Mediaboss Marketing

Evan Vucci/AP

Following the explosive report that President Donald Trump leaned on then-FBI director James Comey to go easy on former national security adviser Michael Flynnand the explosive report that Trump's transition team knew Flynn was under FBI investigation when Trump tapped him to be his top national security aidean increasing number of congressional Republicans have begun to accept the need for full-scale investigations along with the appointment of Robert Mueller as the new special counsel to examine the Trump-Russia affair. But party leaders have not reached the point where they are willing to truly confront the scandal-plagued president. The GOP establishment can't and won't thoroughly challenge Trump over the assorted controversies brewing within his chaotic administration. To do so would risk a nuclear civil war that could blow their party to smithereens.

Ever since Trump moved into the White House, liberals (and others) have plaintively asked, why aren't Republicans fiercely investigating Trump and his crew and seeking to hold them accountable for various instances of improbity? There's been plenty to choose from: the Trump-Russia scandal, the smorgasbord of financial conflicts of interests involving Trump and his family members in and out of government, other possible ethics violations (including nepotistic hiring), the ever-widening Michael Flynn affair, and so on. In the wake of Trump's firing of Comey, the guy in charge of a FBI investigation that could land on Trump's doorstep, and the subsequent report (denied by the White House) that Trump pressured Comey on Flynn, some GOPers on Capitol Hill have gently called for probes into these matters. But by and large, Republican leaders have not dared to take on Trump vigorously. "The last thing I'm going to do is pre-judge anything," House Speaker Paul Ryan said Wednesday.

One reason Republicans have been reticent to criticize Trump is obvious: they care more about working withthat is, usingTrump to attain their most beloved policy desires: generous tax breaks for the wealthy, draconian budget cuts for government programs (including those that assist low- and middle-income Americans), and the repeal-and-replace-or-whatever of Obamacare. But there's a related reason: if congressional Republicans were to challenge Trump in forceful fashion, it could destroy the GOP.

Pop quiz: who's the most vengeful politician on the scene today? Yes, it's Trump. As I reported before Election Day, Trump is completely obsessed with revenge. For years, Trump often said in paid speeches that a key to success is that you have to be a merciless SOB when dealing with foes. Here's how he spelled it out: "Get even with people. If they screw you, screw them back 10 times as hard. I really believe it." Another time, he elaborated:

One of the things you should do in terms of success: If somebody hits you, you've got to hit 'em back five times harder than they ever thought possible. You've got to get even. Get even. And the reason, the reason you do, is so importantThe reason you do, you have to do it, because if they do that to you, you have to leave a telltale sign that they just can't take advantage of you. It's not so much for the person, which does make you feel good, to be honest with you, I've done it many times. But other people watch and you know they say, "Well, let's leave Trump alone," or "Let's leave this one," or "Doris, let's leave her alone. They fight too hard." I say it, and it's so important. You have to, you have to hit back. You have to hit back.

With the president showing signs of narcissism and paranoiaon Tuesday, he declared, "No politician in history...has been treated worse or more unfairly" than he has beenRepublican politicians who dare to confront Trump can expect to be targeted and mowed down by Trump.

Prior to the recent Comey and Flynn controversies, many GOPers were scared of Trump. A House Democrat a few weeks ago told me of a conversation he had with a Republican colleague whom he was close to persuading to sponsor a piece of legislation that would likely be popular in the GOPer's district but not fancied by the Trump White House. "I just can't do it," the Republican finally admitted to the Democrat. "He'll come after me on Twitter." The wrath of Trump was something this Republican feared deeplyjust over a policy disagreement.

Imagine if Republicans squared off against Trump regarding a matter involving his integrityor one that could pose an existential threat to his presidency. (Examining the Comey issues as possible acts of obstruction of justice could well lead to the question of impeachment.) Trump certainly would not consider such action kindly. And if he were going to screw them back 10 times as hard, what would that mean for congressional Republicans?

It would be quite improbable that a raging and revenge-seeking Trump would be able to collaborate with Republicans on legislative priorities. What would be more important for Trump: working with Republicans to achieve tax reform or extracting payback?

