Below is my column in the Washington Post on the vote of Mitt Romney and how his independence is a virtue celebrated selectively by the political establishment and the media. One thing that should unite everyone is the inexcusable attack on Romney’s reference to his faith by President Trump. Romney grew emotional on the Senate floor when he dismissed the “unimaginable” attacks as paling in comparison to what he would lose by violating an oath to God. Trump responded at the National Prayer Breakfast by declaring.” “I don’t like people who use their faith as justification for doing what they know is wrong.” The one thing that I never thought would be questioned is the faith of Mitt Romney, who not only is widely known as a deeply religious Mormon but has been discussed as a possible head of the Mormon Church. I have never been a fan of Romney’s policies, particularly his environmental policies (which are in line with Trump). However, I have never heard anyone suggest that Mitt Romney’s faith is anything but genuine and heartfelt. I have no problem with Trump attacking the merits of his decision but the attack on his motivation is well beyond the pale.
Here is the column:
Mitt Romney no longer has to guess about what “unimaginable” consequences are in store for him after the Utah senator voted to convict President Trump of abuse of power: A Utah legislator has moved to censure him; Donald Trump Jr. has called for Romney to be expelled from the Republican Party; and the National Prayer Breakfast (and later White House press conference) turned into a Romney rage-fest, as the president insulted both the senator’s ethics and his faith.
Romney grew emotional on the Senate floor on Wednesday, when he explained that whatever waited for him in terms of political retribution for his vote would pale in comparison to what he would lose by violating “an oath to God.”
Trump responded at the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday by declaring, “I don’t like people who use their faith as justification for doing what they know is wrong.”
In reality, Romney is precisely what the Framers expected in a senator. He voted his conscience by voting first in favor of the abuse-of-power charge and then against the obstruction-of-Congress charge. Romney’s decision did not make him right, but what should be clear to even the most jaundiced eye is that he believes himself to be right.
This rare profile in courage might have surprised others, but it did not surprise me — though I admit there was a time when it would have. Many years ago, I had little regard for Romney. During his 2012 presidential campaign, I had come to view him as just another plastic-fantastic candidate with scripted answers for every question.
But my view of Romney changed in October 2011, as I was flying back to Washington from Oklahoma, when Romney plopped down in the seat next to me on the plane. I had watched at the departure gate as people spontaneously went up to him, literally grabbing him for pictures and hanging arms around his neck. Romney remained incredibly polite and patient with each and every person.
Once on board, we soon got to talking and I assured him that our conversation would be off-the-record. I noted that I would not want his life. When you are a politician, people often think they have a claim to your body and soul. But once we were in the air, Romney seemed to relax; a less robotic Romney emerged.
Over the course of that conversation, I discovered something I didn’t expect: a genuinely thoughtful and candid man — very different from the stiff and sometimes detached persona I observed from watching the campaign.
That flight came to mind when Trump tweeted this week that Romney, as the GOP nominee, could have defeated President Barack Obama in 2012 had he shown the same “energy and anger” he had shown on the Senate floor in casting his vote. It was partially true. When we got off that flight, I was convinced that Romney was a better man than he was a candidate.
The Democrats are correct to celebrate Romney’s vote as an act of conscience. But this ignores one fact and obscures a second: First, Romney’s conscience not only led him to vote to convict on the abuse-of-power charge, it also led him to reject the impeachment article based on obstruction of Congress. That second article was deeply flawed. Yet, no Democrat joined Romney in that vote of good conscience.
More importantly, Romney’s willingness to depart from the party line was no more evident among his Democratic colleagues than it was among his fellow Republicans. Indeed, even though Democratic members such as Sen. Doug Jones (Ala.) indicated that it was a struggle to understand the basis for the obstruction allegation, all stuck with the party line. Not exactly a Romney-esque profile in courage.
At the same time, the media does not celebrate defections from the Democratic ranks the way it did for Romney’s declaration of independence. I do not recall seeing the same kind of adoring coverage showered on Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), who voted “present” on both articles of impeachment, or on Reps. Collin C. Peterson (Minn.) and Jeff Van Drew (N.J.), both of whom voted against impeachment. Rep. Jared Golden (Maine) cast the same split vote in the House as Romney did in the Senate, but received either criticism or crickets in the media.
