GOP Senator gets DISINVITED from Republican dinner over anti-Trump vote!

The Senate vote last week that sent the resolution of disapproval on Trump’s national emergency to the Oval Office is the reason one Republican Senator has been disinvited from an annual Republican Dinner.

And his name is Roy Blunt:

KY3 – Christian County’s Republican Party disinvited Missouri U.S. Senator Roy Blunt for its annual dinner because of one vote.

Party leaders say they are protesting the senator’s vote against President Trump’s emergency declaration to build a southern border wall. The resolution against the president passed in the U.S. Senate thanks to several Republicans going against party lines.

The senator’s office tells KY3 News the courts will settle the border issue. He did not comment on the protest.

Here’s part of the email sent to Blunt by the Christian County party chair from McClatchy DC:

“I am so disappointed in you now that I can hardly speak,” wrote Wanda Martens, a member of the Christian County Republican Central Committee, in an email to Blunt’s office. “Why could you not support my president in the emergency declaration? President Trump tried every available means to work the Senate to resolve the border issue and build the much needed wall. He is well within his presidential powers to do this.”

Martens serves as the local party committee’s events chair. She told the senator in her email, which was obtained by The Kansas City Star, that she did not want to see him when the local party holds its Lincoln/Trump Day Dinner on April 6 in Ozark, Missouri, one of the most conservative areas in the state.

“Please don’t try to tell me that I don’t understand. I understand completely,” Martens wrote. “I hate it when someone calls you the establishment and that you are part of the swamp, but maybe they were right.”

Martens is the one who rescinded Blunt’s invitation.

It wouldn’t surprise me if more local Republican Parties will follow suit. After all, this was a big vote that left disappointment for many across the country in this Dirty Dozen, as Mark Levin nicknamed them.

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

To our ad-free users: I apologize for the ad below but unfortunately DISQUS requires this ad in order to use their commenting system and I cannot make it go away.

116 thoughts on “GOP Senator gets DISINVITED from Republican dinner over anti-Trump vote!

  1. I wonder if Wanda Martens had an issue with Trump’s tweet insulting the late John McCain AGAIN, referring to him as last in his class.

    I’m sure Wanda Martens LOVED IT. After all, when she disinvited Roy Blunt she used the phrase “My President.”

    Was McShame without sin? NO! Absolutely NOT! Neither is Trump, and his daily temper tantrums are getting ridiculous and are being exploited by the News to distract from actual GOOD things that are happening.

  2. That’s terrific news. Notice needs to be sent that if pols fail to read the tea leaves properly, and do not heed the advice of more discerned members, they should be ostracized. If they don’t get that the Left is the equivalent to jihadis, they don’t deserve to be in d.c.

  3. The reality is that this was a meaningless vote for a lot of those 12 Senators. Pat Toomey also voted against it. I get why he did it. Yes. IT was a naked political calculation. But I don’t mind that he did it Trump took PA mostly because too many Democrat PA voters were so sure Hillary was going to win that they did not show up. Toomey rode that situation and managed to get re-elected on that 2016 voting day.

    In 2018 PA voted in maybe net/plus 5 Dem congressmen. Toomey is looking to 2022. He made the understandable calculation that he can say he stood his ground against Trump. Toomey will not and should not have a primary challenger

    I don’t think this calculation works for Blunt. Missouri is solid Trump country. Blunt should be primaried and kicked out of office.

  4. Lots of conflict here. I don’t agree with Levin for lumping Lee in with those others in the use of a pejorative. I don’t agree with Lee’s vote to take a stand against this national emergency, although I do agree with the need to have Congress get an easier way to approve whether or not a national emergency is legitimate.

    This is one of those times where a number of competing but legitimate concerns are in play and I’m not going to throw Lee under the bus because he’s being the hard-line Constitutional Conservative he’s always been.

    1. As one of my professors has said, these are the situations were you have to look at it and say I understand both sides, and they are reasonable. Neither side is the enemy, neither side is the virtuous defenders of everything that is good and right.

