Mitt Romney's Oath before God: His reasoning for voting to remove Trump from office does not stand up to scrutiny.

American Thinker ^ | 02/07/2020 | Bert Peterson

[SeekAndFind]

Nothing reveals the character of the Democratic Party more clearly than the Democrats' vote to convict based on the second article of the impeachment of Pres. Trump — an article that was about legal disputes over subpoenas, which would normally be settled through the courts.

Instead of doing that, however, the issue was sent to the Senate, where, instead of making legal arguments, Democrats simply cried "cover-up!" to Republican opposition to their demands. For this, because Trump adhered to the legal process, Democratic senators voted, and voted unanimously, to remove...not themselves, but President Trump from office. (Were they kidding?)

The other, the first article of impeachment — which charged that, in asking Ukraine to investigate corruption involving former V.P. Joe Biden, and which also charged that Trump withheld military aid to force such compliance — was only superficially less-clearly baseless. This too was unanimously supported by the Democrats, but this time, there was also someone else — Republican Sen. Mitt Romney — who joined them.

This should not have come as a complete surprise. In a previous vote, over whether the Senate should call witnesses that the House failed to call — that is, whether the Senate should do what the House could and should have done before sending the matter to the Senate — Romney voted that the Senate should ignore the delinquency of the House and do what the House had called on the Senate to do, or be charged with a "cover-up" — reason enough in itself for Republicans to reject the House demand. But there was another reason as well — specifically, that calling witnesses could tie up the Senate for weeks or months for what would have been, like the Mueller investigation, a piously justified Democratic fishing expedition.

[clearcarbon]

Romney 05Feb2020:

"I sought to hear testimony from John Bolton, not only because I believed he could add context to the charges, but also because I hoped that what he might say could raise reasonable doubt and thus remove from me the awful obligation to vote for impeachment."

If he needed Bolton to raise "reasonable doubt" than he had doubt. If he was certain enough of the arguments to condemn a president of the United States to political death, he wouldn't need Bolton.

[abbastanza]

BS

[MrChips]

You win the prize! Follow the money. Check out his links to Burisma.

[bgill]

Those magic undies are getting close to igniting.

[wiley]

Pressed white shirts and pressed blue jeans tells me everything I need to know about Romney. He is an elitist who sees us common folk as his minions.

Oh, one other thing: The way he trashed his Rep opponents in the primary to be followed by his cowardice against his Dem opponent in the general showed me he had no depth.

Overall, he’s a shallow elitist who has no idea that he sanctions a different moral code for himself and his elitist brethren - that includes Biden.

Any of us minions who did something like what Biden did in
Ukraine would be in jail by now. But instead of having to answer to a stricter standard by virtue of their office, they actually answer to a looser one than we by virtue of their elitism. In a word, it’s hypocrisy.

[Sons of Union Vets]

The last temptation is the greatest treason

To do the right (?) thing for the wrong reason

MURDER IN THE CATHEDRAL

T.S. Eliot

[JimRed]

The real reason, if Romney spoke honestly: “It was my turn, dammit!”

Trump did not pay his party dues, get in line and wait his turn. Nobody likes a line-jumper!