Calling out the Unholy Six Republican senators who voted to advance Trump's impeachment trial

[Elderberry]

American Thinker By David Zukerman 2/10/2021

Calling out the Unholy Six Republican senators who voted to advance Trump's impeachment trial

The following is copied and pasted from the CBS News website, February 9:

Senators Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania joined all 50 Democrats in voting to uphold the constitutionality of [Trump's post-presidency impeachment] trial.

First, concerning a certain Senate Democrat: you too, Joe Manchin?

Clearly, the Republican senators listed above have, by their vote against the express language of the Constitution, made common cause with the rabid Senate Democrats and must be primaried next election.  Should the GOP regain their Senate majority in 2022, these senators should be either denied membership on any Senate committee or placed on the most non-consequential of Senate committees.

The Unholy Six have previously made clear their loathing for a now private citizen and have placed their personal disregard of former president Trump far above their duty to the Constitution and their responsibilities to their constituents.  It is worth speculating that these sad excuses for Republicans — call them CRINOs (Craven Republicans In Name Only) — were emboldened by the example of Liz Cheney, who has shown that she can vituperate against the former president with the worst of Democrat anti-Trump propagandists and get away with it.

More: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/02/calling_out_the_unholy_six_republican_senators_who_voted_to_advance_trumps_impeachment_trial.html

[PeteS in CA]

Usual RINO suspects plus Cassidy, of whom I'd not heard before.

Pyrrhus is watching.

[roamer_1]

IIRC, Sasse and Toomey are well over the lifetime ACU rating of 90%.

Lumping them in with the leftward facing is just damn well wrong. Automatic RINOs because they oppose Tump is what makes em RINOs I guess.

I would predictably vote for either one, anytime.

[Right_in_Virginia]

IIRC, Sasse and Toomey are well over the lifetime ACU rating of 90%.

Lumping them in with the leftward facing is just damn well wrong. Automatic RINOs because they oppose Tump is what makes em RINOs I guess.

I would predictably vote for either one, anytime.

How is it possible you still think this is about Trump?

[roamer_1]

How is it possible you still think this is about Trump?

Why else would proven Conservatives be called as RINOs?

[libertybele]

Why else would proven Conservatives be called as RINOs?

Since when do Senators decide the Constitutionality of anything?  That's the problem.  They voted to go ahead with the trial and voted that it was constitutional to move forward.  Trump is no longer the president who is out of office.  They voted to move forward anyways.


Article II

    Section 4

    The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

[catfish1957]

Usual RINO suspects plus Cassidy, of whom I'd not heard before.

Pyrrhus is watching.

Cassidy has been a pretty reliable conservative. Not sure what got into him.  Trump carried LA by 18% in November, even with the NOLA political crime machine. I'd betting there will be some form of censure soon.

[roamer_1]

Since when to Senators get to decide the Constitutionality of anything?  That's the problem.  They voted to go ahead with the trial and voted that it was constitutional to move forward.

That isn't the role of the Senate.

I don't see it that way... Whether it is constitutional is reasonable to assess. If it is blatantly unconstitutional, why hold a trial at all? Of course that is a legitimate question.

And there IS precedence wrt impeachment-after-the-fact.

Now, understanding that, understand also that I disagree with them - This is obviously a partisan witch hunt and should be slapped down on that basis alone. So I would have no problem with folks doing exactly that. However, others may differ. And I would think Sasse and Toomey are looking to preserving the legitimacy of process - The Constitution specifies that the Senate WILL take up the matter - That part is hard to get around.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Cassidy has been a pretty reliable conservative. Not sure what got into him.  Trump carried LA by 18% in November, even with the NOLA political crime machine. I'd betting there will be some form of censure soon.

Having lived for a decade in Louisiana, I can say with certainty Cassidy will not survive his re-election bid next year.  Those LA citizens will rebuke him severely.

BTW, this is on his website:
Sen. Cassidy Votes on Constitutionality of Impeachment Trial
WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) released the following statement after his yes vote on the constitutional jurisdiction to impeach a president no longer in office. 

“We heard arguments from both sides on the constitutionality of having a Senate trial of a president who has since left office. A sufficient amount of evidence of constitutionality exists for the Senate to proceed with the trial. This vote is not a prejudgment on the final vote to convict,” said Dr. Cassidy. “If anyone disagrees with my vote and would like an explanation, I ask them to listen to the arguments presented by the House Managers and former President Trump’s lawyers. The House managers had much stronger constitutional arguments. The president’s team did not.”