Questioning the questioners

President Trump and his shrinking band of loyalists have a host of questions about the investigations that have reduced his administration to its current condition. Among them: How did the investigations start? What are the motives of the investigators? And have they done their investigating properly?

This enthusiasm for inquiry disappears at the boundary between investigative process and results. The facts uncovered by the continuing congressional inquiry and the law enforcement probes that preceded it are so plain and damning that exploring them further only compounds the damage to the president. Hence his focus on how the information was uncovered, why, and by whom.

This tactic reached a panicky peak this week when a faction of House Republicans — among them Butte County’s own Doug LaMalfa — intrepidly “stormed” one of their own hearing rooms to protest the closed process being led by the Democratic chairman of the intelligence committee, Burbank Rep. Adam Schiff. House committees have been taking private testimony from witnesses to Trump’s efforts to force the Ukrainian government to undermine Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden and the findings of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Democratic leaders say they are conducting a preliminary factfinding phase of the impeachment inquiry behind closed doors to allow testimony on classified matters and prevent witnesses from coordinating their stories before they move on to public hearings.

The GOP’s call for transparency has undeniable appeal given public interest in the matter. The trouble for Republican lawmakers is that no fewer than 47 of them — including several of the 30 or so who staged this week’s blitzkrieg — sit on the committees taking the testimony and have ready access to the proceedings. Moreover, the inquiry is being conducted under rules the House approved under a Republican majority. It’s also in keeping with the closed evidencegathering phases of other impeachment and criminal investigations.

Another attack on the process backfired this week when several Republicans hesitated to join a Senate resolution condemning the inquiry. Its sponsor, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, reportedly won over most of the holdouts by shifting the measure’s criticism toward the investigative process and away from the facts.

Nor is the administration done questioning Mueller’s exhaustive documentation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, the Trump campaign’s embrace of that foreign assistance and the president’s obstruction of the ensuing investigation. Attorney General William Barr’s examination of his own department’s probe is now considered a criminal investigation, the New York Times reported. It’s essentially the Justice Department’s version of one of the investigations Trump and company were pushing for in Ukraine, prompting the current congressional inquiry.

That inquiry has so far bolstered an intelligence whistleblower’s allegations about the president’s improper dealings with Ukraine, according to reports — charges that were already supported by the White House’s own accounts. It’s no wonder the president would prefer an investigation of just about anything else.