Mitt Romney's foreign policy adviser sat on the Burisma board of directors with natural gas expert Hunter Biden!

Headline in a story by Ace of Spades: Mitt Romney: The Investigation Into Hunter Biden "Appears Political" and Therefore Must Not Be Undertaken by the Senate. And No, I'm Not Going to Explain Why I Supported the Obviously Political Investigation Into Trump in the Senate.

Maybe there is another reason why Mitt does not want that investigation. See the paragraph below.

Burisma faced a money-laundering investigation and questions over how it had obtained some of its licenses to drill for natural gas. In spring 2014, the company appointed Hunter Biden and a former Polish president, Aleksander Kwasniewski, to its board. Three years later, Burisma added Cofer Black, a former CIA official and foreign policy adviser to Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, to the board.

Read more here.

Romney's efforts to kill the competitors of the cigarette companies

In the blog of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Michelle Minton writes a very thorough article about Mitt Romney's proposed legislation

that would functionally eliminate the vapor industry, killing thousands of small businesses and robbing adults of a life-saving tobacco alternative. Romney is promoting his bill as a way to protect children from nicotine addiction. But, what it really protects is something in which Romney has a personal, political, and financial interest: cigarette sales.

...Romney’s bill, Ending New Nicotine Dependencies Act (ENND Act), would ban:

All e-cigarette flavors except tobacco (though it is also a flavor)

All refillable components or parts

Any e-cigarettes that look like cigarettes, pens, USBs, or other “common nonmedical devices”

Additionally, it would apply the federal cigarette excise tax to e-cigarettes, give the Department of Health and Human Services $115 million extra for an anti-vaping awareness campaign, and—even though the bill bans e-liquids used in refillable or “open” vapor systems—the bill would institute a new e-liquid tax.

If enacted, Romney’s bill wouldn’t reduce adolescents’ attraction to e-cigarettes, however. As I’ve documented before, the type of device, its shape, nicotine content, and flavors having little to do with youth vaping rates. Curiosity is the main driving factor. Without a doubt, it was the well-funded anti-vaping campaigns already underway at FDA and CDC and the constant message telling teens that “everyone is doing it” that reignited youth curiosity in vaping over the last two years. It explains why youth vaping of both nicotine and THC (the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana) have increased over the last year, but marijuana use did not increase. Giving these agencies more money to unintentionally advertise vaping to teens will only make it more attractive.

Furthermore, banning non-tobacco flavors won’t stop kids from using tobacco as we saw back in the mid-1990s when nearly 40 percent of teenagers smoked. They weren’t smoking fruit, candy, or dessert-flavored cigarettes because those weren’t introduced onto the U.S. market until 1999, when youth smoking began declining.

...Without these shops, devices, and the flavors that make e-cigarettes twice as effective as other smoking cessation products, many ex-smokers who switched to vaping will return to smoking. Others will turn to the black market to find their preferred products. Teens will also turn to the black market since no drug dealers check for ID. And in all of these groups, many people will suffer and die as a result, whether from smoking-related illness or from using products laced with illicit drugs or tainted with dangerous ingredients. The only beneficiaries of all this death and misery are cigarette companies that have experienced plummeting sales thanks to e-cigarettes, and those who rely on the tax revenue from cigarette sales.

...Prior to entering “public service,” Romney made a name for himself in the business world with the management consulting firm Bain & Co. It was there that Romney established ties with Big Tobacco, saving Bain from bankruptcy and helping tobacco giants like Philip Morris and British American Tobacco increase sales in the U.S. and take over the cigarette market in Russia.

...Even today, Romney is among the top recipients of donations from Altria (the parent company of Philip Morris).

It is possible that Romney’s relationship with Big Tobacco isn’t behind his attempt to ban their biggest competitor. Perhaps he genuinely believes that making e-cigarettes illegal will stop adolescents from using nicotine. In other words, Romney’s bill may not be intentionally self-interested, but it is appallingly misguided.

Teenagers will not whole-sale stop trying drugs, drinking alcohol, or having pre-marital sex. They won’t stop experimenting with nicotine either, because that’s what teenagers do: they experiment, rebel, and take risks. If enacted, all Romney’s bill will guarantee is that when teenagers use nicotine, the risk to their health will be far greater than the risks posed by legally available e-cigarettes. Furthermore, by depriving adults of access to these life-saving products, it condemns the millions who have already quit smoking using e-cigarettes and the billions who might have done so in the future to either the perils of the black market or an almost certain death from cigarettes.

