Grassley shows grit in standing up to protect Mueller

Welcome back, Sen. Grassley. It’s heartening to see the independent-minded Chuck Grassley of earlier times reappear to protect the special counsel’s probe into collusion between the president’s 2016 election campaign and Russia. As head of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Iowa’s senior senator is refusing to cave to pressure from Mitch McConnell as the Republican Senate majority leader vows not to put a bipartisan bill preventing President Donald Trump from firing independent Special Counsel Robert Mueller up for a full Senate vote.

“Obviously, the views of the majority leader are important to consider, but they do not govern what happens here in the Judiciary Committee,” Grassley has said of his plan to have his committee vote on the measure and move it on to the full Senate.

As Mueller’s investigation of possible collusion to throw the election to Trump has inched closer to the president himself, Trump is pushing back. He alluded to firing the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller. He muttered about firing Mueller himself, and earlier spoke of getting rid of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, incensed that his attorney general recused himself from the investigation.

At that time, too, Grassley stood up, indicating the Judiciary Committee wouldn’t approve a new attorney general if Trump fired Sessions. Grassley subsequently blew up at Sessions for opposing a bipartisan sentencing reform bill Grassley has spent two years working on, which would relax mandatory-minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenses. As the senator pointed out last month of Sessions, “look how hard it was for me to get him through committee in the United States Senate. And look at, when the president was going to fire him, I went to his defense.”

Ironically, both Trump and Grassley share the expectation of loyalty from officials they helped put in office. The president hasn’t hesitated to express his expectation of unconditional loyalty from his appointees — even in the face of possible wrongdoing. He blasted Sessions and former FBI Director James Comey for allowing the Russia probe.

Ridiculous as it seems to have to spell this out, having Russia meddle in our elections does not serve American interests regardless of which party wins.

This is significant because before the Justice Department’s appointment of Mueller, Grassley hadn’t been especially interested in having an independent commission or special prosecutor investigate Trump campaign ties to Russia. But after Mueller’s appointment, Grassley sounded a different tune, saying in a statement, “As I’ve said many times before, the American people deserve to know how Russia attempted to meddle in our democratic process,” and expressing confidence in Rosenstein and Mueller for their independence and credentials. “At the end of the day, we need a public accounting of what went on to restore faith in government.” Yes we do.

Looking back over Grassley’s positions, one finds other occasions where he has either changed his mind or veered from the party line, for better or worse. That has meant stubbornly refusing to schedule hearings on former President Barack Obama’s judicial appointments, most famously his Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland. But he rushed to give Trump judicial appointees their committee hearings.

In a 2014 Senate floor speech, Grassley decried the lack of bipartisanship from Senate Democrats, saying when Republicans controlled the Senate a decade earlier, Congress got things done: “We knew we had to accommodate the minority. We had to have patience, humility and respect for the minority, attributes that don’t exist on the other side anymore.”

We haven’t consistently seen that from the senator. Grassley stood up for Trump in the president’s earlier days in office, even in the face of outrageous moves such as banning people from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. Grassley said, “National security is the number one responsibility of the federal government, and keeping terrorists out of the United States must be a top priority.” But he also said “implementation will be key to ensuring the bad guys are kept out while remaining a welcoming nation to people of all backgrounds and religions.” Those two goals were incompatible in Trump’s ban.

But when Trump lashed out at Khizr and Ghazala Khan, the parents of Capt. Humayun Khan, who was killed by a suicide bomber in 2004, Grassley came back with a rebuke, calling Trump’s remarks “not in line with my own beliefs about how the members of the military and their families should be treated.”

At the end of the day, every member of Congress has to look himself or herself in the face and reckon with their role in making the country better and defending its principles. That means every member, regardless of donor expectations, party affiliations or personal loyalties.

This president and some of his autocratic actions should be putting many members in conflict with their consciences. By taking the stand he has to protect the special counsel’s investigation, Grassley paves the way for others to stand up for what they know deep down is right. Let’s hope they follow his lead.