More About Mike Pence

Writing at The Atlantic, Peter Nicholas says Mike Pence has nowhere to go: 

Mike Pence publicly defied the president once in four years, and for that solitary show of independence, his own political future could be all but finished.

The vice president’s swift journey from acolyte to outcast was head-spinning. This is someone who would pause after mentioning Donald Trump’s name during an address so that the audience had time to clap—and who would then stand silently at the lectern when it didn’t. Editing Pence’s speeches, aides would cut references to Trump when they didn’t believe there was any reason to mention him. Reviewing the changes, Pence would take his Sharpie and add Trump’s name back in, a former Trump-administration official told me.

But Pence will see no reward for his fealty, or for his actions on January 6, when he resisted pressure from Trump to toss out the election results. The springboard to the Oval Office that so many vice presidents have used is gone. Not only has Trump’s base turned on him, but Pence is complicit in the Trump administration’s most egregious actions.

Lashing himself to Trump was a path to becoming president—the only path, really—for a man who has long wanted the job. As a lowly representative from Indiana, he talked privately with former Vice President Dan Quayle about how best to position himself for a White House bid, gaming out whether he should run as a member of Congress or as Indiana governor.

Imagining his next move is difficult. “The biggest and most obvious problem he has is he has to distance himself from the president, and when you’re vice president for four years, you can’t do that,” Bill Whalen, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a former aide to California Governor Pete Wilson, a Republican, told me. Alternatively, “going into a crowded primary field [in 2024], he could say, ‘Hey, I’m the guy closest to Donald Trump.’” But after last week, he can’t do that either.

When Pence’s most memorable act is ushering in the Joe Biden presidency, the MAGA crowd becomes less a reliable following than a possible mortal threat. Spurred on by Trump’s remarks at a rally before the Capitol riot, some in the mob went looking for Pence. “Hang Pence!” they chanted, as they flooded the halls of Congress. Worried about Pence’s safety, federal agents have now surrounded his official residence in Washington, D.C., with chain-link fences and concrete barriers for extra protection. Any credit Pence gets for certifying Biden’s victory comes from people who probably wouldn’t vote for him anyway. “Live by the sword, die by the sword,” Whalen said.

Pence’s rise and fall is emblematic of that of so many people who tethered themselves to Trump with disastrous results. When he agreed to become Trump’s running mate, his career was in peril. He was an obscure governor facing a difficult reelection campaign. At the time, his national profile centered on a bill he’d signed that critics feared could be used to discriminate against the LGBTQ community on religious grounds. By putting him on the ticket in 2016, Trump rescued him from a potentially career-ending loss—a point that Trump hasn’t hesitated to make in private discussions with White House aides.

From the first, Pence worried about alienating a thin-skinned president in constant need of validation. He stayed on message even when there was no message. James Melville, a former U.S. ambassador to Estonia, told me about a visit Pence made to that nation in July 2017. When Pence would huddle privately with aides, he’d invariably ask: “Were there any tweets? Did I miss anything?” Melville recalled. “I thought it was shocking and amusing” that Pence would be engaged in so much “hand-wringing over what the boss was saying.” Working under Trump, Melville said, was akin to “living with an alcoholic. You’re always waiting for the next disaster.”

My first exposure to Pence came during the 2016 transition, and I was immediately struck by his determination to bind himself to Trump. He’d agreed to an interview, but recited only talking points that ate our time—and revealed nothing. With his wife, Karen, sitting nearby, he stood up at the end and, with some sympathy in his voice, asked if he’d said anything that might prove useful. Not really.

Over and over, he gave Trump cover and vouched for him with the evangelical voters who were a crucial part of Trump’s governing coalition. He stayed when families were separated at the border and when the president pressured a foreign leader to find dirt on Biden. He stayed through the tweetstorms and tantrums and false claims of election fraud. “He tends to seek approval from something bigger and more powerful than himself,” Rob Schenck, an evangelical minister who prayed and read scripture with Pence when he was in Congress, told me. “And in this case, it’s the president.”

Embracing Trump was always a gamble. As Brendan Buck, a former House Republican–leadership aide, told me, “There are no happy endings when it comes to Trump.” In this partnership, the president got more out of the bargain. Pence comes away damaged, while Trump, at least, got a vice president who ran a functioning operation.

Pence’s office was a corner of the Trump administration that actually resembled a working executive office. His staff didn’t turn over every three days. There was little public drama and, whatever you may think of his politics, a sense of mission. Career government officials with no love for the president told me that Pence was a fair intermediary who’d listen to their arguments. Joseph Grogan, who left his job as the director of the White House’s Domestic Policy Council in the spring, said that when people ask him who they should call at the White House with a question or problem, he suggests Pence’s office. “I tell them that that’s the only place you can really go right now, because they’re still working,” he said. Now that Trump is holed up in the White House nursing his grievances, Pence is, in some respects, stepping into the role of acting president. Yesterday, he went to the Capitol to thank the National Guard troops deployed to protect the building ahead of Inauguration Day—the sort of gesture a president would normally make.

Until the election’s grisly aftermath, Trump seemed positioned to become a GOP kingmaker who’d hold considerable sway over the political fortunes of any West Wing aspirants, including his vice president. (That is, if he himself didn’t run in 2024.) Now the party faces a reckoning. “Trump’s inexcusable behavior likely blew himself up politically, which may become a huge gift to the Republican Party,” said a former senior White House official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to talk candidly. The official framed Pence as a casualty of Trump’s recklessness. His recent treatment of Pence showed “a complete lack of character.” What Trump was imploring Pence to do by rejecting the election’s certification was not “legal and not constitutional … It’s ridiculous.”

Yet Pence has no obvious place in GOP electoral politics even if his party repudiates Trump. Grateful though they might be that Pence honored the popular vote, independents and Never Trump Republicans have plenty of plausible alternatives when the 2024 primary season rolls around. Consistent and unapologetic critics of the president, such as Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, would most likely attract those voters. In the meantime, the Trump base is more likely to gravitate toward one of the president’s adult children, or maybe one of the two GOP senators who pushed to reject the electoral-vote count: Ted Cruz of Texas or Josh Hawley of Missouri. Pence was never a lock for the presidency, but now he simply has no lane left.

“The hardest core of the Trump crowd is going to turn on him—and Trump is going to make sure that they do,” Doug Heye, a former Republican National Committee spokesperson, told me.

This week, Pence offered Trump one last act of service, rejecting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s call for him to invoke the Twenty-Fifth Amendment and bounce the president from office. But come January 20, he’ll be in the same position as he was after the Capitol riot: out in the cold. (This is the article in its entirety.)

As Donald gets ready to slink back into private life, having effectively destroyed whatever legacy he might have had and getting himself impeached for a second time, I've been wondering if, deep in his soul, such as it is, Donald has any regrets about putting himself in the spotlight of the presidency. To answer Ronald Reagan's famous question, Donald isn't better off than he was four years ago. 

I'm having the same thoughts about Mike Pence. I've believed all along (and said here in the blog,) that the only reason Mike Pence agreed to work for Donald Trump is that he thought it would lead to the Oval Office. Remember, four years ago it was completely reasonable to think that Donald might not last a full four-year term. He would do something stupid, something egregiously illegal, his cholesterol-ridden heart would give out, or maybe he would just decide being president isn't that much fun after all and quit. Voila! Mike Pence would be president.  

