Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 24 of 26

Thread: Shots Fired: Mitt Romney Will Vote to Convict Trump

  1. #1

    Shots Fired: Mitt Romney Will Vote to Convict Trump

    Shots Fired: Mitt Romney Will Vote to Convict Trump

    The senator from Utah just trashed the president on the Senate floor.

    By Greg Walters

    Feb 5 2020, 2:25pm

    WASHINGTON — Mitt Romney just absolutely trashed President Trump on the Senate floor, and said he’ll vote to remove Trump from office.

    In a brief speech, Romney, the Republican senator from Utah, made history by announcing he’d be the lone GOP guilty vote against Trump. While acknowledging that the vote is destined to fail in the Republican-controlled chamber, Romney laid out a scathing case against Trump and said he could vote to acquit while staying true to his oath before God to due impartial justice in the Senate impeachment trial.

    “The president asked a foreign government to investigate his political rival,” Romney said, endorsing the heart of Democrats’ impeachment case against the president. “What the president did was wrong. Grievously wrong.”

    Romney, the Republican nominee for president in 2012 who brutally criticized Trump during the 2016 campaign season, will now make history as the first senator to ever vote to convict a president from his own party in an impeachment trial.

    In an interview on Fox News immediately after his speech, news anchor Chris Wallace raised the possibility that Trump would seek retribution against Romney.

    “You realize, this is war?” Wallace asked. “Donald Trump will never forgive you for this.”

    “I know in my heart that what I'm doing is right. I understand there's going to be enormous consequence. I don't have a choice in that regard," Romney said.

    This is a developing story. Refresh for updates.

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/q...-convict-trump

  2. #2
    At least there is one republican with balls and morals.
    Donít be a tough guy. Donít be a fool! I will call you later

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Frankfooter View Post
    At least there is one republican with balls and morals.
    It was to be expected. Romney hates Trump, its obvious.

    Perhaps this decision is purely political, maybe its personal dislike.
    Either way, its his vote to cast, but feel it to be a costly one.

    Curious to see if any Democrats don't vote to convict now.

    Kathleen HFH

    Kathleen being a Badkat at HFH

    Available at Hands from Heaven Spa in Brampton. Please Visit HFH website for schedule and which location I'll be at each week.
    Available also Independent SP in Mississauga - Please visit my site Badkat.net for info and email.

  4. #4
    Area 51 Escapee
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Stuck in Lodi again
    Posts
    930
    Quote Originally Posted by Kathleen View Post
    It was to be expected. Romney hates Trump, its obvious.

    Perhaps this decision is purely political, maybe its personal dislike.
    Either way, its his vote to cast, but feel it to be a costly one.

    Curious to see if any Democrats don't vote to convict now.
    Romney hates Trump because he succeeded where Romney failed and Romney wants another chance to run for President and can't do that with Trump still in the White House.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    16,347
    Blog Entries
    1
    Romney is honest enough to use his conscience and rightly so. What he said about Trump is dead accurate. After all the existing evidence and the manner in which the Whitehouse obstructed Congress and Justice is terrible. The only Impeachment where the very partisan Senate used their powers to block the witnesses and documentation from being made available. Sad!!


    On ignore: Disrespectful Individuals!!

  6. #6
    Romney is so bitter he has chosen to light himself on fire.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by dickydoem View Post
    Romney hates Trump because he succeeded where Romney failed and Romney wants another chance to run for President and can't do that with Trump still in the White House.
    Ironically, he's done in the GOP now.
    So if Romney was to defect to the Democrat party, he would probably be their best option. He is less 'extreme' than Sanders, and has no skeletons like Biden.

    Kathleen HFH

    Kathleen being a Badkat at HFH

    Available at Hands from Heaven Spa in Brampton. Please Visit HFH website for schedule and which location I'll be at each week.
    Available also Independent SP in Mississauga - Please visit my site Badkat.net for info and email.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by dickydoem View Post
    Romney hates Trump because he succeeded where Romney failed and Romney wants another chance to run for President and can't do that with Trump still in the White House.
    Exactly, he's a loser and now a double loser.
    Terb members on ignore: Frankfooter


  9. #9
    Mitt voted for more witnesses, last week because he didn't have enough evidence. This week he voted to convict... without the vital evidence. What a whack job!
    "I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in," Hillary Clinton

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Kathleen View Post
    Ironically, he's done in the GOP now.
    So if Romney was to defect to the Democrat party, he would probably be their best option. He is less 'extreme' than Sanders, and has no skeletons like Biden.
    That would be great, then the dems would only need 2 more seats.
    Donít be a tough guy. Donít be a fool! I will call you later

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    16,347
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by jcpro View Post
    Mitt voted for more witnesses, last week because he didn't have enough evidence. This week he voted to convict... without the vital evidence. What a whack job!
    He probably wanted the witnesses to testify that Trump was Innocent. The testimonies so far has him as guilty for any non-partisan person following this Impeachment Case!!