    2. I have always liked Lee (and still do) but this vote was for the security of our border. That means security against foreign invaders doing harm to U.S. citizens, and voting in elections to assure the downfall of our republic. I understand that it gives the president a lot of power but history has shown that Democrats dont play by the rules if they dont get what they want. If I had my way, the rules about what constitutes a national emergency would be very specific. No “climate change” or “gun control” would even qualify. It would have to be an actual emergency-protecting U.S. citizens from foreign invaders would definately qualify. I just think Lee picked the wrong battle to fight. I would be for amending the rules but we need the wall and our congress people, who were elected to make that happen, need to do what they have to do to make it happen. I agree with you about the conflict as I am conflicted about it also but I believe the security of our country is more important than nitpicking how it gets done.

      1. I have always liked Lee (and still do) but this vote was for the security of our border.

        No it wasn’t.

      2. “I just think Lee picked the wrong battle to fight.”

        Yep. I’m all for fighting cleanly in general to move things toward the Constitutional purity that I think would be good for the nation – but sometimes strategically using the same methods that the Democrats have been destroying us with is appropriate. The Democrats have set up the rules for this “national emergency” game and I’m all for playing it their way this once. Go ahead and introduce limiting legislation later. I’ll be for that too.

  5. I’m wondering if any of these votes will flip when it comes time for the veto override attempt.

    1. The Senate likely won’t even bring that vote to the floor.

      Sure, the Dems in the House will put on a show, but McCONnell knows there aren’t enough votes to even waste his time with it.

      If he does, it’ll be quick, a rollcall and fail to pass.

  6. We can throw turncoat Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) in with that group of swamp creatures (I live in Tennessee). I’ll be so glad when he’s gone in less that two years.

  7. Blunt owes his political survival to Trump. There was no way he was going to win his reelection in 2016, he was sagging in the polls and for good reason, he does not listen to his constituents, never has. Trump carried Missouri by 19 points, Blunt barely won by 3 points, clearly Trump carried Blunt’s sorry ass across the finish line.

    I’m glad he was told to stay away, I hope more of our county committees dis invite the ungrateful RINO and let him know he works for us. In four years Mr Blunt will be looking for work, we’ve had it with his open borders, C of C globalist BS! Enough of these RINOs stinking up the place.

  8. Anybody who uses the words “trust” and “politician” in the same sentence without the disqualifier of “not” or “don’t” should invest in some deep thought.

      1. Thanks. Well, I spent my fair share of years at the church of “Reagan was perfect!” It’s easy to listen solely to an echo chamber. So I try to listen to some sources I may not necessarily agree with for introspection. It certainly can’t hurt.

  9. I’ve wanted Blunt and McCaskill out for a long time, we got rid of McCaskill hope Blunt is next.

  10. McConnell, McCarthy, the late John McCain, Sen Gov Romneycare and the rest of the Dirty Dozen RINO cabal, along with their former GOP RINO leaders Bush, Boehner, and Ryan, is and will always be politically despised by every Patriotic American Lincoln Reagan Constitutional Conservative, every Trump National Populist Republican in the Nation.

    1. @constitutionalrepublic : Hey! Can I borrow your “Patriotic American Lincoln Reagan Constitutional Conservative and Trump National Populist-Republican ?
      This denomination is fantastic!

    1. Levin irks me with things like that. This isn’t the first dumb thing that Mark levin has done. During the general in 2016 he said anyone that didn’t vote for trump wasn’t a conservative. About a month before that, he declared himself “never trump”.

      Some other patrons to this site would do well to remember that Mike Lee voted against it for the same reason that rand paul voted against it. And it isn’t because they don’t support the END. It’s because they don’t support the MEANS. A lot of folks on TRS would do well to recall that just 4 years ago they’d classify themselves as “principled constitutional conservatives”. Those same people are here today trashing Mike Lee (the member of the senate that has the absolute best voting record) for being, that’s right, PRINCIPLED!

      Anyone that thinks that mike lee wouldn’t vote for wall that makes its way through the house, and into the senate the correct and constitutional way is fricking nuts.

      1. I remember most Mike Lee’s support of Ted Cruz. A lot of people here were Cruz/Lee. One vote against a Trump deal and suddenly he’s the enemy. Nope.

    2. Ren, I think you fail to appreciate how I need an immediate and convenient target in which to focus my misplaced rage. I’m running on full emotion now. No reason or rationality. That’s the only way we’re going to beat the leftists. By becoming just like them.

