It really made no sense last month when our own Sen. Bob Corker gushed over the senseless babble that Donald Trump passed off as his so-called foreign policy.
We could have understood Corker’s admiration if he were just another congressman and GOP stooge. But he’s not. He’s the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman. He’s smart. He’s experienced. He’s a rising political star.
FILE – In this July 10, 2015 file photo, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump smiles as he leaves after speaking at a news conference about immigration, in Beverly Hills, Calif. California Democrats hope to cash in at the polls against Republican members of Congress considered vulnerable to Latino sentiment against Trump. Statements involving immigration and Mexico by the presumptive GOP presidential nominee raised hopes Tuesday, June 7, 2016, for Democrats in some districts with large Latino populations. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, File) And – oh, yeah – he is being mentioned on the short list of Trump’s possible running mates. He’s our hometown guy, and he’s ambitious. Incidentally, there’s nothing wrong with ambition – as long as it’s open-eyed ambition.
But then Donald Trump the reality TV star kept talking, instead of listening, and putting his foot in his mouth. Perhaps Corker, like other GOP leaders, kept hoping for the best and tried to ignore what has been happening right before his eyes.
On Sunday, Corker – looking like a deer in the glare of headlights – appeared for 11 agonizing minutes on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.”
The first question was direct: Trump says it isn’t racist to question whether a judge can be fair if he is Mexican. Do you agree?
Corker was equally direct: “Look, I don’t condone the comments. And we can go on to another topic. He has a tremendous opportunity to disrupt the direction that Washington is moving to, and I think he will.”
Second question: Hillary Clinton uses this as a illustration why Trump is temperamentally unfit to be commander and chief. Why do you think he’ll make a good one?
Corker filibustered on how Clinton, in his view, was a deficient secretary of state.
Stephanopoulos pressed: “What’s the affirmative case for Donald Trump?”
Corker responded: “It’s at his fingertips now. He’s talking to the right people. It’s my hope that he’s going to transition. It’s my sense that he will take advantage of that. I hope that he will.”
Stephanopoulos: “He says he’s not going to change.”
Corker blinked. “Well, I think he’s going to have to change. I’m not talking about him necessarily changing his views, but I think that he’s moving into a different phase. He’s talking to the right people.” The senator launched back to his practiced filibuster of Clinton trashing.
But the questioner deftly steered the talk back to Trump and his foreign relations: “Let’s talk about his ideas. You are the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and you’ve said his call for a temporary ban on Muslims is not a serious proposal. The former head of the CIA said this morning that it is a recruiting tool for ISIS. If Trump as president moved to impose that ban, would you support it or try to stop it?”
“No, I would not support it,” Corker answered, adding that he understands Trump has ” stepped away” from those statements.
He hasn’t. What’s more, Trump continues to say he’ll build a wall on the Mexican border and make Mexico pay for it. Corker acknowledges that we obviously need to have a good relationship with Mexico and Canada. It’s one of the things that makes our country such a stable environment – “having two friends on the border,” as Corker termed it.
But the senator threw up his hands when asked if it’s realistic to expect Mexico to pay for such a wall.
“Well, again, I, I, I, I don’t want to get into a debate about the nuances of that. It’s a statement that he has made. I thought this interview was going to be about the foreign policy area. I think he has a tremendous opportunity – .”
The news host rightly countered: “This is foreign policy.”
Corker put up his own wall. How the Wall of Mexico is paid for “is something Congress will debate,” he said.
(Haven’t we seen this movie already?)
The talk drifted to trade, and still Corker was clearly uncomfortable defending Trump. Corker is a strong supporter of trade deals. Trump opposes them and even wants 45 percent tariffs on China. The news hosts asked Corker: “You’d have to vote on that in the Senate. Is that something you could support?
Corker didn’t answer, but instead offered platitudes about the importance of trade. Finally, in exasperation, Stephanopoulos queried: “So which specific ideas of Donald Trump on foreign policy are you enthusiastic about, are you ready to fight for?”
Blink, blink, blink. That’s when Corker reached for his dream – one tightly bound to his hero, Tennessee’s Howard Baker.
“Here’s what I have seen in Trump statements,” he said. “It’s a degree of realism coming back into our foreign policy. We’ve had neocons on the Republican side, we’ve had liberal internationalists on the Democratic side, and I think bringing that maturity back into our foreign policy is something that’s important. That doesn’t mean us being isolationists. But it does mean selective engagement I see a degree of maturity stepping in. What [some people] see in Donald Trump is a disruptor [to party and policy gridlock] . It is up to him now. to pivot and show [he has] the ability. “
Somehow Corker has placed Trump and maturity in the same sentence, something completely incongruent.
We’re sorry Sen. Corker. We believe it’s your own hopes and dreams (for yourself, your party and our country) that you’re seeing. It’s not Donald Trump’s maturity or ability.