Finally, the historical record of Democratic voting on impeachment is anything but bipartisan. They voted as a bloc to acquit President Andrew Johnson (who was a Democrat and later a National Union party member). They voted as a bloc again during the Clinton impeachment more than 130 years later. In the Trump impeachment, they continued that perfectly partisan record by voting as a bloc for conviction. Bipartisanship remains a virtue respected primarily in the opposing party.
The first time the United States endured an impeachment trial, Sen. Edmund Ross of Kansas, one of the seven Republicans who voted to acquit Johnson, described the experience as “literally [looking] down into my open grave.”
Ross, like Romney, jumped — to the applause of opposing party. In the Senate, self-sacrifice remains an act best admired from a distance.
122 thoughts on ““My Open Grave”: Mitt Romney And Why Washington Admires Bipartisanship . . . At A Distance”
PCS, are your children genetically burdened by your hubris and incompetence?
My heart feels for Senator Romney,
but my head won’t stop shaking.
I was absolutely ready to side with him when I sat down to listen to his reasoning ahead of the vote, but I thought key parts of his rationale were entirely irrational. Left me thinking that he needed to pay less attention to his conscience and more attention to the facts.
Whatever. It’s done.
I do admire many of his colleagues who although not exactly defending his decision, are unwilling to ostracize him. The senate leader impressed me when he essentially reminded everyone that they’re on the same team, and that Senator Romney still had an important part to play in the future.
– disappointed by the President attacking Mr. Romney afterwards. Had he exercised the same restraint as he showed during the sotu, it could have helped win him over. Instead he just embittered him more.
Just a marker post, to avoid the trash below.
Of course PCS has to come along to muck it up.
David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me forty-three citations (one from the OED, one from the town ordinances and two from the Old Testament), an equation and the source of a quotation, after sixty-three weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – David, it is not my job to make your life easy. You don’t pay me enough or even anything for that matter.
See! He came along to muck it up!
“There is no glory in it.”
Jonathan Turley, I disagree with you about the so-called Obstruction of Congress charge. This will come out to haunt at the next impeachment proceedings against a future president; possibly even Donald Trump in his potential second term.
Only Romney knows if his vote was based on his moral conscience, or his distaste for Trump. Romney finds Trump uncouth and in some ways immoral. A twice divorced man who had affairs in his past and a love of self promotion would be a turn off for Romney.
Since the evidence did not prove abuse of power, I disagree with Romney’s vote. Based on his history, I believe he is sincerely religious. But a man can get caught up in disdain for someone, and think he is doing the right thing, when he’s really just quarreling.
As for Pelosi, it is well known in the South that “I will pray for him or her” is either supportive or an insult. If you take someone’s hand, bow your head, and say, “I’m so sorry for your loss. I will pray for you,” it’s supportive. If you say, “That woman is a two-bit whore without the sense of a soda cracker. I will pray for her,” that’s an insult. Kind of like “bless her heart” is not a nice thing to say.
Absolutely, religion can be used to cover an insult. Does Pelosi talk about Trump as someone she feels kindly towards? No, of course not. She uses “I will pray for him” as an insult. When someone lists all the ways they hate someone, and then say they pray for him, it is not being nice. Another example is when she said she offered her hand as an act of kindness, because he looked so sedated. She implied he was so high that she wanted to be kind to him. That’s an insult.
Only God knows what is in Pelosi’s heart. If she really is religious, then God is going to have a heart to heart with her one day.
After Pelosi tore up Trump’s State of the Union speech, she said, “It was the courteous thing to do, considering the alternatives.”
During the impeachment, she claimed everyone was very sad about it, while the Squad was giggling behind her.
She also claimed it was about the Consittuion, even though one of her objections was to the President setting foreign policy.
The trend is for Pelosi to cloak political gamesmanship and fighting with lofty but insincere motivations. Elites with superiority complexes tend to do this.
She also claimed it was about the Consittuion, even though one of her objections was to the President setting foreign policy.
The president’s job is to execute the law (faithfully)
The Congress enacts the law.
That means Congress passes laws that instruct the president on how to act. There is no exception for foreign policy.
Congress has in many cases enacted law that gives the president some discretion on how to act.
