Tag Archives: Marco Rubio

In this case, it is in our ‘best interest’ to remove POTUS

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, a one-time foe and critic of Donald John Trump, is one of those Republicans who’s had a serious change of heart and mind about the nation’s current president.

“Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a president from office,” Rubio said.

Let me ponder that for a second.

OK, I’m done pondering.

If someone’s action do meet that standard, then it seems to me that it’s damn near imperative that we remove that individual from office.

The House of Representatives has impeached Trump on abuse of power and obstruction of Congress allegations. They House made the case. Trump should be kicked out, sent to Mar-a-Lago. It won’t happen. The Republicans who control the U.S. Senate are going to acquit the president on Wednesday.

However, Sen. Rubio — once the butt of tasteless, crass quips from Trump back when the two of them competed for the 2016 presidential nomination — says that impeachable behavior is not a reason to punish the doer of that deed. Is that what he really means?

Goodness, gracious alive. What in the world has happened to us?

Trump ‘jokes’ about asking China to ‘investigate’? Uh huh, sure

Donald “Knee Slapper in Chief” Trump just keeps cracking me up.

He strolls out onto the White House lawn and after revealing that he asked Ukraine for help in investigating former VP Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, he calls on China to do the same thing.

I don’t know about you, but I didn’t see him winking or smirking when he said it. Gosh, he seemed quite serious about it. Didn’t he seem that way to you as well?

He’s in some scalding water at the moment because of his solicitation of foreign governments to help him get re-elected and do destroy the candidacy of someone who might run against him in 2020. House Democrats have launched an impeachment inquiry and are going to impeach the president, maybe quite soon.

Oh, but now Trump’s GOP allies in Congress say he was just kidding. He didn’t really mean for China to investigate anyone, especially the former vice president of the United States.

  • U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan refused to answer a direct question Sunday morning about whether he thought it was appropriate for Trump to solicit help from China.
  • U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio said Trump merely is trying to get the media riled up.
  • Sen. Roy Blunt said the president was kidding; he was making a joke.

Man, the president has to improve on his comedic timing.

Oh, but he wasn’t kidding. Any dunderhead observer who saw him make that statement didn’t presume Donald Trump was merely making a bad gag.

Sen. Rubio wants aid for Florida … but with caveats?

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio wants the federal government to fast-track aid to hurricane-ravaged Florida, which he represents in the Senate.

He says it’s the government’s responsibility to help Americans in distress from natural disasters.

I agree with the Republican lawmaker. He is right. But let’s remember that when Super Storm Sandy pounded New Jersey in 2012, Rubio wasn’t quite so quick to rush to New Jersey residents’ aid. He voted against an appropriation to assist Sandy victims, citing “pork barrel” spending provisions buried deep inside the bill.

It reminded me of the time then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor pushed back against relief for victims of a tornado that tore through Joplin, Mo. The Virginia Republican argued that Congress needed to cut money from other programs to pay for the Joplin relief package.

Rubio demands federal response

I have an idea. Why doesn’t Sen. Rubio insist publicly, clearly and loudly that any Hurricane Michael relief aid is free of the kind of excessive and non-essential spending he alleged was contained in the Sandy relief legislation?

If it does contain that kind of excess, would the senator then be willing to vote “no” in the name of fiscal responsibility?

I doubt he would do that. Serious political courage, though likely would require Sen. Rubio to speak the truth about the way Congress doles out relief aid.

Trump channels Rubio’s ‘water moment’

I knew I wasn’t the only one who had this thought, but it still makes me chuckle when I watch news reports of Donald Trump’s televised remarks upon his return home from his 12-day trip to Asia.

The president had, um, an awkward water moment. He reached for some water to battle a case of dry mouth while talking earlier today. The bottle wasn’t there. He groped under his podium for some water and was informed there was a bottle of Fiji water nearby.

He fumbled around for a moment longer, took a swig of it and went on with his remarks.

Now, you’re possibly asking: Why bring this up?

Oh, I don’t know. I guess it’s because candidate Donald Trump made such a show of a similarly awkward moment that befell Republican presidential primary opponent U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, who in 2013 fumbled for a water bottle while delivering his party’s response to President Obama’s State of the Union speech.

