Mark Leibovich is one of the most astute political journalists in the nation. Until last December, he was the chief national correspondent for The New York Times Magazine. He is now a senior editor at The Atlantic.
This article, “The Most Pathetic Men in America,” explains in vivid prose why Kevin McCarthy and Lindsey Graham worship at the feet of Donald Trump. They know he’s a fraud and a liar. They know he lost the election. But they slobber over him and crave his approval. Neither man has a shred of dignity or integrity. They are, quite simply, the most pathetic men in America.
Here is an excerpt:
Bottom line, Trump is an extremely tedious dude to have had in our face for seven years and running. My former New York Times colleague David Brooks wrote it best: “We’ve got this perverse situation in which the vast analytic powers of the entire world are being spent trying to understand a guy whose thoughts are often just six fireflies beeping randomly in a jar.”
Better objects of our scrutiny—and far more compelling to me—are the slavishly devoted Republicans whom Trump drew to his side. It’s been said before, but can never be emphasized enough: Without the complicity of the Republican Party, Donald Trump would be just a glorified geriatric Fox-watching golfer. I’ve interviewed scores of these collaborators, trying to understand why they did what they did and how they could live with it. These were the McCarthys and the Grahams and all the other busy parasitic suck-ups who made the Trump era work for them, who humored and indulged him all the way down to the last, exhausted strains of American democracy.
The GOP’s shame, ongoing, is underscored by the handful of brave Republicans willing to speak the truth about Trump in public, before the January 6 committee and on the panel itself. The question now is whether they have any hope of wresting some admirable remnant of their party back from Trump’s abyss before he wins the Republican nomination for president in 2024 or, yes, winds up back in the White House….
Consider again the doormat duo—McCarthy and Graham. I’ve known both men for years, at least in the weird sense that political reporters and pols “know” each other. They are a classically Washington type: fun to be around, starstruck, and desperate to keep their jobs or get better ones—to maximize their place in the all-important mix. On various occasions I have asked them, in so many words, how they could sidle up to Trump like they have. The answer, basically, is that they did it because it was the savviest course; because it was best for them. If Trump had one well-developed intuition, it was his ability to sniff out weakness in people—and, I suppose, in major political parties. Nearly all elected Republicans in Washington needed Trump’s blessing, and voters, to remain there. People like McCarthy and Graham benefited a great deal from making it work with Trump, or “managing the relationship,” as they say.
McCarthy knew that alienating Trump would blow up any chance he had of becoming speaker, which had become the singular objective of his “public service,” such as it was. He cultivated Trump from the start. The president came to refer to McCarthy as “my Kevin,” a term of ownership as much as affection. But “managing the relationship” was often a daily struggle, McCarthy conceded, when I interviewed him for The New York Times in his Bakersfield, California, district in April 2021. “He goes up and down with his anger,” McCarthy said of Trump. “He’s mad at everybody one day. He’s mad at me one day … This is the tightest tightrope anyone has to walk.”
Once, early in 2019, I asked Graham a version of the question that so many of his judgy old Washington friends had been asking him. How could he swing from being one of Trump’s most merciless critics in 2016 to such a sycophant thereafter? I didn’t use those exact words, but Graham got the idea. “Well, okay, from my point of view, if you know anything about me, it’d be odd not to do this,” he told me. “‘This,’” Graham specified, “is to try to be relevant.” Relevance: It casts one hell of a spell.
“I could get Trump on the phone faster than any staff person who worked for him could get him on the phone,” McCarthy bragged to me. There was always a breathless, racing quality to both men’s voices when they talked about the thrill ride of being one of Trump’s “guys.”
What would you do to stay relevant? That’s always been a definitional question for D.C.’s prime movers, especially the super-thirsty likes of McCarthy and Graham. If they’d never stooped this low before, maybe it’s just because no one ever asked them to.
Diane The commentary on and quotes from Graham, to me, are the most depressing I have heard in a very long time. I “read” Graham’s attitude as the “power lust” part of lust for “money and power.” A totally defunct person. CBK
Lindsay Graham should be defunct but is not. He is a man totally lacking in morals, ethics, or conscience. He was McCain’s puppy for years but abandoned him for Trump before McCain died. Graham knows that Trump is a fraud, but he still attaches himself to that fraud.
Hello Diane This may be over-simplified, but then again maybe not:
If there is a kind of chain in democracies that is circular but upward-moving, and that runs between “the people,” their sworn representatives, their policies and ministrations, and back again to the people, then Graham and the other R’s, along with Scotus and many state legislatures, have broken that chain. The vacuum that is created at the breaks invites in the grifters, self-servers, and fascists among us. Too much of that process gone unchecked, and democracy is no more. CBK
It has been shown that the conservative mindset and fascist mindset are virtually identical. It only takes a nudge to move a conservative over to being a fascist.
A nudge-nudge and a wink-wink
Bob As you probably know, “conservative” these days is not what it used to be, as is evidenced by the flood of self-defined conservatives who have left the R party; not to mention those who are like Liz Cheney who apparently remains “arch” conservative but who vehemently defends civil life, the rule of law, and the U.S. Constitution.
Also, a passive reference? . . .what are the writer’s sources about “nudging”? In any case, that’s a pretty big nudge to actually take in real life . . . or again, to assume about “conservatives” as a whole. But of course, that’s probably not what you meant. CBK
Dishonesty is at the core of reaction, conservative and fascist. Most conservatives are not going to come right out and say, “I don’t care whether poor and brown and black people live or die.”
And I don’t buy into the myth of the Golden Age of good guy conservativism. The Barry Goldwaters and Bill Buckleys and Ronald Reagans and Richard Nixons were all racist and sexist and homophobic to the core.
I have some bad news to report to Senator Graham: he will never be relevant. In fact, I just looked up “atavism” in Merriam-Webster, and there was a thumbnail of Lindsay Graham with the definitions.
Closeted and self-loathing? Am atavism? Check.
CX: An atavism
Apparently, it is well known in SC that the Senator is closeted. It’s not for me to criticize him for anything other than being a weak person who lacks principles or decency.
Evidently, this was also true of Yassir Arafat. It was well known but unspoken.
Here’s what bothers me about people remaining closeted. It means one of two things: that they are cowards, which isn’t admirable, and can’t face up to the inevitable prejudice that will come their way or, worse yet, that they share that prejudice–that they are gay but themselves think that there is something wrong with being gay. The latter is simply prejudice, and prejudice is always offensive.
I’m with Milk about this.
Especially if one is a politician and so worried about being outed that the threat of this can be used as kompromat.
I lived in Barney Frank’s district in Newton, Massachusetts, back when that creep tried to blackmail him and Frank chose, instead, to come out loud and proud. And then I was also proud that his district–my neighbors–responded by voting him back into office overwhelmingly.
Well, I meant atavism in the sense of “recurrence or reversion to a past style, manner, outlook, approach, or activity.” In Senator Graham’s case, his atavism returned him to being a right-wing suck-up to a president who has all the grace and dignity of a member of a Gambino crew in Bensonhurst. I don’t know if Lindsay Graham is closeted—but in any case I am more worried about him becoming an accessory to a fascist coup in this country.
Senator Graham will attach himself to the biggest guy in the room, regardless of views. Yes, he is an accessory to fascism.
Same meaning, Mark. In the 1950s and ’60s and earlier, it was common for gay people to hide the fact that they were gay. This was true of people of Rock Hudson and Spencer Tracy’s generation. So, this fact about Graham–his essential dishonesty about his sexuality–is an atavism, a reversion to that 1950s and earlier type, in addition to being part and parcel of his general dishonesty. Graham knows better than the Trumpy positions that he espouses these days, and he is full of tells that this is the case. He’s not fooling anyone except, evidently, the yokels in his home state.
Ah, ok. I thought in this context it meant returning to a set of political and social values that existed, say, before the Progressive Era–values Graham and his ilk (I actually heard Texas Governor Rick Perry, in an interview with Jon Stewart, that it was his goal to subvert the public safety legislation of the Progressive Era–i.e. say goodbye to the Pure Food and Drug Act) seek to return this country to.
This is a recurrence or reversion to a past style, manner, outlook, approach, or activity–in this case, to behavior from a time when most gay people thought that they had to be closeted. Of course, a journey to South Carolina is not only in space but also in time.
I could borrow a Lindsey Graham joke I heard, but it won’t come out.
I have to quibble with the use of the term “men.” Granted, they may meet the physical requirements (although, like trans students in certain states, they should be required to show proof by dropping their drawers for the public in front, especially since they’ve been doing it the other way for years), but according to “history and tradition”, they don’t meet the historical (meaning Hollywood-driven and defined) standard of a “Man.” They certainly don’t know about being “stand up”!
Indeed. The term is used, here, quite loosely. Which reminds me of one of the many names of Trump:
Child-man in the Promised Land
One of the many ironies of American life is that all the “leading men,” the heart throbs of the movie magazines of the Golden Age of Hollywood in homophobic America were gay or bisexual.
I think that we need to give credit where credit is due. Russian intelligence is pretty darned good at working up kompromat on American politicians, and American intelligence is so bad at revealing this that the term “intelligence” really shouldn’t be applicable.
The prime example these days is, of course, Putin’s dog, Comrade Trump
Is there any intelligence failure in history larger than the one that enabled a Russian asset to become President of the United States? I don’t think so.
QED.
So, Garland is continuing a tradition there.
I’m sure the answer will also help us understand why so many Germans supported Hitler in the 1930s and 1940s, Russians that supported Stalin before his death in the 50’s, and rasPutin today.
These Trump sycophants are disgusting. I have the same reaction to them that one has to, say, spoiled or rotten food.