It didn't happen and here we are. Unless something happens within the next 44 hours, Donald will have served a complete term and Mike Pence, like pretty much everyone who has worked for Donald, leaves with his reputation destroyed and his career in ruins. He's not better off after four years either.    

Mike Pence For President? Umm, No.

Did Mike Pence destroy his chance to be elected president by standing up to Donald Trump? In an article titled "Pence Reached His Limit With Trump. It Wasn't Pretty," the New York Times says yes:  

WASHINGTON — For Vice President Mike Pence, the moment of truth had arrived. After three years and 11 months of navigating the treacherous waters of President Trump’s ego, after all the tongue-biting, pride-swallowing moments where he employed strategic silence or florid flattery to stay in his boss’s good graces, there he was being cursed by the president.

Mr. Trump was enraged that Mr. Pence was refusing to try to overturn the election. In a series of meetings, the president had pressed relentlessly, alternately cajoling and browbeating him. Finally, just before Mr. Pence headed to the Capitol to oversee the electoral vote count last Wednesday, Mr. Trump called the vice president’s residence to push one last time.

“You can either go down in history as a patriot,” Mr. Trump told him, according to two people briefed on the conversation, “or you can go down in history as a pussy.”

The blowup between the nation’s two highest elected officials then played out in dramatic fashion as the president publicly excoriated the vice president at an incendiary rally and sent agitated supporters to the Capitol where they stormed the building — some of them chanting “Hang Mike Pence.”

Evacuated to the basement, Mr. Pence huddled for hours while Mr. Trump tweeted out an attack on him rather than call to check on his safety.

It was an extraordinary rupture of a partnership that had survived too many challenges to count.

The loyal lieutenant who had almost never diverged from the president, who had finessed every other possible fracture, finally came to a decision point he could not avoid. He would uphold the election despite the president and despite the mob. And he would pay the price with the political base he once hoped to harness for his own run for the White House.

“Pence had a choice between his constitutional duty and his political future, and he did the right thing,” said John Yoo, a legal scholar consulted by Mr. Pence’s office. “I think he was the man of the hour in many ways — for both Democrats and Republicans. He did his duty even though he must have known, when he did it, that that probably meant he could never become president.”

Former Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona, one of Mr. Trump’s most outspoken Republican critics and a longtime friend of Mr. Pence before they drifted apart over the president, said he was relieved the vice president had finally taken a stand.

“There were many points where I wished he would have separated, spoke out, but I’m glad he did it when he did,” Mr. Flake said. “I wish he would have done it earlier, but I’m sure grateful he did it now. And I knew he would.”

Not everyone gave Mr. Pence much credit, arguing that he should hardly be lionized for following the Constitution and maintaining that his deference to the president for nearly four years enabled Mr. Trump’s assault on democracy in the first place.

“I’m glad he didn’t break the law, but it’s kind of hard to call somebody courageous for choosing not to help overthrow our democratic system of government,” said Representative Tom Malinowski, Democrat of New Jersey. “He’s got to understand that the man he’s been working for and defending loyally is almost single-handedly responsible for creating a movement in this country that wants to hang Mike Pence.”

The rift between Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence has dominated their final days in office — not least because the vice president has the power under the 25th Amendment to remove the president from office with support of the cabinet. The House voted on Tuesday demanding that Mr. Pence take such action or else it would impeach Mr. Trump.

Mr. Pence sent a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi late Tuesday refusing to act. But Mr. Trump has been nervous enough about it that he finally broke five days of the cold shoulder to invite his vice president to the Oval Office on Monday night to smooth over their split. The official description of the hourlong conversation was “good”; the unofficial description was “nonsubstantive” and “stilted.”

The clash is the third time in 20 years that a departing president and vice president came to conflict in their last days. After Vice President Al Gore lost his presidential campaign in 2000, he had a bitter fight with President Bill Clinton in the Oval Office over who was to blame. Eight years later, just days before leaving office, Vice President Dick Cheney castigated President George W. Bush for refusing to pardon I. Lewis Libby Jr., the vice president’s former chief of staff, for perjury in the C.I.A. leak case.

Mr. Trump came into office with no real understanding of how his predecessors had handled relationships with their running mates. In the early days, when it became clear that there would be no organizational chart or formal decision-making process, Mr. Pence made himself a regular presence in the Oval Office, simply showing up with no agenda, often walking into a policy discussion for which he had received no briefing materials.

He arrived in the West Wing each morning, received an update about when the president was coming down from the residence and then simply stationed himself in the Oval Office for most of the day. He was almost never formally invited to anything and his name was rarely on official meeting manifests. But he was almost always around.

Calm and unflappable, Mr. Pence took on the role of confidant for cabinet secretaries and other officials fearing Mr. Trump’s ire, advising how to broach uncomfortable topics with the president without triggering him.

Not angering Mr. Trump “was a key objective of his,” observed David J. Shulkin, the former secretary of veterans affairs. “He tried very hard to straddle a very tough line.” But that meant Mr. Pence’s own views were often opaque.

“Were the policies and the statements being put out, were they ones that he completely agreed with?” Dr. Shulkin asked. “Or was it his strategy that it is better to be in the room, it is better to be a trusted party to help moderate some of those strategies and the way to do that is not to publicly disagree? I think that was a really hard one to figure out, exactly where he stood.”

Mr. Pence ultimately discovered that loyalty to Mr. Trump only matters until it does not. Tension between the two had grown in recent months as the president railed privately about Mr. Pence. The vice president’s allies believed Mr. Trump was stirred up in part by Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, who told him that Pence aides were leaking to reporters. That helped create a toxic atmosphere between the two offices even before Election Day.

When Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the election results were rejected at every turn by state officials and judges, Mr. Trump was told, incorrectly, that the vice president could stop the final validation of the election of President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. in his role as president of the Senate presiding over the Electoral College count.

Mr. Pence’s counsel, Greg Jacob, researched the matter and concluded the vice president had no such authority. Prodded by Rudolph W. Giuliani and Jenna Ellis, two of his lawyers, Mr. Trump kept pressing.

Mr. Pence’s office solicited more constitutional opinions, including from Mr. Yoo, a prominent conservative at the University of California at Berkeley who served in Mr. Bush’s administration.

In the Oval Office last week, the day before the vote, Mr. Trump pushed Mr. Pence in a string of encounters, including one meeting that lasted at least an hour. John Eastman, a conservative constitutional scholar at Chapman University, was in the office and argued to Mr. Pence that he did have the power to act.

The next morning, hours before the vote, Richard Cullen, Mr. Pence’s personal lawyer, called J. Michael Luttig, a former appeals court judge revered by conservatives — and for whom Mr. Eastman had once clerked. Mr. Luttig agreed to quickly write up his opinion that the vice president had no power to change the outcome, then posted it on Twitter.

Within minutes, Mr. Pence’s staff incorporated Mr. Luttig’s reasoning, citing him by name, into a letter announcing the vice president’s decision not to try to block electors. Reached on Tuesday, Mr. Luttig said it was “the highest honor of my life” to play a role in preserving the Constitution.

After the angry call cursing Mr. Pence, Mr. Trump riled up supporters at the rally against his own vice president, saying, “I hope he doesn’t listen to the RINOs and the stupid people that he’s listening to.”