      1. Reading the different threads “by becoming just like them” has taken over big time. Rational thought used to be the norm, but one question, one criticism (especially of a certain individual) & it’s flat out attack about how unpatriotic we are, we wanted the other guy to win, or “they” did it so….. etc, etc.

        Amazing what “good qualities” are exposed by the greatest person EVER / s.

      2. AT: This is true. We have talked about this matter a few days ago………
        We need a country with borders first and then we can talk about/and implement the Constitution. Even birds know that they have to build a nest first before they lay eggs……

          1. AT: I hope you understood what I meant. I am not talking about the level of importance of the Constitution, but about the logical sequence of priorities.

            It looks like we just want to talk about the Constitution!

            Where was everybody, when we had to swallow down that the Individual Mandate was a Tax and a Penalty at the same time?

            Where was everybody, when the Dems made up the rules to pass Obamacare without even reading the 2300 pages and even more nobody was worried about the 16’000.– additional pages 7 years after passing the law!

            1. It looks like we just want to talk about the Constitution!

              Because that’s the only thing that matters. If we can’t do something, anything, Constitutionally – then we can’t do it. This game of “act first, check if it’s OK later” is straight out of the leftist playbook. And I don’t think we should reduce ourselves to that.

              It’s like me eating your lunch and then saying, “Gosh, that was wrong. I shouldn’t have done that.” Well, hey, great – we acknowledged the problem with what I did, but you still go hungry.

              1. AT: This is definitely not what I mean and you know it. No worries. I am not going to talk about the Constitution ever again. I mean the Constitution that only one side seems to respect and that can only work if we have borders.

    3. @renny I agree. However, I’m deeply confused by his vote if: 1) Trump can legally call for a national emergency (it appears he can), and 2) It’s been done 40+ times before now with no legal/constitutional blow back (well, except when obama employed it illegally with DACA).

      Mike Lee is one of only about 5 senators I trust in congress and this vote of his doesn’t make any sense to me. Mark is right to call him out but to place him in the list of “dirty” anything kind of sucks – even though this vote is highly controversial. Lee and Ted usually vote the same.

      1. I agree. Mike Lee should be no more exempt from criticism than any other Senator. It’s just that many of us look at him as one of the few people of character in the Senate. And when he does something of which we are absolutely against it’s puzzling to say the least.

    4. Mike Lee has been, for me, the most respected member of the Senate for some time. I was very disappointed in his vote. I was sad to see him in such nasty company.

      Dirty Dozen was a convenient and easily recognizable title for 12 Senators who took a position many on the right didn’t like.

      One vote does not a Senator make. But I didn’t agree with his explanation for why he voted as he did and his halo isn’t quite as shiny from my point of view anymore.

      1. @kenoshamarge
        But at least you’re comments are reasonable & thoughtful regarding Lee, not just throw him under the bus, he no longer exists, etc, etc.

        To me, he’s now made 3 decisions I disagree with, however he’s still a hundred times better than some in the Senate.

        1. I don’t dismiss him as if he’d committed some atrocious crime because I never forget that even though he is the Senator I most respect – he’s still a politician.

          He’s one of the good ones but he’s not perfect and I will disagree with him from time to time.

    5. @renny I support Senator Lee wholeheartedly, BUT I do NOT support his decision on this particular vote. Lee has proven that he, like every other politician will make decisions with which I will disagree. The good ones do it infrequently.

  11. Guess she told him in no uncertain terms. If and when he runs again his “NO” vote could well backfire when he needs her support.

  12. There is a laundry list of reasons why the Dems want/need the wall to not be built, and they are all nefarious. As painful as that whole dog and pony show was to watch, I think we as a country all needed to see for ourselves where our representatives loyalty truly lies. We also witnessed how far our MSM has fallen from the watchmen of the republic we had grown to trust.
    Tens of thousands of undocumented men of fighting age pouring across a border every month isn’t just a matter of national security, it’s an invasion. The woman and children are raped, murdered, kidnapped, trafficked into our country, and sold because of how easy it is for them to disappear. I know it’s not easy to talk about, but these women and children are not being sold as laborers to farmers. The numbers coming out from people on the ground are saying more than a third of the women and girls are assaulted at least once along the way. What’s a third of fifty thousand a month? This is a humanitarian crisis on a massive scale, and crimes against humanity are being committed.
    Those in Washington DC know this to be true. Yet they refuse to fix the laws, and throw in never ending freebies to boot. All one has to do is take one step over the border. The lure is so great, and corruption is so bad in their country, they are willing to risk the lives of their children. Our politicians can care less, they need the votes. Their donors don’t give a flip, they want cheap labor. This all needs to stop and people need to be prosecuted, because the most precious commodity to the architects of it all, are the children.

    1. @mojavegreen : Finally someone who is addressing the children. I have mentioned this all over the place and nobody seems neither to want to listen, to hear nor to see what is really going on. The open border is a multi-billion market that the Dems and I believe some Republicans don’t want to shut down. The discussion about the Constitution and legality from Trump’s actions is just a distraction. I wonder what other country in the world has discussions about “paperwork” while it is invaded….. women and children are raped…..and their own citizens get killed……..

    1. @Ronbo I’m no democrat. Far from it. And proud of it.

      These 12 Republicans deserve every bit of pushback they might get. This is a national emergency, buddy. Enough Fentanyl in to kill 115 million Americans. Red staters drowning in debt to support, educate, medicate illegals -and- my own friends sick kids can’t get help fast enough.

      The Dirty Dozen deserve whatever comes their way.

      1. Good idea. Let’s trade in a guy with a near perfect voting record in the senate. Who knows, maybe we’ll get lucky and replace him with a 1 issue guy that fully supports an unrestricted executive branch like you do, but also supports gun confiscation, green new deal, and baby murder.

        What could go wrong?

        1. @djumv I didn’t mention “a guy” in my comment. I mentioned some of the serious problems resulting from this open border situation. Too bad you don’t find those things I mentioned as being a crisis. There are many more crisis situations surrounding the border situation.

          You don’t know anything about me so don’t be putting words in my mouth or planting ideas when you don’t know the facts on where I stand. You’re sore that you’re “a guy” is part of The Dirty Dozen. Too bad!

          1. They are a crisis, I would agree to that. They were a crisis a year ago. Two years ago.

            Not a damn thing was done about it while “our team” had the numbers. Why didn’t “we” shutdown the government then? Why didn’t we put legislation in for a wall then? Why didn’t we declare a national emergency then?

            Oh right, because the GOP needs votes and “we” are too stupid to simply let the democrats hang themselves on their crappy policies and socialism.

            But naw bro, totally mike lee’s fault for not wanting to set this precedent. Watch what the scummy dems do next.

          1. @bronx This person is ranting about Mike Lee, not Blunt. djumv just doesn’t use Lee’s name. Seems to prefer “a guy”.

            1. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I followed the debate and never seen Mike Lee’s name so I automatically went with who the article was about Roy Blunt.

              My fault and yes Mike Lee is a stand up guy but I’m hoping he doesn’t get too comfortable with voting against the U.S. Constitution. As far as this National Emergency is concern he’s been a feather in the wind. On other conservative issues…solid as a rock.

  13. Let’s revisit The Dirty Dozen:

    Mike Lee
    Rob Portman
    Lamar Alexander
    Roy Blunt
    Susan Collins
    Jerry Moran
    Lisa Murkowski
    Mitt Romney
    Marco Rubio
    Patrick J. Toomey
    Roger Wicker
    Rand Paul

    Leave it to Republicans to assist their statist parents, the Socialist Democrats.

    1. If you’re calling Lee or Paul a leftist you don’t know jack. BOTH men tried to justify the NE constitutionally, can could not. It was their duty to vote no.

      The rest of that list is nothing more than butthurt RINOs, but to lump two good men in with them is asinine.

      1. @texas-chris I don’t know what you’re talking about. I called out The Dirty Dozen by name. Lee and Paul were part of that cabal. Facts!

      2. @texas-chris Except that @golfcartone did NOT call them leftests, but said they aided the Socialist Democrats with their vote, which they did.

        They can try to frame it around the constitution–but they would be WRONG.