    But it is very likely that it would have been from the frying pan into the fire for Trump if the witnesses and full documentation was provided for not only the Senators, but also to the 75% of Americans who wanted to see it for themselves as well!!


    On ignore: Disrespectful Individuals!!

  12. #12
    Mitt always did say that about 47% of Americans are useless types who live off the public teat. I guess he just wanted to make it clear which side he considered himself to be on by joining the 47% of Senators fitting that description.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by bver_hunter View Post
    He probably wanted the witnesses to testify that Trump was Innocent. The testimonies so far has him as guilty for any non-partisan person following this Impeachment Case!!

    But it is very likely that it would have been from the frying pan into the fire for Trump if the witnesses and full documentation was provided for not only the Senators, but also to the 75% of Americans who wanted to see it for themselves as well!!
    Mitt's vote was personal. Period.
    "I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in," Hillary Clinton

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    16,347
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by jcpro View Post
    Mitt's vote was personal. Period.
    If it was personal then he would have voted for BOTH the articles, not just one article that he voted for. He just made it very clear regarding the article that he voted for was what he thought that Trump broke the law. Period!!


    On ignore: Disrespectful Individuals!!

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    16,347
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Dutch Oven View Post
    Mitt always did say that about 47% of Americans are useless types who live off the public teat. I guess he just wanted to make it clear which side he considered himself to be on by joining the 47% of Senators fitting that description.
    Those 52% of the Americans want to keep a crook in office. Period!!


    On ignore: Disrespectful Individuals!!

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by bver_hunter View Post
    If it was personal then he would have voted for BOTH the articles, not just one article that he voted for. He just made it very clear regarding the article that he voted for was what he thought that Trump broke the law. Period!!
    LOL!! No Republican, even one as craven as Romney, would ever convict on the obstruction of Congress charge. It violated the separation of powers, to begin with. Any member of Congress who voted "guilty" on that charge is a traitor to the Constitution and to the American people. Par for the course for the Pelosi led Democrats, but too far for even a RINO.
    "I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in," Hillary Clinton

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by jcpro View Post
    LOL!! No Republican, even one as craven as Romney, would ever convict on the obstruction of Congress charge. It violated the separation of powers, to begin with. Any member of Congress who voted "guilty" on that charge is a traitor to the Constitution and to the American people. Par for the course for the Pelosi led Democrats, but too far for even a RINO.
    I was actually surprised that Manchin, Sinema and other moderate Democrats didn't vote to acquit on article two obstruction of justice. By voting to convict on article one, that should have taken off the heat from the Democratic party faithful.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by jcpro View Post
    LOL!! No Republican, even one as craven as Romney, would ever convict on the obstruction of Congress charge. It violated the separation of powers, to begin with. Any member of Congress who voted "guilty" on that charge is a traitor to the Constitution and to the American people. Par for the course for the Pelosi led Democrats, but too far for even a RINO.
    I wish there was a font with flames to highlight that line.
    It really deserves the full fire and brimstone treatment.

    Total George Orwell like quote, well done.
    Donít be a tough guy. Donít be a fool! I will call you later

  19. #19
    It's an accurate statement. You disagree, but the again, you don't know anything. The Democratic senators cannot hide behind ignorance. They knowingly voted to convict the accused on a charge they knew was illegitimate. It's not an opinion, in the case you want to argue it, it's a fact.
    "I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in," Hillary Clinton

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by jcpro View Post
    It's an accurate statement. You disagree, but the again, you don't know anything. The Democratic senators cannot hide behind ignorance. They knowingly voted to convict the accused on a charge they knew was illegitimate. It's not an opinion, in the case you want to argue it, it's a fact.
    Trump admitted to trying to bribe Ukraine in the transcript he released.
    That's the fact.

    Nobody doubts that he did it.
    Donít be a tough guy. Donít be a fool! I will call you later

  21. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    29,293
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by jcpro View Post
    It's an accurate statement.
    Anybody who actually believes that, is admitting that they are in a cult.

    Listen to yourselves: "If you believe that our leader is capable of any wrongdoing, then you are treasonous."

  22. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Frankfooter View Post
    Trump admitted to trying to bribe Ukraine in the transcript he released.
    That's the fact.

    Nobody doubts that he did it.
    To be fair to jcpro's Constitutional Scholarship, he was referring to article two, which is a separate issue from what Trump did with Ukraine.

  23. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Frankfooter View Post
    Trump admitted to trying to bribe Ukraine in the transcript he released.
    That's the fact.