“He set Mike Pence up that day by putting it on his shoulders,” said Ryan Streeter, an adviser to Mr. Pence when he was the governor of Indiana. “That’s a pretty unprecedented thing in American politics. For a president to throw his own vice president under the bus like that and to encourage his supporters to take him on is something just unconscionable in my mind.”

Mr. Pence was already in his motorcade to the Capitol by that point. When the mob burst into the building, Secret Service agents evacuated him and his wife and children, first to his office off the floor and later to the basement. His agents urged him to leave the building, but he refused to abandon the Capitol. From there, he spoke with congressional leaders, the defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — but not the president.

A Republican senator later said he had never seen Mr. Pence so angry, feeling betrayed by a president for whom he had done so much. To Mr. Trump, one adviser said, the vice president had entered “Sessions territory,” referring to Jeff Sessions, the attorney general who was tortured by the president before being fired. (A vice president cannot be dismissed by a president.)

On Thursday, the day after the siege, Mr. Pence stayed away from the White House, avoiding Mr. Trump. The next day, he went in, but spent most of the day at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building next door, where he held a farewell party for his staff.

But aides said Mr. Pence did not want to become a long-term nemesis of a vindictive president, and by Monday he was back in the West Wing.

Unlike Mr. Trump, Mr. Pence plans to attend Mr. Biden’s inauguration, then expects to divide time between Washington and Indiana, possibly starting a leadership political committee, writing a book and campaigning for congressional Republicans.

But no matter what comes next, he will always be remembered for one moment. “We’re very lucky that the vice president isn’t a maniac,” said Joe Grogan, Mr. Trump’s domestic policy adviser until last year. “In many ways, I think it vindicates the decision of Mike Pence to hang in there this long.” (This is the article in its entirety.)

The subject of Pence's political future also came up on Morning Joe this morning, as Mika and George Conway discussed the fact that Pence is refusing to invoke the 25th Amendment to get Trump out of office. Mr. Conway said this: "If Michael Pence thinks he's going to be president any other way than the 25th Amendment or impeachment, he's smokin' something." 

One week from today, (Yay!) Joe Biden becomes the 46th president of the United States. Four years from now, will Mike Pence be inaugurated as the 47th? My guess is no. 

A Pickle For Mike Pence (Or Let's Watch The VP Squirm)

One week ago, in an Opinion piece at the NY Times titled "Will Pence Do the Right Thing?," Neal K. Katyal and John Monsky pondered the vice president's situation: 

President Trump recently tweeted that “the ‘Justice’ Department and FBI have done nothing about the 2020 Presidential Election Voter Fraud,” followed by these more ominous lines: “Never give up. See everyone in D.C. on January 6th.”

The unmistakable reference is to the day Congress will count the Electoral College’s votes, with Vice President Mike Pence presiding. Mr. Trump is leaning on the vice president and congressional allies to invalidate the November election by throwing out duly certified votes for Joe Biden.

Mr. Pence thus far has not said he would do anything like that, but his language is worrisome. Last week, he said: “We’re going to keep fighting until every legal vote is counted. We’re going to win Georgia, we’re going to save America,” as a crowd screamed, “Stop the steal.”

And some Republicans won’t let up. On Monday, Representative Louie Gohmert of Texas and other politicians filed a frivolous lawsuit, which has multiple fatal flaws in both form and substance, in an attempt to force the vice president to appoint pro-Trump electors.

Mr. Trump himself has criticized virtually everyone’s view of the election, from that of the Supreme Court to the F.B.I. to Senator Mitch McConnell, but he has never attacked Mr. Pence, suggesting he has hopes for the vice president.

But as a matter of constitutional text and history, any effort on Jan. 6 is doomed to fail. It would also be profoundly anti-democratic and unconstitutional.

Both Article II of the Constitution and the 12th Amendment say that the votes of the Electoral College are to be opened by the “president of the Senate,” meaning the vice president. The Electoral Count Act, passed in 1887 to avoid chaotic counts like the one that followed the 1876 election, adds important details. It provides a detailed timeline to tabulate electoral votes, culminating with the final count to take place on Jan. 6, and it delineates the powers of the vice president.

He is to be the “presiding officer” (meaning he is to preserve order and decorum), open the ballot envelopes, provide those results to a group of tellers, call for any objection by members of Congress, announce the results of any votes on objections, and ultimately announce the result of the vote.

Nothing in either the text of the Constitution or the Electoral Count Act gives the vice president any substantive powers. His powers are ministerial, and that circumscribed role makes general sense: The whole point of an election is to let the people decide who will rule them. If an incumbent could simply maneuver to keep himself in office — after all, a maneuver to protect Mr. Trump also protects Mr. Pence — the most foundational precept of our government would be gravely undermined. In America, “we the people,” not “we, the vice president,” control our destiny.

The drafters of the Electoral Count Act consciously insisted on this weakened role for the vice president. They guarded against any pretense he might have to throw out a particular state’s votes, saying that the vice president must open “all certificates and papers purporting to be” electoral votes. They further said, in the event of a dispute, both chambers of Congress would have to disagree with a particular state’s slate of electoral votes to reject them. And they made it difficult for Congress to disagree, adding measures such as a “safe harbor” provision and deference to certification by state officials.

In this election, certification is clear. There are no ongoing legal challenges in the states of any merit whatsoever. All challenges have lost, spectacularly and often, in the courts. The states and the electors have spoken their will. Neither Vice President Pence nor the loyal followers of President Trump have a valid basis to contest anything.

To be sure, this structure creates awkwardness, as it forces the vice president to announce the result even when personally unfavorable.

After the close election of 1960, Richard Nixon, as vice president, counted the votes for his opponent, John Kennedy. Al Gore, in perhaps one of the more dramatic moments of our Republic’s short history, counted the votes and reported them in favor of George W. Bush.

Watching Mr. Gore count the votes, shut off all challenges and deliver the presidency to Mr. Bush was a powerful moment in our democracy. By the time he counted the votes, America and the world knew where he stood. And we were all lifted up when Mr. Gore, at the end, asked God to bless the new president and vice president and joined the chamber in applause.

Republican leaders — including Senators McConnell, Roy Blunt and John Thune — have recognized the outcome of the election, despite the president’s wrath. Mr. McConnell put it in clear terms: “The Electoral College has spoken. So today, I want to congratulate President-elect Joe Biden.”

Notably, Mr. Pence has been silent. He has not even acknowledged the historic win by Kamala Harris, the nation’s first female, first African-American and first Asian-American vice president.

He now stands on the edge of history as he begins his most consequential act of leadership. The question for Vice President Pence, as well as other members of Congress, is which side of history he wants to come down on. Can he show the integrity demonstrated by every previous presidential administration? The American people accept a graceful loser, but a sore loser never goes down well in the history books.

We urge Mr. Pence to study our first president. After the Revolutionary War, the artist Benjamin West reported that King George had asked him what General Washington would do now that America was independent. West said that Washington would give up power and go back to farming. King George responded with words to the effect that “if he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.”

Indeed, Washington did so, surrendering command of the army to Congress and returning to Mount Vernon for years until he was elected president. And he again relinquished power eight years later, even though many would have been happy to keep him president for life. Washington in this way fully realized the American Republic, because there is no Republic without the peaceful transfer of power.

And it’s now up to Mr. Pence to recognize exactly that. Like all those that have come before him, he should count the votes as they have been certified and do everything he can to oppose those who would do otherwise. This is no time for anyone to be a bystander — our Republic is on the line. (This is the article in its entirety.)

About the authors: Mr. Katyal, a law professor at Georgetown, is a former acting solicitor general of the United States. Mr. Monsky is the creator of the American History Unbound Series of multimedia productions that covers watershed moments in American history and a board member of the New-York Historical Society.  

Today, in an article titled "Pence's Choice: Side With the Constitution or His Boss" and subtitled "The vice president will preside on Wednesday when Congress convenes to ratify Joe Biden's victory. President Trump still seems to hold out hope that his loyal No. 2 could change the outcome," the Times has this to say: 

WASHINGTON — Speaking to supporters of President Trump on Monday at the Rock Springs Church in Milner, Ga., Vice President Mike Pence implored the crowd to vote in the two runoff elections Tuesday that will determine whether Republicans maintain control of the Senate.

“I am here for one reason and one reason only, and that is that Georgia and America need David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler back in the Republican majority,” Mr. Pence said.

But the crowd had a message for him, too.

“We need you do the right thing Jan. 6!” one supporter cried out. “Stop the steal!” shouted others. The crowd applauded.

If Mr. Pence has tried to skirt Mr. Trump’s efforts to cling to power, his reception in Georgia on Monday served as the latest reminder of the delicate role he will play on Wednesday, when Congress conducts what is typically a ceremonial duty of opening and counting certificates of electoral votes.

As president of the Senate, Mr. Pence is expected to preside over the pro forma certification of the Electoral College vote count in front of a joint session of Congress. It is a constitutionally prescribed, televised moment in which Mr. Pence will name the winner of the 2020 presidential election, Joseph R. Biden Jr.

It is also a moment some of Mr. Pence’s advisers have been bracing themselves for ever since the president lost the election and stepped up his baseless claims of widespread voter fraud. There is no chance of Mr. Pence not being there, people close to him said. Mr. Pence’s aides have told people that they view the vice president’s role as largely ceremonial.

“I know we all have got our doubts about the last election,” Mr. Pence said Monday in Georgia, attempting to assuage Trump supporters. “I want to assure you that I share the concerns of millions of Americans about voting irregularities. I promise you, come this Wednesday, we will have our day in Congress.”

It was not clear, perhaps by design, what he meant. Mr. Pence does not have unilateral power to affect the outcome of Wednesday’s proceedings. But he has carefully tried to look like he is loyally following the president’s lead even as he goes through a process that is expected to end with him reading out a declaration that Mr. Biden is the winner.

After nearly a dozen Republican senators said they plan to object to the certification of the vote on Wednesday, the vice president’s chief of staff, Marc Short, issued a carefully worded statement intended not to anger anyone.

“The vice president welcomes the efforts of members of the House and Senate to use the authority they have under the law to raise objections and bring forward evidence before the Congress and the American people on Jan. 6,” he said.

The statement, which frustrated senators who say Mr. Trump is trying to thwart democracy, helped to mollify the president, according to one person close to him.

But it was not enough to squash the belief of many Trump supporters — and the president himself — that the vice president could still somehow help overturn the results.

Two people briefed on the discussions said Mr. Trump had directly pressed Mr. Pence to find an alternative to certifying Mr. Biden’s win, such as preventing him from having 270 electoral votes and letting the election be thrown to the House to decide.

In Georgia on Monday night at a rally for Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, Mr. Trump openly pressured the vice president, saying, “I hope Mike Pence comes through for us, I have to tell you.” He added, “Of course, if he doesn’t come through, I won’t like him as much,” before saying that he really likes Mr. Pence.

On Monday, after Mr. Pence returned from Georgia, the vice president and Mr. Trump were expected to hear a last-minute pitch at the White House from John Eastman, another Trump lawyer. Mr. Pence also met with Senate parliamentarians for hours on Sunday to prepare himself and the president for what he would say while on the Senate floor.

The fact that Mr. Pence’s role is almost entirely scripted by those parliamentarians is not expected to ease a rare moment of tension between himself and the president, who has come to believe Mr. Pence’s role will be akin to that of chief justice, an arbiter who plays a role in the outcome. In reality, it will be more akin to the presenter opening the Academy Award envelope and reading the name of the movie that won Best Picture, with no say in determining the winner.

“President Trump’s real understanding of this process is minimal,” said Scott Reed, a Republican strategist.

Some of Mr. Trump’s other advisers have helped fuel the idea that Mr. Pence could affect the outcome of the election. In an interview with Jeanine Pirro on Fox News on Saturday night, Peter Navarro, a White House trade adviser, claimed inaccurately that Mr. Pence could unilaterally grant a demand by Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and 11 other Republican senators for an “emergency 10-day audit” of the election returns in the states Trump allies are disputing.

On Saturday morning, Mr. Trump called Mr. Pence and expressed “surprise” that the Justice Department had weighed in against a lawsuit filed by Trump supporters, including House members, seeking to expand Mr. Pence’s powers in the process. The suit was dismissed on Friday by a federal judge in Texas whom Mr. Trump had appointed.

One person close to Mr. Pence described Wednesday’s duties as gut-wrenching, saying that he would need to balance the president’s misguided beliefs about government with his own years of preaching deference to the Constitution.

Members of the vice president’s circle expect that Mr. Pence will follow the rules while on the Senate floor and play his ceremonial role as scripted, aides said. But after that, he will have to compensate by showing his fealty to Mr. Trump.

A tentative final foreign trip by Mr. Pence to visit Israel, Bahrain and Belgium was scrapped, while more events to talk up Mr. Trump’s legacy at home are being considered, according to a person familiar with the plans. Aides would not say whether Mr. Pence would attend Mr. Biden’s inauguration.

Pence aides said they expected the vice president to walk through what is expected to happen on Capitol Hill with Mr. Trump before Wednesday, in part to inoculate himself against public criticism in real time.

But even with his practice at managing the president, Republican strategists described Mr. Pence as being in the worst political position of any potential 2024 major Republican presidential candidate. The vice president will be unable to avoid a nationally televised moment when he declares Mr. Biden the winner, potentially disappointing those who believe Mr. Trump was the victor and angering those who think he has the power to change the outcome.

“His best bet is to buck and dodge and make it through without infuriating either side,” said William Kristol, the conservative columnist and prominent “Never Trump” Republican who was chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle.

“He has to hope the Trump people are furious at Tom Cotton and anyone else who doesn’t go along,” Mr. Kristol said, referring to Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, an ally of the president’s who said he would not join the effort to challenge the Electoral College results. “He has to hope establishment Republicans are furious at Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz. And then he’s the guy who didn’t offend anyone.”

Four years ago, Mr. Pence was facing a difficult re-election for governor of Indiana when Mr. Trump’s advisers at the time saw opportunity in choosing the mild-mannered, silver-haired conservative who was popular among the evangelical voters whose support Mr. Trump needed.

Since then, Mr. Pence has played the role of the president’s relentless defender and — with rare exception — prevented daylight from coming between them.

In an administration that has cycled through four chiefs of staff, four national security advisers and four press secretaries, the vice president’s political calculation has long been that being the unstintingly loyal No. 2 would give him the best shot at inheriting the Trump mantle.

But with just 16 days left in the administration, Mr. Pence is at risk of meeting the fate that he has successfully avoided for four years: being publicly attacked by the president. (This is the article in its entirety.) 

