Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) was perhaps the most crucial vote in the Senate's decision to ultimately reject additional witnesses in President Trump's impeachment trial.He was long seen as a possibility to join the ranks of Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Mitt Romney (R-Utah) in crossing the aisle to link up with Democrats, but he and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) wound up sticking with the GOP. Alexander has explained his reasoning a few times, arguing Trump's dealings with Ukraine were "inappropriate" but didn't rise to the level of an impeachable offense. He also worried about a conviction tearing the country apart, "pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist."But he also provided USA Today with a slightly different rationale. He said he was "struck" by the fact that not a single House Republican voted to impeach Trump following Congressional hearings. If just a few of them had voted in favor, he told USA Today he might have voted differently. Unsurprisingly, that explanation doesn't appear to hold up for some Democrats. Read more at USA Today. > Alexander with new rationale for opposing removal: this was a partisan impeachment because all House Rs voted against it> > So if one party blindly follows its leader, he can't be impeached? That's pretty much the opposite of what the framers intended https://t.co/amLNG7dgzm> > -- Chris Lu (@ChrisLu44) February 1, 2020More stories from theweek.com Mitch McConnell's rare blunder John Bolton just vindicated Nancy Pelosi All the president's turncoats
from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3aZPUZI
Post a Comment