fit, wondering aloud if he had a house account at Men’s Wearhouse. More recently, some party operatives have grumbled about the DeSantis family’s affinity for the perks of power, zeroing in on media reports about Mori Hosseini, a Florida developer and longtime Republican donor, who was said to have helped arrange a round of golf for DeSantis in 2018 at Augusta National, home of the Masters. In 2019, Politico reported that Casey DeSantis used Hosseini’s private plane to travel to a state function. (The governor’s net worth, as of late last year, is a little over $300,000, according to a recent financial disclosure, though a rumored book deal would increase the figure considerably. The disclosure said he was still working to pay off some $20,000 in student loans.)Now, amid his growing celebrity and fatigue with Trump among moneyed Republicans, DeSantis will not lack for financial resources ahead of 2024. His operation had hoped to raise $150 million by the end of this cycle and is on pace to surpass that handily. DeSantis is not expected to spend more than $100 million on a re-election in which he is favored against Charlie Crist, the state’s onetime Republican governor and, more recently, a Democratic congressman. “It’s like he cares more about Iowa voters than Florida people,” Crist told me earlier this year, acknowledging he’d used the line before: “It’s not the first time. It probably won’t be the last.” (Trump has privately amused some friends by talking up Crist’s chances and talents, ignoring polls that show DeSantis ahead.)A recent F.E.C. case involving a political ally could set a precedent clearing the way for any remaining money raised by DeSantis to aid a potential presidential campaign. In the interim, his re-election race offers donors a useful pretense: They can give to him under the guise of the midterms to avoid antagonizing Trump (in theory) while still hoping the governor recognizes the gesture ahead of 2024. “No one even talks about his re-election,” Eberhart said of donors. “It’s all about Trump and DeSantis.”Some of the governor’s biggest backers have ruled out supporting another Trump run, including Ken Griffin, a DeSantis megadonor who has given at least $5 million this cycle. (Griffin announced in June that he was moving the global headquarters of his hedge-fund firm, Citadel, from Chicago to Miami.) But neither has DeSantis shied from Trump’s own supporters, scheduling high-dollar events from San Francisco to Nantucket and making clear from his earliest days in office that he intended to be a fund-raising juggernaut. “It is the governor’s desire to fund-raise and maintain a high political profile at all times — inside and outside of Florida,” an adviser, Susie Wiles, wrote in a January 2019 memo, reported later that year by The Tampa Bay Times.According to records kept by DeSantis’s political committee, he has raised millions from some of the former president’s friends and benefactors, including Steven Witkoff, a New York developer whose son’s wedding was attended by both Trump and DeSantis at Mar-a-Lago in May; Thomas Peterffy, a billionaire trader who has called DeSantis his “favorite man”; and the Midwestern megadonors Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein. After once dismissing the idea that DeSantis might run against Trump, many Republicans are bracing for an uncomfortable choice. Mica Mosbacher, a longtime party fund-raiser who told me late last year that a DeSantis bid would be “possible suicide” for him, laughed recently when reminded of the comment. “There’s been a lot of change,” she allowed.Mike Shields, a veteran party official who worked on the 2018 campaign, told me DeSantis’s Florida had taken almost “mythological” hold of the wider Republican imagination. CPAC moved there. Trump lives there. “He’s now the governor of the home of where all these conservatives feel like the center of gravity moved, and it’s his place, and he helped create that,” Shields said. “How many times has that happened in politics?”DeSantis’s swaggering reputation can create the impression that he is more battle-tested than he is. As a congressman from a safe Republican district and a celebrated conservative governor, he has almost never taken meaningful political heat from the right, let alone the relentless onslaught that has historically visited any Trump opponent. “Not sure he’s ready for prime time,” Trump has said privately, according to a person who heard it. Kellyanne Conway, the longtime Trump adviser, told me that while DeSantis had been successful, he was still “new and undefined enough to allow people to project onto him what they want.” Others in Trump’s orbit have been more openly condescending. “He’ll be terrific,” Newt Gingrich told me of DeSantis, “in 2028.”There would be perhaps no greater divide in a Trump-DeSantis primary than prospective press relations. Trump still speaks semi-regularly with mainstream reporters, often to repeat his election fictions. A symbiosis with traditional outlets helped deliver him the presidency in 2016, his rallies airing widely without context or interruption. While DeSantis’s restrictive approach could be a gamble in a national campaign, many Republicans seem to envy not only his refusal to engage with journalists on their terms but also his ability to get away with it. “I work in the Capitol,” Rubio told me, sighing that reporters he regularly encounters in the building are liable to press him on the party squabble du jour. “Someone just asked me in the hallway, ‘Do you think Trump and DeSantis hate each other?’”The perceived inevitability of a 2024 clash can almost cloud the remarkable risk that DeSantis would be taking. While Trump habitually overstates his importance to endorsees, his role in DeSantis’s arc is undisputed, leaving the governor vulnerable to credible claims of disloyalty. Trump has called him ungrateful in private, while publicly swiping at “gutless” politicians (like, say, Ron DeSantis) who refuse to discuss their Covid booster status. (A Trump spokesman did not respond to a request for comment.) DeSantis’s strongest electability argument against Trump — that renominating the only person who has demonstrated he can lose to Biden might be unwise — is also difficult to deliver in today’s G.O.P. Privately, DeSantis has cited strategic mistakes, and not any election-thieving plot, as the reason Trump lost in 2020. But making this case publicly would mean affirming the legitimacy of that election. In a run of August appearances organized by Turning Point Action, the conservative youth group led by the far-right figure Charlie Kirk, DeSantis stood not just with Mastriano but other Trump-backed Republicans — including J.D. Vance, the Senate nominee in Ohio, and Kari Lake, running for Arizona governor — who have called the last presidential election stolen.Not long ago, Trump was flirting with announcing another White House bid before the midterms, hoping to discourage challengers by consolidating support early. His more pressing concern now is his multifront legal jeopardy, particularly the inquiry into his handling of classified materials at Mar-a-Lago. Conway insisted that Trump and DeSantis remain “allies, not scorpions in a bottle,” taking care to place the governor among the Republican masses who expressed outrage at Trump’s treatment from federal authorities. But no one, including the would-be primary competitors, knows exactly what the investigations might yield — or what political shape Trump might be in on the other side.Trump has said privately that DeSantis previously told him he would not run if Trump did, a version of events that people who know DeSantis refuse to believe. While the governor is surely young enough to take multiple cracks at the White House, there is a case that he almost has to run now as proof of political branding. So much of his appeal is rooted in being the man unafraid to go where his peers won’t, to do what his enemies fear. At their event in Phoenix, Lake hailed the governor’s “B.D.E.” — for “Big DeSantis Energy,” she added implausibly. His campaign store sells a two-golf-ball set in a box reading, “FLORIDA’S GOVERNOR HAS A PAIR.”Do those with Big DeSantis Energy really wait their turn, forever appeasing the former president to avoid becoming the next Liddle Marco or Low-Energy Jeb? His 2024 bet, should he go through with it, amounts to an educated guess that the rules of contemporary American political history need not apply anymore. He is not the candidate to charm the fine people of Dubuque one on one. He would be building state-by-state campaign infrastructure with a diminutive inner circle. (Among other departures, DeSantis has fallen out with Wiles, a veteran Florida operative, in part because he suspected her of leaking to the press. Wiles, who also worked on both Trump campaigns, is now considered the former president’s top political adviser.) DeSantis has little in common with the last half-dozen presidents — he is not an electric speaker, or a veteran statesman, or a dynastic heir. “He’s just Richard Nixon, and I mean that as a compliment,” a person who has known him for years told me. “He’s smart. He’s detail-oriented. He’s motivated by resentment toward the people in charge, and he understands the system that he wants to run.”At the Pittsburgh rally, attendees seemed divided on whether they were looking at the next president. There could be no debate that DeSantis, the youngest governor in the union, with three small kids and a telegenic wife who just faced down breast cancer, represented a new generation. John and Holly Lawson, in their mid-60s, told me they had traveled more than five hours from Allentown to see DeSantis. “There’s so much baggage that the Democrats have put on Trump,” Holly Lawson said, declaring her preference for DeSantis. “If he doesn’t get in,” John Lawson told me, sliding his finger from the first name on his “Trump-DeSantis 2024” shirt to the second, “I’d like to see him.”From the stage moments earlier, DeSantis suggested that the times demanded a little daring. Threats were everywhere. Bold offensives were necessary. The hour had come, he said, pulling from scripture, to “put on the full armor of God.” He gazed out on a crowd full of MAGA red, specked with more than a few rally-worn encouragements if he looked closely enough: “Can’t Miss DeSantis” (with a caricatured governor playing beer pong beneath palm trees); “My Pronouns Are UNVACCINATED”; “DeSantis 2024: Make America Florida.”“Stand your ground, stand firm, don’t back down,” DeSantis said as he closed, nodding a little at his own words. “We can do this.” More