E-cigarettes are the first real opportunity we’ve been given to bring America close to a smoke-free society. We’re almost there now, thanks in no small part to their ability to help smokers quit and divert new smokers to a safer alternative. But, as the result of greed, vanity, or hubris, Romney would kill that opportunity, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. His proposal—and all like it—should be rejected, not for the motivation behind them, but for the unmitigated disaster they would end up causing.

Read more here.

Mitt/Pierre can never quite pull off the act

In American Greatness, Julie Kelly writes about Mitt Romney and his Twitter alias, Pierre Delecto.

Now, Romney is trying to act like a tough guy. But whether it was his failure to confront Barack Obama about his post-Benghazi lies before the 2012 presidential election; his groveling before Donald Trump after the 2016 election; or his operating behind a hilarious Twitter alias, Mitt Romney can never quite pull off the act.

We all know the type—and Romney, reliably, plays it to a tee.

Read more here.

Sneaky Mitt

He is not surprised by Romney's "treachery."

You may have heard about Mitt Romney's secret Twitter account. Mychal Massie writes an opinion piece in World Net Daily that is highly critical of Romney. Read it here.

Get out of our way, Romney!

You caused cancer, tortured puppies, scissor-raped a gay boy’s hair, kept women bound, and were set to put blacks back in chains. Remember?

You didn’t fight back hard enough. And you lost.

You’ll never, ever, ever learn.

Get out of our way. https://t.co/jneJRrfHNY

— Mulder’s Yale Degree in Crack Addiction (@proteinwisdom) October 4, 2019

"Nobody likes a backstabbing coward!"

Oregon Muse tells it like it is this morning at Ace of Spades Hdq.

"So failed presidential candidate Mitt Romney took to the op-ed pages of the WaPo to lambaste President Trump's character, by which he means banging porn starlets and publishing mean tweets. Presumably, Romney doesn't do these awful things, which makes him, in his mind, morally superior to Donald Trump. But there's more to 'character' than this. For example, there's courage. There's commitment. There's leadership. There's not backing down, caving in to criticism, and sticking to a course of action when things get tough. To my knowlesge, none of these characteristics have ever been attributed to Mitt Romney.

In fact, in recent years, Romney has turned out to be quite a weasely little Vichy Republican, kind of like Evan McMullin, but with not as much estrogen. Oh, and then he whines, quote, Trump's words and actions have caused dismay around the world, unquote. So why is that a bad thing? A lot of these guys, you *want* to have dismayed. I'm sure Robert E. Lee was "dismayed" by General Grant on more than one occasion. And no doubt the Soviets were "dismayed" by Ronald Reagan. That's what we call a feature, not a bug. If you're not pissing somebody off, you're not doing your job. Trump understand this. Mittens does not. There's speculation that this op-ed is Romney getting into position for the 2020 primaries. Which makes me wonder what Mitt's advisors are telling him, because I don't see any big groundswell of support for a Romney presidency. He'll find this out the hard way if he keeps up his weasel act. If he dares to put up a primary challenge in 2020, Trump is going to schlong him good and hard. Nobody likes a backstabbing coward."

and from Melody V on Twitter:

Embracing the masked thugs of Antifa

John Hayward writes at Breitbart,

On Tuesday evening, three prominent Republicans — Senator John McCain, Senator Marco Rubio, and 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney — endorsed the left-wing media’s preferred narrative and embraced the masked thugs of Antifa as heroes.

...The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is one of the finest expressions of uncompromising principle in human history. In order to maintain that standard, we must protect speech and assembly rights for the unsavory, and then use free speech to demolish their toxic ideas. Professing allegiance to the First Amendment while authorizing vigilante gangs to shut down disapproved speech with the Heckler’s Veto — or clubs and broken bottles, when the Heckler’s Veto doesn’t get the job done — is not good enough. “The First Amendment doesn’t cover hate speech” is a much more dangerous, far more contagious fascist ideal than anything snarled over a tiki torch in Charlottesville.

Frankly, if you can’t win an argument with a handful of Nazis without resorting to violence, you suck at freedom. If you can’t damn the swastika without also cursing the hammer and sickle, you suck at history.

Read more here.
hat tip JJ Sefton

The Renegade Party

Matthew Burke reports at Politistick that a new political party has been formed on Twitter. It is called the Renegade Party.

The new Twitter account is only following six individuals, which may provide a clue as to who has organized the party.

