All Things Considered, It’s Better Not to Be under FBI Investigation

T he FBI search of Mar-a-Lago predictably boosted Donald Trump’s standing among Republicans.

A few weeks ago, Florida governor Ron DeSantis had pulled even with him in one poll in New Hampshire. In a recent survey of the state, Trump is trouncing him again with nearly a 2–1 lead.

Trump has benefited, as usual, from his being the center of attention, as well as from a defensive reflex among Republicans who may have misgivings to rally around him anyway, figuring that if he is so hated and abused by the other side they owe it to him — and themselves.

This may be an understandable sentiment, especially with memories still fresh of the abuses and hysteria that attended the Russia-gate probe. At the end of the day, though, that a potential presidential candidate was raided by the FBI is a terrible reason to support him.

We still need to learn more about the search. I’m taking a wait-and-see approach that may last until I get a top-secret clearance and can repair to a SCIF and review the relevant documents myself. That said, it’s become clear that Trump certainly could have been more cooperative and forthcoming in the negotiations with the National Archives, to keep the conflict from even getting to this point.

Indeed, the search is a reminder of the haze of controversy and drama that always surrounds Trump, and the sense of things being constantly out of control. This helped him in 2015–16 as he was a dominant media presence, but it undermined his presidency and, arguably, ultimately led to his defeat in 2020.

This characteristic of Trump should be considered an unavoidable downside, not a positive feature sending people scrambling to his banner.

Ron DeSantis hasn’t been raided by the FBI. Neither has Tom Cotton or Mike Pence or Ted Cruz. Does this speak poorly of them? Should they try harder?

Well, it might be said, if they become even more prominent and powerful, they, too, will be the subject of politically motivated investigations.

There’s much to that. Back in the day, George W. Bush, now widely praised as a responsible citizen of the GOP, was portrayed as a monster, and the Valerie Plame investigation was pursued against his advisers as a matter of blood sport.

The other side will manage to work up a good hatred of any other Republican president or presidential candidate — they always do. But they won’t be working off a yearslong running start the way they are with Donald Trump, who has stoked and welcomed the ire of his detractors since beginning his first campaign in 2015.

And who will be best suited to fight back against the other side, and not just issue thunderous denunciations of them but defeat them in detail in Congress and in the bureaucracy? The former president who notched some truly important and praiseworthy policy victories, but is shambolic and mercurial and will be operating in an environment of almost unprecedented political hostility, or a Republican who is more buttoned-up and organized?

One of Trump’s greatest talents is portraying himself as a victim, to his own political advantage.

In his telling, he was the victim of the Russian hoax (true), the victim of a stolen election (false), and the victim of the FBI search (exact circumstances and verdict yet to be determined). He may yet be the victim or purported victim of a January 6–related prosecution.

That’s a lot of victimhood, with more, no doubt, yet to come. Wouldn’t it be better to go with someone who isn’t so routinely victimized; indeed, someone who doesn’t adopt a framework of victimhood at all?

The answer would seem obvious, but not many Republicans feel that way, at least not right now, not when Trump has an FBI investigation working in his favor.