If the going gets tougher, Trump will insist on fealty from his fellow Republicans. Yet if some opt to join the forces of investigation, a dividing line would be created within the party: you're with Trump, or you're not. Of course, Trump and his minions would be keeping score. During the the first and chaotic effort of House Republicans to gut Obamacare, the Trump White House considered compiling an enemies list of those GOPers who opposed the Trump-backed bill. Republicans who threatened his presidency could expect much worse than being placed on a roster of unfriendlies.

This is far more than an inside-Washington affair. Trump's base is the party's base. Despite all the screw-ups, false assertions, broken promises, and flip-flops of Trump's still young (but exhausting) presidency, he remains hugely popular among Republicans84 percent of Republicans still approve of Trump in the latest Gallup pollwho presumably buy his "fake news" attacks on media reports that cast him as an autocratic, truth-challenged, and bumbling president. If Republicans on Capitol Hill turn against Trump they could well encounter the fury of their most dependable voters. In the fight for the soul of the party, could GOP leaders (Washington insiders!) best the demagogic Trump? Sen. Mitch McConnell or Rep. Paul Ryan would be no match for him. The idea of a President Pence would likely be little consolation for the base during a clash between Republicans and Trump.

The Republican establishment has already demonstrated that political calculations, not principles, are its driving force. And one calculation is easy to process: if the GOP breaks rank with Trump on any of these scandals, there will be no turning back. An irate (and irrational?) Trump would demand retribution. A base already suspicious of GOP insiders could become furious. Tax cuts and the like would be at risk. The party itself would be endangered. Of course, as is so often noted, if the Republicans start to feel Trump-related electoral painsay, they lose one of the upcoming special House elections in GOP-leaning districtsthey might reevaluate their situational loyalty to Trump. But the smart ones know the costs of such a courseeven if necessary for survivalcould be exceedingly high.

There is no good answer for congressional Republicans facing the dilemma of what to do about Trump. They long ago decided to lash themselves to a man with a decades-long record of dishonesty, arrogance, bullying, sleazy deal-making, and score-settling. There are no easy escape routes. No convenient off-ramps. No lifeboats on this ship. He made the bed, and they leaped into it. (Oh, Donald!) Now they're screwed. The old clich is that you don't go after the king unless you can kill the king. But for Republicans, the situation is worse that that: it may not be possible for them to battle their king without razing their kingdom.

See more here:
There's No Way Republicans Will Truly Confront Trump on His Scandals. It Would Destroy Their Party. - Mother Jones

One of the more regular lines that Latino Republicans peddle to their audience is that they or their families came from countries with despotic rulers and so cherish their new home in the United States because we live by the rule of law. But these Latinos have been largely silent while President Donald Trump has trampled on the norms of democracy that have been established for centuries in this country.

Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, for instance, weaves heroic stories of Cubans living under Fidel Castro who come here seeking refuge and then built a better life under the institutions of a benevolent United States.

Rubio is particularly talented in this storytelling, and, in turn, has been rewarded with a position at the highest levels of representative government. If you have not seen his speech at the Reagan library, you should. It's a fantastic speech, but it is also an indulging fantasy that feeds the narrative to his audience that the United States is unique, a "city on a hill", from which all other countries should see as a model of good governance.

Coming from a Cuban-American family, Rubio validates the stereotypes his audience has of Latinos and feeds the notion that Latin countries are despotic regimes largely because they are incapable of self-governance. What Rubio, and other Latino Republicans leave out, is the role that the United States has played in these countries that have driven them to despots.

One of the more approachable overviews of the U.S. role in this is by Juan Gonzalez's book, Harvest of Empire, where he lays out American support for strongmen in pursuit of corporate interests. From the rich sugar crops of Puerto Rico, to bananas in Central America, the United States has turned many of these countries upside down.

RELATED: Trump Establishes Voter Fraud Commission

But these warriors for freedom, such as Rubio and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, have stood largely silent when Trump has flaunted the norms of democracy. Only now that former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been appointed as a special counsel in the Russian investigation does Rubio acquiesce with the inevitable, saying "special counsel will lead us to the truth."

