President Donald Trump (AP)

Democrats tend not to question why Republicans in Congress stick with President Donald Trump despite his various ongoing scandals -- including new reporting that the FBI investigated the possibility that the president is an actual Russian agent.

We live in a hyper-partisan age. And so congressional Republicans continue to back Trump, goes the thinking, simply because he's a fellow Republican. (After all, congressional Democrats remained loyal to President Bill Clinton during the 1998-99 Monica Lewinsky scandal even after they knew he had lied to them and the country.)

But some anti-Trump Republicans increasingly believe there's more to it than extreme party loyalty -- and they're increasingly being vocal about it. They worry that some GOP congressional members defend Trump while also believing he's a danger to both U.S. economic interests and national security.

These Trump critics believe, in short, that at least a handful of prominent congressional Republicans are compromised by Russia, just like Trump.

Don't Edit

Intel. 101:

Whose job is it to detect and to remove a Russian mole?

The F.B.I.

Who is paranoid about the F.B.I.?

A Russian mole. — Richard W. Painter (@RWPUSA) January 14, 2019

Is this a nutty anti-Trump conspiracy theory on par with nutty far-right conspiracy theories about 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton (see: Pizzagate)?

Richard Painter, University of Minnesota law professor and former chief ethics counsel for President George W. Bush's White House, and psychologist Leanne Watt argue that it's not a conspiracy theory at all.

In an opinion essay penned as voters went to the polls last November, they say they applied "political and psychological insights, as well as Occam's razor -- the reasoning principle used by scientists and academics that states that the most obvious explanation is usually the correct one -- [to make] an evidence-based case" against some of the foremost Republican members of Congress.

Don't Edit

Donald Trump and Mike Pence on the campaign trail in 2016 (AP)

Below are the U.S. representatives and senators who Painter and Watt fear are compromised:

Don't Edit

The Associated Press

Lindsey Graham

The South Carolina senator, Painter and Watt point out, had a long public track record as a principled, independent conservative. He also had a long public track record as a Trump critic, including calling him a "kook," "crazy" and a "race-baiting xenophobic bigot." Graham vigorously supported former FBI Director Robert Mueller's appointment to lead a special-counsel investigation into alleged "collusion" between Russia and members of Team Trump.

Then, quite suddenly in 2017, Graham's attitude and statements about Trump flipped. Painter and Watt write that "Graham began to contradict himself in a way that was totally out of character for him." Indeed, he became arguably Trump's biggest supporter and defender, pushing back hard against Mueller's investigation. Long an institutionalist, Graham began to mimic Trump's criticism of a "Deep State" and a corrupt FBI out to get the president.

Don't Edit

The Associated Press

Why the dramatic change of heart?

"We know that Senator Graham's emails were stolen by the Russians, based upon his own admission in a December of 2016 interview," Painter and Watt write. "Most of Graham's hacked emails have not been released, so it is reasonable to consider the possibility that many of his emails are still in play."

The authors argue there's evidence that 10 years' worth of emails involving the Republican National Committee were hacked by Russian operatives.

Don't Edit

Don't Edit

The Associated Press

Mitch McConnell

The Senate majority leader long has been known as a conservative pragmatist, and so Painter and Watt find his behavior toward Trump and the Mueller investigation to be both puzzling and alarming. Since 2016, the authors allege, McConnell "has exhibited a host of disturbing behaviors in relationship to Trump and Russia that are at odds with reasonable conduct."

They point out that in the fall of 2016 McConnell refused to go along with President Barack Obama's request for a bipartisan leadership announcement that warned, based on the intelligence community's assessment, of Russian attempts to interfere with the election. They also worry about why he has refused to bring forward proposed bipartisan legislation that would protect the Mueller investigation.

"Does McConnell doubt the [Mueller] investigation and intelligence community's findings?" Painter and Watt write. "Does he not care about protecting the United States from potential enemy attacks if the attacks help the Republicans? Or is he resistant to the special counsel for his own private reasons?

They add that between 2015 and 2017, McConnell's Super-PAC received $3.5 million from "a Russian-American oligarch with close ties to [Russian President Vladimir] Putin."

Don't Edit

The Associated Press

Devin Nunes

Two years ago, Nunes was a little-known rural California congressman. Then, as chairman of the House intelligence committee, he began to block the House's investigation into the alleged Trump-Russia conspiracy and muddy the evidence that already had been put forward. This included an impromptu 2017 White House visit -- undertaken without the knowledge of his fellow intelligence committee members -- to inform Trump that the president had been "caught up in surveillance by U.S. intelligence agencies."

Nunes was forced to recuse himself from the House investigation, but, with the tacit approval of GOP House leaders, he allegedly did so in name only. He continued to undercut the investigation, and Democrats on the committee have called the final report a sham.

Write Painter and Watt: "There is no logical reason for Nunes to go so far in trying to obstruct the Russian investigation unless he has something personal at stake."

This week, The Daily Beast reported that the Special Counsel's Office is "scrutinizing a meeting involving former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, one-time National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, and dozens of foreign officials." The meeting took place at Washington, D.C.'s Trump International Hotel two days before Trump's inauguration as president. A year ago Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI and is cooperating with the special counsel.

Don't Edit

Paul Ryan (AP)

Kevin McCarthy, Paul Ryan and Steve Scalise

During the early days of the 2016 presidential primaries, Ryan, then the House speaker and the party's de facto leader, regularly showed discomfort with Trump. Even after the reality-TV star and real-estate developer had sewn up the nomination, Ryan insisted he was "not there yet" when asked whether he endorsed Trump for president.

Ryan's unhappiness with Trump soon fell away. He continued to support him during the fall campaign despite the various scandals and controversies that swirled around the Trump campaign. This, Painter and Watt write, suggests Ryan found himself caught up in Russian financial and propaganda support for the Republican Party.

They point out that a month before the 2016 Republican convention, McCarthy, then the House majority leader, said in a private meeting of GOP House leaders, "There's two people I think Putin pays: [then-Calif. Rep. Dana] Rohrabacher and Trump." Raucous laughter followed, but Ryan cut it off. "This is an off-the-record [meeting]," he said, adding: "No leaks!" He continued: "This is how we know we're a real family here." (The meeting was secretly recorded, and the recording was later leaked.)

Don't Edit

Kevin McCarthy (AP)

Over the next two years Ryan occasionally expressed dismay when Trump made particularly outlandish comments on Twitter but, like his House colleagues McCarthy and Scalise, he consistently supported the president. (Ryan, once considered the future of the Republican Party, surprised even many insiders early in 2018 when he announced he would not seek reelection.)

Ryan, McCarthy and Scalise continued to back Nunes as House intelligence committee chairman despite Nunes' questionable actions. They also sidestepped legislative efforts to shore up election security for the 2018 midterms and protect the Mueller investigation.

Plus, write Painter and Watt, "Ryan was instrumental in stalling and weakening the Russia sanctions bill ... doing a solid for Putin, rather than doling out the appropriate consequences and protecting the United States' interests against an enemy combatant."

Don't Edit

Vice President Mike Pence (AP)

All of this is opinion, however "evidence-based" it might be. Painter and Watt acknowledge the country is going to have to wait for the special counsel's report to know the actual, nailed-down facts -- and that even then, the role of congressional Republicans might not be addressed.

Still, they point out that these prominent Republicans' continued support for Trump simply makes no sense, considering the damage he is doing to the "GOP brand" and that "Vice President [Mike] Pence would be Trump's inevitable successor" if Congress removed Trump via impeachment and Senate conviction.

"On the surface," they write, "ushering in a President Pence would appear to be both a brilliant and logical move for the Republicans. ... [Congressional Republicans'] failure to create this change suggests that something outside the realm of normal politics cements Republican leaders to Donald Trump."

Read the essay by Painter and Watt.

Don't Edit

Don't Edit

-- Douglas Perry

@douglasmperry

Visit

to get Oregonian/OregonLive journalism delivered to your email inbox.