James Hohmann/WaPo;
THE BIG IDEA: The biggest news out of Donald Trumps Thursday interview with NBC was his confession that the Russia investigation was on his mind when he fired FBI Director James Comey.Undercutting 48 hours of denials by his aides, the president said: In fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story; its an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.
But what may ultimately get Trump into bigger trouble is his story about Comey assuring him he was not under investigation during a one-on-one dinner at the White House.Lester Holt askedthe president to elaborate on his claim, made in the letter firing Comey, that hed been told three times he was not under federal investigation. He wanted to stay at the FBI, and I said Ill, you know, consider and see what happens,Trump said. But we had a very nice dinner, and at that time he told me, You are not under investigation.
David A. Hopkins/Honest Graft:
Why Congressional Republicans Won't Abandon Trump Over Comey
To McConnell, Republican support for any Democratic calls to investigate Trump would only signal to voters that Trump had indeed done something wrong, further reducing the president's public support and thus giving the Democrats even more of an advantage. Converting every Trump-related controversy into a partisan food fight instead allows Republicans to summon their base to rally behind them in yet another polarizing battle against the left. Since Democratic supporters are already likely to be highly motivated to turn out against Trump in the next two elections, Republicans are concerned about whether their own side will match their opponents' level of engagement.
Of course, this approach carries certain risks. The most obvious danger is that congressional Republicans could wind up chaining themselves more tightly to Trump just as he plummets off a political cliff. The lack of a meaningful difference between Trump and the rest of the Republican Party gives anti-Trump voters good reason to replace even personally popular Republican incumbents with Democratic challengers. Unless Trump finds a way to bolster his national popularity in the future, even a relatively energized Republican base may not be enough to protect the party against a wider popular backlash among Democrats and independents.
It's also quite possible that Ryan and McConnell would be better served in the long run by buzzing a warning pitch or two under Trump's chin at this stage of his presidency. Automatic party support for his various antics in office may only reinforce bad behavior on Trump's part, making future Comey-scale debacles all the more likely and dragging the entire party into an inescapable political morass. Occasional demonstrations of independence by congressional Republicans might have a constraining effect on a president with flawed knowledge, instincts, and judgment, encouraging him to consult with a wider array of interlocutors and steering him away from the most disastrous courses of action. Normally, party leaders' interests are not well-served by greater intra-party tension. But we are, at the moment, a fair ways off fromnormalcy.
Vann Newkirk II/Atlantic:
How Unprecedented Is James Comey's Firing?
A Q&A with historian Beverly Gage about the history of conflicts between FBI directors and the executive branch
Vann R. Newkirk II: Ill start with the big question. Is James Comeys firing by Donald Trump an unprecedented clash between president and FBI?
Beverly Gage: The answer is yes and no. It is unprecedented in its extremenessno president before this moment has fired an FBI director who was engaged in conducting an ongoing and politically sensitive investigation of his own campaign. On the other hand, this sort of conflict between the FBI and the executive branch is not itself totally anomalous. It's something that we've seen over the course of American history. During J. Edgar Hoover's day, he had repeated conflicts with presidents, and he had a kind of autonomous power that allowed to withstand and sometimes win those conflicts, for better or worse. Since then, most presidents have been cautious about this kind of direct confrontation.
Amanda Taub/NY Times:
Comeys Firing Tests Strength of the Guardrails of Democracy
Norms about political behavior and power serve as soft guardrails for democracy, said Steven Levitsky, a professor at Harvard who studies authoritarianism.
In a healthy democratic system, when politicians violate important norms, other institutions push back, ensuring that the violators pay a hefty price and the guardrails are preserved for another day.
But in collapsing democracies, the opposite happens. Instead of banding together to protect democratic norms, warring parties take violations by their opponents as justification for breaking other norms in response. Its a process of escalation that often begins with minor stuff and ends with coups, Mr. Levitsky said.
Dave Weigel/WaPo:
Republicans misstate, again and again on TV and at town halls, whats in their health-care bill
That means these lawmakers face two potential backlashes: one if opponents of Obamacare perceive the bill does not go far enough, and another from Americans worried that the bill would eliminate their coverage.
The result has been a confused sales effort and a series of flat misstatements and contradictions about whats actually in the bill.
Its a risky strategy especially in front of the skeptical crowds and interviewers Republicans have been speaking to in recent days. On Wednesday, Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-N.J.) spent nearly five hours answering questions from a disgruntled audience of constituents, some of whom spoke at length about what Medicaid meant in their communities. MacArthur was blown back by laughter when he argued, as House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) has, that caps on per capita Medicaid funding would leave the system stronger.
I am trying to save a system so it continues to help you, he said. I am trying to make sure Medicaid is strong enough to continue.
Later, MacArthur argued that the tax cuts in the bill were for everybody but when a constituent calculated that MacArthurs own savings would amount to $37,000 if the bill was passed, the congressman agreed that the bills large investment tax cut was not going to benefit everyone equally.
Paul Krugman/NY Times:
So its nave to expect Republicans to join forces with Democrats to get to the bottom of the Russia scandal even if that scandal may strike at the very roots of our national security. Todays Republicans just dont cooperate with Democrats, period. Theyd rather work with Vladimir Putin.
In fact, some of them probably did.
Now, maybe Im being too pessimistic. Maybe there are enough Republicans with a conscience or, failing that, sufficiently frightened of an electoral backlash that the attempt to kill the Russia probe will fail. One can only hope so.
But its time to face up to the scary reality here. Most people now realize, I think, that Donald Trump holds basic American political values in contempt. What we need to realize is that much of his party shares that contempt.
Laurence Tribe, Richard Painter and Norman Eisen/USA Today:
Whether the presidents clumsy and seemingly ill-thought-out steps will backfire is impossible to predict. Attorney General Jeff Sessions had promised to recuse himself from all Justice Department matters involving Russian interference with our election, but waded right into the middle of the decision to discharge Comey. Perhaps Sessions will step aside while Rosenstein attempts to redeem himself for his role in the pretense that Comey was fired overmissteps in the Clinton email probe. The deputy attorney general could do it by appointing an independent special counsel.
But the constraints under which such a special counsel would have to operate under current law, and the constitutional subservience of any such counsel to the president as head of the executive branch, are a prescription for a replay of an ugly drama: President Nixonfired two attorneys generalbefore finding someone (Robert Bork) willing to fire special prosecutor Archibald Cox only to be pressured into appointing another special prosecutor,Leon Jaworski, who ended up being as determined and unshakable as Cox.
Peter Beinart/Atlantic:
L'Etat, C'est Trump
The president and his advisors believe loyalty to the country and loyalty to him are the same thing.
Its not just that Trump has never worked in government. Hes never worked in a job devoted to a cause larger than self-enrichment or self-aggrandizement. Hes spent virtually his entire professional life in a family business where he sets the rules and where people answer to him. Note how promiscuously Trumps uses the first person possessive: my generals, my African-American. Last spring, when journalists asked him who his Israeli advisors were, hewheeledout his Jewish lawyers. He sends his children on diplomatic missions, where they also hawk his products. He doesnt really distinguish between public and private interest, between obeying the law and obeying him.
See the original post:
Abbreviated Pundit Round-up: Republican cowards and enablers buckle but don't act - Daily Kos