Jonah Goldberg: Senate GOP’s no-win scenario | TribLIVE.com
Featured Commentary

Jonah Goldberg: Senate GOP’s no-win scenario

Jonah Goldberg
1788709_web1_1785857-6e81f1fd148e48c1b3c368ef4854cd9d
AP
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham.

In response to news reports Oct. 6 that at least one additional administration whistleblower has come forward to say what he or she knows about President Trump’s Ukrainian schemes, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham tweeted, “I’ve seen this movie before — with Brett Kavanaugh. More and more doesn’t mean better or reliable.”

Graham’s raw political spinning has a fatal flaw.

Graham wants to tar the whistleblowers as part of a partisan campaign. But their motivation is largely irrelevant now because the bulk of the allegations have already been corroborated by the rough phone call transcript released by the White House and by the statements of the president and his aides. So while it’s still possible that the whistleblowers are part of some elaborate Democratic or “deep state” plot to take down the president, the plotters are using truthful information to do the deed. Graham surely knows this but is opting to pretend that there’s no plot there.

The most charitable view of Graham’s sycophancy is that the president has put him and GOP senators in general in a no-win predicament.

The political hell most Senate Republicans have found themselves in since 2016 can be described as the chasm between how Trump wants them to behave and how they believe they should govern. Virtually none of these senators can get re-elected without the third of Republicans who adore Trump, but the vulnerable ones need more than just the Trumpers to get across the finish line. This means they have to attract less single-minded voters who are often more Trump-skeptical — mostly suburban, college-educated Republicans and Republican-leaning independents. But because the president and his most ardent fans will not brook any criticism of the president, the senators have been left trying to thread a very narrow needle: Differentiate yourself from Donald Trump while not actually criticizing Donald Trump.

The impeachment drama is shrinking the needle’s eye even more, and from both sides.

On one side is the president. For instance, going by published reporting and my own conversations with senators and Senate staffers, as well as straightforward common sense (as opposed to the fantasy reasoning one finds in some corners of cable news and Twitter), I can tell you with a high degree of confidence that virtually no GOP senator agrees with the president that his July 25 phone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was, as Trump likes to say, “perfect.” Beyond that, opinions differ, but it’s a safe bet that most Senate Republicans think the conversation could have gone better and would dearly love for the president to say so.

Trump is determined to go another way and to punish those who disagree, as he has already tried to do with Utah Sen. Mitt Romney. That’s why Graham, Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio find it necessary to hide behind various parsing rationalizations. Rubio’s response to Trump’s calling on the Chinese to investigate Joe Biden is now the official safe harbor for Republicans: He didn’t really mean it, he’s just trolling the press. Ernst says, in effect, that criticizing the president won’t change his behavior, so why bother?

Meanwhile, the Democrats have bungled the impeachment issue. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, in particular, has never missed an opportunity to burn any credibility he might have as a sober and honest investigator. Democratic partisans may like his red-meat rhetoric, but they lose sight of the fact that trolling Trump just makes the president’s job easier. Schiff’s entirely fictional account of Trump’s conversation with the Ukrainian president, read into the congressional record, may have infuriated the president, but it also gave Trump a talking point and an excuse for Republicans to hide behind the unfairness of the process.

If impeachment is going to be anything other than a partisan protest immediately swatted down by the GOP-controlled Senate, Democrats need to carefully and methodically make their case through serious fact-finding — an investigation that not only persuades at least 20 Republican senators but also a sufficient number of the voters those senators need to stay in office.

Short of that, the safer path will be for Republicans to continue to pretend everything is “perfect.”

Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.