I have no admiration for Mike Pence, so I'm enjoying watching him squirm about this. I also like the idea of him being in the worst political position of any potential 2024 major Republican presidential candidate. Someone recently declared that Pence has the charisma of a ream of paper, and I agree. Even without his current between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place quandary, it's hard for me to imagine him getting elected to anything in the future. 

This Day in History, 1955/1963/2008 - Updated

On this day in history:

65 years ago: 14 year-old Emmett Till was murdered in Mississippi. (Read more here)

57 years ago: The 1963 March on Washington and Martin Luther King Jr.'s I Have A Dream speech.

There's another march today:

57 years after Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his "I Have a Dream" address, demonstrators once again descended on the National Mall to demand racial justicehttps://t.co/vOyzshHZwi

— Mashable (@mashable) August 28, 2020

12 years ago: Barack Obama accepts the Democratic nomination for president


Update: Something else that happened on August 28 is that this picture was taken:

Henry Wallace (left) and Pete Seeger on a plane in Norfolk, Virginia on this date August 28 in 1948. Photo by AP. #OTD pic.twitter.com/fWXrfKzXcd

— Jeffrey Guterman, Ph.D. (@JeffreyGuterman) August 28, 2020

We know who Pete Seeger was, but who was Henry Wallace? He was one of President Franklin Roosevelt's three vice presidents. He replaced John Nance Garner in 1940, after Garner had served two terms, and was himself replaced in 1944 by Harry Truman. The tweet above led to some fun What If/Counterfactual History tweets about a topic that intrigues me, vice presidential succession:

Imagine a world that saw President Henry Wallace instead of President Harry Truman... What could have been?

— I'm a tree (@Earwig360) August 28, 2020

It is not far-fetched to imagine an alternate history scenario of Henry Wallace staying on the ticket with FDR in 1944 and becoming president in 1945. My guess is Wallace would have either not been nominated in 1948 or he would have lost in a landslide to Dewey. @greenfield64 https://t.co/znV7DjxCMg

— Jeffrey Guterman, Ph.D. (@JeffreyGuterman) August 28, 2020

Alternate alternate: Wallace is replaced by James Byrnes, ex Sen., Sup Ct justice, Secy of State. Ardent segregationist. If he becomes POTUS in '45, does a Dewey-led GOP become the party of civil rights? https://t.co/TcBj0N1oFG

— Jeff Greenfield (@greenfield64) August 28, 2020

And speaking of vice presidents, back here in the real world, Mike Pence has now accepted the nomination to run for VP again, so the Dump Pence movement is (almost certainly) over.

Dump Pence? - Updated

I've written several times here in the blog about the possibility that Donald would dump VP Mike Pence in favor of Nikki Haley, so much so that I started using a "Dump Pence" tag. (Click here to see those posts.) Now, as we wait for the name of Joe Biden's (female) pick, there's a little more Veepstakes intrigue, this time on the Republican side.

Do you know who Kristi Noem is? Neither did I, until this morning. She's the Republican governor of South Dakota and now she's the one who may be trying to shove Mike Pence aside. How? With some serious sucking up to Donald.

In an article titled How Kristi Noem, Mt. Rushmore and Trump Fueled Speculation About Pence’s Job, and sub-titled After Ms. Noem, the South Dakota governor, flew to Washington on Air Force One, speculation about her ambitions ensued. She made a second trip to smooth things over with Mike Pence, New York Times reporters Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman tell an intriguing story:

WASHINGTON — Since the first days after she was elected governor of South Dakota in 2018, Kristi Noem had been working to ensure that President Trump would come to Mount Rushmore for a fireworks-filled July 4 extravaganza.

After all, the president had told her in the Oval Office that he aspired to have his image etched on the monument. And last year, a White House aide reached out to the governor’s office with a question, according to a Republican official familiar with the conversation: What’s the process to add additional presidents to Mount Rushmore?

So last month, when the president arrived in the Black Hills for the star-spangled spectacle he had pined for, Ms. Noem made the most of it.

Introducing Mr. Trump against the floodlit backdrop of his carved predecessors, the governor played to the president’s craving for adulation by noting that in just three days more than 125,000 people had signed up for only 7,500 seats; she likened him to Theodore Roosevelt, a leader who “braves the dangers of the arena”; and she mimicked the president’s rhetoric by scorning protesters who she said were seeking to discredit the country’s founders.

In private, the efforts to charm Mr. Trump were more pointed, according to a person familiar with the episode: Ms. Noem greeted him with a four-foot replica of Mount Rushmore that included a fifth presidential likeness: his.

But less than three weeks later, Ms. Noem came to the White House with far less fanfare — to meet not with Mr. Trump, but with Vice President Mike Pence. Word had circulated through the Trump administration that she was ingratiating herself with the president, fueling suspicions that there might have been a discussion about her serving as his running mate in November. Ms. Noem assured Mr. Pence that she wanted to help the ticket however she could, according to an official present.

She never stated it directly, but the vice president found her message clear: She was not after his job.

There is no indication Mr. Trump wants to replace Mr. Pence. Mr. Trump last month told Fox News that he’s sticking with Mr. Pence, whom he called a “friend.”

Yet with polls showing the president trailing Joseph R. Biden Jr., the presumptive Democratic nominee, and Republicans at risk of being shut out of power in Congress, a host of party leaders have begun eyeing the future, maneuvering around a mercurial president.

Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas was in New Hampshire late last month, Senator Rick Scott of Florida is angling to take over the Senate Republican campaign arm to cultivate donors, and Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming is defending Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the government’s leading expert on infectious disease, while separating herself from Mr. Trump on some national security issues.

At the same time, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is attempting to shore up his conservative credentials by pushing a hard line on China, and Senators Ted Cruz of Texas and Rand Paul of Kentucky are attempting to reclaim their standing as fiscal hawks by loudly opposing additional spending on coronavirus relief.

Drawing less attention, but working equally hard to burnish her national profile, is Ms. Noem. The governor, 48, has installed a TV studio in her state capitol, become a Fox News regular and started taking advice from Mr. Trump’s former 2016 campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, who still has the president’s ear.

Next month, she’ll address a county Republican dinner in Iowa.

“There seems like there might be some interest on her part — it certainly gets noticed,” Jon Hansen, a Republican state representative in South Dakota, said of Ms. Noem’s positioning for national office.

Her efforts have paid off, as evidenced by the news-driving celebration at Mount Rushmore. Yet Ms. Noem’s attempts to raise her profile have not been without complications. And they illustrate the risks in political maneuvering with a president who has little restraint when it comes to confidentiality, and a White House that shares his obsession about, and antenna for, palace intrigue.

To the surprise of some of her own advisers, Ms. Noem flew with Mr. Trump to Washington on Air Force One late in the evening after his Mount Rushmore speech. Joined by Mr. Lewandowski, she and the president spoke for over an hour privately during the flight — a fact that Mr. Trump and some of his aides soon shared with other Republicans, according to officials familiar with his disclosure.

An aide to Ms. Noem, Maggie Seidel, said she did not raise the vice presidency with Mr. Trump. Mr. Lewandowski, who is a paid adviser to the Pence-aligned Great America PAC, also denied that he or the governor ever raised the subject of replacing Mr. Pence on the ticket.

Mr. Lewandowski, in a brief interview, described Ms. Noem as a star who “has a huge future in Republican politics.”

A White House official laughed at the notion that Mr. Trump is open to replacing Mr. Pence, a move that, among other things, would exude desperation. And regarding the phone call about adding the president’s image to Mt. Rushmore, the official noted that it is a federal, not state, monument.

