The Editorial Board

USA TODAY

During the Senate Watergate Committee investigation in 1973, one of the toughest inquisitors into Nixon administration wrongdoing was Republican Sen. Howard Baker, the committee’s vice chairman. “What did the president know, and when did he know it?” Baker famously asked. It’s almost inconceivable that the senator from Tennessee would have dropped everything to tip off the White House about some new piece of evidence.

Then there’s Devin Nunes, R-Calif., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, which is investigating what could be the biggest political scandal since Watergate: Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election and whether Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with, or was somehow compromised by, the Russians.

Nunes is no Howard Baker. Instead of dogged fact-finder, Nunes seems to see himself more as a surrogate for the Trump White House. He has been enlisted by the White House to rebut news reports, and he has appeared more focused on leaks than on getting to the bottom of Russia’s meddling.

The latest evidence of this approach came Wednesday, after Nunes learned that communications involving members of Trump’s transition team, and possibly Trump himself, had been picked up incidentally during U.S. surveillance of foreigners.

Did Nunes immediately brief the top Democrat on the panel, his fellow Californian Adam Schiff? No. Instead, he rushed over to the White House and told Trump, who promptly said he felt “somewhat” vindicated about his widely refuted tweetstorm of March 4 accusing President Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower before the election.

We’re running a full, fair inquiry: Opposing view

Whether Nunes was trying to carry water for the White House, or he simply failed to understand the responsibilities of a committee investigation, doesn’t really matter.

What’s crucial is that Congress provide an honest, credible examination into the Russian connection. Nunes’ bad instincts undermine public confidence that his panel can conduct such an inquiry.

There are better alternatives to having the House and Senate intelligence committees run the investigation.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has recommended the creation of a Watergate-style select committee, a panel of highly respected members of Congress from both chambers.

Alternatively, Congress could delegate investigative authority, with subpoena power, to a special bipartisan commission staffed by leading public figures and policy experts, similar to the one that investigated the 9/11 attacks.

Any evidence of criminal conduct uncovered by the investigation into the Russian connection, as well as the ongoing FBI inquiry confirmed Monday by Director James Comey, would be turned over to a special counsel appointed by a top-ranking career official at the Justice Department.

Congress must show it’s capable of following this path of suspicion, whether it leads nowhere or to the Oval Office. That requires putting the inquiry in the hands of people with reputations for integrity and independence, not administration apologists.

USA TODAY's editorial opinions are decided by its Editorial Board, separate from the news staff. Most editorials are coupled with an opposing view — a unique USA TODAY feature.

To read more editorials, go to the Opinion front page or sign up for the daily Opinion email newsletter. To respond to this editorial, submit a comment to letters@usatoday.com.