        Personally, particularly with Lee, I wonder who’s donating to his campaign for those votes. When someone who normally votes conservative suddenly doesn’t, follow the money.

        Rand Paul is a libertarian, so i’m not surprised at his vote.

  14. About time RINOS learn the consequences of ticking off the folks back in Cornfield County. Better start looking for a second career, Mister Blount.

  15. That’s rather petty.

    But I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. For literally years, we’ve all championed Mike Lee around here – and then the ONE time he steps out of line everyone starts shrieking that he’s dead to them and a traitor to conservatism. Never mind that he had a perfectly valid point and most will still agree with everything else he says and does.

    But apparently anyone or anything that’s a threat to Donald’s Magic Wall is persona non grata on the right now. Which is kinda sad.

    1. Hey, I have an idea to cure the sadness. Let’s play a fun game. I’m calling it: “You Can Only Have One.”

      It’s a game of 100% hypothetical scenarios that will never happen, but force you to prioritize your goals. (And it’s supposed to be fun, so don’t whine about it all you would-be party poopers.)

      OK, I’ll start us off with three:

      Overturn Roe v Wade or The Wall.
      Eliminate the National Debt or The Wall.
      Exile J-Mao to Venezuela or The Wall.


      Aaaaaand GO!

        1. I think the wall takes lower priority than all three.

          OK, maybe not J-Mao, but I’d still probably choose it over the wall because she really needs an education about socialism that she won’t learn in schools or other echo chambers.

      1. Turn 22 trillion debt into 100 trillion surplus or eliminate leftist media

        Brainwash all politicians into thinking they love this country or eliminate leftist academia

        Turn Hollywood into a Conservative haven or have rats excrete gold pellats.

        1. OOOOooohhh, those are good ones. Let’s see.

          I’m going to go with the surplus, eliminating academia, and changing Hollywood.

          The first is just good fiscal sense, and I can live with chirping vassals if it means long-term economic security. The second, I’m just not down with brainwashing in general. The third I have to vote against the gold because of how bad it’d destabilize the world economy.

      2. Eliminate the National debt with a balanced budget amendment? Or eliminate the national debt only to have it return a few years later?

        I’d say overturning roe v. Wade is probably the most critical of all. These wicked scumbags are talking about post partum murder and third trimester abortions.

    2. Lee did have a valid point, he pointed out that Trump’s declaration was legal. Lee then listened to the money bags who reminded him who financed his last campaign. So fine, Lee can listen to the money bags and ignore the voters. The voters are free to turn on Lee as they saw him turn on them.

      1. There’s a difference between legal and constitutional.

        Congress legally delegated its authority over spending to the president during a declared national emergency. However, that delegation of power was unconstitutional, since the power of the purse resides solely with the congress, and no power to delegate authority exists in the document. In fact, all powers not specifically delegated are prohibited by the 10th Amendment.

        Lee and Paul’s logic is 100% sound. Their votes are correct.

        The other 10 are just butthurt RINOs out to tweak Trump’s nose.

        1. I don’t remember either of the two senators raising constitutional issues when Obama deemed that Libya presented a national emergency and thus used unappropriated funds to bomb the country into the stone age. Perhaps they did, might you freshen our memories with citations?

          1. Comment is awaiting moderation.

            A Google search would return a plethora of documentation on that exact opposition, but since you are blinded by your Trump worship I assume a simple search is beyond what your religious fervor will tolerate.

      1. Lee is loyal to the big money that finances his election campaigns. That’s all that matters to most politicians.

      2. Exactly Tracy.
        In time I will forgive Mike Lee – but I won’t forget.
        I know it`s just one vote that I didn’t like, but this was important.

        1. No the pushing Koch agenda jailbreak, the pushing of family leave act and this vote, that’s the trend.

          1. For the record, I fail to understand any conservative who doesn’t see that prison reform is a huge issue. This system is failing our principles of justice and constitutional rights in every way possible.

            I’ve written at length on this subject. But I guess that makes me a traitor huh.

