Los Angeles Times - 07.03.2020

A10 SS LATIMES.COM

WASHINGTON — Mick
Mulvaney, President
Trump’s third and least
powerful chief of staff, was
replaced Friday by North
Carolina Rep. Mark Mead-
ows, an announcement
Trump made in an evening
tweet.
Trump named Mulvaney
special envoy to Northern
Ireland after a 14-month ten-
ure in which he made few, if
any, attempts to curb the
president’s often impulsive
actions and statements.
Meadows, one of the
most conservative members
of the House since 2013, has
been a staunch Trump de-
fender and leading surro-
gate during the recent im-
peachment.
Meadows was one of the
most disruptive members of
Congress during the rise of
the tea party, filing a motion
to remove Republican
House Speaker John A.
Boehner in 2015 that helped
lead to his resignation.
Meadows announced in De-
cember that he would not
seek reelection to the House
this year, fueling speculation
that he would take a job in
the Trump administration.
Mulvaney, a former mem-
ber of Congress from South
Carolina, made his name in
Trump’s orbit as a utility
player, willing to take on
three different jobs, two of
them on an acting basis, and
eager to subsume his own
beliefs in the service of
Trump’s.
He ascended to the chief
of staff ’s post in January af-
ter the departure of John F.
Kelly, a retired general who
as chief of staff became mar-
ginalized after he attempted
to impose more discipline on
the president’s decision-
making process and restrict
the access that some of
Trump’s friends and infor-
mal advisors enjoyed.
Trump made it clear that
he resents such restrictions
and, at least initially, was
comfortable with Mul-
vaney’s laid-back approach.
As the onetime congress-
man gradually surrounded
himself in the West Wing
with a cadre of loyal aides, he
worked to foster a collegial
working environment and to
avoid confrontation with his
boss. He kept a popcorn
machine in his office and, for
the most part, sat back and
watched the show.

But Trump, who prefers

to keep staffers on a short

leash, never gave Mulvaney

the formal title of chief of

staff, calling him “acting

chief of staff ” throughout his

tenure. Though Mulvaney

said he did not mind the

slight, it was a constant re-

minder that his lease on the

job was subject to Trump’s

whims.

His most notable and

publicly embarrassing mo-

ment came in October, when

he held a rare White House

news briefing to announce

and defend Trump’s deci-

sion to host the Group of 7

conference of world leaders

at his resort in south Flor-

ida. After insisting Trump

would not make a profit, ad-

vertising the hotel’s ameni-

ties from the White House

lectern and dismissing con-

cerns about self-dealing,

Mulvaney further jeopar-

dized Trump’s defense

against the Democratic-led

impeachment inquiry.

He said Trump had tem-

porarily held up nearly $

million in congressionally

approved aid to Ukraine un-

til President Volodymyr Ze-

lensky satisfied three condi-

tions, including Trump’s re-

quest that the government

investigate Democrats, and

a debunked claim that

Ukraine played a role in in-

fluencing the 2016 election.

“I have news for every-

body: Get over it. There’s go-

ing to be political influence

in foreign policy,” Mulvaney

said — words that quickly

became emblematic of his

view of Trump’s powers.

The news conference

proved disastrous. Trump

angrily canceled his plans to

host the G-7 at his hotel, and

Mulvaney struggled to walk

back his statements regard-

ing Ukraine. But the admis-

sion struck at the heart of

the impeachment inquiry,

seeming to confirm a quid

pro quo with Ukraine that

Trump publicly denied.

That messy perform-

ance, coming on top of other

poorly executed maneuvers,

increasingly rankled Jared

Kushner, the president’s

senior advisor, son-in-law

and one of the few adminis-

tration officials with signifi-

cant and lasting influence.

Mulvaney, who was

named by witnesses as a key

player in helping Trump

withhold the aid money, lat-

er defied a House subpoena

to testify in the impeach-

ment investigation at the re-

quest of Trump.

“From day one, Mul-

vaney abdicated the most

important duty of any White

House chief of staff, which is

to be able to tell the presi-

dent what he doesn’t want to

hear,” said Chris Whipple,

author of “The Gatekeepers:

How the White House Chiefs

of Staff Define Every Presi-

dency.”

“The fundamental prob-

lem is not Mulvaney. It’s the

fact that this president has

never been interested in hav-

ing an empowered chief of

staff,” Whipple continued.

“This is what you get when

you have a chief whose phi-

losophy is to ‘let Trump be

Trump’: There’s no process,

and that’s dangerous for do-

mestic policy and especially

foreign policy.”

Mulvaney did not try to

prevent Trump from tweet-

ing or from making impul-

sive comments in calls with

foreign leaders. And he

worked strenuously to de-

fend Trump in public. But

over time, as he looked to as-

sert more influence behind

the scenes, he clashed with

several top aides, according

to two senior administration

officials.