Yes, Pelosi was courteous, even though he refused to shake her hand. She had just sat through a long list of lies about Trump’s nonexistent economic success and false claim of creating the most-successful economy in history. Then, there was the disgusting made-for-TV show: a reunion of the soldier with his family, the poor little black girl and her single mother, getting a scholarship because of the allegedly crummy school she attends. Of course, we didn’t know at the time of the SOTU that she already was going to a very elite and successful public charter school that turns away hundreds of applicants every year. Then, there’s the Tuskeegee Airman, trotted out to seek applause by someone too cowardly to serve his country, someone who lied about nonexistent bone spurs. His feigned support for the military is phony: he insulted the Gold Star Khan family, he insulted and mocked war hero John McCain, he diverted funds from the Pentagon that were allocated by Congress to provide decent housing for military families in order to build the wall, so he can claim: promises made…promises kept.” The grounds for stealing this money: national emergency, which is ironic in view of the fact that fatso also claims that there’s no longer any crisis at the border. It’s hard to decide what was the most disgusting aspect of this sad circus: he even gave Rush Limbaugh the Presidential Medal of Freedom, cheapening the significance of this award, previously given to people like Rosa Parks and Mother Teresa. If I had been in the speaker’s chair, I’d have thrown the pack of lies in his fat orange face.
You speak of gamesmanship yet support the most-corrupt and least-qualified person ever to cheat his way into the White House. The Constitution gives Congress oversight over the Executive Branch. However, the fat slob occupying the White House refuses to cooperate, leverages aid to an ally, diverts funds appropriated for other projects and constantly lies. Yes, the impeachment was about enforcing the role of Congress in oversight. Republicans are the ultimate gamesmanship players: even the ones who admitted he was guilty didn’t have the guts or patriotism to vote to convict, even though they took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. That sets the stage for future presidents to manipulate money appropriated by Congress for whatever they want: leveraging aid in order to get a foreign country to gin up false charges against their opponent, diverting funds from military budgets to whatever pet project they want, even after Congress says “no”, by lying about a national emergency. There are strong grounds to really worry about the future of this country.
You definitely have a chip on your shoulder about “elites”: west-coast elites, east-coast elites, educated “elites”. You are the typical Trump supporter, someone who resents those you perceive to be better-educated and more successful, and who deeply resented the success of Barak Obama. You believe that such people look down on you. You, like other Trumpsters are open to racism and xenophobia, and are gullible enough to buy the Fox News argument that people who find Trump repulsive are trying to take away your vote It’s really sad.
Yet another female voice chimes in to prove that giving women the right to vote was a huge mistake.
Not quite as bad as giving men the vote
“Yet another female voice chimes in to prove that giving women the right to vote was a huge mistake.”
Another nutjob (“allahsgoat”) heard from…
Counter Puncher you ignoramus!
What causes you to opine that she has a heart?
LOL. Not a fan, are you? I find her a terrible snob.
Yes, she’s not good at snobbery. The English were so much better at it.
Karen, have you spoken with God about Pelosi? That’s amazing. Can you tell us about it, and did he tell you who will win Best Picture later tonight?
Karen……i love your last two sentences, especially.
No, Karen, the evidence DID prove abuse of power. 48 U.S. Senators said so, as did a majority in the House of Representatives. Romney broke with his party. What law allowed Trump to refuse to cooperate with Congressional investigations? None, or Turley would have cited it. What law allowed Trump to command that witnesses refuse to cooperate? There isn’t any. What previous U.S. President has claimed a blanket privilege and immunity from cooperating with Congressional investigations? None. Even Nixon and Clinton cooperated. Claiming himself to be king and therefore immune from prosecution was not only an abuse of power, it was a dangerous precedent. Did all Republicans agree Trump did nothing wrong? No. Stupid Susie Collins said he learned his lesson and cowardly Lamar Alexander thought he should take the easy way out and leave it to voters. In a jury trial, these three, along with the rest of the Senate, would have resulted in a conviction, even in the absence of witnesses or exhibits, which no real trial would have excluded. Trump was NOT exonerated by the Senate. He cheated his way out of it. Again. Like he cheats at everything else in his life: in business, in his marriages, and now, in politics.
What is sad and shocking is that Romney somehow had difficulty complying with his conscience, and has to be concerned about retribution. That is the sad state of affairs Trump has brought this country to–a sincere person of faith cannot act according to his conscience without fear of retribution. Ask Lt. Col. Vindman, and his twin brother about it, along with Fiona HIll, Ms. Yavonivich and Amb. Sondland about the price to pay for speaking truth to power against the most-corrupt administration in U.S. history.