Still, word of the Air Force One conversation quickly reached White House officials, including those in Mr. Pence’s office.

A short time later, Ms. Noem was jetting back to the capital, this time in less grand fashion, after requesting a meeting with Mr. Pence.

White House aides kept Ms. Noem from meeting with Mr. Trump again, one person familiar with the planning said. But Mr. Pence’s office gladly put his session with the governor on his public schedule and the vice president tweeted about it afterward. Ms. Noem’s aides, hoping to tamp down questions about the second trip, emphasized that she had also met with officials from the Department of Health and Human Services and other agencies while she was in the capital.

One official close to the vice president said that Ms. Noem did not discuss her Air Force One flight with Mr. Pence but used the conversation to say she wanted to help the campaign however she could. The official suggested that the vice president’s team has an opportunity for her in mind: helping Mr. Pence prepare to debate whichever woman Mr. Biden selects as his running mate.

Yet one senior Trump adviser has recently lamented to others that Mr. Trump could have boosted his re-election campaign had he replaced Mr. Pence with a woman, according to people familiar with the conversations. One potential candidate mentioned was Nikki Haley, the former United Nations ambassador who is close to the president’s daughter and son-in-law, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner.

However, Mr. Pence has been an unstinting ally of Mr. Trump, and the vice president retains a number of allies in the president’s orbit.

“I think we’ll win South Dakota either way,” Brian Ballard, a lobbyist close to Mr. Trump, said.

That these kinds of speculative conversations about a different running mate have taken place at all, though, illustrates the depth of frustration in Mr. Trump’s inner circle over his political fortunes.With early voting starting in less than two months in some states, the president’s ineffectual response to the coronavirus has alienated voters and made the election primarily a referendum on him.

Speculation has long lingered in Republican circles that Mr. Trump could swap out Mr. Pence for Ms. Haley, partly because of the president’s own musings about it.

For a time in 2018, Mr. Trump queried people about Mr. Pence’s loyalty. And officials in the administration, including some close to Mr. Pence, said they believed that Mr. Kushner and Ms. Trump were angling to replace him with Ms. Haley.

In his memoir, “The Room Where It Happened,” the former national security adviser John R. Bolton recounts how, flying to Iraq on Christmas night in 2018, the president asked him for his opinion on jettisoning Mr. Pence.

Ms. Noem, the daughter of a rancher who took over her family’s property after her father died, has insisted that she has little appetite to return to Washington, where she served as South Dakota’s sole House member for eight years before becoming governor.

“She’s focused on being the governor of South Dakota,” said Ms. Seidel, her senior adviser.

The president’s transition team contacted her about interviewing for a cabinet post after the 2016 election, but she was already planning to run for governor then. Some of her allies believe she’d also be open to the interior or agricultural secretary roles in a second Trump term ahead of the 2024 race.

Ms. Noem’s poll numbers have increased after a difficult first year in office. But to some of her aides, Mr. Lewandowski, a hard-charging New Englander, has been a disruptive presence in Pierre, South Dakota’s small state capital. He appeared as a guest speaker at one luncheon with cabinet officials and pressed the governor’s appointees to make a more aggressive case for her, irritating the state officials, according to a person briefed on the events.

The governor is now on her third chief of staff because the last one, Joshua Shields, left in part because of the increased role of Mr. Lewandowski, according to South Dakota Republicans.

Mr. Lewandowski has sought opportunities that could benefit both Mr. Trump and Ms. Noem. He recently discussed with the president’s advisers sending Mr. Trump to the annual motorcycle rally in Sturgis, S.D., where there would be a big crowd and where the two might have appeared together again; Mr. Trump’s aides did not want him in the same politically safe state twice in two months.

Ms. Noem has been a steadfast ally of Mr. Trump and has mirrored his handling of the virus.

She has pushed for schools to reopen for in-person classes, denounced mask mandates and had South Dakota participate in a study on hydroxychloroquine, the malaria treatment Mr. Trump has trumpeted.

It was her star turn at Mount Rushmore, though, that has gotten Republicans talking and been a boon to South Dakota tourism, the state’s second-largest industry.

Recognizing the president’s immense interest in the monument, Ms. Noem worked with his Interior Department to ensure there would be fireworks for the celebration, a longstanding priority for Mr. Trump. There had been no fireworks there for the previous decade because of environmental and fire-risk concerns.

In the weeks leading up to the event, Ms. Noem went on Laura Ingraham’s show on Fox News to make clear she was expecting to “have a large event” for the president and would not require social distancing or masks.

Then, as the president sat watching her remarks in a bunting-wrapped box just offstage, she praised America as a place where someone who was “just a farm kid” could become “the first female governor of South Dakota.” (This is the article in its entirety.)

I'm trying to decide which part of this is the most annoying, disgusting and/or pathetic:

• A woman smart enough to get elected governor is taking advice from Corey Lewandowski
• The Republican belief that putting a woman on the ticket will get women who don't like Donald to vote for him
• Donald's dream of seeing his face on Mt. Rushmore

Now let's think about Governor Noem. A recently-elected female governor in a large, western state with a small population. The first female governor of that state and one of the youngest governors in the country. An ambitious woman with national-level dreams. Who does that remind you of? Our old friend Sarah Palin, of course. 

I think of Sarah every four years as we wait to hear who's been picked to run for VP. Ever since 2008, avoiding John McCain's catastrophic mistake has been Job One for every presidential candidate. I also assume that it's not just the person doing the picking who doesn't want to repeat the Palin disaster. Presumably everyone who's interviewing for the job is also determined to do it a hell of a lot better than Sarah Palin was able to do. Sarah was given a rare opportunity, one that probably every politician in America would kill for, and she squandered it. She wasn't ready in 2008, but she was only 44, young for a governor. She had political skills and many, many Republicans thought she had potential for the future and wanted her to succeed.  

So what happened? Where is she now? Twelve years after her star turn as the Republican VP candidate, followed by a couple of years in which she was the It Girl Of All It Girls, Palin, who even now is only 56 years old, is completely out of politics, and as far as I can tell, isn't doing much of anything. She quit her governorship without completing a single term and never ran for office again. She wrote a few books. She appeared on several reality TV shows, including most recently something called The Masked Singer. She has seven grandchildren. She's divorced. What's next? Believe it or not, in a recent interview with ABC News, she said that she's thinking of running for something again. Here's how People reported the story:

Palin told ABC that the woman who 2020 Democratic candidate Joe Biden picks to be his running mate "has really got to be strong and be vocal when it comes to those trying to shape them, mold them, tell them what to say," referencing campaign aides who advise politicians on everything from policy to clothes.

"That candidate had better be strong and stand up for what she knows is right," Palin said.

As for herself, Palin said she would run for office again "in a heartbeat" and that she planned to run for an elected position again at some point.

She said she would take more control of her public image the next time around, however.

"I would've gone rogue a lot earlier," she said, when addressing what she would do differently in a future campaign. "I would've fought back against those who were running the campaign who, you know, weren't in touch with the American people and what the American people wanted."

She continued: "I'd do it again in a heartbeat, and I want to do it again. I want to be back in there in public service." (Read the entire article here.)