Trump was merciless in his mocking of Sen. Rubio. He called it a “catastrophe.”

Trump has his own clumsy moment

For his part, Rubio had a clever and self-deprecating response, which he delivered via Twitter:Ā Similar, but needs work on his form. Has to be done in one single motion & eyes should never leave the camera. But not bad for his 1st time.

Take notes, Mr. President. There might be someone out there who’ll use that moment against you.

‘Less than ideal,’ Sen. Rubio?

“Certainly itā€™s less than ideal, but it is what it is.”

Those words of “wisdom” came from U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, the Florida Republican who once battled with Donald John Trump for his party’s presidential nomination.

He got involved in that juvenile and petulant verbal p****** match with the eventual GOP nominee and president.

So now that Trump has become entangled in what is looking more and more like a serious constitutional crisis, his former foe says “it is what it is”? That’s it?

Young man, it’s a lot worse than that!

What we have on our hands, Sen. Rubio, is a situation in which the president of the United States of America reportedly has asked the then-FBI director to back off an investigation of a former national security adviser.

Rubio is too young to remember an earlier constitutional crisis, but Richard Nixon did something quite similar regarding a break-in at the Watergate office and hotel complex. He had it on tape. The Senate got its hands on that tape and, well, that was all she wrote for President Nixon.

I am not about to predict a similar outcome for the current president, but as of this evening, it doesn’t look good.

Does this president have an inherent hatred for his enemies? Or is he just clueless about the consequences of his actions? I am going to give Trump the benefit of the doubt and presume that he just doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing as president of the United States.

Whatever the context or the circumstance, the Senate and the House of Representatives will need to hear from James Comey personally and will need to know precisely what he gleaned from the president’s “request” for him to drop the FBI probe of Michael Flynn.

What a difference a year makes for CPAC

It’s been said that a “week is a lifetime in politics.”

So is a month, or perhaps an hour.

If any of those time measurements amount to a lifetime, how does a year compute?

IĀ pose the questionĀ because of what transpired this week at the Conservative Political Action Conference, where Donald J. Trump took the place by storm, prompting rousing applause and cheers, declaring that CPAC finally had one of their own as president.

Do you recall what CPAC speakers were saying a year ago to equally rousing cheers and applause? They were calling Trump a phony conservative. You had the likes of U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz talking trash about Trump. The crowd ate it up, swallowed it whole.

Trump then went on to vanquish those two, and a host of other Republicans to take command of the GOP and ultimately to become elected president of the United States.

What gives? How fickle are these CPACers? I believe they’re quite fickle. You see, the president is still the same guy who got the raspberry a year ago.

Trump was supposed to speak to CPAC a year ago. Then he backed out, fearing his immigration policies would provoke disturbances at the conference … or so he said.

CPAC conservatives used to embrace free trade. They used to consider Russia to be a mortal enemy of the United States. They frowned on politicians who led less-than-upstanding personal lives.

Trump — the thrice-married admitted philanderer, free trade foe andĀ supposed palĀ of Vladimir Putin — gets elected and then stands before CPAC to soak up all the cheers that once went to other Republicans.

What on this ever-lovin’ Earth am I missing?

Political leanings turned upside-down

I am listening to U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters rail, rant and ramble about a dastardly human being, Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The California Democrat — so help me — is sounding like a 1950s Republican! She is not alone among congressional Democrats who are calling Putin a war criminal, a monster and no friend of the United States of America.

Meanwhile, we have the nation’s leading Republican — the president-elect — continuing to bite his tongue as it regards Putin. Donald J. Trump just won’t — or cannot — bring himself to say what Democrats are saying. Which is that Putin is a seriously bad guy.

What’s going on here?

Republicans traditionally have hated the Russians, especially when they were governed by the communists who created the Soviet Union. Indeed, Putin is a creature of the monstrous Soviet era, the KGB, the notorious and ruthless spy agency he once ran.

These days, though, we’re mired in debate over what role the Russians played in influencing our 2016 presidential election. Democrats are enraged. Republicans, well, are not … generally.

