This week, news broke that Sen. Chuck Grassley Charles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleyCollins says she will vote 'no' on Supreme Court nominee before election The Hill's Morning Report - Sponsored by Facebook - Trump, GOP allies prepare for SCOTUS nomination this week Gardner signals support for taking up Supreme Court nominee this year MORE (R-Iowa) intends to move legislation protecting Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III through the Senate Judiciary Committee, hopefully paving the way for a floor vote in Congress’ upper chamber and in the House. While many people seem to be surprised by the move, they should not be. And Republicans, including President Trump Donald John TrumpOmar fires back at Trump over rally remarks: 'This is my country' Pelosi: Trump hurrying to fill SCOTUS seat so he can repeal ObamaCare Trump mocks Biden appearance, mask use ahead of first debate MORE himself — should be thanking Grassley for moving on the issue.

ADVERTISEMENT

While it remains unlikely that Trump would in fact fire Mueller — to do so would demonstrate tremendous weakness, when the president’s popularity with his base has always been a result of his image as a Hulk-level tough guy, an impression Trump carefully and rightfully cherishes and guards — Grassley is right to move this legislation forward. There are several major reasons why this is so.

First, it draws a line under the media’s ability to depict Trump as a rash, Richard Nixon redux just waiting for Saturday night to roll around so he can undertake his own massacre. Despite the obvious uptick in his anger level this week, Trump is still unlikely to actually pull the trigger on nixing Mueller (or Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Rod RosensteinDOJ kept investigators from completing probe of Trump ties to Russia: report Five takeaways from final Senate Intel Russia report FBI officials hid copies of Russia probe documents fearing Trump interference: book MORE) — but by getting this legislation through Committee, and ideally getting it passed into law, Grassley and Congress can relieve the American public from the constant high-drama, Defcon-1 breaking news alerts from cable news and major mainstream media about a supposedly-imminent firing.

Grassley: "It would be suicide" for Trump to fire Mueller https://t.co/eod5hZal6s pic.twitter.com/55ExrkFxls — The Hill (@thehill) April 10, 2018

That may sound insignificant, but for a lot of Americans who are tired of every day being treated like 9/11 when they’re just trying to get the news at the end of a long, hard day at work, it matters greatly.

And, should Trump actually be at risk of firing Mueller or Rosenstein in a moment of extreme weakness, the legislation Grassley intends to move through committee would serve to save Trump from himself — and from a lot of Democrats, who would love nothing more than for him to give Mueller his marching orders, giving them an extra boost heading into November’s midterm elections. If Trump looks weak, which a firing would guarantee, Democrats benefit. If Trump doesn’t even have the option of doing something to so significantly aid the opposition party, so much the better for him and Republicans.

Republicans who support Trump should — and indeed many do — back Grassley and others giving this legislation a pathway forward, because it actually enables a lot of the bad press surrounding Trump to disappear, and eliminates a bunch of doubts about whether he’ll finish out his first term and be well-positioned to run for re-election. These things are significant for the GOP, politically, even if they may strike some as counterintuitive. Objectively, there’s no reason to think as of now that Trump would not finish out his first term or run for re-election. Yet, every day, constant speculation around the topic ensues.

McConnell refuses to allow vote on bill to protect Mueller https://t.co/qAmtFmkUkK pic.twitter.com/VQ86uYfpeH — The Hill (@thehill) April 10, 2018

Counterintuitively, in protecting the Mueller probe, Grassley might just be ensuring more negative scrutiny for Democrats and some of the biggest names in Clintonworld — as well as the D.C. establishment more broadly. Think about it: The biggest victims of the Mueller investigation so far have been very well-entrenched, D.C. lobbyists — the dictionary definition of the “Swamp” that President Trump and other Republicans so routinely rail against. Who was one of the biggest names to be brought before the Mueller probe, in fact perhaps the biggest name? None other than Tony Podesta, the brother of Bill Clinton William (Bill) Jefferson ClintonChelsea Clinton: Trump isn't building public confidence in a vaccine Hillary Clinton launching podcast this month GOP brushes back charges of hypocrisy in Supreme Court fight MORE’s former chief of staff and Hillary Clinton Hillary Diane Rodham ClintonButtigieg stands in as Pence for Harris's debate practice Senate GOP sees early Supreme Court vote as political booster shot Poll: 51 percent of voters want to abolish the electoral college MORE’s former campaign chairman.

Anyone who thinks Podesta will be the last big name Democrat Mueller considers isn’t paying attention to the way Russia and Russia-allied players have tried to influence both parties via cold, hard cash over years now.

Finally, Grassley is also doing the right thing here by being a good committee chairman and giving consideration to legislation that has the support of a majority of his members. That’s basic governance 101, and at a time when so many Americans across the political spectrum lack even a shred of confidence in government, it’s nice to see someone in Washington, D.C., doing their job.

When Sen. Mitch McConnell Addison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellPelosi: Trump hurrying to fill SCOTUS seat so he can repeal ObamaCare Senate GOP aims to confirm Trump court pick by Oct. 29: report Trump argues full Supreme Court needed to settle potential election disputes MORE (R-Ky.) said he did not see a “clear indication yet” that Grassley’s bill was necessary, he was ultimately half right: It’s unlikely that Trump would fire Mueller, so strictly speaking, the legislation Grassley intends his committee to weigh is not “needed.” But it is still highly desirable, for all of these reasons. The committee and the broader Senate should pass it, as should the House.