From my Senator Pat Toomey

This was taken from his weekly update:

Quote:

My Statement on the Conclusion of the Impeachment Trial

On Wednesday, I joined a majority of senators in voting to acquit President Trump. The Constitution sets a very high bar for impeachment and removal of a sitting president. While some of President Trump's actions were inappropriate, they did not come close to meeting the very high bar required to justify overturning the last election, removing him from office, and kicking him off the ballot in an election that has already begun. In November, the American people will decide for themselves whether President Trump should stay in office. In our democratic system, that's the way it should be.
It is my hope that Congress can now move past this extremely partisan and divisive episode and get back to working on issues that will strengthen our economy and make our communities safer.
For more on my rationale on opposing President Trump's removal from office, please check out the op-ed I wrote for the Philadelphia Inquirer this week.

I take no issue with that, I will defer to his greater knowledge of this question.

I will point out, that few have denied that trump did exactly what he was accused of and he has continued to lie about.

Yes he's not perfect, but Angles probably don't work that hard for our Nation and get results.

I received this reply today in response to my note to him during the impeachment trial. I take no issue with it and fully understand and appreciate his position. I invite all to read it, we do have thoughtful and bright people representing us.

February 13, 2020

Dear David,
Thank you for contacting me about the impeachment of President Trump. I appreciate hearing from you.
In 1999, then-Senator Joe Biden posed the following question when he voted against removing President Bill Clinton from office: "[D]o these actions rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors necessary to justify the most obviously antidemocratic act the Senate can engage in-overturning an election by convicting the president?" It is this constitutionally grounded framework that guided my review of President Trump's impeachment and, ultimately, my decision to join a majority of Senators in opposing his removal from office.
The Constitution gives the Senate "the sole Power to try all Impeachments." I took this duty during the three week trial of President Trump very seriously. I carefully studied the information presented during the trial, which included video testimony from 13 witnesses, over 28,000 pages of documents (including the House testimony of 17 witnesses), and more than 30 hours of presentations from the House Managers and President's counsel. The Senate is not required to hear from live witnesses (it did not do so in several prior trials), nor in this case was it necessary. As Vice President Biden explained during President Clinton's impeachment, the Senate's "constitutional role as a sole trier of impeachment does not require it to take new evidence or hear live witness testimony."
The president's actions were not "perfect." Some were inappropriate. But the question for the Senate was not whether his actions were perfect, but if they constituted impeachable offenses that justified removing a president for the first time and forbidding him from ever holding office.
House Democrats alleged that President Trump briefly paused aid, and withheld a White House meeting with Ukraine's president, to pressure Ukraine into investigating publicly-reported corruption matters. When House Democrats demanded witnesses and documents concerning the president's conduct, he invoked constitutional rights. This resistance to their demands was the basis for the article of obstruction.
House Democrats alleged the president lacked "lawful cause or excuse" to resist their subpoenas. This ignores that his resistance was based on constitutionally grounded legal defenses and immunities that are consistent with longstanding positions taken by administrations of both parties. Instead of negotiating a resolution or litigating in court, House Democrats rushed to impeach.
But as House Democrats noted during President Clinton's impeachment, a president's defense of his legal and constitutional rights and responsibilities is not an impeachable offense.
House Democrats separately alleged President Trump abused his power by conditioning a White House meeting, and the release of aid, on Ukraine agreeing to pursue corruption investigations. Their case rested entirely on the faulty claim that the only possible motive for his actions was his personal political gain. In fact, there are also legitimate national interests for seeking investigations into apparent corruption, especially when taxpayer dollars are involved.
Even if House Democrats' presumptions about President Trump's motives are true, additional witnesses in the Senate, beyond the 17 who testified in the House, were unnecessary because the president's actions did not rise to the level of removing him from office. Nor did they warrant the societal upheaval that would occur with his removal from office and the ballot months before an election. Our country is already far too divided and this would have only made matters worse.
As Vice President Biden also stated during President Clinton's impeachment trial, "the Constitution sets the bar for impeachment very high." A president can only be impeached and removed for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." While there's debate about the precise meaning of this phrase, it's clear that impeachable conduct must be comparable to the serious offenses of treason and bribery.
The Constitution sets the impeachment bar so high for good reasons. Removing a president from office, and forbidding him from seeking future office, overturns the results of the last election and denies Americans the right to vote for him in the next one. The Senate's impeachment power essentially allows 67 senators to substitute their judgment for that of millions of Americans.
Vice President Biden's framework for judging an impeachment was right then and it is right now. President Trump's conduct did not meet the very high bar required to justify overturning the election, removing him from office, and kicking him off the ballot in an election that has already begun. In November, the American people will decide for themselves whether President Trump should stay in office. In our democratic system, that's the way it should be. It is my hope that Congress can now move past this extremely partisan and divisive episode and get back to working on issues that will strengthen our economy and make our communities safer.
Thank you again for your correspondence. Do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.
Sincerely,

Pat Toomey
U.S. Senator, Pennsylvania

His response sounds right to me.

Yes, understandable and logical.

Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by UTAH

Yes, understandable and logical.

Hunter

Yea, we don't get much of that from Washington anymore.:clap::rolleyes2: