The billboard on the freeway encourages me to thank Mitt Romney for his integrity. I am wondering how I should feel about him for ignoring the facts of the recent Trump impeachment trial. The main concern here is worrying if my duly elected Senator has again come down on the wrong side of history. Senator Romney’s speech and vote to impeach President Trump has ignited a firestorm among fellow Republicans and conservatives and stoked the public relations machine of progressive opposition. None of this makes Romney or Utahans look good.
Romney’s speech described a wrestle of conscience and his perceived duty for “impartial justice”. He stated “My promise before God to apply impartial justice required that I put my personal feeling and biases aside. Were I to ignore the evidence that has been presented and disregard what I believe my oath and the Constitution demands of me, for the sake of a partisan end, it would, I fear, expose my character to history’s rebuke.”
Again, what specific evidence is he referring to?
It was not helpful that on the same day Romney voted to impeach that his colleague, Senator Mike Lee, appeared on Laura Ingraham’s Fox News program and said essentially “I am not sure what he was looking at. Nothing presented in the proceedings even came close to an impeachable standard.” Facts are tough if you have not given them due consideration.
Speaking of justice, how might Romney feel about the related standard of “bearing false witness”? It appears the entire case concocted in the House revolved around inflamed hearsay and convoluted facts, which on deeper analysis add up to an orchestrated string of disinformation. That would also be known as lies. That is anything but partial. Did Romney not see this? Did he receive bad advice from his staff? What is his explanation for seeing the evidence as something more than the obvious?
To even label Joe Biden as a political opponent is a reach. His performance in the current primaries indicates he is nowhere close to being the Democrat candidate come fall. To stretch the facts to suggest Trump needed help discrediting Biden is laughable. In addition, there is the small detail of the Clinton era treaty in force with Ukraine that required Trump to investigate corruption before sending additional aid. And, as we shall soon see, the facts on the ground in Ukraine indicate that corruption ran deep with Obama and Biden. Trump actually has a duty to ensure things were on the up and up. He was simply doing his job.
The fallout from all of this is not related to value systems or faith. They are related to issues of credibility. At this point, at least among the conservative community, Romney has none. And that is a poor position to be in if one is a designated legislative representative for a community. Major conservative voices, individuals that have long experience in legal principles and political strategies, such as Mark Levin or Jeanine Pirro, have lambasted Romney for his exclusionary perspective of fact and procedure. He was the subject of Pirro’s editorial last weekend on Fox News, which can be seen here:
Romney was recently grilled in front of local Utah legislators to answer for his decisions. There are recommendations to censure or even recall him based on these actions. His behavior is not worthy of recall but remains baffling for those who have followed this entire charade in depth. His position is unjustifiable in light of the evidence.
The House impeachment of Trump will remain a partisan stain on the history of this country. Never has a legislative body attempted to skew procedural privilege to such an extent to remove a political opponent and wrest power from the electoral results of its citizenry. I fear in the long term analysis of these events Romney will indeed be counted on the wrong side of history.