    Nobody doubts that he did it.
    As I said, you don't know anything. Article two was obstruction of Congress.
    "I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in," Hillary Clinton

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Valcazar View Post
    To be fair to jcpro's Constitutional Scholarship, he was referring to article two, which is a separate issue from what Trump did with Ukraine.
    The obstruction of justice was in relation to his abuse of power with his acts in Ukraine.
    Without the bribery attempt on Ukraine he wouldn't have obstructed justice to try to stop it from being investigated.

    Interesting take here on the impeachment.

    This is how ancient Rome’s republic died – a classicist sees troubling parallels at Trump’s impeachment trial


    The U.S. Senate has made its judgment in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, acquitting the president. Fifty two of 53 senators in the Republican majority voted to acquit the president on the abuse of power charge and all 53 Republican senators voted to acquit on the obstruction of Congress charge.

    All 47 Democratic senators voted to convict the president on both charges. Senator Mitt Romney of Utah was the only Republican voting to convict for abuse of power.

    The Republican senators’ speedy exoneration of Trump marks perhaps the most dramatic step in their capitulation to the president over the past three years.

    That process, as I wrote in The Conversation last fall, recalls the ancient Roman senate’s compliance with the autocratic rule of the emperors and its transformation into a body largely reliant on the emperors’ whims.

    Along with the senatorial fealty that was again on display, there was another development that links the era of the Roman Republic’s transformation into an autocratic state with the ongoing political developments in the United States. It’s a development that may point to where the country is headed.

    Leader is the state

    Trump’s lawyers argued that the president’s personal position is inseparable from that of the nation itself. This is similar to the notion that took hold during the ascendancy of the man known as Rome’s first emperor, Augustus, who was in power from 31 B.C. to A.D. 14.

    Trump defense attorney Alan Dershowitz asserted that “abuse of power” by the president is not an impeachable offense. A central part of Dershowitz’s argument was that “every public official that I know believes that his election is in the public interest” and that “if a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.”

    This inability to separate the personal interests of a leader from the interests of the country he or she leads has powerful echoes in ancient Rome.

    There, no formal change from a republican system to an autocratic system ever occurred. Rather, there was an erosion of the republican institutions, a steady creep over decades of authoritarian decision-making, and the consolidation of power within one individual – all with the name “Republic” preserved.

    Oversight becomes harassment

    Much of Rome’s decline into one-man rule can be observed in a series of developments during the time of Augustus, who held no formal monarchical title but only the vague designation “princeps,” or “first among equals.”

    But in fact the senate had ceded him both power (“imperium” in Latin) over Rome’s military and the traditional tribune’s power to veto legislation. Each of these powers also granted him immunity from prosecution. He was above the law.

    Augustus’ position thus gave him exactly the freedom from oversight – or what Trump calls “presidential harassment” – that the president demands. Such immunity is also the sort that Richard Nixon seemed to long for, most famously in his post-presidency declaration that “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.”

    In Augustus’ time the idea also emerged that the “princeps” and the Roman state were to a great extent one and the same. The identity of the one was growing to become inseparable from the identity of the other.

    So, for example, under Augustus and then his successor Tiberius, insults against the emperor could be considered acts of treason against the state, or, more officially, against “the majesty of the Roman people.”

    A critic of the “princeps” – be it in unflattering words or in the improper treatment of his image – was subject to prosecution as an “enemy of the people.”

    A physical demonstration of the emerging union of the “princeps” and the state came in the construction of a Temple of Roma and Augustus in cities across the Mediterranean region.

    Here the personification of the state as a goddess, Roma, and the “princeps” Augustus were closely aligned and, what is more, deified together. The message communicated by such a pairing was clear: If not quite one and the same, the “princeps” and the state were intimately identified, possessing a special, abiding authority through their union.

    Many higher-ups in the Trump administration, from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to former Secretary of Energy Rick Perry to former Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, have spoken publicly of Trump as a divinely chosen figure. And Trump himself declared earlier this year, “I do really believe we have God on our side.”

    To this point, however, a Temple of Lady Liberty and Trump along the lines of the Temple of Roma and Augustus has not yet been constructed.

    But the Senate impeachment trial has shown us how far along the identification of leader and state has moved in the Trump era. A central part of the president’s impeachment defense is, as we have seen, that the personal will of the president is indistinguishable from the will of the state and the good of the people.

    Will the GOP-led Senate’s endorsement of this defense clear a path for more of the manifestations – and consequences – of authoritarianism? The case of the Roman Republic’s rapid slippage into an autocratic regime masquerading as a republic shows how easily that transformation can occur.
    https://www.juancole.com/2020/02/cla...peachment.html
    Donít be a tough guy. Donít be a fool! I will call you later

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •