Every day since the election has presented at least one scenario that has baffled or horrified me at an unprecedented level. We have reached a point where indicating as much borders on lazy cliche, but it’s true.
On Wednesday, in fact, it happened twice.
In the morning, President-elect Donald Trump tweeted a jab at President Barack Obama in the form of a “Not!” switcheroo joke popular in ’90s: “Doing my best to disregard the many inflammatory President O statements and roadblocks. Thought it was going to be a smooth transition — NOT!”
Then, in the evening, former Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Michigan, suggested on CNN that, despite concern from the FBI and CIA and a bipartisan coalition of members of Congress over purported Russian interference into the election, the president-elect might be wise to seek intelligence from third-party agencies. He could look to intelligence provided by other countries instead, for example.
This was an actual suggestion that an actual former lawmaker, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, made on behalf of an actual president-elect.
To recap: The president-elect made a passive-aggressive point about the transition from the current administration by employing a joke expression that’s over 20 years stale. Whatever. If there are any bumps in this transition, it’s fair to assume they are taking place because the president-elect, without exaggeration, appears wholly disinterested in the business of governing.
Specifically, the current administration is sorting through how to respond to a purported security breach carried out by an occasionally aggressive, ideologically antagonistic state actor — a former KGB man. They are sorting through a response while the president-elect, a beneficiary of this purported intervention, presents himself as dangerously disinterested. So, yeah, I could see how maybe the transition is probably a little awkward.
The Republican Party, until very recently, presented itself as being so intensely concerned with national security that its members authorized the expenditure of millions and oversaw multiple investigations into the attacks on Benghazi over the course of dozens of hearings. But, underscoring nearly all criticism that their concern was actually about turning an actual tragedy into political theater, the majority of Republicans — with notable exceptions in Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham — aren’t making much of a stink about Russian involvement in a U.S. election.
These are the same Republicans who, until very recently, apparently, fetishized the image of Ronald Reagan, a leader whose legacy is intertwined with his stand against Russia’s totalitarian communist predecessor. But they appear only mildly annoyed that — again — Russia, according to our intelligence agencies, interfered in the election as a means of tipping it in Trump’s favor.
Interestingly, before this love affair even began, Republicans and Putin shared a mutual disdain for Hillary Clinton. Where the GOP politicized a tragic situation as a thinly veiled effort to undo Clinton, Putin’s interest in throwing the election in Trump’s favor is supposedly rooted in disdain for Clinton’s strength. Ironically, Putin didn’t much like that Clinton challenged the fairness of Russian elections. Go figure.
In fact, Putin — a leader who is opposed to the Syrian resistance lest it give any democracy-hungry Russians dangerous ideas about what is possible when people organize against an autocratic regime — has surged in favorability among Republicans in a few short weeks. Yes, the same Putin whose political enemies routinely turn up dead. And, yes, the same Putin who — and this may sound familiar — favors the spread of fake news stories because a citizenry unconcerned with facts is the least threatening to autocratic governance. Russia ranks 180 out of 199 countries in the way of press freedom.
All the while, our president-elect has been himself quoting fake news makers, such as deniers of the Sandy Hook massacre, and threatening journalists. He is maintaining a private security force and, presented with evidence that foreign state actors intervened in our election, is shrugging it off, suggesting the intelligence agencies are biased against him. Supporters and surrogates are going so far as to suggest he seek a second opinion by way of other intelligence agencies.
As I understand it, North Korean intelligence agencies are incredibly thorough.
Alex Steed has written about and engaged in politics since he was a teenager. He’s an owner-partner of a Portland-based content production company and lives with his family, dogs and garden in Cornish.
