Republican politicians will give Trump another chance
What a complete political novice Trump must be, pundits Left and Right alike scoffed, to think he could eliminate his Russia probe problem with a simple “You’re fired!” Surely, Republican congressional leaders would finally turn on their party’s president as he trampled on American sensibilities of executive restraint and adherence to checks and balances?
That seems unlikely.
While the Comey firing should not be taken lightly, congressional Republicans lack the right incentives to bring Trump to judgment day over the matter, and they have no mechanism by which to spank him without chafing themselves in the process.
One reason is purely calendarrelated. American presidents enjoy relative immunity from midterm elections at the beginning of a term. In 2010, the huge unpopularity of the recently passed Obamacare cost Democrats control of the House as well as six senators in a massive political bloodbath. But it was congressmen and senators who lost their jobs, not President Obama. Eighteen months from now, when Americans go to the polls, it will be a referendum on Trump’s performance so far, but his name will not appear on the ballot. Instead, the names of all 238 Republican members of the House of Representatives and eight hopeful Republican senators will, and they will bear the brunt of Trump’s wrongs.
It’s in their interest to minimise Trump-induced scandals and remain loyal.
The Comey firing does present a constitutional crisis of sorts. It reveals a chink in the system of checks and balances. But that is precisely the context that, coupled with the calendar, presents a disincentive for congressional Republicans to take action against Trump.
Yes, the American political system has hard-wired checks by which one branch might hold another accountable, and Congress could theoretically call for a special investigation into the firing of Comey. But they won’t, because this would have to be done extraneously, stealing time and oxygen from the Republican policy agenda.
This demonstrates how inaccessible the tools by which Americans hold the executive accountable are, and how tied they are to gentlemanly politicking. Trump has no qualms about upending that sense of decency. Safeguarding against executive corruption is no longer done by default – even the FBI is merely another executive agency that is under the president’s thumb.
Politically, Republicans in Congress will be much better served by hurling their energy towards speedily confirming a replacement FBI director.
Likewise, the speed with which Trump can find a replacement will directly affect the need felt by congressional Republicans to pursue an inquiry – no matter how upset they may be privately with Trump, they are better served by quelling voter outrage through nomination hearings that seem transparent than by allowing a special investigation to distract from their policy agenda.
This makes speculation over potential Trump nominees for the post intriguing. Names being thrown around include former Senator Kelly Ayotte and former New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, among others – none are considered Trump loyalists.
This suggests the nomination process will involve a highly staged show by the nominee, promising to investigate thoroughly the Russia matter, and Trump surrogates widely trumpeting said nominee’s independence.
Assuming public satisfaction with the choice and successful Senate hearings, the Republicans will be able to move on, having effectively consumed the media bandwidth that would otherwise have been used to discuss a special investigation probe.
This is not good news for American democracy – but it does pose a chance for Republicans to stay afloat amid this unorthodox presidency.
Trump’s relationship with the rest of his party is quickly becoming like well-worn American folk lyrics: If you can’t be with the one you love, honey, love the one you’re with.