Sure, some GOP senators have spoken out against the Russians. Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio are three harsh critics of Putin and they all have openly challenged Trump’s relationship with him and the rest of the Russian government.

The president-elect? He’s keeping quiet.

Donald Trump is the leader of the Republican Party, the traditional enemy of Russia. Democrats used to be accused of being squishy-soft on the Russians.

Talk about a reversal of roles.

Castro created an unintended legacy


The late Fidel Castro wanted to create a legacy in his island nation of Cuba.

He led what he called a “revolution” in the late 1950s. Castro promised to bring democracy to Cuba. He brought instead a reign of repression and terror.

In the process, though, El Comandante created another legacy. He helped formĀ a lasting political movement in the United States of America. When thousands of Cubans wised up to the misery that was coming to their nation, they fled Cuba for the U.S. of A.

Most of them settled initially in south Florida. The Cuban expatriates then coalesced into a formidable political bloc. They were — and remain — fervently anti-communist to the core.

Their numbers continued to grow through the early and mid-1960s as more Cubans fled the island. Their families expanded in this country. The expats then taught their children and, later, their grandchildren about the hideous rule that Castro had brought to their homeland.

They became involved in U.S. politics. They got elected to high public office. A couple of Cuban descendants — U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas — sought the Republican Party presidential nomination.

Indeed, the bulk of the Cuban-American political community leans heavily to toward the GOP. Their influence has helped inform Republican Party policy toward Cuba for nearly six decades.

This bloc of voters also fought successfully — until recently — against efforts to restore diplomatic and economic relations between the United States and Cuba.

The Cuban commies who mourn Castro’s death likely won’t bring up this part of the tyrant’s legacy. I have just done so here.

Rubio to Trump: I detest you, but not as much as I do Hillary


U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio finds himself defending an unusual political position.

The Florida Republican stands by his comment that GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump is a “con man” who shouldn’t be president of the United States.

But he’s going to vote for him anyway.

Some observers in Florida and elsewhere are quizzing the one-time GOP presidential primary candidate who, during the campaign, said some amazingly harsh things about the man who defeated him — and 15 other contenders — for the party nomination.

Rubio isn’t back away from any of them.

But he’s voting for Trump … he says.

This well might summarize the state of the 2016 presidential campaign.

Many rank-and-file “establishment” Republicans can’t stomach the candidacy of Trump, but they truly detest — even hate — the Democratic nominee, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Lesser of two evils? This is it, according to Sen. Rubio.

Cruz endorsement might not arrive


The question of the night for political junkies from coast to coast … to coast.

Will U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz endorse Donald J. Trump when he stands in front of the Republican National Convention crowd?

If I could predict anything, I’d say ain’t no way, no how, no never mind.

Cruz has called Trump everything but the Devil Himself.

Pathologist liar; narcissist “the likes of which I’ve never seen”; a whole plethora of nasty names.

He challenged Trump’s courage after the GOP frontrunner put a tweet out there that poked malicious fun at Heidi Cruz, for crying out loud.

Having declared that by any reasonable measure, Cruz wouldn’t ever endorse Donald Trump, we have the following:

Rick Perry endorsedĀ Trump after calling him a “cancer on conservatism; Chris Christie endorsed Trump after saying he is “unfit” to become president; Marco Rubio has all but endorsed Trump after calling him a “con man.”

Cruz’s speech tonight is ginning up a bunch of speculation. Some sources say there might be an endorsement forthcoming; others say there won’t be an endorsement, but that he’ll express “support” for the nominee and for the party.

Still others have suggested that given Cruz’s fervent support among many of the convention delegates that he might deliver aĀ “Dream Shall Never Die” sort of message, a la the kind of speech Ted Kennedy gave during the 1980 Democratic convention after losing that fight to President Carter.


Some conservatives want Cruz to endorse Trump.

I’ll tune in later tonight to see if Cruz prefers to stand by a nominee he cannot stand or will stand by the “conservative principles” that mean nothing to the guy who’s going to lead the party into the election campaign.