Skip to content

Don’t hold your breath

According to Vanity Fair, Mitt Romney is secretly plotting to lead the Republican pro-conviction forces in the Senate. (Fun fact: the Senate doesn’t impeach, it convicts):

According to people close to Romney, he’s firmly decided against primarying Trump, an enterprise he believes to be a sure loser given Trump’s enduring GOP support. Romney has also told people that, as an unsuccessful two-time presidential candidate, he’s the wrong person to take on Trump. Instead, a Romney adviser told me, Romney believes he has more potential power as a senator who will decide Trump’s fate in an impeachment trial. “He could have tremendous influence in the impeachment process as the lone voice of conscience in the Republican caucus,” the adviser said. “Romney is the one guy who could bring along Susan Collins, Cory Gardner, Ben Sasse. Romney is the pressure point in the impeachment process. That’s why the things he’s saying are freaking Republicans out.” (Romney, through a spokesperson, declined to comment.)

GOP elected officials and donors are privately war-gaming what an endgame for Trump would look like. “It’s clear the House is going to impeach,” the prominent Republican told me. Making matters worse for Trump, a policy wedge has opened up between Trump and the Republican Senate at a moment when he needs its support most. Trump’s surprise decision to pull back American troops in Syria and allow Turkey to take on our Kurdish allies has enraged Trump’s closest GOP allies, including Lindsey Graham. “The Syria decision is a much bigger deal,” another former West Wing official said. “No one on the inside can hold Trump accountable. The Senate Republicans are the only check on power right now.”

It is marginally possible that Romney will actually vote to convict, though I doubt it. He could easily politically survive such a vote, since Trump is not all that popular among the Mormons, since, giving them their due, they are a bit more put off by his lack of morals than their evangelical cousins. But Susan Collins, for example, is a sure vote against conviction, though I’m sure she will express her profound disappointment in the genius. Susan has painted herself into a corner. A vote for conviction would be seen by those Mainers ready to vote against her as the act of desperation it would be: a vain attempt to recover her never deserved reputation as a “moderate” voice of reason in the Republican caucus. It would likely recover very few votes for her from that sector of the electorate, for, after all, Kavanaugh is still on the court. It would, however, lose her plenty of votes from the brain dead, the base of support she must keep solidly in her corner. 

There’s a lot of talk these days about the possibility that by the time the trial is held, Republican Senators will feel a lot of political heat to vote for conviction. It would be nice if that were true, but I doubt it, though I hope I’m wrong. Every Senator, especially those up for reelection in 2020, will be facing the same dilemma as Collins. A vote for conviction sacrifices the base without gaining much on the other end.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.