In September, White

House Counsel Pat Cipol-

lone fought Mulvaney about

the decision to release a

summary of the president’s

July 25 phone call with Ze-

lensky that became the cen-

ter of the House impeach-

ment inquiry, the officials

said.

They also clashed over

Mulvaney’s ham-handed at-

tempt to bring in a friend,

former Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-

S.C.), as part of the presi-

dent’s legal team mainly to

carry Trump’s public de-

fense on television.

News of Gowdy’s hiring

was leaked to the press and

Trump announced it before

aides realized that House

ethics rules, which require

former members to take a

one-year time-out upon

leaving office before lobby-

ing their former colleagues,

would prevent Gowdy from

beginning his work until

January, potentially after

the impeachment inquiry

had run its course.

Before working for

Trump, Mulvaney as a

South Carolina congress-

man made his name in the

fiscally conservative tea

party movement.

During the 2016 election,

he called Trump a “terrible

human being” after the re-

lease of the “Access Holly-

wood” tape that revealed

Trump speaking crudely

about sexually assaulting

women. Before that, Mul-

vaney supported a govern-

ment shutdown during the

Obama administration be-

cause of what he called a

core belief in shrinking the

budget deficit.

Yet he abandoned both of

those convictions when

Trump chose him at the be-

ginning of his tenure to lead

the Office of Management

and Budget, making him the

top White House advisor on

spending matters.

In addition to serving as

budget chief, Mulvaney also

took on the role of acting

director of the Consumer Fi-

nancial Protection Bureau

for more than a year. Like

many conservatives, he was

a fierce critic of the agency,

eager to use his job to

curb regulations on the fi-

nancial industry that had

begun under President

Obama.

Though Trump vowed to

eliminate both the deficit

and the national debt, he

showed little regard for bal-

ance sheets once he took of-

fice, pushing massive tax

cuts along with billions in

spending on projects such

as the promised wall at the

border and significant in-

creases in military outlays.

Deficits under Trump,

nearly $1 trillion in the most

recent fiscal year, have far

exceeded Obama’s record,

despite a relatively healthy

economy.

Mulvaney has put up lit-

tle resistance.

Meadows, who turned

down an offer to become

Trump’s chief of staff last

year just before Mulvaney’s

appointment was an-

nounced, once responded to

the president’s approval of a

massive spending bill by

noting that his former

House colleague was “not

winning on some of the fiscal

issues down at the White

House.”

Defiant in an interview

with the Atlantic, Mulvaney

recalled his response to

Meadows: “I told him, ‘Yeah,

but at least I’m losing at the

very highest levels.’”

Mulvaney out as Trump’s chief of staff

After 14 months without a formal title in the job, he’ll be replaced by Rep. Mark Meadows

By Noah Bierman
and Eli Stokols

PRESIDENT TRUMPnamed Mulvaney, right, special envoy to Northern Ireland. The former congressman

from South Carolina took a laid-back approach to the chief of staff post, working to avoid confrontation.

Susan WalshAssociated Press

$552 million on an ad blitz
and limped away with victo-
ries nowhere but in Ameri-
can Samoa. Bloomberg
spent more than $130 on ad-
vertising for each vote he
won on Super Tuesday. The
cost per vote to Biden?
Roughly 40 cents.
And Elizabeth Warren,
the Massachusetts senator
who started her campaign
announcing only grass-
roots donors were welcome,
ended it with the full-
throated backing of the big-
gest, shadowiest super PAC
to emerge in the contest —
yet still lost everywhere.
“Not long ago, the press
and pundits declared our
campaign dead,” Biden, who
bounced out of Super Tues-
day the front-runner, told
the overflow crowd of 350
donors at Lansing’s house.
One reason: The cam-
paign was broke until this
week.
The former vice presi-
dent was outspent and out-
organized in almost every
state Tuesday. Bloomberg
funneled money into the
race faster than any candi-
date ever had, giving him su-
premacy over the airwaves
almost everywhere.
Vermont Sen. Bernie
Sanders also eclipsed Biden
in resources across the elec-
toral map, having raised
$167 million in small dona-
tions through February,
roughly twice what Biden
collected.
So few donors were inter-
ested in Biden that even the
marquee event at Lansing’s
home wasn’t getting many
takers when she started
sending invitations in the
gloomy days before Biden
won the South Carolina pri-
mary on Feb. 29.
The organizers had set-
tled on an intimate gather-
ing for 80 people in her living
room. “Then South Carolina
happened,” Lansing said

Wednesday, introducing Bi-

den to her guests. “The calls

just kept coming in, over and

over. It was like a deluge.”

Wednesday morning, af-

ter Biden won nine states

from Maine to Texas, more

people called. Even after

moving the event outside,

“we literally had to cut it off

and tell everyone who called

that we had actually reached

full capacity” of about 350,

she said. Money is also gush-

ing into the super PAC sup-

porting Biden, Unite the

Country.

“We will do whatever is

needed to support the vice

president’s candidacy,” said

supporter Andy Spahn, a

Hollywood power broker

who has long advised the po-

litical activity of industry fig-

ures such as Jeffrey Katzen-

berg. “We have been talking

with the campaign this week

about where we can make

the biggest contribution or

how we can make the biggest

difference.”

It’s that kind of enthusi-

asm that helped the Biden

campaign raise $22 million

in five days, a haul he re-

ported when he called into a

fundraiser in Bethesda, Md.,

where some 130 donors had

gathered Friday night.

The donors in Spahn’s or-

bit had earlier been hedging,

spreading money to several

viable candidates and hold-

ing back from writing big

checks to super PACs. The

shift by deep-pocketed

donors once Biden started

winning is netting a windfall

for him.

“The last seven days have

been by far our best seven

days of the entire cycle,” said

Steve Schale, an advisor to

Unite the Country. He de-

clined to say exactly how

much the PAC has raised.

Even as the cash is now

flowing fast, some reformers

are pleased by the muted im-

pact big wallets have had so

far this year. They are par-

ticularly encouraged by

Bloomberg’s flameout.

“The takeaway is that if

you are not cultivating

grass-roots donors and you

don’t have grass-roots sup-

port, your money alone will

not buy you a viable cam-

paign,” said Tiffany Muller,

president of the advocacy

group End Citizens United.

“We don’t believe billionaires

should be able to spend un-

limited money. We think that

is a huge problem in our

democracy.”

Of course, Bloomberg’s

billions may not disappear

from this race. The former

New York mayor is now con-

sidering putting his expen-

sive campaign machine to

work helping elect Biden.

Such moves are fraught

with risks that didn’t exist in

the recent past. More voters

frown on big-money infu-

sions than once did.

That’s a trend driven in

large part by Sanders’ suc-

cess funding a formidable

national campaign entirely

on 1.9 million individual

donors making contrib-

utions averaging $21. Sand-

ers’ proof that it could be

done moved other candi-

dates to swear off using su-

per PACs and corporate

money — and also to pledge

support for comprehensive

campaign finance reform if

elected.

By this point in 2016,

when the field of candidates

jockeying in the GOP presi-

dential primary was almost

as crowded as it was this

year on the Democratic side,

super PACs and other inde-

pendent groups had plowed

more than $200 million into

the race. That’s more than

triple the outside spending

in this cycle, according to

End Citizens United.

“Are we disappointed su-

per PACs have forced their

way inside this primary? Ob-

viously,” said Muller. “But

even how long we were able

to hold off super PACs in this

race has made a substantial

difference.”

Others are less im-

pressed. Paul Ryan, vice

president for policy and liti-

gation at Common Cause,

said he saw the vows by can-

didates at the start of the

race to disavow big money as

more about messaging than

substance.

“This is where we have

been at in every cycle since

super PACs were born,” he

said. “I was skeptical of the

promises at the outset. I

thought whoever the Demo-

cratic nominee is will be sup-

ported by huge outside mon-

ey.”

Even Sanders is getting

help from outside groups.

The super PAC affiliated

with the National Nurses

United union spent heavily

on his behalf in 2016 and may

do so again. And Common

Cause has filed a federal

complaint against the non-

profit Sanders helped found,

Our Revolution, charging it

with violating existing laws

— weak as they are — requir-

ing disclosure of donor iden-

tities and spending related

to helping a candidate. The

allegations are languishing

at the Federal Election Com-

mission, where vacancies on

the board have left the

agency for months without

the quorum needed to act.

The biggest letdown to

good-government groups

may have come when the

pro-Warren Persist PAC

emerged. Anti-corruption

was a centerpiece of War-

ren’s run, which ended when

she withdrew from the race

Thursday. Yet when she

really needed help, the super

PAC poured $14 million into

the race to help her and re-

fused to simultaneously re-

veal the identities of its

donors. It is not legally re-

quired to disclose those

names until March 20.

Warren did not disavow

the group or its tactics. In-

stead, she argued that other

candidates were being

helped by outside money, so

she had no choice.

Despite all the promises

of reform, this is not an elec-

tion where voters are look-

ing for absolute purity. Not

when the eventual nominee

will be going up against an

incumbent expected to push

every fundraising and

spending boundary.

Getting big money out of

politics is “an issue that is

important and people care

about,” said Sarah Bryner,

research director at the Cen-

ter for Responsive Politics,

“but I don’t think it is a moti-

vating factor, especially not

in this particular election.

Defeating Trump is the pri-

mary motivation.”

Halper reported from

Washington and Mehta

from Los Angeles. Times

staff writer Janet Hook in

Washington contributed to

this report.

Cash suddenly pouring in for Biden campaign

[Biden,from A1]

A RESURGENTJoe Biden celebrates his big night at a Baldwin Hills rally on

Super Tuesday. His campaign was essentially broke until this week.

Robert GauthierLos Angeles Times