When did Pelosi list “all the ways she hates” Trump? Give us the date, time and place of these statements. BTW: Trump did look sedated, and has for other occasions. It is most-noticeable when he slurs his words. It is likely something suggested by his handlers to keep him at least somewhat within the guard rails, since he literally has no internal controls, doesn’t care about the dignity of Congressional chambers, nor does he care who or what he insults so long as the cameras are on him. He is the first POTUS ever to use profanity in the Blue Room. He had a long laundry list of lies to get through at the SOTU, along with the disgusting and pathetic dog and pony show.
And, where does a person such as yourself, whose only discipleship is to the most-deceitful and fraudulent person ever to occupy the White House get off on questioning anyone’s religious motives or the sincerity of their faith? How dare you claim that Nancy Pelosi is intending to insult Trump by claiming to pray for him? That is no doubt some garbage you heard on Fox. Nancy can’t even pray for her enemy without being criticized, and dipsticks like you suck up this slop.
No, Karen, the evidence DID prove abuse of power. 48 U.S. Senators said so, as did a majority in the House of Representatives.
LOL! You routinely whine that a majority of voters chose Clinton and that the electoral college did not reflect the will of the American voters. Now you whine that a minority of Senators voted to convict on the articles of impeachment, thus inferring the majority didn’t acquit the President. And then of course you emphasized the majority vote in the House. You would be Exhibit A on why pure democracies fail. You don’t like rules that protect us from ignorant passions.
President: [Rule] 270 electoral college
House Impeachment: [Rule] Majority
Senate Trial: [Rule] 67 Senators
You’ve hitched your ride to passionate rule, as opposed to right reason. And you’ll never understand why you and your ilk continue lose.
I refuse to believe that you inferred what NUTCHACHA fraudulently and deceitfully did not imply but explicitly stated, and I paraphrase, “The lie is the truth and the truth is the lie.”
Thank you, NUTCHACHA.
Communists love the disarray of “ignorant passions.” That is when they insinuate themselves to seize power. Look at American history. Newly minted and exiled-to-Illinois Marxists* induced “Crazy Abe” to take America into chaos over its “ignorant passions,” the Progressives seized power, controverted the Founders and the Constitution, nullified the rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities of Americans and incrementally led America into the current and entirely unconstitutional, communist, American welfare state. The communists allowed the frog to immerse itself in contemplation of his “ignorant passions,” made the frog comfortable in cold water, then heated it slowly until the frog was cooked.
The influence of Marxists on Lincoln:
You Trumpsters act like King Donnie, Prince of the Order of Bone Spurs, was exonerated. That’s not the truth. Having 48 U.S. Senators vote to convict, and a majority of the House voting to impeach is not exoneration. And, even those who refused to convict admitted they knew he was guilty. The rest are gutless cowards who shirked their oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Everyone knows their votes were political. Everyone knows the games Republicans played with gerrymandering, voter suppression, purging voter rolls and other dirty tricks to keep hold on the Senate.
There’s real danger now. Letting a POTUS lie about a nonexistent national emergency in order to divert funds from the military budget, to fund projects Congress already rejected, just to provide fodder for a political campaign is illegal. Letting a POTUS withhold aid from an ally in order to leverage help with a political campaign is a violation of several laws and is abuse of power. Trump is threatening to try to unseat Mitt Romney, and he fired those brave witnesses who chose to speak truth to power. Republicans are trying to out the whistleblower and cause him problems, just like Dr. Ford, whose life was turned upside down by speaking the truth.
No wonder Prince Donnie admires Putin so much: Putin gets away with stuff like this, and worse.
That’s not the truth.
🙂 I see you choose truth over fact, just like Biden. Whatever you decide to do when you grow up, please don’t change who you are on the inside.
America is in a condition of nutchacha, hysteria, incoherence, chaos, anarchy and rebellion.
President Abraham Lincoln seized power, neutralized the legislative and judicial branches and ruled by executive order and proclamation to “Save the Union.”
President Donald Trump must now seize power, neutralize the legislative and judicial branches and rule by executive order and proclamation to “Save the Republic.”
Why yes you clearly are, “allahsgoat.”
Natacha — please stop with your mindless rants against Trump supporters.
You said: “Everyone knows the games Republicans played with gerrymandering, voter suppression, purging voter rolls and other dirty tricks to keep hold on the Senate.”