But from Trump's refusal to release his tax returns, to suggesting that journalists be put in jail, Cruz and Rubio have stood idly by. Trump has appointed Kris Kobach to a commission on "voting integrity" that by all accounts is a turkey hunt meant to justify further barriers to participation for minorities. Kobach has been behind the anti-immigrant legislation, SB 1070, in Arizona, and he has also been the tip of the spear poking the administration to get it to create a registry of Muslims in the U.S. But those so endeared to democratic principles have a way of not showing it.

RELATED: Trump Immigration Adviser Kris Kobach Wrote the Book on Muslim Registry

The president of Turkey, Tayyip Erdoan, himself an authoritarian consolidating power in his own country, recently drove through our nation's capital and his bodyguards assaulted American citizens protesting him. There was no action taken by Latino Republicans in defense of American citizens. Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, was under investigation for being on the payroll of a foreign country while performing his duties to his country, and yet Cruz and Rubio do nothing.

One is often asked what they would do in the face of authoritarianism, and we all fashion scenarios in which we would valiantly resist. Indeed, Cruz and Rubio, have largely painted this picture of themselves while stroking their audiences' fantasies of Hillary Clinton's authoritarian tendencies.

But it is not often that we get to actually see how we would react should we be faced with an actual threat to our democratic institutions. But now, we may know.

If Rubio and Cruz were party members of the Cuban regime while Castro rose to power, would they have drawn the line or would they, out of self-interest and fear of losing their comfortable positions within government, play the fool?

Follow NBC News Latino on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

Go here to read the rest:
Opinion: Latino Republicans are Silent in the Face of Authoritarianism - NBCNews.com

The past few months of special elections have been endlessly nerve-wracking for theGOP.

In April, Republicans nearly lost a congressional race in Kansass 4th District, one of the most conservative seats in the country. Meanwhile, they are still struggling in Georgias 6th District, where Democrat Jon Ossoff is neck and neck with pro-Trump career politician Karen Handel.

Now, Republicans face similar woes in Montana, wherevoters head to polls next week to fill the at-large congressional district vacated by Trumps Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke.

The Democratic candidate is Rob Quist, a locally renownedpolitical folk singer-songwriter best known in Montana as the former guitarist and banjo player in the Mission Mountain Wood Band. He has also served on the Montana Arts Council, where he enacted an anti-bullying initiative and protected arts funding for Montana schools.

Quisthas campaigned on his political independence, at one point responding to accusations he would strip people of gun rights by shooting a TV. He is a staunch supporter of overturning Citizens United, and hasrun on protecting public lands, education funding, and reproductive rights.

His Republicanopponent, Greg Gianforte, is a techmillionaire and a transplant fromNew Jersey, who ran afailed campaign for governor in 2016against incumbent Steve Bullock.

Gianforte has drawn fire for his donations to anti-LGBT hate groups, and fordiscriminating againstdisabled employeesat his business. He was caught on tape praising the disastrous GOPhealth care repeal billin a phone call with corporate lobbyists, something he is trying to back away from.

He alsoowns shares in state-run Russian oil companies under U.S. sanctions, and in a European cement company accused of paying off ISIS.

Republican interest groups like the Chamber of Commerce are desperately flooding this election with last-minute ad buys, scared they may lose this seat. Meanwhile,the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee just injected $400,000 into the race, independent Vermont Sen.Bernie Sanders is campaigning for Quist, and he is being boosted by a joint campaign of progressive organizations, including SwingLeft, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, MoveOn.org, and Democracy for America.

Quite aside from Gianfortes personal scandals, partof the problem for Republicans is that, while Montana is solidly red in presidential racesand this Houseseat has been held by the partyfor 20 years, conventional right-wing messaging does not sit well with Montana voters.

As BuzzFeeds Anne Helen Peterson writes in her fascinating synopsis of the race, a large number of Montana voters deliberately split their ticket because they view divided party control as a natural check on government power:

Heres what you need to understand about Montana before all else: Its a state where 56% of voters backed Trump but that same election, 50.2% also voted for their Democratic governor, Steve Bullock. In 2012, 48.6% voted for Senator Jon Tester, also a Democrat. Traveling over a thousand miles in the state, I talked to many Montanans whod voted this way and were incredibly proud of it. In Montana, the independent voter isnt a mythical unicorn. Its a way of life.