  • in

    Justice Dept. Issues 40 Subpoenas in a Week, Expanding Its Jan. 6 Inquiry

    It also seized the phones of two top Trump advisers, a sign of an escalating investigation two months before the midterm elections.WASHINGTON — Justice Department officials have seized the phones of two top advisers to former President Donald J. Trump and blanketed his aides with about 40 subpoenas in a substantial escalation of the investigation into his efforts to subvert the 2020 election, people familiar with the inquiry said on Monday.The seizure of the phones, coupled with a widening effort to obtain information from those around Mr. Trump after the 2020 election, represent some of the most aggressive steps the department has taken thus far in its criminal investigation into the actions that led to the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob.The extent of the investigation has come into focus in recent days, even though it has often been overshadowed by the government’s legal clash with Mr. Trump and his lawyers over a separate inquiry into the handling of presidential records, including highly classified materials, the former president kept at his residence in Florida, Mar-a-Lago.Federal agents with court-authorized search warrants took phones last week from at least two people: Boris Epshteyn, an in-house counsel who helps coordinate Mr. Trump’s legal efforts, and Mike Roman, a campaign strategist who was the director of Election Day operations for the Trump campaign in 2020, people familiar with the investigation said.Mr. Epshteyn and Mr. Roman have been linked to a critical element of Mr. Trump’s bid to hold onto power: the effort to name slates of electors pledged to Mr. Trump from swing states won by Joseph R. Biden Jr. in 2020 as part of a plan to block or delay congressional certification of Mr. Biden’s Electoral College victory.Key Revelations From the Jan. 6 HearingsCard 1 of 9Making a case against Trump. More