Frank LaRose is a Phony, Part 2
April 6, 2022
For Immediate Release:
Wednesday, April 6, 2022
Columbus, OH — In case you missed it, Frank LaRose is running out of sides of his mouth to talk out of, once again trying to deny the statement he was recorded saying. After the Ohio Capital Journal reported on Friday that LaRose told a group of GOP donors and activists that he “certainly wouldn’t oppose” impeaching Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor and her impeachment “may be the right thing to do,” LaRose is now denying he called for her impeachment, despite a recording proving otherwise.
Frank LaRose is showing Ohio voters that once again, the only thing that we know for sure about Frank LaRose is that he’s a phony. From calling GOP-gerrymandered maps “asinine” yet voting for them anyway, to trying to claim he didn’t say what he’s on tape saying, it’s clear Frank LaRose can’t be trusted.
“Two-faced Frank LaRose is at it again, talking out of both sides of his mouth and showing Ohioans he can’t be trusted. The only thing Ohioans can count on Frank LaRose to do is betray them in order to advance his own interests. Instead of blaming anyone but himself for the election chaos he’s caused, it’s time for LaRose to do his job and pass a fair map,” said Ohio Democratic Party spokesperson Matt Keyes.
Read more from the Ohio Capital Journal here and below:
- Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose on Tuesday denied that he had called for the impeachment of Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor after she had repeatedly ruled against LaRose and the rest of her fellow Republicans on the Ohio Redistricting Commission.
- LaRose’s comments come four days after he told a group of Union County Republicans that Justice O’Connor had “violated her oath of office” and that for the legislature to impeach her “may be the right thing to do”.
- Tired, apparently, of partisan gerrymandering, Ohio voters in 2015 overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment that requires districts be drawn so that the partisan makeup of the legislature resembles the partisan breakdown in recent statewide elections.
- This year, using the new system for the first time, the five Republicans on the seven-member redistricting commission have passed four sets of maps that O’Connor and the three Democrats on the Supreme Court have ruled are too partisan.
- Meanwhile, Republican frustration with O’Connor, who will leave the court at the end of the year, has been boiling over. Some Republican members of the legislature last month floated the idea of impeachment.
- Gov. DeWine called the notion “extraordinary” and said it’s a bad idea to talk about removing judges whenever one disagrees with their decisions. But LaRose, the secretary of state, wasn’t so reticent on Friday when asked at a Union County Republican breakfast if O’Connor should be impeached.
- “I think that she has not upheld her oath of office, and that to me is a basic test of a public servant,” he said. “That’s up to the state legislature, whether they want to impeach the chief justice or not. I certainly wouldn’t oppose it.”
- At Tuesday’s event, LaRose tried to draw a distinction between saying impeachment may be the right thing to do and actually calling for it.
- “The thing that I did was not call for anybody to be impeached,” he said. “I answered a question that was asked at a little breakfast gathering where I was with a group of supporters in Union County and what I said was, ‘It’s up to the state legislature.’ There are 33 senators and 99 representatives. If they gather evidence and hold that trial for an impeachment, if they decide as the people’s representatives to do that, then I don’t oppose that.”
- Democratic Secretary of State candidate Chelsea Clark said LaRose’s comments about O’Connor make him unfit for his office.
- “It’s now obvious to anyone that Frank LaRose can’t be trusted to administer organized elections and now when he’s called out for the chaos, he wants to blame the referees,” she said in an email. “To claim ‘it would feel good’ to impeach the chief justice because he disagrees with the court’s rendering is pathetic. For someone who claims to believe in separation of powers, Secretary LaRose has no problem trying to overturn the will of the people.”