I’m not speaking metaphorically but literally. Do others feel the same? If I look at Graham, it makes me sick, in the same way that looking at Pence when he was spending his days groveling before The Don made me sick. Revolting.
If Garland doesn’t prosecute Trump, then democracy in America is already over. We are a full-fledged Banana Republic without the bananas. That said, here is
Your Handy-Dandy Guide to Some of the Federal Laws Under Which A.G. Garland Might Charge Donald J. Trump (note that these are ones related to The Big Lie; a whole other set of laws would enable a whole other set of charges related to The Big Rip-off). Note that Trump needs to be charged with multiple, separate counts of each of the following:
18 U.S. Code § 2384 (2000): Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
18 U.S. Code § 2385 (2000) Advocating overthrow of government
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.
18 U.S. Code § 371 (2000) – Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States
If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.
18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antritrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or
Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—
Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
To this essay: “and in addition” or “Sorry, I have to disagree.”
The SILENT and DENYING-WHAT-THEY-KNOW-IS -TRUE and IDIOT (a term not taken lightly) ELECTEDS and CANDIATES are THE MOST PATHETIC and CRAZY WOMEN!
They are the checks and balance, they are the guardrails, THEY TOOK OATHS and they say nothing or lie. Hundreds of officials and candidates could state – “Enough – We’re done with this b.s.” – and the kicker is, they would get more votes if they did!
Elected Governors, Representatives, Senators, and Attorneys General – AND CANDIDATES for these offices are COMPLICIT and PERPETUATORS of the lies.
There are electeds and candidates who THEY KNOW THE ELECTION WAS 100% FRAUD-FREE, THEY KNOW January 6 was an ARMED VIOLENT ATTACK on the nation’s capitol and killed officers defending the Capitol… THEY KNOW THE TRUTH and they refuse to speak or respond to questions.
There are elected and candidates who are either flat out stupid, crazy (there are some), or liars who actually say outloud there is evidence of election misdeeds and that it is ok for armed men to attack the Capitol to abduct and harm the VP, Speaker of the House, and others.
These men and women sold their souls and integrity and oaths to a detestable man and these hypocritical party “leaders.”
The Supreme Court just agreed to hear, next year, the case Moore v. Harper, which deals with the Independent State Legislature Doctrine. This case will enable the court to give an ex post facto thumbs up to the Fake Elector insurrection scheme that Trump and his co-conspirators tried to carry out.
This is not “justice.” It’s treasonous. It is aiding and abetting people who tried to overthrow democratic governance in the United States.
WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE IN THE MEDIA ABOUT THIS?!?!??!
Are we going to SLEEP THROUGH THE U.S. BECOMING A FASCIST STATE?????
This is the way the world ends. Not with a bang but a whimper. –T. S. Eliot
Bob Exactly that . . . shows the essential relationship between the federal government and its power . . . that comes into play where states conflict with the principles underpinning our founding documents, e.g., again, civil rights.
But as you suggest, SCOTUS is doing an end-run around even that relationship. I hate to tell all those oligarchs this, . . . but on the world scene, where democracies go, so go the economics. CBK
I’d say the most pathetic men in America are sitting on the Supreme Court.
And what makes them most pathetic of all is that they actually believe that they are great legal minds.
Yeah, that’s really funny, or would be if it weren’t so tragic. Alito and Thomas and Kaveman in particular should buy some Puritan hats to go with the robes. And Barrett should live up to her faith and Originalism and resign from the bench.
I am happy in my irrelevance.
It’s frighteningly easy to imagine Trump’s dog, Graham Cracker, trying to stay “relevant” in Germany in 1938.
As a South Carolinian who has lived in this state since 1987, but has had SC family members from the 1700s who fought for American Independence (my 8th & 9th Great-grandfathers fought, see All for Liberty on Tubi which tells the Felder family story) I can’t tell you how frustrated I am with Lindsay Graham representing us. I warned him early on that Trump is a pathological narcissist and as a Ph.D in Psychology I know what I’m talking about. Graham noted that, well, that was my opinion… Well it’s mine and every other psychologist I know and most of those that I don’t know. I’ve always thought that Trump has threatened Graham with exposure if he were to really turn against Trump. Most people in SC think that Graham is gay but the thing is, the Dems don’t care and the Reps simply discount the rumors. Denying something like being gay opens one up to all kinds of manipulation and IMO Trump keeps Graham on a tight leash by threats of outing him.
Why the other guys continue in thrall to Trump is incredibly frustrating because Trump only stands for himself. He has no filter and believes that he’s cooler, smarter, better looking, etc. than everyone else. We’ve learned that there are a lot of people who are attracted to the nastiness that spews from Trump. He appeals to the ignorant and uneducated….look at MTG yesterday noting that she’s “tired” of all of this separation of church and state stuff. In Trump’s America everyone is free to expose their ignorance and self-interest and behave like toddlers who have no concept of the future and no understanding that they are not the center of the world. And, no embarrassment at exposing those qualities to the world either.
Thank you, Patricia.