Besides Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, considered an establishment Republican, the account follows a group who would normally not be in 100 percent agreement on issues, from Tea Party-supported Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse , to more establishment types like 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, American Enterprise Institute’s Arthur Brooks, and General (Ret.) Stanley McChrystal, along with former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, who also ran for the presidency in 2012, and even billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks.

...It’s interesting and more than ironic that the group would use the name “Renegade,” being that on Sunday, Breitbart News, ran a piece entitled, “Bill Kristol Republican Spoiler, Renegade Jew,” an opinion piece disparaging Kristol for not joining the Trump Train, a piece that former Breitbart editor Ben Shapiro referred to as “garbage.”

Read more here.

We wish Romney was more like Trump, and we wish Trump was more like Romney?

The Five analyzes Romney's speech and the state of the race.

A response to Romney

My friend Curt Dale had this response to Romney's speech today:

I listened to Mitt Romney scathing attempt, today, to stop Donald Trump from getting the Republican nomination for President. Though I'm still liking Cruz best, I find myself totally embarrassed by Romney's speech for various reasons.

I felt he was totally disingenuous in how he has turned on Trump after he had so vehemently praised Trump as he received "The Donald's" endorsement just 4 years ago. Today he went back so far into Trump's history that he surely would have known all this stuff existed way back then, if true, and would not have been so efflusive in accepting that endorsement. I am embarrassed that I found myself supporting Romney back then, but who has now shown himself willing to stand before the American People at this late date and attempt to torpedo Trump who appears well on his way toward the nomination. I see it as Romney's attempt to retain some modicum of leadership that he "feels" is the responsibility of himself and John McCain, both off whom lost their elections due to therr lack of tenacity and vigor in going after the Obama.

Now, he (and McCain) are blistering Trump for doing exactly what they should have done to win their elections--and that is to come out with all guns firing, no holds barred, root hog or die. But McCain hogtied Sarah Palin and wouldn't let her do her job of destroying Obama at the outset while he blithered and waved his arms in despair. Then, Romney was so politically correct, so sensitive, so unaggresive in his treatment of Obama that he lost in a most awful landslide. Had Romney used the same Trump like venom, firey speech, bluster and willingness tro call names and raise accusations against Obama--which would have been true accusations--as he was to try to destroy Trump today, Romney would now be running for his second term.

Instead, Romney is now helping The GOP RINO Establishment of Beltway Buckaneers attack the front runner of the Republican Party and doing all he can to put Hillary in the Whitehouse.

Finally, I am sad that Romney chose to make this speech at the Hinckley Institute, University of Utah. I identify the name of Hinckley with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, as President Gordon B. Hinckley was such a marvelous Prophet for so many years. Yes, I'm a staunch Mormon. I did not like seeing that name behind Romney in this speech that I firmly believe was deliberately constructed with a broad smattering of half truths and cesspool summations by Romney and his RINO chohorts in the Establishment.

Yes, I'm angry at the Establishment for it's ineptitude and detachment from reality. I may not be Trumps biggestr supporter, but at the moment, I hold him in far higher esteem than Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan,John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Haley Barber, Orrin Hatch,, and the long list of RINOs, and certainlyh Mitt Romney. A dispicable speech, Mitt. I predict you have helped Trump far more than you hurt him, and you probablyjust doomed the candidacies of Cruz and Rubio.
Colonel Curtis D. Dale, PhD,USAF (Ret)
Visit WoolyMammoth.org on Facebook

Where was this Mitt Romney four years ago?

Here is Mitt Romney's speech today.

Will the Democrats do to Carly what they did to Mitt?

Dick Morris believes Carly Fiorina is subject to the same kinds of Democrat allegations about her corporate career as Mitt Romney was in 2012.

The sight of a woman like Carly Fiorina — like that of an African-American like Dr. Ben Carson — vying for the Republican nomination for president is enough to make all our pulses beat faster. It is, after all, only by breaking the Democrats’ condominium over blacks, Latinos, single women, gays, and young voters that Republicans can at avoid ultimate extinction.

While Carson disappointed with his questioning of the use of force in Afghanistan after 9-11, Carly soared during the debate. As it turned out, none other than Trump fed her the best straight line when he questioned her appearance and then tried to spin his remarks. Her flat out statement that all women heard what he had said and should make their own judgment was an ace that could not be returned.

Carly Fiorina is a skilled advocate for the private sector, for limited government, against crazy regulations and for lower taxes. She is a Republican dream. In the debate, she showed how conversant she is with defense matters and her ability to summon passion and commitment in her answers triggered widespread admiration.