Here’s a newsflash for you Natacha….”purging voter rolls” is required by law, requiring proper ID is not “voter suppression,” the Senate does not have voting districts…so “gerrymandering…to keep hold on the Senate” is a completely false statement.
In fact all your list of these “Republican dirty tricks” you list are false and you have NO facts to back them up. Per usual for you.
PS Natacha, please name ONE thing that Dr. Ford said happened regarding the “incident” with Brett Kavanaugh, that was actually verifiably true. You can’t. Her best friend questioned everything Chrissy Baby Talk said. Her own family would not come to her defense. No one remembered anything remotely like the “story” Chrissy Baby Talk told. She lied about everything. And you know it. If you don’t know it, shame on you.
more clamorous, grating, strident, outrage from Nuthatch
which yet has become so boring in spite of the volume
like a noisy construction site nearby, you can get the hang of ignoring it within a day
you can get the hang of ignoring it within a day
My sister and her husband ran the farm for a county home in Iowa. I lived with them and worked on the farm for about 1 year. The residents were for the most part functional, but mentally challenged. Some of them were permitted to work the farm with us. Some were allowed to wander about, but not work the farm. And then we had those that exhibited behaviors that required controlled supervision. Every time this Natacha character posts a comment, I’m reminded of that latter group and suspect those supervising her allow her this access as therapy. 🙂
NUTCHACHA does it again!
The evidence DID NOT prove abuse of power.
52 U.S. Senators said so.
“The first article, abuse of power, was rejected 48 to 52, and the second, obstruction of Congress, was defeated 47 to 53.”
– N.Y. Times
The communist “majority” in the House was elected by eminently predictable, alms-seeking, parasitic and dependent foreign invader hyphenates and their treasonous, unstable and unjustifiably guilt-ridden liberal allies which the American Founders never intended to vote.
The American Founders constitutionally imposed rational and coherent restrictions on the vote as did the Greeks, who created republican democracy, and the Romans who perpetuated it.
The next time they hold the House, Senate and Presidency, republicans must impose severe constitutional restrictions on the vote. Ben Franklin admonished Americans saying that we gave you “…a republic, if you can keep it.” As Tytler, demonstrated, one man, one vote democracy is nonviable and always devolves into dictatorship. The American Founders imposed profound restrictions on the vote in 1789 and if the Founders did it, it was and is constitutional. Progression to one man, one vote democracy was an inexorable death sentence for the American Republic.
“The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”
“If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”
– Alexander Hamilton – The Farmer Refuted, 1775
“…a body of citizens entitled to vote…”
re·pub·lic | \ ri-ˈpə-blik
Definition of republic
b(1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the people discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy–to be followed by a dictatorship.”
– Alexander Fraser Tytler
boring TDS talk yawn
You’re an Idiot? Good luck in 2020… LMAO!
We don’t need no morman senators….we don’t need no thought control….
All in all it’s just a dip in the road!
Oh come on… does anybody truly believe that Romney’s tears were genuine? And if not? Then Trump is 100% right. Even if you don’t personally view Trump as truly religious, or truly Christian-righteous, he is still “right.”
Render unto God what is God’s
Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.
Romney’s church must have a different interpretation.
Mitt Romney didn’t vote for God.
Mitt Romney didn’t vote for truth.
Mitt Romney didn’t vote for freedom and free enterprise.
Mitt Romney didn’t vote to conserve the “original intent” of the Founders.
Mitt Romney didn’t vote for the “manifest tenor” of the U.S. Constitution.
Mitt Romney didn’t vote for Ben Franklin’s Republic.
Mitt Romney didn’t vote for America.
Mitt Romney didn’t even vote for Utah.
Mitt Romney voted for Mitt Romney.
Very good, I like it.
President Trump is now insanely claiming that Mitt Romney voted to convict him (but only on one charge?) in order to cover up some wrongdoing of his own connected to the Bidens.
Is this the same Professor Turley who called Trump’s spiritual advisor’s religious beliefs “bizarre” and her sermons “unhinged”?
Cindy Bragg – Shirley JT would never call someone’s religious beliefs bizarre or unhinged. He is not that kind of guy. 😉
Paul C ….we all have double standards from time to time……..It’s just hard to see it in print.😁
“It’s just hard…”
If you fell for Romney’s religious act you are a gullible one. It seems you just have to lean left at times. That’s fine but please use example of meat for Dems more carefully if you want to be taken seriously.
