Even in a presidency, which was long ago burned by all possible superlatives, Trump's statement was a runner.
This was the US president – the man responsible for protecting the constitution, US democracy and the West – Trump says he would accept dirt on political rivals from foreign governments ” data-src-mini=”//cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170410121034-trump-small-169.jpg” data-src-xsmall=”//cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170410121034-trump-medium-plus-169.jpg” data-src-small=”http://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170410121034-trump-large-169.jpg” data-src-medium=”//cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170410121034-trump-exlarge-169.jpg”
Anchor George Stephanopoulos raised FBI director Christopher Wray's warning that anyone who received incriminating information from a foreign power should call the agency.
"The FBI director is wrong," Trump said, his voice. He denied what disturbed the US election – as Russia did in 2016 to help him win – is even a problem.
"There is no disturbance. They have information. I think I would take it. Was something wrong, maybe I would go to the FBI if I thought there was something wrong, said the president." Then Trump had said earlier moments: "I do not think in my whole life, I" I ever called the FBI. "
New impeachment calls
The immediate political impact of Trump's interview was to braid more democratic calls to the president's impeachment – and making the President Nancy Pelosi more difficult. It is criminal, it is criminal, and we must hold this president accountable. "The Democratic Republic of Brenda Lawrence, D-Michigan, told CNN's Erin Burnett."
"About feeling We must begin the process," says Lawrence, one of a growing minority of democratic house members calling for more robust action against Trump, referring to impeachment.
It would not be farfetched to argue for the President's remarks in It may end up as part of a case of impeachment if anything ever comes so far.
The Democratic Party's presidential candidates from 2020 competed with each other to hit the point of impeachment – suggesting the growing power of the argument despite the fact that Russia's survey is not dominant in 2020 The problem.
"# MuellerReport made it clear: A foreign government attacked our 2016 election in support of Trump, Trump welcomed that help and Trump prevented the investigation" Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, tw eeted.
Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont said he was not shocked because he believed Trump did not respect the Constitution The Ion
"I think the House should begin persecution requests," said Sanders to CNN's Anderson Cooper.
and then Kamala Harris in California – State's former lawyer – tweeted: "China listens. Russia listens. North Korea listens. Let's talk the truth: this president is a national security threat."
All that is required
But the political consequences of Trump's statements on Wednesday may fade in comparison to the intelligence and national security issues they will be spreading.
The president not only risked the integrity of the 2020 vote, he already reinforced a strong impression that he would do everything – something – to win. Because he has the power of the Presidency, it is a worrying thought.
Given that reality, all foreign entities that help him in 2020 can expect all kinds of unspecified housing in politics or otherwise – one reason why Trump's private meetings with Putin
<img class = "media__image media__image – responsive "alt ="
If he takes dirt from a foreign power, the president can place himself in a dangerous, uncompromising position.
Even US intelligence services – and even The White House – says they do everything they can to protect the election, The most powerful man in the world signals that he doesn't care and would be willing to undermine these efforts.
And it can't even ask for any dirt detected on their opponents is true, since the 2016 Russian effort showed that rumors and misinformation can be as powerful as genuine information.
Trump's swipe at Wray will also spark a new speculation about the position of the president's second FBI director.
There was no immediate comment from the Bureau.
But will it not matter?
The doctrine of Trump's two plus years in power is that the conventional divisive comments like these will not do anything to crumble the stiff GOP base of support that maintains its presidency.
On evidence of previous kerfuffles, Republican senators can be expected to avoid and nest. Conservative pounds will deny that he did anything wrong. And his White House can accuse journalists of taking him out of context or denying the evidence of tape that the president said at all.
Every drum-manipulated outrage ends in the same way, with his critics fulminating and the president untouched and uncomfortable, reinforcing his brand as a flamthrower who burns the structures of Washington governance, as he promised his fans as he was supposed to.
Trump knows what he's doing. He makes such urgent statements well aware that they will release a media storm that will explode heads of Washington, further divide the nation and agitate the political base that he needs to show up in bulls by 2020.
Now it is almost like if Trump intends to show that in the turbulent political era he created there are no enforceable standards for minimally acceptable public behavior. That his power cannot be limited and reality is what he says is it. Another presidential limitation is wiped out, and a new outrage will soon be laid.
The cost of democracy
That is not to say that it will not be reverberated from the president's interview. In the real world there will be political, practical and intelligence implications.
After all, he invites someone to play in the process, which ultimately underlines American democracy. If elections have no integrity, public belief in those it grants power cannot be guaranteed and the system will be in serious danger.
Trump's comments represented a particular condemnation of expert Robert Mueller, who even made a tense ground for his Americans in protecting his democracy in his taciturn.
On the first page of the Mueller report, the special council writes that Russia interfered in the 2016 election in a "sweeping and systematic way".
At the end of his news conference last month, Mueller again sought to get his message consistent with the final of his mission: "There were several systematic efforts to interfere with our choice. And that claim deserves every American's attention."
Trump delivered his reply on Wednesday, addressing problems with Mueller's case – central to arguing that the target against an opponent through a foreign espionage operation is acceptable.
It's called opo-research, Trump told ABC.
Added insult to injury, the president also flagrantly explained Mueller's report of several meetings between his team and Russians in the 2016 campaign: "In fact, we actually declined your friends from Russia; we actually drove them back – we averted them. "
Mueller did not find a conspiracy between the Trump team and Russia. But he wrote in the report that "the campaign expected that it would benefit selectively from information stolen and released by Russian efforts."
The ultimate question arising from the special council's farewell warning and Trump's answer is whether Mueller's reason will reason or whether another presidential limitation will dissolve in particular.