homersapien 11,513 Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 Romney may vote against Trump again — this time with some bite By Aaron Blake March 5, 2020 at 5:12 p.m. EST Mitt Romney became persona non grata in certain parts of the conservative movement last month by becoming the first senator of a president’s own party to ever vote to remove them from office. Now, he could throw another wrench in President Trump’s and the GOP’s efforts to dig up dirt on the Bidens — this one with more practical impact. Romney indicated Thursday that he is skeptical about the need for the Senate Homeland Security Committee to issue a subpoena related to Hunter Biden’s work for Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian energy company. “I would prefer that investigations are done by an independent, nonpolitical body,” Romney told The Post’s Mike DeBonis. “There’s no question the appearance is not good.” Romney also told reporters the effort “appears political” and said, “I think people are tired of these kind of political investigations.” While Romney’s vote to remove Trump was essentially a symbolic one, that wouldn’t be the case in the committee. Republicans have a 8-to-6 majority, meaning Romney’s vote, when combined with the six Democrats on the committee, would deadlock it at 7-7 and prevent the subpoena from being issued. (Ohio GOP Sen. Rob Portman hasn’t committed to voting for the subpoena yet, either.) The chairman of the committee, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), has set the vote for Wednesday. The subpoena seeks documents from Blue Star, a Democratic public affairs firm, about Hunter Biden’s role on the Burisma board. There has been no evidence produced that Hunter Biden did anything illegal, even as it’s generally acknowledged that he was profiting off his father’s time as vice president. Trump’s initial conspiracy theory about the situation involved the idea that then-vice president Joe Biden did something corrupt by forcing out a Ukrainian prosecutor who had at one point investigated Burisma. But there are myriad logical flaws in that argument, and during impeachment proceedings Trump’s legal team largely shelved it and instead focused on the idea that Hunter Biden had done something wrong. Johnson indicated he’d pursue the subpoena in letters sent last week and then on Sunday, one day after Joe Biden revitalized his campaign with a win in the South Carolina primary. Biden then followed that up with stream of wins on Super Tuesday that put him at the top of the race to become the Democratic nominee. Trump seems to suddenly have his interest in Hunter Biden and Burisma rekindled. After he and his party went weeks following impeachment without invoking the issue much, Trump on Wednesday night told Fox News that Hunter Biden and Burisma would be a fixture of a potential matchup with Joe Biden in the general election. Trump noted that Democrats hadn’t used the issue against Biden and said that “wouldn’t happen with the Republicans, I can tell you.” “That will be a major issue in the campaign,” Trump said. “I will bring that up all the time, because I don’t see any way out for them. I don’t see how they can answer those questions. I hope they can. I’d actually prefer it that they can’t.” Romney preventing the issuing of a subpoena would be a setback in those efforts, clearly. But it wouldn’t be all that surprising in the context of his comments about Hunter Biden. When he voted to remove Trump, he indicated he saw little more than a political effort in the efforts to launch the investigation. “With regards to Hunter Biden, taking excessive advantage of his father’s name is unsavory but also not a crime,” Romney said. “Given that in neither the case of the father nor the son was any evidence presented by the president’s counsel that a crime had been committed, the president’s insistence that they be investigated by the Ukrainians is hard to explain other than as a political pursuit. There is no question in my mind that were their names not Biden, the president would never have done what he did.” But the vote would be notable for one key reason: Romney has come under withering attack from conservatives and from Trump. He was banned from the Conservative Political Action Conference and saw conspiracy theorists try to tie him to Burisma through a former political adviser. Trump himself promoted those attacks and lodged some of his own, including calling Romney a “disgrace” and a “grandstander.” He even criticized Romney for invoking his faith in making his decision on impeachment. Had failed presidential candidate @MittRomney devoted the same energy and anger to defeating a faltering Barack Obama as he sanctimoniously does to me, he could have won the election. Read the Transcripts! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 6, 2020 If the whole effort was meant to punish Romney for his apostasy or dissuade him from further acts of disobedience, it doesn’t appear to have worked terribly well. Trump has had great success in keeping the GOP troops in line, but not so much with Romney. Even though polling showed a strong majority of Utahns opposed Trump’s impeachment, reactions to Romney’s vote were more positive than negative. The same poll showed 60 percent of Utah Republicans disapproved of the decision, but that’s far less blowback than we’ve seen with other Republicans who have earned Trump’s very public ire. The flip side of going to war with Romney, of course, is that it might not work. And in a closely divided Senate, sometimes you need that vote. Wednesday could drive that home, if Romney votes like he seems to be inclined. (He hasn’t committed yet, instead saying he would review the available information.) And to the extent Romney continues to delegitimize the Hunter Biden attacks, that’s an arrow in the Democrats’ quiver too. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/05/romney-may-vote-against-trump-again-this-time-with-some-bite/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_M4_AU 8,056 Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 Liz Johnson, a spokeswoman for Romney, said Friday that he would support the subpoena — which is expected to request documents and an interview with former Blue Star Strategies consultant Andrii Telizhenko — during Wednesday's committee meeting after getting assurances from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.). “Senator Romney has expressed his concerns to Chairman Johnson, who has confirmed that any interview of the witness would occur in a closed setting without a hearing or public spectacle. He will therefore vote to let the Chairman proceed to obtain the documents that have been offered," Johnson said. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/486311-romney-to-vote-for-burisma-subpoena What a difference a day makes. I guess we wait to see what Wednesday brings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