Romney’s decision did not make him right, but what should be clear to even the most jaundiced eye is that he believes himself to be right.
Wow Turley, you’ve just defined the modern day Progressive Movement. That is not a compliment.
But one of the key defenses put forward by Donald Trump’s lawyers in his trial was that if Trump merely *believed* he was doing the right thing, then he couldn’t be impeached for that act.
Trump believed he was acting within his constitutional authority. Progressives believe they are acting on some other authority. Romney chose the latter.
Romney grew emotional on the Senate floor on Wednesday, ….by violating “an oath to God.”
Romney belongs to a cult. A man like Mitt has got to be either a phenomenal huckster who craves attention (like most cult leaders), or he really believes the crap that Mormons peddle. Either way Romney is a fraud.
Turley, you were butt hurt when the Democrats tore into your ass not too long ago, and you carried on like a wounded animal for weeks. You reminded us daily how bothered you are that your “colleagues” in your academic circles criticize you. Trump’s behavior at the Prayer Breakfast was a window as to how wounded he was as well. All of it was expected and your indignation therein shows the hypocrite you are: you demand mercy, compassion and understanding but you prefer to show a cult member like Romney your virtue signaling, but reap scorn on Trump.
Is Mormonism a Cult?
God used to be a man on another planet, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 321; Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 613-614; Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 345; Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333).
God resides near a star called Kolob, (Pearl of Great Price, p. 34-35; Mormon Doctrine, p. 428).
“The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s…” (Doctrines and Covenants 130:22).
God is in the form of a man, (Joseph Smith, Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p. 3).
“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!!! . . . We have imagined that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil, so that you may see,” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345).
After you become a good Mormon, you have the potential of becoming a god, (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345-347, 354).
There is a mother goddess, (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 443).
God is married to his goddess wife and has spirit children, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 516).
The Trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. “That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35).
Turley Makes Disengenous Point
I do not recall seeing the same kind of adoring coverage showered on Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), who voted “present” on both articles of impeachment, or on Reps. Collin C. Peterson (Minn.) and Jeff Van Drew (N.J.), both of whom voted against impeachment. Rep. Jared Golden (Maine) cast the same split vote in the House as Romney did in the Senate, but received either criticism or crickets in the media.
Here Turley cites the votes of relatively obscure House members and compares them to Mitt Romney, a former presidential candidate and current senator. Of course Romney’s defection is more newsworthy. To argue that the others should have gotten ‘equal coverage’ is ridiculous. Turley is pandering here to a culture of victimhood currently embraced by conservatives.
None of those people you mention was attacked by someone like the President.
Romney predicted he would be attacked, and he was right.
I was with you a hundred percent, well, with the exception of that, ” a former presidential candidate and current senator” – I mean, you didn’t have to tell us that, we all know that – but, that last line is just bizarre. Traditionally speaking, conservatives, even moderate conservatives, have never been the party of teary-eyed “victimhood.” Nope, our bleeding hearts and crying eyes was strictly the domain of democrats; well, until they legalized both illegals AND victimization, and now “victimhood” is everyone’s business. Right?
Bipartisanship and it’s comrade Cross partisanship are just two ways of saying ‘cave to the left.’ We didn’t sent them to ‘get along’ we sent them represent us as supporters of a Constitutional Republic or in some misguided cases as a Socialist misfit. If they want bipartisanship start by getting rid of Comrade Schumer and Comrade Pelosi.
Romney is a RINO which is the same as saying right wing of the left, He is not a Constitutionalist
No, he’s not. In fact what Mormons have long been pressing is the concept of a benevolent dictator. That’s a fact. But as we all know, or maybe I should say, “as history has proven,” benevolence is not a quality typical of those who rise to power, or retain power, through force.
JT, Impeachement was a psy-op to cement supporters of the legacy parties into the continued belief that the parties are actually different from each other on matters which effect most Americans. They are not. As far as the oligarchy’s agenda, the legacy parties are fully bi-partisan. They march in lock step. I’m going to present another view of things with a video from Tucker Carlson with guest Jimmy Dore:
I like Jimmy Dore! I think he is an idiot about a lot of things, but at least he is an honest idiot! One day people like him and Tulsi Gabbard will kill off the Democratic Party and replace it with an honest, though mostly dumb, party.
Can’t get much dumber than they are now. Collectively speaking, I have estimated their political IQ is about 65. At best maybe 80, which imo is still sub-par.
Comments are closed.