            1. I didnt have a problem with reform, but this bill had issues and Lee didnt seem very honest about those issues.

      3. @tracy One vote on this very important national security subject is enough for me. I’m supposed to stand with Lee when he’s part of the cabal allowing enough Fentanyl in to kill 115 million Americans? I’m supposed to stand by him while he allows his fellow red staters to drown in debt to support, educate, medicate illegals -and- my own friends sick kids can’t get help fast enough?

        NOPE! I’m done with Lee for these and the many other reasons he’s provided of late. I’m living this nightmare every damn day.

    3. Mike Lee is a heartbreaker. He has gone off the rails on more than this. If he is so concerned about the Constitution, I’d like him to show where the Constitution says we need to pay family leave, ironically called “The Cradle Act” ? The “First Lady,” Ivanka, in this case, champions leftist ideas & went crying to Daddy.

      The Swamp has been after Lee from Day One. He finally buckled. He used to be stellar, but these latest decisions say It is time for Mike Lee to leave.

      1. We dodged a big bullet. He was on the list of potential nominees to
        fill a Supreme Court vacancy. We could have been looking at a
        John Roberts 2.0

        1. Woah, we’re beginning to discover Lee has a misguided libertarian streak, but he held a perfect liberty score for 6 years, so he should have more leeway with conservatives, some of the same people who defend Cruz (10 percent nosedive) to the death, than any other Republican in Congress.

      1. So much so that if one person ever disagrees with me on anything I am going to hate them forever. Forever.

        1. @AT You didn’t address my question to you about whether you believe national security is petty, as you stated in your original comment. The border is a crisis. I didn’t mention “hate”. You did.

          You also always turn serious issues into a game. Like the game you played the other day… that Friday drinking game. Now this game for this serious issue. EOD

          1. This particular issue wasn’t about border security. It was about the NEA. Mike Lee voted against this (mis)use of the NEA. I agree with him on that.

            See, I’m capable of divorcing my frustration with the problems at the border in order to focus on the means by which that problem is solved. Mike Lee is too. That’s why I like him.

            But some people can’t do that, and they regard Mike Lee’s position on the NEA as a flippancy towards the border crisis. And now they hate him forever regardless of anything he’s done before or will do in the future. Those people are being very silly, and are probably not thinking clearly.

          2. You also always turn serious issues into a game.

            Tell you what. I’ll start taking issues seriously, when I can start taking people seriously.

            You let me know when that day comes, ok?

    4. @AT Don’t and won’t consider Mike Lee to be dirty. I don’t care what Levin wants to call it. I have my dirty two of radio hosts. Limbaugh and that other guy. The karate expert. Forgot his name.

    5. This is nothing more than Republicans acting like spoiled children, throwing a tantrum in the supermarket because mommy won’t give them a candy.

      Paul and Lee voted to uphold the constitution. Period.

      If the party throws a fit every time a man casts a hard vote of conscience then why will any good man bother to run in the future?

      1. And more importantly, do we – the electorate – want good men to run?

        Because it doesn’t seem like we do.

  16. “Lincoln/Trump Day” dinner? Okey dokey.
    I don’t blame them for shunning Blunt but does it matter? Probably not.

  17. Roy Blunt = Mitch McConnell footsoldier. Mitch tells him to jump, and he says yes sir, how high.

    That he backed up his vote with the statement that “the courts will settle it out” sounds to me like he would love to be a member of the 9th circuit. He more often supports the Dems with his votes than he ever does the Republicans.

    1. The courts are allowed to settle way too much in our government. They are given too much power. This issue will give them the power of the purse.

      1. @squirrelly That’s how Republicans get away with shirking their duties and responsibilities to their voters—that “let the courts do it” routine. They started heavy down that road with Obamacare and that exploded in their face.

    2. Nope, it just takes the decision making off their backs so they can get re-elected. All the Rinos think this way…

      1. Bingo!

        That is why I included the statement that Blunt wants the courts to settle it. Yes, the liberal court decisions are Blunt’s out. Doesn’t sound like the GOP MIssouri folk are buying it though.

  18. :thumbsup: I love Wanda Martens‘ comment to Roy Blunt. It was unvarnished, direct and to the point. I was kind’a hoping she would have started her comment with, “I’m going to be blunt here…”.

  19. Yep, let’s just send all this crap over to the courts so One Activist Loon can decide what the President does….

Comments are closed.