Republicans do not seem to understand this, and have tried torun a conventional partisan red contest, attacking Quist as a hippie and Nancy Pelosi in a cowboy hat. By contrast, Quist has spurned discussion of parties and focused solely on issues.

Montana is yet another reminder of how Republicans are on the defensive now that they are a unified governing party. Voters around the country are starting to see the GOP only cares about power, and candidates like Quist who are out to truly represent the people are finding fertile ground. Whatever happens next week in Montana, this should scare Republicans.

More:
The special election in Montana is terrifying Republicans - Shareblue Media

New York Times

Republican Hopes for Rewriting Tax Code in 2017 Are Fading New York Times WASHINGTON Only two months ago, Republicans in Congress and President Trump's top economic advisers were confidently predicting that a sweeping rewrite of the tax code would be in hand by summer's end. But with the White House consumed with ... Republicans worry Trump scandals may doom legislative agendaReuters Republicans fear Trump turmoil will derail agendaFinancial Times all 65 news articles »

Read more from the original source:
Republican Hopes for Rewriting Tax Code in 2017 Are Fading - New York Times

Senate Republicans argue House and Senate intelligence committees' investigations are continuing to proceed with bipartisan support, and that that they should be the primary vehicles for the investigation.

"I don't think we're there yet," Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake said of a special prosecutor.

A special prosecutor would be appointed in place of the current FBI investigation into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, while an independent commission would replace the congressional investigations into the matter.

Sen. Richard Shelby, an Alabama Republican, said the Senate should give the intelligence committee time to complete its investigation before considering additional steps.

"A special prosecutor generally is far-ranging and never stops," Shelby said. "It goes everywhere and generally there's not much discipline to them."

Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was the first Republican senator on Wednesday to suggest a special prosecutor was needed to investigate the Russia allegations.

"It's imperative that we Congress, the FBI, the administration work to restore the public's trust," she said in a statement. "In order to gain the credibility, it may be that we need to look to an independent commission or special prosecutor."

"It is time we look at the idea of an independent commission or special prosecutor," the Illinois Republican told CNN's Alisyn Camerota on "New Day.

And Rep. Mike Simpson, an Idaho Republican, also endorsed an independent commission for the Russia investigation, though he made the distinction that he did not support appointing a special prosecutor. He argued that the congressional investigations would be tainted by partisanship.

"Nobody's going to believe them," Simpson told reporters. "That's unfortunately just the way it is because it got so partisan."

Rep. Walter Jones, a North Carolina Republican, has also signed on to Democrat efforts to create an independent commission.

Several committees in Congress were quickly moving to address the Comey memo story Wednesday. The Senate intelligence committee invited Comey to testify and sought his memos, while the Senate judiciary committee requested the FBI memos as well as any possible tapes from the White House in response to Trump's tweet last week suggesting he had taped conversations with Comey.

And House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Jason Chaffetz announced he was inviting Comey to testify before his committee next Wednesday, though the committee has yet to make contact with the former FBI director.

House Democrats also sought to ramp up pressure on Republicans by pushing for a discharge petition to force a vote on creating an independent commission.

Republicans on the intelligence panels defended their ability to carry out their investigations.

Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, a Senate intelligence committee member, said on CNN's "New Day" she did not support a special prosecutor for the investigation.

"I am confident that we will do a good job," Collins said. "I do think it would help if we brought in an experienced former prosecutor or an experienced investigator, and I have made that recommendation to both the chairman and the vice chairman."

Other Republicans are also sticking by the intelligence committees, saying they weren't confident that an independent commission or special prosecutor was a better option.

Sen. John McCain has long called for a select committee to investigate Russia, but the Arizona Republican does not back a special prosecutor.

"The problem with a special prosecutor is we've had mixed results in the past," McCain said.

Sen. Pat Toomey, a Pennsylvania Republican, pointed to bipartisan agreement thus far in the Senate intelligence investigation, although the House's probe has run into partisan problems.

"I still have a lot of confidence in the Senate intelligence committee," Toomey said. "There's bipartisan leadership that have both very publicly committed to getting this job done."

CNN's Ted Barrett contributed to this report.

Read the original:
Republican voices grow for independent Russia probe - CNN