Hell will freeze over before Donald's face is carved into the mountains of South Dakota and my bet is that it'll be pretty cold before Sarah Palin runs for office again, too. (Unlike 10 years ago, when every little thing Sarah said got wall-to-wall coverage, her interview with ABC was almost invisible, although ABC could run it again as part of their coverage of Joe Biden's VP pick.)

Would Donald dump Pence for Kristi Noem or Nikki Haley? Unlikely, but nothing would surprise me.


Update:

Meanwhile, on #Russia's state TV. pic.twitter.com/9BJcy50uX7

— Julia Davis (@JuliaDavisNews) July 4, 2020

Update #2:

President Coolidge dedicates site of Mount Rushmore, South Dakota, today 1927, says Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, T.R. earned their places on monument by “following the truth”: pic.twitter.com/wNdlImgbOj

— Michael Beschloss (@BeschlossDC) August 10, 2020

And, by-the-way, Donald, no, you can't have your face carved on Mt. Rushmore. The Sioux City Argus Leader explains why, other than the obvious reasons, it's not possible:

The problem is, as most South Dakotans already know, adding Trump, let alone any president, is not possible.

Maureen McGee-Ballinger, public information officer at Mount Rushmore, said workers are asked daily whether any president can be added. And for years, people have suggested Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, among others. A website – MakeRoomonRushmore.com – advocates for Obama.

"There is no more carvable space up on the sculpture," McGee-Ballinger said. "When you are looking on the sculpture, it appears there might be some space on the left next to Washington or right next to Lincoln. You are either looking at the rock that is beyond the sculpture (on the right), which is an optical illusion, or on the left, that is not carvable."

A brief history lesson: Gutzon Borglum originally intended to put Thomas Jefferson first in the lineup. Washington had already been started in his current spot, but when work commenced on Jefferson, it was determined the rock wasn't usable. Washington remained, but Jefferson had to move.

Lincoln had to be relocated, as well, leaving behind another segment of worked rock. An inscription in the shape of the Louisiana Purchase was scrapped. (Read the entire article here.)

Update #3 on Thursday, August 20. I don't know how credible reporter Helen Kennedy is, but I saw her tweet this morning and decided to put it here:

.....and my money is still on Pence getting kicked to the curb next week.

— Helen Kennedy (@HelenKennedy) August 20, 2020

Will Donald kick Mike Pence to the curb next week? Stay tuned. 

Too Much Pot Brownie?

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd published a not-very-well-edited column this morning, claiming that it had been 36 years since "a man and a woman ran together on a Democratic Party ticket." This caused political/history nerds such as myself to scratch our heads. What about Hillary and Tim, a mere four years ago? How quickly they forget.

A howl of outrage went up on the Twitterverse and the offending sentence was quickly fixed, although the NYT can't bring themselves to apologize for the error:

Correction: An earlier version of this column incorrectly said it had been 36 years since a man and a woman ran on a Democratic Party ticket. It has been that long since a man chose a woman to run as V.P. on the Democratic ticket. We’ve deleted a tweet that repeated the error.

— New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) August 8, 2020

Fortunately for history, Daniel Larison had grabbed a screenshot of the original NYTimes Opinion tweet:

pic.twitter.com/wXTNFZm104

— Daniel Larison (@DanielLarison) August 8, 2020

Hillary weighed in too:

Either @TimKaine and I had a very vivid shared hallucination four years ago or Maureen had too much pot brownie before writing her column again. https://t.co/J3SSwtkg7x

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) August 8, 2020

It was entertaining, but all is well for the moment and there's not much else to say except c'mon Joe Biden, put us all out of our quadriennial Veepstakes misery and announce your pick soon!

But wait. "A very vivid hallucination," "Too much pot brownie"? What's that about? Hill is referring to a column Dowd published on June 3, 2014. Titled Don't Harsh Our Mellow, Dude, this is what it said:

The caramel-chocolate flavored candy bar looked so innocent, like the Sky Bars I used to love as a child.

Sitting in my hotel room in Denver, I nibbled off the end and then, when nothing happened, nibbled some more. I figured if I was reporting on the social revolution rocking Colorado in January, the giddy culmination of pot Prohibition, I should try a taste of legal, edible pot from a local shop.

What could go wrong with a bite or two?

Everything, as it turned out.

Not at first. For an hour, I felt nothing. I figured I’d order dinner from room service and return to my more mundane drugs of choice, chardonnay and mediocre-movies-on-demand.

But then I felt a scary shudder go through my body and brain. I barely made it from the desk to the bed, where I lay curled up in a hallucinatory state for the next eight hours. I was thirsty but couldn’t move to get water. Or even turn off the lights. I was panting and paranoid, sure that when the room-service waiter knocked and I didn’t answer, he’d call the police and have me arrested for being unable to handle my candy.

I strained to remember where I was or even what I was wearing, touching my green corduroy jeans and staring at the exposed-brick wall. As my paranoia deepened, I became convinced that I had died and no one was telling me.

It took all night before it began to wear off, distressingly slowly. The next day, a medical consultant at an edibles plant where I was conducting an interview mentioned that candy bars like that are supposed to be cut into 16 pieces for novices; but that recommendation hadn’t been on the label.

I reckoned that the fact that I was not a regular marijuana smoker made me more vulnerable, and that I should have known better. But it turns out, five months in, that some kinks need to be ironed out with the intoxicating open bar at the Mile High Club.

Colorado raked in about $12.6 million the first three months after pot was legalized for adults 21 and over. Pot party planners are dreaming up classy events: the Colorado Symphony just had its first “Classically Cannabis” fund-raiser with joints and Debussy. But the state is also coming to grips with the darker side of unleashing a drug as potent as marijuana on a horde of tourists of all ages and tolerance levels seeking a mellow buzz.

In March, a 19-year-old Wyoming college student jumped off a Denver hotel balcony after eating a pot cookie with 65 milligrams of THC. In April, a Denver man ate pot-infused Karma Kandy and began talking like it was the end of the world, scaring his wife and three kids. Then he retrieved a handgun from a safe and killed his wife while she was on the phone with an emergency dispatcher.

As Jack Healy reported in The Times on Sunday, Colorado hospital officials “are treating growing numbers of children and adults sickened by potent doses of edible marijuana” and neighboring states are seeing more stoned drivers.

“We realized there was a problem because we’re watching everything with the urgency of the first people to regulate in this area,” said Andrew Freedman, the state’s director of marijuana coordination. “There are way too many stories of people not understanding how much they’re eating. With liquor, people understand what they’re getting themselves into. But that doesn’t exist right now for edibles for new users in the market. It would behoove the industry to create a more pleasant experience for people.

“The whole industry was set up for people who smoked frequently. It needs to learn how to educate new users in the market. We have to create a culture of responsibility around edibles, so people know what to expect to feel.”

Gov. John Hickenlooper and the Legislature recently created a task force to come up with packaging that clearly differentiates pot cookies and candy and gummy bears from normal sweets — with an eye toward protecting children — and directed the Department of Revenue to restrict the amount of edibles that can be sold at one time to one person. The governor also signed legislation mandating that there be a stamp on edibles, possibly a marijuana leaf. (Or maybe a stoned skull and bones?)

The state plans to start testing to make sure the weed is spread evenly throughout the product. The task force is discussing having budtenders give better warnings to customers and moving toward demarcating a single-serving size of 10 milligrams. (Industry representatives objected to the expense of wrapping bites of candy individually.)

