As expected, bitter RINO Mitt Romney will vote today to allow additional witnesses and documents in President Trump’s impeachment trial proving to all Americans that he’s always been a turncoat.
According to The Hill, Romney said, “he wants to hear from Ambassador Bolton, and he will vote in favor of the motion today to consider witnesses.”
Romney joins Senator Susan Collins, another RINO up for reelection in November. The freshman Senator has been dropping in the polls in his home state of Utah. A Utah state legislator even proposed a bill to be able to recall a Senator before the six-year term is up.
Dems need 4 Republican Senators to vote with them to allow witnesses or three Republicans and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to break a tie.
Senator Lamar Alexander confirmed last night that he will vote for NO witnesses:
Senator Lamar Alexander, a key swing vote in the Senate, just came out against witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Trump.
The Tennessee Republican, who is retiring, announced late tonight that he would not support having additional witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial.
Fox News reports that Alexander dismissed Democrats’ “obstruction of Congress” article of impeachment as “frivolous” and said that there is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven and that does not meet the United States Constitution’s high bar for an impeachable offense.”
Senator Alexander added:
“There is no need for more evidence to prove that the president asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter; he said this on television on October 3, 2019, and during his July 25, 2019, telephone call with the president of Ukraine.
There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens; the House managers have proved this with what they call a ‘mountain of overwhelming evidence.’
There is no need to consider further the frivolous second article of impeachment that would remove the president for asserting his constitutional prerogative to protect confidential conversations with his close advisers
It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation.
When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations, it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law. But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.”
Alexander concluded:
“Our founding documents provide for duly elected presidents who serve with ‘the consent of the governed,’ not at the pleasure of the United States Congress. Let the people decide.”
“The framers believed that there should never, ever be a partisan impeachment,” he continued. “That is why the Constitution requires a 2/3 vote of the Senate for conviction. Yet not one House Republican voted for these articles.
The vote by Alexander is a sure one.
