If you tried to make this stuff up, nobody would believe you.

The Director of National Intelligence holds a briefing for members of Congress. Attending the meeting is a leader of the political opposition, who, nevertheless, is a member of Congress and has every right to be in the room.

The DNI shares some troubling news. Current intelligence assessments find there is credible evidence that a foreign government, namely Russia, is attempting to influence the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. Their candidate of choice is the incumbent president of the United States, Donald John Trump.

The reasoning behind the Russian interference is incomplete, but it appears they believe they are in a better position to do “business” with him than they would be should a Democrat be elected president. Or maybe it’s because President Trump’s isolationist tendencies have been more successful in unraveling this country’s leadership position in the free world than the former Soviet Union’s feeble attempts ever were.

Another possibility is simply to add chaos as an additional element into an already volatile stew of contending factions in an already destabilized and divided American public.

The Russian factor is a sore point with President Trump. He has just survived impeachment in the House of Representatives and a politically inspired escape in the Senate based on an unwillingness on the part of the Republican caucus to cross their president for fear of political reprisals.

The president denies any coordinated activity with the Russians in 2016, and it is unlikely his cause would be helped with the repetition of rumors of Russian meddling in 2020.

You would think at this point damage control measures would include a strongly worded public statement again denying any personal wrongdoing on his part in 2016, another couple of victory chants about “no collusion, no obstruction,” and a warning that stern measures would be taken should the new charges be substantiated at some indeterminate point down the line.

Such a response would more than satisfy his political base who account for over 40 percent of the electorate. They are predisposed to believe anything the president says. Many believe he is doing God’s work. Some believe he was sent by God to save the country from the ungodly.

With such support, it is more than likely the story would fade from the headlines after a couple of news cycles and life would go on – even if the Russian bear was, in fact, trying to put its paw on the scales.

Not our president.

Instead, he focuses on the fact a Democrat was allowed in the room to hear the assessment of the nation’s intelligence network firsthand. He fumes that the DNI did not allow him to vet the content of the report before it was presented to members of Congress. He is livid that the unexpurgated version could be used by Democrats for political purposes.

After dressing down the DNI for his temerity in doing his job, he fires him, and names a Trump loyalist as his “acting” successor. As a result, the country’s intelligence apparatus is headed by an individual who has absolutely no intelligence-gathering experience and whose only obvious qualification is a demonstrated slavish devotion to the person of the president.

I don’t claim to know the truth about Russian involvement, or Ukrainian, or Chinese, or whoever, but the response of the president is telling. It is indicative of a man who interprets everything in terms of his interests only – not the interests of the country he swore on a Bible to defend.

These views may not be popular in this neck of the woods, but increasingly, and especially given the carte blanche conferred upon him recently by his Senate enablers, the president appears to equate his own interests as being those of the state as well.

This does not describe a president. It describes a king. It is a chilling perversion of the rule of law and limited government – complete with checks and balances – established by “We the People” in the Constitution of these United States.

Hopefully, people will begin to wonder out loud, and in increasing numbers, whether this is the precedent we wish to bequeath to our children, and to our children’s children.

Time will tell.