“My kids put rocks and batteries in their mouths,” said Bob Eschino, the owner of Incredibles, which makes candy and serves up chocolate and strawberry fountains. “If I put a marijuana leaf on a piece of chocolate, they’ll still put it in their mouths.”

He argues that, since pot goodies leave the dispensary in childproof packages, it is the parents’ responsibility to make sure their kids don’t get hold of it.

“Somebody suggested we just make everything look like a gray square so it doesn’t look appealing. Why should the whole industry suffer just because less than 5 percent of people are having problems with the correct dosing?”

Does he sound a little paranoid?

And one more thing. Was Hillary being just a little bit snarky in her tweet about Dowd's mistake? Yes. Why? In 1999 Dowd won a Pulitzer Prize for a series of 10 columns she wrote in 1998, in which she gleefully shredded Bill Clinton for his activities with Monica Lewinsky. (The Pulitzer committee cited her "fresh and insightful columns on the impact of President Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky.") What did she say, exactly? Consider:

January 25, 1998: 

Let's review what we've learned so far.

The President a liar? Knew that.

The President a philanderer? Knew that.

The President reckless in the satisfaction of his appetites? Knew that.

The President would say anything and hurt anybody to get out of a mess? Knew that.

Married men cheat? Knew that.

Married men cheat with young women? Knew that.

Married men who cheat with young women lie about it? Knew that.

Hillary isn't throwing Bill's stuff out on the White House lawn because she is as committed to their repugnant arrangement as he is? Knew that.

August 23, 1998:

After the President's prime-time confession, the news media were abuzz about whether Mr. Clinton could repair his damaged relationships with his wife and daughter.

Suddenly, That Woman stamped her feet. Like the Glenn Close character in "Fatal Attraction," Monica Lewinsky issued a chilling ultimatum to the man who jilted her: I will not be ignored.

She let it be known that she was wounded that the President had failed to apologize to her and had dismissed their grand, 18-month romance, their shared passion for books and laughs, as trivial -- a mere mechanism for relieving Oval Office tension.

Mr. Clinton rejected a more contrite version of the speech written by Bob Shrum -- nicknamed the "Shoot Me" draft at the White House -- that contained an apology to "Monica Lewinsky and her family." Instead, with some brass-knuckle guidance from Hillary, he embraced his wife and daughter as "the two people I love most," while swatting Monica away as "inappropriate."

He portrayed himself, insultingly, as a passive participant in their trysts. What she called true love, he called "legally accurate."

September 13, 1998:

Middle-aged married man has affair with frisky and adoring young office girl. Man hints to girl he might be single again in three or four years. Man gets bored with girl and dumps her. Girl cries and rants and threatens, and tells 11 people what a creep he is.

The dialogue in this potboiler, compiled with sanctimonious, even voyeuristic relish by Reverend Starr, is so trite and bodice-ripping that it makes "Titanic" look profound.

In fact, Monica identified with Rose, the feisty, zaftig young heroine of "Titanic." Last January, the former intern wrote the President what she called "an embarrassing mushy note" inspired by the movie, asking her former boyfriend if they could have sex (the lying-down kind).

Despite the fact that it takes place in the most powerful spot on the planet, the romance does not sizzle.

Bill Clinton fancies himself another Jack Kennedy and invoked his idol's name last week to defend himself.

But Kennedy was cool. His women were glamorous. The Rat Pack was good copy. He may have been just as immoral, but his carousing at least had style.

Mr. Clinton's escapades are just cheesy and depressing. The sex scenes are flat, repetitive, juvenile and cloying, taking place in the windowless hallway outside the Oval Office study or in the President's bathroom.

November 18, 1998: In the final column, Dowd concluded with this: 

At the White House, the truth is employed only to the extent that it's useful. When the Monica story broke, Dick Morris said, the President asked him to do a poll to tell him what would play better, the truth or a lie. Mr. Morris said he told his old pal he couldn't tell the truth and survive, and Mr. Clinton replied, "Well, we'll just have to win."

New York magazine, which included me among its mug shots, rains a cascade of poll numbers showing that by big margins the public is fed up with hearing about the scandal.

I know exactly how the public feels. I'm sick of hearing about it too.

But the fact is that the scandal is there, and the President did what he did and said what he said, and the consequences of what he did and said have preoccupied the executive, the legislative and the judicial branches of government for a year.

To pretend otherwise, to submit robotically to the polls, to take one's professional instructions from the wishes and whims of a fickle electorate would be to abdicate the role the public says it wants the press to play: covering the news.

If the President had told the truth immediately, the story would have died. But it is our job to undo the spin and look into the lies and go the extra skeptical mile to see that there is no cover-up. Moreover, all journalists are not like all other journalists in the wild and woolly and recklessly fast era of the 24-hour news cycle of cable, the Internet and high-decibel know-it-alls and gossips.

The impure history of modern America -- Vietnam, Watergate, Iran-contra -- proves that reporters have a duty to dig for the truth, whatever the public thinks.

There is a danger of making false equations between popularity and rightness, between what is liked and what is true. The danger is that next time, when the cover-up takes place in a less gray area, reporters will look at the numbers and go home early. Next time it may not be about sex and lies. It may be about life and death.

You can read all ten columns here.

Days until the election: 87

Yesterday In History, 1984: Mondale Selects Geraldine Ferraro As Running Mate - Updated

Somehow I went through the entire day yesterday without seeing any of these tweets, so this is a "This Day In History" post, one day late. Representative Ferraro was an historic pick in 1984; within a few days we should have another woman running to be Vice President.

36 years ago today: Presumptive Democratic nominee Walter Mondale announces that he has selected New York Rep. Geraldine Ferraro to be his running mate, which would make her the first woman ever on a major party’s national ticket: pic.twitter.com/lOFScXMmcO

— Steve Kornacki (@SteveKornacki) July 12, 2020

OTD: (1984) Geraldine Ferraro became the first woman nominated for vice-president by a major U.S. political party, chosen by Walter Mondale of the Democratic Party. pic.twitter.com/a9L8uadZt9

— Travis Akers (@travisakers) July 12, 2020

On July 12, 1985, Representative Geraldine Ferraro, D-New York, was chosen as the first female to run for vice president of the United States on the Democratic Party ticket with Walter Mondale, D-Minnesota. #todayinhistory #womenmakinghistory #womeninhistory pic.twitter.com/buAHemP9lF

— WV Federation of Democratic Women (@WVFDW) July 12, 2020

Note: In the tweet above, the date is wrong. It should be 1984.

Update: Here's a political moment that did take place on this day in history:

JFK was nominated for President 60 years ago tonight: pic.twitter.com/LgsvqGg0Jk

— Michael Beschloss (@BeschlossDC) July 13, 2020

I Can't Resist (There's Always A Tweet)

Remember this tweet from 2014?

The way President Obama runs down the stairs of Air Force 1, hopping & bobbing all the way, is so inelegant and unpresidential. Do not fall!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 23, 2014

Yesterday Mike Pence, clearly trying to showcase his robust healthiness, in contrast to Donald's lack of same, decided he would run up the stair to Air Force Two. It did not go well:

As wobbly as Donald's been looking lately, it wouldn't surprise me if one of these days, he trips and falls down the stairs of AF1.

Hypocrisy

Mike Pence left a football game because some players were kneeling in peaceful protest against racial injustice. https://t.co/rypmLO93GE

— Miranda Yaver (@mirandayaver) May 29, 2020