President Trump's "Team America" squad lost one of its most notorious Islamophobes this week when General Michael Flynn was asked (or not asked?) to tender his resignation as National Security Advisor. Aside from basic competency issues that embarrassed the President, Gen. Flynn got himself into quite a pickle when the web of U.S. surveillance caught his phone call(s?) to Russian diplomats prior to Donald Trump's inauguration. With Russian malfeasance and abiding concern of those who care about the integrity of U.S. democracy, the bombshell revelations of Flynn's unsanctioned phone calls to Russian leaders have reopened the plentiful question marks about the relationship Russia has with the Trump campaign and White House. But here's what matters: Congressional action. And - ridiculously - we can't promise you Congress will choose to investigate the role of a adversarial foreign government in influencing a presidential election and shaping U.S. foreign policy favorably. Several key members of the House of Representatives who once thrived in their duties to oversee the Executive, are now sheepishly dithering on whether they want to formally investigate Flynn and the broader Trump-Russia connection. Members of Congress like Jason Chaffetz (R, UT-3) and David Nunes (R, CA-22) - who participated in the Benghazi investigation and are staunch supporters of vast surveillance powers - are now saying that they are more troubled by the intelligence community's surveillance of Flynn than the findings of the surveillance. So instead of investigating Flynn, they'll investigate leaks about Flynn. The Senate - ever the adult - is being more patriotic about the matter and promising a thorough investigation into Russian connections. But we're left trying to imagine how the Watergate scandal would have played out if Congress chose not to investigate the scandal itself, but the leak. It's a different world.