By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Representative Don Bacon (R-Neb.) criticized Donald Trump’s approach to Russia, calling it “terrible” and expressing disapproval of Trump’s criticism of Europe alongside his perceived flattery of Russia. Bacon has been a vocal critic of Trump’s handling of the Ukraine-Russia war, particularly his rhetoric towards European allies and his views on Putin’s actions. Bacon disagrees with Trump’s proposed peace plan, which includes ceding Ukrainian territory to Russia, arguing that it rewards the invader and fails to secure lasting peace.
Read the original article here
GOP congressman tells Trump to stop ‘kissing Russia’s ass,’ and the sentiment is pretty hard to miss. It’s a blunt assessment, a direct call-out of Trump’s perceived affinity for Vladimir Putin and, by extension, Russia. The phrase itself is intentionally provocative, but it underscores a deep concern about the former president’s relationship with a geopolitical adversary.
The fact that a Republican, in this case, Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), is making this statement is noteworthy. It suggests a fracture within the party, a breaking point where some members are willing to publicly criticize Trump’s actions. This isn’t just a political disagreement; it’s a questioning of loyalty, a suggestion that Trump’s actions might be detrimental to the country’s interests. This also might be a sign of Bacon’s own political calculations, and deciding to not run again has given him new freedoms.
It raises questions about what’s driving this criticism. Is it genuine concern about Russian influence, a political maneuver to distance oneself from a potentially damaging association, or a combination of both? And, of course, the obvious question remains: why now? Why has this particular GOP member chosen this moment to voice such strong disapproval?
One could argue that this is too little, too late. If the accusations are true, then the damage may already be done. Trump’s apparent deference to Putin has been a subject of scrutiny for years, and now, when the former president is out of office, is a bit late to the show.
The commentary touches upon an accusation that Trump should have been prosecuted for failure to register as a foreign agent for the Kremlin. The failure to register as a foreign agent implies a lack of transparency and a potential conflict of interest. This point, combined with the “kissing Russia’s ass” comment, paints a picture of someone who is either actively aiding Russia or is at least being manipulated by them.
The response to this situation is varied. Some suggest that Trump should be impeached, while others believe that the only real solution would be the application of the rule of law. Some comments indicate the belief that the GOP is somehow complicit in this situation, that the party is unwilling to hold Trump accountable. This criticism implies that the GOP is more interested in maintaining power than in upholding ethical standards or protecting national security.
The image that’s conjured is one of power dynamics, political games, and potential personal failings. Some even suggest that Trump’s behavior is driven by fear of some kind of leverage held by the Russians, that Trump is a pawn in a larger game. This adds a layer of complexity to the issue, making it not just about political differences but about potential blackmail and corruption.
The responses included a reference to Trump’s actions being similar to that of leaders throughout history that were banished or dealt with in ways that ensured no possibility of a return to power. This hints at the level of anger and distrust some people have towards Trump.
Then, there are the more cynical perspectives. Some believe that the criticism is merely performative, that the GOP members criticizing Trump are not truly committed to holding him accountable. They might be waiting for the right moment, or that they are more interested in their own political survival than in actually taking action against the former president.
There is a sense of frustration, that the situation is far more grave than a simple political squabble. And, as one might say, the question is not *if* Trump is in Russia’s pocket, but *how deep*?