Colorado Pols readers are well aware that Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Yuma) has taken extreme measures to avoid talking publicly about President Trump’s actions and the looming impeachment trial in the U.S. Senate. Gardner regularly flees from reporters at the U.S. Capitol building by ducking out back doors and sliding into little-used elevators; journalists in Colorado just flat don’t get a response from Gardner or his staff — on any questions, really.
Gardner has given no reason to indicate that he will be anything but a loyal soldier for Trump and Senate Majority Leader “Moscow” Mitch McConnell, but media outlets keep trying to press him for information about how he’ll approach impeachment discussions. And sometimes, Gardner actually gets cornered.
On Thursday, 9News had no luck (again) getting a real response from Gardner’s office on impeachment issues, but later reporter Marshall Zelinger serendipitously found himself on the same flight from Washington D.C. to Denver. That’s how 9News reporter Steve Staeger ended up waiting for Gardner at Denver International Airport and chasing him through the concourse:
@SteveStaeger met their flight at DIA to ask Sen. Cory Gardner in person if he supports including witnesses in the trial, impartiality, and the new digital ad against him (Marshall was still stuck on the plane).
You can watch the full exchange here: pic.twitter.com/dm5OIhAcXM
— Next with Kyle Clark (@nexton9news) January 17, 2020
We’d encourage readers to watch the entire exchange, but here’s the gist of it:
STAEGER: Are you open to hearing from more witnesses in a Senate trial?
GARDNER: We have a trial, and that’s where we’re at right now.
“We have a trial.”
Staeger later asks Gardner about Thursday’s bombshell news that the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) believes Trump “broke the law” by withholding foreign aid from Ukraine in order to coerce an investigation into a potential political opponent.
STAEGER: There was a report released today from the nonpartisan GAO that the President broke the law in withholding aid to the Ukraine. Where do you stand on that?
GARDNER: We have a trial, and I’m sure that will be part of the discussion.
“We have a trial.”
Gardner’s absurd non-response to Staeger is being picked up nationally, and rightfully so. As we’ve said before in this space, Colorado voters should be embarrassed by their junior Senator.
I think they are.
Soo … all that stuff about how a trial must have witnesses and documents and stuff when the House was conducting the impeachment inquiry was just pointless, cuz now we got a trial.
Not at all. Cory Gardner doesn’t owe the lamestream media anything. Republicans know he’s going to stand with the President. In return we will stand with Gardner in November.
Meanwhile, I heard the left hates Hick….
Stay the Course Senator, They'll thank you.
Poddy predicting X is pretty much an ironclad guarantee of ~X. Perhaps Coreless is destined not to be on the ballot at all come November. 🙂
Maybe he'll pull a McSally on the media.
Participation Trophy McSally.
You might be on to something, Fluffy . . .
. . . Cory’s just too damn embarrassed at being in sniveling thrall to publicly give voice to his support for the criminal anymore, and equally as embarrassed by the ilk that’s claiming to be supporting him??!
Blind pigs and Kleenex boxes . . .
. . . and weasel’s who’ve finally reached their weaselethical limits. Crazy times, indeed.
He owes his constituents some conversation, access, and a spine. He's a joke. CU should rescind his law degree.
No, FluffyBalls, the left does not hate Hick. Insomuch as I can speak for "the left", we "hate" Cory in comparison to our disappointment in Gov. Frackenlooper, but only in that sense.
Hatred is the specialty of the GOP in general, but the Whitest House in particular.
I do hate most Elected Republicans.
Maybe Gardner can recuse himself seeing as how he has his nose so far up Trumps butt that he can see Trump’s molars. Oh and that fund raiser he headlined at the Trump Towers. I think it would be an honorable course of action even if it meant he would avoid one of the most consequential votes in his career (which of course he would prevaricate about until the vote and then vote for his king) but it would show that he is a completely compromised prick who couldn’t be impartial even if it was certain he would lose the next election. His vote to acquit is a foregone conclusion so his dodges and evasions are just more proof that the fix is in with this worm of a man.