CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese



President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*


CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg




CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 21, 2019 01:10 PM UTC

Mitt Romney Blows Gardner's Mueller Kumbaya

  • by: Colorado Pols

As you probably know from last week’s news coverage, Sen. Cory Gardner is very much ready to “move on” from the investigation into Russian support for Donald Trump in the 2016 elections, after the release this week of a redacted version of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report that supporters of the President desperately want America to think “totally vindicates” Trump.

Gardner is smart enough to avoid the words “exoneration” or “vindication,” but his desire to stop talking about this is clear:

Donald Trump, Cory Gardner.

Despite Attorney General William Barr’s widely-panned attempt to spin the report ahead of its release Thursday, upon which Gardner and a large swath of the GOP based their own “let’s move on” statements immediately after, the report’s actual contents are very far from exonerating–documenting a President who repeatedly attempted to obstruct justice after his presidential campaign, if not collusively than as the willing beneficiary, freely trafficked in information illegally obtained by Russian intelligence agencies to discredit his opponent.

On Friday, Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, admittedly well known for his on-again off-again criticism of President Trump relative to his own political aspirations, unleashed a broadside against Trump that left Gardner and every other Republican who sent out a “let’s move on” statement on Thursday looking like collaborationist stooges at best:

“I am sickened at the extent and pervasiveness of dishonesty and misdirection by individuals in the highest office in the land, including the president,” the Utah Republican wrote. [Pols emphasis] He said that he was also “appalled” that members of the Trump campaign welcomed assistance from Russia.

However, Romney said at the beginning of his statement that he believed it was “good news” that there was insufficient evidence to charge the president of obstruction of justice. The special counsel’s office punted on the issue, not coming to a conclusion as to whether Mr. Trump obstructed justice.

The report provided evidence of 10 “discrete acts” where the president may have obstructed justice. In one instance, Mr. Trump asked then-White House Counsel Don McGahn to fire the special counsel. McGahn refused to do so. When The New York Times later reported Mr. Trump’s request to McGahn, Mr. Trump asked McGahn to say the president never requested that Mueller be fired. McGahn again refused to do so, as the reports were accurate.

“Reading the report is a sobering revelation of how far we have strayed from the aspirations and principles of the founders,” Romney wrote.

There is speculation this weekend about the possibility that Romney might even mount a primary challenge against Trump next year after these very harsh comments, bitterly at odds with the GOP party line that the investigation found “no crime” and Trump is in the clear. Even if that doesn’t happen, Romney’s very strong attack on Trump’s character and honesty, which he can’t take back even in the very possible event he tries, significantly complicates Gardner’s recent wholesale embrace of Trump.

If he is forced to keep talking about this at all, Gardner would much rather talk about Russia than Trump’s campaign. The problem is, you can’t simply talk about Russian interference in the 2016 elections without reckoning with the universally acknowledged objective of their interference–to elect Donald Trump President of the United States.

And that’s where we arrive at questions that not even Mitt Romney has the courage to ask.

Because the hard questions are not about Russia. They’re about the Republican Party.


4 thoughts on “Mitt Romney Blows Gardner’s Mueller Kumbaya

  1. Romney vs. Weld vs. Trump 2020. I like it.

    I've seen Weld interviewed on a number of shows recently. He's kind of a traditional Republican, fiscally conservative, socially liberal.  He could chew the heck out of $rump and help elect a Democrat.

    1. ROFL!

      In Trumpmerica 2019???

      Letsee, . . .

      Cruz, Rubio, Christie, Paul, Former Mayor 911, Nunes, . . .

      . . . Graham, Palin, Nevilles 1,2&3, Gardner, Lamborn, Tipton, 

      . . . Marble, Saine, Scott??????

      There just isn’t any low bar left that’s not way too high today for these clowns, dude!!

  2. Has anyone asked Sen. Gardner what "move on" means when it comes to the Mueller report?

    We now have a Special Prosecutor's report to add to the earlier indictments. Even among the Trump-appointed heads of the intelligence community, their testimony to Congress leaves no doubt about Russian interference in US elections.  Private corporations have found extensive evidence of efforts to use social media to influence elections.

    Biggest questions to Gardner, others in Congress and all those in the Trump Sad!-ministration — what can be done now to insure an end or at least a substantial reduction to outside interference in future elections? 

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

42 readers online now


Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!