countoff 331 Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 I've grown weary of our elected officials putting the interests of their party above the good of the country or the good of the people they represent. It seems to me that on any given vote within Congress, there should always be at least a few (if not more than a few) reps/senators that cross the general party stand. These days, virtually every vote in Congress is simply an "all in" republican vote and an "all in" democrat vote. So, in general, I applaud the concept of someone voting counter to the party line like Mitt Romney did. However, in this case, Mitt has been in an ongoing feud with Trump for a very long time. So I can't help but to think that Mitt's motivation was less about "doing the right thing" as opposed to an opportunity to hurt a person he dislikes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,513 Posted March 8, 2020 Author Share Posted March 8, 2020 2 hours ago, countoff said: I've grown weary of our elected officials putting the interests of their party above the good of the country or the good of the people they represent. It seems to me that on any given vote within Congress, there should always be at least a few (if not more than a few) reps/senators that cross the general party stand. These days, virtually every vote in Congress is simply an "all in" republican vote and an "all in" democrat vote. So, in general, I applaud the concept of someone voting counter to the party line like Mitt Romney did. However, in this case, Mitt has been in an ongoing feud with Trump for a very long time. So I can't help but to think that Mitt's motivation was less about "doing the right thing" as opposed to an opportunity to hurt a person he dislikes. There is no comparison between Trump and anyone - much less Romney - for shear pettiness: Trump calls Inslee a 'snake' over criticism of coronavirus rhetoric The president went off on Inslee for saying that he wanted Trump to stick to the science when discussing the coronavirus outbreak. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/06/donald-trump-jay-inslee-coronavirus-123114 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creed 1,666 Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 Was there really a vote to remove the president or a vote to impeach? Am I confused? Aren't both two different things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,136 Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 2 hours ago, countoff said: I've grown weary of our elected officials putting the interests of their party above the good of the country or the good of the people they represent. It seems to me that on any given vote within Congress, there should always be at least a few (if not more than a few) reps/senators that cross the general party stand. These days, virtually every vote in Congress is simply an "all in" republican vote and an "all in" democrat vote. So, in general, I applaud the concept of someone voting counter to the party line like Mitt Romney did. However, in this case, Mitt has been in an ongoing feud with Trump for a very long time. So I can't help but to think that Mitt's motivation was less about "doing the right thing" as opposed to an opportunity to hurt a person he dislikes. Don’t think so. That didn’t help Mitt. And he’s supported most Trump policies. He dislikes Trump for the reasons that led Trump to behave in the way that led to his vote. That’s not the same as voting against someone because you dislike him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
countoff 331 Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 1 hour ago, TexasTiger said: Don’t think so. That didn’t help Mitt. And he’s supported most Trump policies. He dislikes Trump for the reasons that led Trump to behave in the way that led to his vote. That’s not the same as voting against someone because you dislike him. Yeah. Perhaps I should have said "So I can't help but to wonder that Mitt's motivation....." I have no idea what was really going on inside his head. But bottom line is that I would have liked to have seen someone (or perhaps a few) republicans to vote against the president as well as a few democrats vote for the president. It would show to me that they are truly voting what they think instead of what the parties are telling them to think. For the most part, I agree with Trump's policies. I just don't like his methods and his childish bantering and name calling. It's unbecoming of the leader of our nation. It's equally unbecoming to watch Pelosi and other democrats act the same way. It's depressing to watch them all. Jeez....why can't they be dignified and respectful of each other? Anyone remember Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neil? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,136 Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 1 hour ago, countoff said: Yeah. Perhaps I should have said "So I can't help but to wonder that Mitt's motivation....." I have no idea what was really going on inside his head. But bottom line is that I would have liked to have seen someone (or perhaps a few) republicans to vote against the president as well as a few democrats vote for the president. It would show to me that they are truly voting what they think instead of what the parties are telling them to think. For the most part, I agree with Trump's policies. I just don't like his methods and his childish bantering and name calling. It's unbecoming of the leader of our nation. It's equally unbecoming to watch Pelosi and other democrats act the same way. It's depressing to watch them all. Jeez....why can't they be dignified and respectful of each other? Anyone remember Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neil? There used to be a time someone who behaved like Trump would have never been elected by either party no matter how much folks agreed with the person’s policy. Once that behavior gets rewarded, however, others will follow suit. We asked for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.