Perhaps you’ve heard the reports that the FBI began an investigation of President Trump for inappropriate ties to Russia, aka he’s a Russian intelligence asset, or perhaps you’ve been living under a rock this week. Year. Two years. In case it’s the latter, here’s the fast summary from The New York Times:
In the days after President Trump fired James B. Comey as F.B.I. director, law enforcement officials became so concerned by the president’s behavior that they began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests, according to former law enforcement officials and others familiar with the investigation.
The inquiry carried explosive implications. Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence.
This led to another example of what seems to be faux-outrage from Rep. Peter King (R-NY), as noted by Talking Points Memo:
Rep. Peter King (R-NY) seized on a White House talking point — that reports of the FBI investigating whether President Trump was working for Russia prove Trump was right about the deep state — and took it a step further Monday: “that’s almost like a coup.”
During an interview with Fox News on Monday, King called news of the probe “absolutely disgraceful.”
“From what I’ve seen and heard, if this is true, what the FBI did is absolutely disgraceful,” King said. “They have been investigating the Trump campaign from the summer of 2016. Absolutely nothing, zero has come up involving President Trump. James Comey told that to the president. The reason President Trump fired Comey was Comey refused to say that publicly, that the President was not under investigation.”
No, Rep. King, he fired him to stop the collusion investigation, as the President himself stated. This Reuters report has both the admission and the later attempts by the White House to retract the admission on the grounds NBC fudged the tape.
But besides those trivial details known as facts, the question of why does Rep. King insist on ignoring the recent revelations which justifies the investigation calls merrily for an answer. If you’re wondering about these revelations, Steve Benen provides a lovely summation in connection with Trump’s inclination to destroy the most important bulwark against Russian aggression, NATO:
* Jan. 3: Trump publicly endorsed the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan in the late 1970s, arguing that the Soviets “were right to be there.” It was one of several recent examples of the Republican president endorsing Russian propaganda for no apparent reason.
* Jan. 10: The Trump administration tried to defend the idea of relaxing Russia sanctions. It didn’t go well.
* Jan. 11: The New York Times reported that after Trump fired then-FBI Director James Comey, the FBI began an investigation into whether Trump “had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests.” The article added, “Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security.”
* Jan. 12: The Washington Post reported that Trump has “gone to extraordinary lengths to conceal details of his conversations” with Putin, going so far as to take his own interpreter’s notes after one private discussion.
* Jan. 14: The New York Times reports that Trump raised the idea of withdrawing from NATO “several” times in 2018.
So what is the reason for King’s faux-outburst, his apparent idiocy?
Trump may not be desired by the Republican Party, but he is the result of 25 years of Republican Party culture. This is nearly definitional, and certainly undeniable, because the Republican base loves him. If King and his fellow Congressional members from the Republicans turn on Trump, they are also turning on themselves and each other, because just about all of them, now that the moderates have moved out of the party, or become irrelevant from illness, old age, or death, are also products of the Republican Party culture.
To condemn Trump is to condemn themselves and the very culture which got them elected to high office. Without the hardest of evidence of Trump being a Russian asset, they’ll only play around the edges of opposition: pass the occasional bill he opposes, and then only if the support is overwhelming and the arena is arcane. Once in a while suggest he settle down. That sort of ineffectual thing.
Because, for reasons of ego, they just can’t condemn themselves. Impeaching and convicting Trump risks the very Republican Party itself in its present form, and while the Republican base will still support Trump even if impeached and convicted, that is a small portion of the electorate; the 40% or so of the electorate that calls it independents, like myself, would consign the Republican Party to the ashcan of history, and down the toilet would swirl King and his colleagues.
King must be in a cold sweat.