But…

She has several key vulnerabilities that we have to take seriously. The worst is the way Democrats can successfully twist her business record to her own disadvantage. Haven’t we just lived through the Romney catastrophe? Didn’t we all hear Republican primary rivals like Newt Gingrich decrying Mitt’s record at Bain Capital only to nominate him anyway and then watch Obama tear him to pieces using the same arguments? What is acceptable in business makes for a very bad record in politics.

Our thanks to Chris Cillizza, who writes “The Fix” blog for the Washington Post, for reminding us of just how vulnerable Carly’s Hewlett Packard record left her. He reminds us that she was closing in on California Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer in their epic 2010 contest. A few weeks before Election Day, they were locked in a statistical tie. Then Boxer threw the HP punch.

Her ad noted that Fiorina had laid off 30,000 workers at HP. It played a film clip of Carly saying: “when you’re talking about massive layoffs — which we did — perhaps the work needs to be done somewhere else?” Then the announcer says “Fiorina shipped jobs to China and while Californians lost their jobs, Carly Fiorina tripled her salary, bought a million dollar yacht and five corporate jets.” The lethal ad ends by playing a clip of Carly saying “I’m proud of my record at Hewlett Packard.”

This is just the kind of ad we don’t want to see in October, likely this time replete with testimonials from workers who have lost their jobs.

In California, the damage to Fiorina was mortal. She fell apart the moment the ad started to run and lost by ten points.

With the current animus for high priced corporate executives who make millions while laying off workers and outsourcing jobs, there is no reason to make our hopes for the White House hinge on the ability of one such CEO to justify her actions. To Republicans, it doesn’t matter. We get it that you often have to lay off workers and outsource to protect the remaining jobs still in the U.S. But if Romney taught us anything it is that voters don’t get it.

Let’s not make the same mistake twice.

The real reason Mitt didn't run this time

Have you been wondering why Mitt Romney took himself out of the running for the 2016 Republican nomination fight? Jenny Erikson thinks she knows the reason.

Bush may be the one most hurt by Romney's decision not to run.

Dick Morris gives his take on Romney's announcement that he will not run for the GOP nomination.

At first blush, one would have to assume that former Governor Jeb Bush is the most likely beneficiary of Mitt Romney’s decision to bow out of a race in 2016. But that may not be the case.

Were Romney and Bush both to have run, it would be fair to assume that their combined vote share in the early primaries might approach or even exceed a majority of the voters. The main attention in the race would be focused on the push/pull between the two, leaving little in the way of money, media attention, or available voters to impel one of the other candidates to the first tier.

A tame two way Romney-Bush race was highly predictable. My bet is that Romney would have won by using the immigration issue. Now all bets are off and there is time and room for other candidates to come forward.

Read more here.

"Mitt choked"

Comparing Mitt Romney to a golfer who chokes on a three foot putt, Donald Trump told Iowans today that Republicans cannot make the mistake of nominating Romney or Jeb Bush, whom Trump described as being terribly weak on immigration and a Common Core advocate. Go here to read more and listen to the Donald blast Bush and Romney.

Can Ted Cruz win the center?

Dick Morris notes that the Republicans have a "safe default" position filled by candidates such as Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush. He wonders whether Ted Cruz, while being faithful to the right, can win the center. He does not mention Scott Walker. Watch his analysis here.

Romney the Reagan of 2016?

Will Mitt Romney be seen by voters as the Ronald Reagan of 2016? Jim Guirard writes:

Remember, please, that the late, great Gipper's ideological and political identity began in the "New Deal Left" and moved gradually to the center-left, the center, the center-right, the moderate right, and finally to "Mister Conservative" himself. Once a classical liberal Hollywood union boss, Reagan did not become a Republican until age 53 – moving gradually toward the socio-political and foreign policy right, but never to the far right by today's standards.

And notice now that a decade or more ago, a centrist Mitt Romney began his own trek toward the center-right and moderate conservative positions he holds today – realizing as Reagan did that neither the so-called "liberal" nor the left-illiberal (i.e., the Progressive and Socialist) models work well at all, and are in fact destructive of the Life, Liberty and Happiness and the Separation of Powers assurances of our founding documents.

Read more here.

I find this article to be thought-provoking, which is why I excerpted here. However, I think the author is wrong in assuming that the voters who stayed home in 2012 would now come out in support of Romney. On the contrary, I think the "Tea Party" conservatives have only solidified in their opposition to men like Romney.

Obama is not the only politician who loves Jonathan Gruber

Thanks to Michael Walsh